Show HN: Making a smart TV dumb and then smart (github.com)

107 points by animalhot 2 days ago

A recent (unwanted) webOS update that got installed on TV prompted me to start going down the rabbit hole of writing new TV software. After a couple of weekends and massive help from 4 different models, finally managed to get v1 working.

My daughter enjoys navigating TV through speech while I get to browse on the biggest screen at home.

While all of the code was written by ML models, there were decisions I had to help with. In specific: using WebRTC to cut down latency, repurposing vendor logic for buffering voice samples and designing user experience.

It was liberating to finally free the TV of bloatware and make it truly personalized!

bradknowles 1 day ago
So, de-bloating the TV and removing all the ads, etc… is good. None of that requires an Internet connection, and no TV should ever need an Internet connection. And here, I can see that might take you writing some software to achieve that goal. I would try to just choose a better vendor of TV hardware, but I know that’s not always an option.
As for putting the smarts back in, why not just plug in a small but trusted device that can output HDMI and can give you the smart output that you want? This could be a media server front end (obviously not Plex, but one of the many Plex alternatives), or a trusted software solution from another source? This part doesn’t seem to require writing any software, just choosing a suitable alternative and configuring it.
For me, that would be an AppleTV device, but I know that this community is not going to like that vendor.
wffurr 1 day ago
$7000 DGX Spark as a media PC, what a world. Surely there's cheaper hardware that can run a decent voice assistant.
- animalhot 1 day ago
  valid point; DGX spark is slowly becoming the brain of my household and is multipurpose.
  I am also developing a harness for coding and chat so it helps a ton to have a local model and fine tuning it for cases.
  Additionally am trying to wean off homekit/googlehome and build a local network (possibly air gapped from internet), so the device helps experiment.
- lisplist 1 day ago
  Tbf you could get them as low as $3500 a few weeks ago
Sytten 1 day ago
What are the best brands / models to buy right now to install webOS?
- animalhot 1 day ago
  webOS is under LGs stewardship; I find their OLED displays to be gorgeous. However, there software leaves much to desire
  - animalhot 1 day ago
    their*
pcardoso 1 day ago
Found this a few days ago as well.
https://github.com/Gathin23/cleanyourtv/tree/main
- vanviegen 1 day ago
  So they recommend that you debloat your TV by pasting a rather lengthy prompt into your coding agent, that'll take a long time to sort things out.
  And then, near the bottom of the page, they provide a 9 lines of shell script that according to them does "everything the agent does". Uhh.. okay? I guess the agent would be for trouble shooting, but I'm not really sold on this modern of delivering software yet.
  https://github.com/Gathin23/cleanyourtv/tree/main#doing-it-b...
  - tonyedgecombe 1 day ago
    I don’t know, I think that I might prefer the prompt over the slop it produces.
    LambdaComplex 1 day ago
    At least the slop it produces would be deterministic.
- TheSkyHasEyes 1 day ago
  Give it time. Someone will make a website referencing TV make/models to match BASH scripts doing the job cleanly, predictably. :)
- jorisw 1 day ago
  This is cool, but beware this takes a long time to complete even with an agent.
  And the result I didn't find particularly pretty to look at
- animalhot 1 day ago
  a lot of folks are trying this and am glad we finally have options!
a1o 1 day ago
Curious about Netflix, does it limit the resolution because it is not an “official” app or something like this?
Also, it says you have to have system root of the tv, how does one get root access to the LG TV?
- cassianoleal 1 day ago
  > how does one get root access to the LG TV?
  https://cani.rootmy.tv/
- animalhot 1 day ago
  Netflix works fine. While rooting, this does not replace the app store and these are official apps
gawacer 1 day ago
How do you keep webOS from updating itself again and undoing all this? Rooted, or running on top of stock?
- animalhot 1 day ago
  it is rooted; am still maintaining the original settings as a backup on laptop and not flashing the TV memory; however, the current code is persistent.
Zookaz 1 day ago
Just get an exisiting tv box or make your own. dumb your tv down and keep it that way smart tvs are a joke
- animalhot 1 day ago
  a truly smart tv can be a real enabler especially for kids navigating it. As more and more streaming services take exclusive rights to games/matches, it becomes hard to keep track of where to watch an event. A Smart TV with personalization can help - as long as you can keep it private.
