First of all, open the TV and disconnect the wireless radio from the main board, on mine (Samsung) it was just unplugging one cable (AI or Google it). I dislike doing stuff like that, but it was easy in my case, maybe you'll be lucky, too.
Second, never use the "apps" built into the TV.
Next, don't plug Ethernet into the TV. Plug HDMI cables into the TV.
Use a box of your choice on the other end of the HDMI cables. This is now the box that you trust. (Roku? Shield? Blu-ray? MacBook? PC? Linux? Playstation? XBox? Whatever you want.)
The Smart TV itself is now fine. Choose the devices you plug into it to play content. The TV just shows it.
The thing I'd be worried about when doing this is spending $1000+ on a TV, then realizing it has some sort of pre-downloaded ads that it shows on the main screen ("sign up for your free six months of HBO Max!") or otherwise has a nag prompt that appears to tell you to connect to WiFi. I think that would be basically intolerable.
Been a few years since I had to get a new one, but I booted mine up, switched to the HDMI input for my AppleTV, and never looked back. Just boots straight into the AppleTV input when you use the AppleTV remote to wake it up.
We have to use the actual TV remote to debug some audio issues or disable the motion blur stuff again every once in awhile, but otherwise it might as well just be a display for the AppleTV. I’ve only seen the actual home screen of the TV a handful of times.
I guess it’s probably still spying on us somehow, and it seems like different models make using the AppleTV remote and booting right into the AppleTV harder than others, so your mileage may vary.
You have to be careful with this path. Some manufacturers embed LED's into the bezel and blink them at you (part of the IR sensor for the remote, to prevent you from taping over with electrical tape) if they do not have network.
Yeah and if it was using LoRa or something similar, ot could reach hundreds of meters through buildings or many kilometers in open space, with a very small antenna. If they built in a big antenna into the TV chassis itself, it cpuld get quite and insane reach but it would be more expensive.
What it would connect to ? To other TVs (comfortably connected to mains power) forming a mesh network. A bunch of Internet connected gateways planted by the manufacturers would capture the data from the network.
MeshCore and MeshTastic have demonstrated community networks like this, so I would not put it past TV manufacturers to try missuse the same idea.
I think the more logical concern would be that it would wait until it could find any potential unsecured wifi to use. I live in an apartment building and there a few wifi access points that I can reach from my apartment with no security. Though one of them appears to be an air conditioner??
Say the TV finds such an access point and uses it. It phones home and so now the manufacturer now knows that such and such serial # TV is located in that neighborhood.
They still need to tie it to you. If you've not given it a shred of personal information, it has to be fingerprinting via surreptitious audio/video recording, or else by obtaining the purchase info from the retailer (like the name and billing address from your credit card) and matching that by serial number (which would have to be recorded during purchase).
I wouldn't be surprised if they did audio fingerprinting. But even if they don't, the third parties who are buying the data can easily re-identify the users by doing data fusion with other sources (smartphone location data from other vendors)
Not that I have any evidence it's happening, but it'd be more likely for TV manufacturers to partner with ISPs that offer public WiFi using the access points they rent to their customers.
The low bandwidth always on kindle modems could also be feasibly built into TVs for telemetry, and may be cheaper than the money they could get from selling the data.
it's not just your wifi you have to worry about. neighbour can have insecure wifi. or deliberately open ones like coffee shops, free municipal hotspots, etc.
This is trivial to test yet not a single person claiming TVs will connect to open networks all on their own has ever provided a shred of evidence of it actually happening.
My xfinity modem helpfully defaults to providing an open network that others can connect to. If I didn't know to disable this, it would be the first network it could find.
The one we have is even worse. It won't really work well outside of things like airplay or chromecast, and those require wifi. It was extremely cheap though.
(It has an HDMI port, but it's clearly a second class citizen in the menus, etc. Default to HDMI on power up is intentionally broken. It's also intentionally designed to turn into a brick if we ever lose the remote. At boot, it puts a screen up saying to press a button on the remote if you want it to display anything else, and that screen never times out. If you plug in an HDMI input, it says "HDMI input detected; press OK.". There's no "OK" button on the projector itself. You have to press the OK button on the remote.)
Not from privacy issues, but all the typical ones from projectors never went anywhere: low brightness, high heat, low maximum operating lifetime, fan noise, and hard to set up (impossible in some places).
