On: California passes nation’s first IoT security bill...

[crankylinuxuser]

> The only way that would be profitable was if every smart tv required a service contract to support such demands, otherwise the model is flawed.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

Support your shit properly, or keep the devices dumb.

I prefer dumb, so I can add my own smarts without being tied to some shitty proprietary IoT.

[supernovae → crankylinuxuser]

thats not the consumer pattern though, and to be honest, you can get dumb tvs :)

[s73v3r_ → supernovae]

If the dumb tv is poorly engineered and sets my house on fire, then I would be able to sue them for liability. I see no reason whatsoever why I should not be able to do the same thing if their software causes issues.