How standardized a lcd panels? Could I replace the controller in a smart TV with one of these HDMI to LCD controllers?
this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
409 points (94.7% liked)
Technology
59427 readers
3449 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well you could not connect it to the internet...
Not anymore with sidewalk and other similar corporate networks bypassing any requirement for the consumer to connect the TV to wifi
https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/everything-you-need-to-know-about-amazon-sidewalk
"How much of my internet bandwidth does Amazon Sidewalk require?"
"Very little. Sidewalk’s connectivity is distinct from your home Wi-Fi. If you choose, however, to enable Sidewalk on your eligible Bridge devices, those devices would use a small amount of internet bandwidth."
This sounds like it still needs your internet to work unless I'm missing something.
If you don't have a sidewalk bridge but your neighbour half a mile away has one, your device will connect to your neighbour's bridge and send data to Amazon without you knowing
Uhhh. No.
im sorry how is this legal?
Corpo exception.
Also, maybe it isnt; state isnt gonna stop em either way.
correct me if im wrong, but a device trying to connect to the network in order to analytics. Which can't, which then defaults to a SECONDARY BACKUP mechanism, just to transmit ANALYTICS. Is basically just spying, and you cannot convince me otherwise.
I... Well I might try but only if it were funny. I agree. But its not effectively (and I don't think technically) illegal.
the fact that it isn't illegal is astonishing to me.
or at least incredibly frowned upon.
Why? Laws aren't here to protect you. The entire pretense of that is just to make you accept when the propertarian (and in most places white supremacist) gangsters want to walk into your community and disappear/murder someone they don't like.
It is frowned upon tho. By us. Others too, i bet, if they know about it. So what's the plan? Me, I just haven't bought a new TV since like 2014, but that's a personal dodge rather than a systemic fix, and it feels really trashy not having a solution for others, besides 'go without'.
I mean, the law literally states that we aren't required to house soliders in the time of war if we desire. It also asserts privacy and a certain level of personal freedom. I see no extent as to why this shouldn't extend to multinational corpos or at the very least, be explicitly clear.
Ultimately, i think we just need to get into government, and actually fucking do something about it.
"The system is broken! We must appeal to the system for help!"
That's insane and absurd.
The amount of effort required to make government do anything other than imperialism and genocide (and they will always half ass it) is always a substantial multiple of just doing it yourself. Stop begging, and letting their bullshit appropriate your desire for a better world.
ok then, let's go coup the government.
No that would still end up with a government. If I'm gonna risk my ass like that for something, its going to be something I actually want.
i have a theory that anarchy always ends in some form of government. I suppose you could have an anarchic government. But i would much rather have a difference government, with the same principles to begin with tbh. Anarchy is more of a driving force to me than anything else.
Everything always ends in something else. If it didn't, it wouldn't be an ending, or would violate thermodynamics.
The point is nobody being in charge, in shrinking authority while keeping coordination.
that's an interesting place to use a thermodynamics jumpscare, but frankly i think we just need proper isolation from state and federal government, each has their own purpose. They should do specifically what is most productive for themselves and nothing more.
But that's just me being fed up with shit being entirely inconsistent from state to state for no fucking reason.
Not a jump scare; conservation. The warm fuzzy part?
Why do you want people in charge without coordination? That seems remarkably unpleasant.
it's not zero coordination, it's highly coordinated, on account of being incredibly strict by design. The federal government would oversee things that are logical to be controlled by the federal government. The general workings of tax law for example. While state would focus on it's micro system in comparison to the fed, adjusting federal tax law to be applicable to the state level.
Etc... repeat ad nauseam, until government no longer shit.
Read 'brain of the firm' and 'seeing like a state'.
Well, that's a pretty good reason to break your neighbors shit.