I don't think this apply to most UST projector nowadays. I mean, operating lifetime is probably still an issue, fan noise while higher than a TV (which doesn't have it) is not an issue anymore, heat.. well, come close to my (old, ok) OLED LG TV and you can still warm your hands (although not like the previous plasma one I had, that's true).
For the setup I don't know exactly but there are online shops that gives you the 1st setup for free (at the cost of doing the unboxing for you). Also probably nowadays with an LLM almost anybody that care enough to research and buy a projector can do it, I guess.
Yes, I want to buy a projector this Black Friday (Hisense PX3-Pro).
Any chance the TV can phone home via that? One would have to make sure the HDMI cable physically doesn't have the Ethernet pairs, or set the trusted box to filter the traffic.
The HDMI standard defines an Ethernet channel as an optional feature. Approximately zero consumer products have ever implemented it. There's no need to worry about an unsuspecting consumer having supporting devices at both ends of the cable.
I don’t know of any consumer laptops or tv boxes like shield/Apple TV that implement that so that. It’s basically a non-issue unless it’s implemented on the HDMI devices.
If you use something you can control, like a Linux box, this isn't an issue. Even if the device did get added, and then udev or network manager auto configured, a firewall script should protect you.
> disconnect the wireless radio from the main board
Can you explain why you can't just not give the TV your Wi-Fi password?
Or are we worried about the case when the TV did have Wi-Fi (due to it being mandatory for some initial setup, say), but we don't trust that "Forget Network" and "Wi-Fi off" are actually honored?
Suppose the device surreptitiously reconnects to Wi-Fi in spite of being told to forget it. You may be able to block it in your router and failing that, change the access point password.
People believing even without proof that TVs connect to open WiFi. This would be trivial to prove if true, yet there is no evidence. In addition, it doesn’t make any sense for any of them to bother. 99% of consumers willingly connect their TV to WiFi because they want to use it with the built-in streaming apps. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to waste time capturing the 1% of users most likely to be evade them anyway just to cause a PR and/or legal fiasco.
Xfinity runs an open WiFi for its customers. If you instead their gateway and don’t change anything (which is 99% of users) any Xfinity customer can get online. Several of my neighbors have them, and you can’t walk around in my commercial district without seeing the “Xfinity WiFi” SSID. It would be smart for TV mfrs to do a deal with Xfinity and their equivalents world wide in order to sell viewer data to advertisers and receive “fresh” ads, even if the TVs are excluded from the residential network.
This is actually so very doable in US, cutting deal with those like XFinity.
But if the TV manufacturer is smart in their spying game, they could also be probing for any public SSIDs to connect to when no local internet access is setup.
It doesn't sound insane, actually. Keeping in mind, Windows XP did exactly that for a while until everyone realized, "hey, that's a security issue". I would swear MacOS too, but I wouldn't bet money on it.
>It would be smart for TV mfrs to do a deal with Xfinity and their equivalents world wide in order to sell viewer data to advertisers and receive “fresh” ads, even if the TVs are excluded from the residential network.
Doesn't exactly sound like a thing to be that concerned about if you never plug in your TV. If you buy a TV right now and never plug it in, how would it know about any future deal with Xfinity to connect to its open networks? And if it had a feature to connect to random open Wi-Fi networks right now, that wouldn't be hard to prove. My LG has never shown up in my Wi-Fi client list despite my open guest Wi-Fi. You can even test it by naming your guest network "Xfinity WiFi".
Taking apart your TV and pulling out the wireless radio sounds like absolute overkill to me. Feel free to do it if it makes you feel better. It will definitely not allow it to send data (over Wi-Fi) under any circumstance. I'm just not convinced that the alternative is that much riskier.
Our Samsung fridge will mesh network with any Samsung TV specifically to exfiltrate marketing info, at least according to the manual. (The fridge even has marketing surveillance cameras in it).
I assume at some point, appliance manufacturers will start "partnering" with things that actually need WiFi for exfiltration purposes. Phones would be a good place to start.
That way, we'd need to either Faraday cage our friends' phones, not invite them over, or send marketing pervs video feed of our moldy pickles.
We're worried about it connecting to a neighbor's unsecured network or some sort of unpublished mesh capability for exfiltrating your data and downloading ads.
So, I have an Nvidia Shield TV Pro. I dislike how Google had to put ads on the homescreen (ads which are not suitable for my children), and I just checked: it has Android patch level Jan 2026. It is, as of today, Nov 2026. 10 months without patches. So no patch for eMudhra, no patch for Brotli, and you name it.
