flacebo

That is not my experience, although I haven't tried Apple TV. It's usually the same app, just running on faster hardware (most TVs are slower than a 30$ streaming box). Also it costs much less overall if you don't have to replace your TV because of some streaming app update. If you change your TV regularly enough that this has not been the issue for you yet, then I dare to assume cost shouldn't really be an issue for you. Of course if you can accept all the shitty things TV manufacturers are shoving down our throat, nobody is going to stop you.

Damn... The faraday cage around my TV will worsen the picture quality.

He is right though.

Nice workaround. Feels pretty stupid that you have to do that. Sounds like they choose the easy way to comply with the regulations. They could probably just have blocked certain frequency ranges.

Although I'm still fully convinced that TVs just got worse for the consumer since they became "smart". My extended family had to replace perfectly good TVs three times because the new version of a streaming app did not work anymore.

Add stuff like running ads on an expensive TV, running spyware that sends screenshots even of your HDMI source back to the company (possibly exposing your passwords and everything), the continuous nagging about new versions and ToS (with dark patterns to accept sending voice data home), and I feel like the only sane option is to never ever give internet connection to these TVs. Use a separate device for streaming.

I wish the graph was sorted by release date.

> Google also can’t:

> Offer developers money or perks to launch their apps on the Play Store exclusively or first

That's exactly what Epic did trying to make their store happen. They're not the good guys, they just want part of the profit.

Other than that, I see this as a win for other developers and consumers.

Although I don't think this is over, Google will do everything to fight this.

Just because Apple promises? There is actually zero evidence that apple is any better for privacy. Your absolute best option is something like a raspberry pi with an open source OS.

Just don't connect it to your network and you're probably fine. Use a smart box for streaming services.

Sure, it's practical, that's why most people don't have a separate smart box. That's why I called it a curse, because most people are being nagged with ads and being tracked on a level the article talks about.

Smart boxes can communicate with the TV (HDMI-CEC), and you don't have to ever use the TV's remote. If the box turns on, it turns on the TV and switches the source. Same with turn off. If you cast a youtube video to the box, the TV also turns on, etc. So it works completely seamless (at least in my case).

Oh wait, I just remembered regular TV channels exist, I guess you will still need the TV's remote for that.

With smart boxes you have much more options. I'm thinking a stipped down android TV box doesn't make screenshots and track you like most smart TVs do, they also don't serve random ads on the home page.

Smart TVs are a curse (from a consumer perspective). A separate smart device makes much more sense.

People usually replaced their TVs when they broke, which could be 6-8+ years. Nowadays as their already slow hardware becomes even more obsolete, streaming apps are no longer updated and start to break, new ones are not released, etc. they go ahead and buy a new one.

You also have to accept all kinds of crappy agreements, so you can be spied on and get served ADS (?!?!).

Not to mention even the most expensive TVs come with baffingly slow hardware and software. $2k devices can take 10+ seconds to load the menu with 4 options, where you can modify picture settings. Incredible.

A TV should be a display with inputs and nothing more IMO.

Smart boxes are cheap and much faster than even the most expensive TVs, and they can be replaced inexpensively when eventually they become obsolete.

For a long time I pulled the network cable from my TV after I got tired of getting bombarded with changed ToS agreements, firmware updates and home screen ads. Now I have it on the network again just because I wanted to control the source from my PC, but it's still blocked from the internet on the firewall. Go ahead and make snapshots you stupid little TV.

I wouldn't consider that an alternative to a solar radio watch.

Yes, on all my keyboards. No double presses so far. On the keyboard I use for gaming, I actually use 1000Hz polling just to get that sweet placebo effect.

The default debounce algorithm in QMK also introduces a minimum of 5ms delay, and the default usb polling rate another 10ms.

To mitigate the debounce algorithm delay, you can put "DEBOUNCE_TYPE = asym_eager_defer_pk" in your rules.mk file.

What this does:

asym: use different debounce algorithm for key-down and key-up events.

eager: the key-down is registered instantly at the first signal, instead of waiting 5ms for debounce

defer: registering key-up will wait for the debounce delay, this will make sure you won't get multiple key-downs registered before a proper key-up

pk: per key debounce timer, uses the most resource but you have plenty on your rp2040. although I don't completely understand how this works, this is supposed to be the fastest.

To increase the polling rate, this can be defined in config.h:

#define USB_POLLING_INTERVAL_MS 2

It's in ms, so 2 is 500hz, 1 is 1000hz, IMO the latter is overkill.

Together, you save a minimum of 6ms, maximum of 14ms of delay, which is orders of magnitude more than you save by not scanning the matrix.