  Typing for TVs is hard with a remote. Even Apple TV can be cumbersome. imho, voice is the ideal input source for a tv. But making it truly functional requires connecting to good models!
jelder 1 day ago
All I really want my TV to do is turn on, quickly and reliably, and display whatever is plugged into HDMI1. The market is flooded with “Smart” (actually Surveillance) TVs so not buying one isn’t really practical.
- pwg 1 day ago
  I wonder if your comment suggests a re-framing of the TV's name. Start referring to them as "Surveillance TVs" in all contexts. Maybe the idea will spread?
  - leni536 1 day ago
    Just call them telescreens.
    dsr_ 1 day ago
    Not everyone has read 1984, so it's accurate but not horrendously useful.
- tarentel 1 day ago
  My Sony Google something or other from 2-3 years ago turns on directly to the active HDMI, more or less reliably for most devices, otherwise it'll turn on to the last used HDMI. I never connected it to the internet. I don't buy TVs very often so I was kind of shocked I didn't need the remote anymore to switch inputs when switching between devices. I expect every TV to do this now. It is sad to know that this may not be the case if I ever decide to buy a new TV.
- mchristen 1 day ago
  You can buy what are called digital signage displays which are mostly just that. A quick search shows a 65" Samsung model available in US retail for $1400.
  - mikestew 1 day ago
    A quick search shows…
    I’ve noticed that very few people recommending signage displays as a substitute for a traditional TV ever say, “here’s the one I bought…”
    That’s because one will quickly discover that signage displays aren’t very good TVs.
    nicwolff 1 day ago
    I have a 55" LG Wallpaper signage display on my living room wall right now, with just an Apple TV plugged in, and it's fantastic. Cost $5000, 3.65mm thick, no smart features at all.
    jelder 1 day ago
    And at only 10x the price!
  - thesuitonym 1 day ago
    Digital signage displays are not TVs though. They are much more expensive and frequently don't have features that dumb TVs had 40 years ago such as speakers, TV tuners, and multiple inputs.
    ssl-3 1 day ago
    Perfect.
    That matches exactly how I've used every television I've owned for 20-ish years: I don't have the outside antenna I'd need for ATSC reception here so a tuner is useless, and I don't ever wish to hear the slightest utterance from a television speaker so speakers are useless, and I don't need it to have multiple inputs (but the digital signage displays usually seem to have a few, anyway, just as PC monitors do).
    burnte 1 day ago
    Ok, but in this context it's EXACTLY what the user wants for a TV. Everything can go to an HDMI switch, including external tuners, and you'll have a soundbar because TV speakers are GARBAGE today.
    mchristen 1 day ago
    But I think that's the point? One thing I find silly is seeing all these smart TVs with "fancy" speakers sitting behind a sound bar that has a Roku/fire TV/Chromecast plugged in. Paying twice for devices with a large overlap in features...
    ink_13 1 day ago
    I already don't use the speakers, TV tuner, or multiple inputs of my TV. That's what I have a sound system and streaming box for.
    ragall 1 day ago
    Go buy an AVR and get yourself a proper 5.1.2 home theater (even in a living room); and then the TV will be just a dumb display with the AVR acting as multiplexer.
    ForHackernews 1 day ago
    Part of the reason they're more expensive is that they're not subsided by ad revenue.
    thesuitonym 1 day ago
    Neither were dumb TVs in the 90s, but they were still somehow affordable.
    freeone3000 1 day ago
    The price of the median purchased TV in 1997 was ~$4000, in nominal (1997) dollars. The price of the median TV in 2026 is ~$800.
    So before we account for inflation, consumers are paying about one-fifth the price for a TV now. When we account for inflation, consumers are paying 3.7% of the price for a TV that they did in 1997. And it’s not even the same TV!
    An apples-for-apples comparison, a 44” flatscreen TV with 1080i input was $45,000 in 1997 dollars, whereas the current price for a comparable model is $220. (The 2026 model is still better, with a lower operating cost and no burn-in, but it was the worst I could find.)
    TVs today are significantly cheaper than those in the 90s. It’s not the TV’s fault they’re unaffordable.
    Telaneo 1 day ago
    The Sony KV-32FS120, a high-end set in 2004, had an MSRP of 600 USD.[1] (remember, HD hadn't really happened yet, so anything with that feature wasn't a normal consumer item until at least 2005 (unles you were in Japan)) 1080i basically didn't exist in 1997, unless you lived in Japan, where it had barely got of the ground. The modern day comparison is a 100 inch 8K OLED. Your median is so far off base I have a hard time we live in the same world.
    [2] https://crtdatabase.com/crts/sony/sony-kv-32fs120

Showing 40 of 78 comments. Full thread on Hacker News.