this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2025
810 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37830 readers
284 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well that’s not true. They have been in business for 40 years. They sell TVs for people who don’t want anything except video in. Mainly commercial places like offices, stadiums, etc.
Yes because the majority own/buy TV's commercial places like offices and stadiums.
I’m not understanding what the point is that you’re trying to make? I’m sorry.
I said that the privacy concerns being worth the cost of a "smart"-free TV means nothing to the majority of people.
You said that this isn't true, and that their main customer is commercial places.
I suggested, in response to this, that the majority of people don't own such commercial places.
What part are you not understanding?
Ah ok…
I was disputing the implication that this type of dumb tv only matters to Lemmy users. I felt as if that was an implication you were making in your first message. You left that out of your summary here.
Agree that the majority of people don’t want to pay for a dumb tv, and in fact I’d think that the majority of people would not even like a dumb tv. A tv with built in apps to access services is far more desired by the vast majority.