Other than that, I agree regarding TV, with one caveat: you might want to update the firmware right away, or at some point. The device might need to phone home for that. In order to achieve that, you can put up a temp WLAN AP with your smartphone.
With regards to my STB: I am considering cancelling all my subscription services and simply downloading everything to my NAS. This already runs Jellyfin. Then all I need is a Jellyfin client and HDMI. Perhaps a RPi 4 or RPi 5 would be suffice there.
Yes, I use that on my Shield(s) and my Xiaomi android TV boxes (4 in total). It can completely take over the home screen and you can strip everything out of it so it is just a list of exactly what you want to have available.
While practical advice its just odd to me there's no major legislation or movement or activism or boycotts about this. We just accept our TV might be silently recording everything we say in our home and the fix is to not plug it into the internet.
So your idiot brother doesn't connect your spy TV to the WiFi when he comes to visit, instead of using the goddamn Chromecast that is already plugged into it. >:(
This. I've had this happen with relatives who come to visit. It's unkind to tell them "Don't fuck with the TV" or "Ignore the TV if it tells you it wants to connect to something."
They want to be "helpful" and show me they can "work tech" by doing stuff like this. They don't understand that the TV is manipulating them. I don't want to have to explain to them that I'm basically a neurosurgeon and they just tried to impress me by drilling a hole in somebody's head. Because the TV told them to.
Disconnecting the wifi avoids the need for unpleasant conversations.
Even if you never connect the TV to your WiFi network it will constantly scan for public networks and also scan for any devices that will respond. “Off” doesn’t actually mean off anymore. :(
Do you have any specific examples of devices where this has been implemented? Because I've heard this idea thrown around a lot as a hypothetical, but never any concrete evidence that it's been done.
Hypothetical is beside the point. The hardware is there, the software is closed and you can't verify what is really happening, so the potential threat exists.
Connecting to open wireless networks is exactly the sort of behavior that would be trivial to confirm the presence of, if it were actually present. You wouldn't even need any unusual tools - just set up an open access point and see if the TV connects to it.
Why would I care that some device to which I never gave a shred of my personal information of any kind (e.g. not logging it into any online account) found an open public network that I don't use and that has no connection to me?
Sure, I would be disturbed that it's doing that sort of thing in spite of Wi-Fi being explicitly turned off.
Because it's acting with your IP address, so attempts to prevent whatever shady botnet things it gets up to may also interfere with legitimate use by humans on your network.
Samsung TVs were literally recording people with microphones and doing voice recognition. Unless you don’t speak in your home, it will have you identified quite quickly.
If we want privacy, should we be buying a TV which has these peripherals? I don't think a TV should have such things, so I would sooner rip out or damage the microphone and camera if I had to get such a TV. The ability to connect to a network could be useful; I'd not mess with it.
They have your location, and can detect your interests from what you watch, and fingerprint you. Things like this are pieces of a larger, comprehensive picture of your life.
Also, how do you pay for streaming channels, etc., if you don't give it any information?
The assumption here is that we don't give the TV any personal information; it's just used as a monitor. The content comes from some other device connected to an input (e.g. HDMI1). (That device may raise privacy issues, but we are concerned with the TV).
Without either doing the fingerprinting from surreptitious audio recording in the room that other commenters mention, or else matching the unit serial number to the purchaser (requiring the retailer to leak personal info to the manufacturer), they can't match the unit's location to our identity.
I see. Roku, for example, takes screenshots of the TV N times per second (and sends them home).
Remember that it doesn't take much to identify someone: Gender, birthdate, and (zip code?) uniquely identify ~80% of Americans. From viewing habits, it should be easy to fingerprint someone - Chicago Bears fan; strong technology interest; on your city block; likes AI porn with Lara Croft; home during day Sa, Su, Tu, Th; watches YouTube videos about ...
Because the TV is recording your voice, what you watch and possibly taking pictures, depending on the brand, and it needs a connection to send that information to whoever will pay for it.
While I've certainly heard plenty of theorizing about the possibility of this happening, I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that it has ever been done.
EDIT: What I am referring to here is the specific allegation that smart TVs will connect to open wireless networks without being commanded to do so. It's not a catch-all for any nefarious thing involving TVs or wireless networks.
