How else will they subsidize the cost of the jumbotron in your living room?

Yesterday's post (about rooting a samsung) was a $3,000 TV. I don't think it's about affordability.

	▲	hnfong 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Well, it would be a $3001 TV without the extra money they collected on the side...

▲

dtgriscom 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is the answer. Lots of people (myself included) are happy to buy a big, cheap TV, but it's cheap because the manufacturer gets money by paid app placement, ads (sometimes), and selling information about you.

A senior friend has bad vision, so I recommended an inexpensive but enormous TV that they can use as a display, and never let it connect to the network. Unfortunately, every few months the display tries to coax them into connecting to WiFi, and it confuses the heck out of them. But, that's the game.

▲

devsda 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is it actually proven that TVs are sold below cost or is it just a conjecture to justify the ads.

▲

masfuerte 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wifi access points should offer a sort of "/dev/null" network for smart devices to connect to.

▲

wincy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m just curious what brand the tv is? That way I can be sure to avoid it.

	▲	cowlevel 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It doesn't matter, it's all of them.

▲

Orygin 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Expensive TV also spy on you, so spending more does not help

	▲	20after4 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is the point everyone misses. It's not just that they are subsidizing the price of the TV. Whenever there is an opportunity to extract more profit, eventually they will do it. The rich are not immune from being targeted by this but they sure like to think that they are when they support this behavior in the companies they control.