zlacker

>>hliyan+(OP)
We really need some legislation that outlaws this sort of control over devices we buy.

If someone wants to install an advert app on their fridge (I assume in exchange for money) then fair enough.

If I buy a tv I shouldn't just have to accept that, now or in the future, the manufacturer will sell advertising on it.

>>jamesb+X2
I'm going to keep this sort of on topic and this will not be a popular opinion.

No, this does not need legislation. If you don't wants ads on your refrigerator, how about not buying a refrigerator with a screen built in, it's not necessary.

>>mlrtim+Ih
Try to buy a new TV without « smart » features. It’s nearly impossible and all of them will come with some kind of ads on it. I fear it will become impossible to buy a fridge without screen and ad if we don’t find a way to stop this. It’s pure profit for manufacturers and the consumers are fucked since fridge are basic necessities.

>>Arcanu+3j
That would be a waste of money on the manufacturers part. It will always be possible to disable the screen

>>gentoo+1l
And what if the manufacturers decide to sue you for disabling the screen? Or decide to simply disable your fridge? This isn't a far out scenario either, the whole right-to-repair movement was based on a company not allowing you to do things with the tractor you bought.

>>fzeror+9o
The lawsuit you described in the first question would be without merit. The class action lawsuit stemming from the second would be choc full of merit.

If the fridge is in my house and hammers aren't banned yet then that fridge will not be showing me ads.

>>gentoo+Ao
It would be with merit, because it would be part of the contract you signed when you bought the damn thing. We already live in a world where any attempt to bypass DRM on things you've bought is tantamount to a potential legal battle if they really wanted to be assholes about it. Where you don't really own the things you buy.