And that isn't even the same thing either! (This seems to be a recurring theme.) If it were true that LG TVs "spy" on ambient audio, that would certainly be bad, but it wouldn't also establish that the TVs were connecting to open wireless networks to exfiltrate that data.
Comcast runs a separate "Xfinity WiFi" on all their routers, any Comcast user can connect to it with their credentials. Would they strike a deal with TV manufacturers to let them use it? It would not surprise me.
Pretty sure this is a known offering from Comcast, you just have to talk to the right sales rep... I haven't yet seen any evidence of a TV using it (yet), but hve been told they will sell a company IoT or fleet device access to their wifi endpoints for enough money. I'm not sure it would be cost effective for mass market device surveillance, though.
Also Amazon does this same model with their Sidewalk service, which can run over bluetooth or lora, instead of wifi... and is specifically priced to be usable for large numbers of devices.
All the TV manufacturers have to do is make a deal with Xfinity to jump on their AP, and you're toast. I don't know why anybody would defend them or give them any bit of slack on this. Once they figure this out, they will do it.
> Use a box of your choice on the other end of the HDMI cables. This is now the box that you trust. (Roku? Shield? Blu-ray? MacBook? PC? Linux? Playstation? XBox? Whatever you want.)
If they choose a Firestick or Roku what's the difference? XD
No, it doesn’t in any real sense. Nothing ever implemented it and the channel was reallocated to eARC with different encoding so they couldn’t even co exist.
Lol, you mean like here in the UK where all banks are closing down branches left and right? I think my nearest one is a 45 minute drive away, and last time I went in they just directed me to a terminal that was basically my exact online banking interface and I had to log in the same way I would have done at home. I don't know what kind of query would warrant speaking to an actual teller. If you're regularly sending money or even want to check your balance this cannot be sustainable, would be an enormous waste of time.
To do.. what exactly? Pay for my bills? I don’t know how it’s setup in your country but in mine that’s not realistic. Everything is handled on the app.
In 2013 Backblaze saw ~14% avg failure rate at 3 years 3 months. Drive useful life: 4 years, roughly.
In 2021, Backblaze saw ~14% failure rate at 7 years 9 months. Drive useful life: about 6 years.
That gave us what was a stable-seeming, old "replace drives at 5 years, or you're getting risky" rule of thumb (unless you prefer to replace on failure, of course).
In 2025, Backblaze saw ~5% failure rate at 10 years 3 months. Drive useful life: ~10 years, roughly!
I wonder if any of the improvements in failure rates were caused by changes in how backblaze operates the drives? Like, have they learned things about cooling or improved write leveling or better power management or something.
Could be better controllers, or better driver firmware, or something.
Just curious where in the chain the improvements come from.
I find the upgrade quite surprising. I would have expected them to be mature already in 2013. Or maybe there is change in selection. Blackblaze did go for cheap drives before. But with most users moving to SSD as default drive maybe overall HDDs have moved to more reliable segment. As in lower quality drives are just not made for desktops in mass volumes.
Part of it was drive quality. The 2011 flood that impacted Western Digital[1] caused them to buy a lot of lower-quality Seagate drives which affected their stats for years.
But I think part of it is the modern densities have less tolerance for manufacturing issues, so if the disks work they work well. Kinda like the Mars rovers which only had to work 90 days but they really had to work, so they ended up working for years.
The term "bathtub curve" came from the fact that typically hard disks had a lot of early deaths in the first year right out of the factory, hence a graph of hard drive death age would have a high side on the left (brand new drives dying) and a high side on the right (old drives dying), and during the average lifetime the drives were reliable, so the curve was shaped like a bathtub (high sides, flat bottom).
This lead to a lot of people doing things like intensive burn-in cycles for a week to test new drives before putting them in their machines.
When there are no longer early deaths (the "left" side of the bathtub), it's just "old things wear out" which doesn't have a special word for it.
Well, until the tail of the bathtub, which still seems to be there, but more of a wide dyke rather then a sharp and tall bathtub-edge. Which is father away than it used to be.
Drives still have a meaningful average working life is what I see in te data. There's just barely any infant mortality left.
I remember back in the late nineties / early 2000s drive failures really were pretty common. During my childhood I think I had three. I've never had a catastrophic failure since then, really came a long way.
My father was deep into photography in that era and digitized all his photos. He was understandably paranoid about drive failures. The solution? ZIP disks everywhere! Cue massive family stress when the disk containing his competition entry was nowhere to be found and definitely in one of the kids rooms. It was, of course, found 3 days later in the glove box of his truck (thank you for reading my lowercase-t trauma dump).
> I remember back in the late nineties / early 2000s drive failures really were pretty common.
Yup. And most people wouldn't bother but typically you could RMA HDDs: the terms were quite generous. I was in Europe and did learn, as a teenager, how to RMA HDDs to get shiny replacements (IIRC for example for Seagate HDDs I'd send them to the Netherlands and then after a few weeks I'd get a new one by the mail).
I think that's because there is differences in comparison. When an HDD reached 5 (or X) years it's much more likely to live to 10 (or y) years than one that died at 2 (or Z) years already. ;)
There is both the mathematical truth to it, but also the physical/chemical one. If something eg. deformed or had a slight manufacturing mistake the wear will be quicker. If everything works perfectly and eg. there are little vibrations (can be everything from earthquake to noise) then HDDs also tend to live longer and run faster. Of course the shipping process also can take its toll and vary greatly.
I think in the world of computers it's all to easy to forget that things largely aren't binary and "logically perfect". Even with advancements in manufacturing and materials drives are physical things in the real world influenced by many things inside and outside of the manufacturer's and user's control.
This is broadly consistent with my own experience at smaller scale. Out of a dozen or so 2TB HGST drives in use for 10+ years (mostly Ultrastar SATA, with a few Deskstars that may or may not be mechanically identical), I've had only one failure, and that was of a bare drive that was outside my control, so I have no idea how it was handled. And this was in a dusty environment with no air conditioning, not a datacenter.
Likewise with SSDs. Given their slightly more write intensive than ordinary desktop workloads, I'm reasonably confident that the capacitors in my 10-year-old enterprise SSDs (HGST SAS with Intel flash) will fail before the flash.
> That gave us what was a stable-seeming, old "replace drives at 5 years, or you're getting risky" rule of thumb (unless you prefer to replace on failure, of course).
That's not exactly what this means. This is like life expectancy at birth vs life expectancy at current age. (which is the thing where people act like "only kings got old" in the past, when while there is some truth to it also doesn't mean "you would be dead by 30" when you already reached adulthood. The biggest difference we got regarding life expectancy at birth by far was doctors and nurses cleaning their hands, followed by things like vaccines for childhood diseases)
Manufacturing errors are likely to hit early. So replacing a drive means you might replace a perfectly healthy drive with one that will eat your data.
Just use SMART and you have a way better insight of how well your drive does than any such advice.
And also you likely won't run your drives in the same conditions as Backblaze, so things might vary in both directions.
There is shipping, storage, running conditions, series, manufacturing, and many variables. So you have a way better understanding of your drive than what Backblaze can provide if you just look at your drive's SMART data and run a self test.
Interview him while you still can. I encourage you to seek out whoever Ted's contact people are and try to get that interview in. Make it long and thorough, and put it on YouTube and archive it.
What's wrong with the G502? I like the wired G502 pretty well. Ideally I'd tweak the shape to be a little more like the M500s shape, but I'm happy enough with it overall.
I had a G502 that lasted years, but the last two I bought lasted me 6 months each (the wheel got completely gummed up somehow). I acknowledge that cat hair and sweaty hands are a bad combination for a mouse wheel, but that's insanely poor durability, and they're annoying enough to disassemble that they're effectively not cleanable.
> Can I safely uninstall the extension and keep my existing containers, names, colors, icons, cookies, and active sessions?
Great question.
As a very satisfied, long time user of 2 extensions in combination, Temporary Containers and Firefox Multi-Account Containers, I wonder the same thing.
I found out the hard way some time back that simply disabling (not even removing it) and re-enabling the Firefox Multi-Account Containers extension would cause all the painstakingly set up containers and their saved credentials/data to get "lost".
If there were to be a way to "export" and "import" sets of named containers with their settings and data, that would be great for not losing which-site-maps-to-which-container-and-is-already-signed-in (whether natively or within an extension).
Second, never use the "apps" built into the TV.
Next, don't plug Ethernet into the TV. Plug HDMI cables into the TV.
Use a box of your choice on the other end of the HDMI cables. This is now the box that you trust. (Roku? Shield? Blu-ray? MacBook? PC? Linux? Playstation? XBox? Whatever you want.)
The Smart TV itself is now fine. Choose the devices you plug into it to play content. The TV just shows it.
reply