VPN on Samsung Smart TV?
Hello, I am planning to use a VPN on my Samsung smart tv UN40N5200AF I want your guy's recommendation that which VPN works good on smart TVs and is VPN actually compatible with smart TVs? currently, I am considering PureVPN as they are offering 3 years subscription for $69, but I want to know should I go for it? and can I buy a VPN for my Samsung smart tv?
|
My preference for VPN is Private Internet Access (PIA).
Definitely nothing free, not Nord. This is worth a read: https://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-s...ymous-in-2019/ PureVPN doesn't even make their list, which raises eyebrows. That all said, smart TVs being compatible with VPNs would be news to me. "Smart" TVs are generally pretty dumb, very basic, and go obsolete within a couple of years due to no real updates. I guess it really depends on the networking advanced features on the TV model. |
If your Smart TV is Android based, it's as simple as downloading the corresponding VPN client from the store. If not, you can always use a PC as a gateway and route all traffic through it. PureVPN is a good & reliable service as far as I know. Those lists are complete BS. You know you can't trust them when you look at the sponsorship list from all those sites lol All these sites are getting paid by all these VPN services to make it through their "top ten lists".
|
Quote:
Similar to how this site is not biased by money when it comes to quality hosting companies, best DVD media, etc. Not everybody can be corrupted by $$$$$, some reliable information still exists out there. :wink2: |
1 Attachment(s)
Thank you.
Quote:
|
You're seemingly (willingly?) confused. Having a site-wide sponsor doesn't change the nature of the article about VPNs. You're clearly still not reading the actual article.
For your convenience, from the intro: Quote:
Quote:
People have too much blind faith in the letters "VPN", and do not really research what is going on. The TorrentFreak article aims to shed some light on those aspects. Again, read it. :book: Stop being a conspiracist. If that's your attitude no information from anybody is to be trusted ever, and you may as well live in a cave "off the grid" while wearing a tinfoil hat 24/7/365. Even non-profits must have funding. Even the most ethical and earnest folks must have funding. And funding is not necessarily given with strings attached. So, for example, it means that the presence of a VPN ad on a news site about privacy does not mean that an article about VPNs was somehow influenced. Journalists have long had a separation between editorial and advertising. Yes, some sleezy places have dropped that wall, but not everybody has done so. Even an entity as unsavory and factually-challenged as Fox News, or The Wall Street Journal (Op/Ed section), doesn't allow ad to leech into editorial (political ads excluded). |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
PIA is what we've used for years now. That decision wasn't based on ads or fake splogs. And we re-evaluate that decision annually. BTW, I see NordVPN is back in the news again. I known Nord from all the hyperbolic TV ads -- and the news stories about them being exploited, continually hacked, and their overall shady octopus entanglements with 3rd parties. Advertising has near-zero effect on me, because I look deeper. NordVPN stinks, PureVPN stinks. Software, capture cards, blank media, etc -- we look for the quality here, the "regard". Their ad money is mostly just them pissing in the wind. We don't choose VPNs based on ads, and at most only get awareness of a company existing due to the ads. PureVPN is Hong Kong operated, meaning China. PureVPN keeps logs. (Supposedly, as of a few months ago, they claim to no longer keep logs, but that remains to be seen. The claim is dubious, especially given the logging policies of China. I call BS, as do most others.) There's nothing more to say about that. Keeping logs makes VPNs semi-pointless. Why pay a 3rd party to spy on you, when the ISP can do that for free? It's arguable that even some ISPs are more privacy-oriented than some VPN services out there. Outrageous! :mad4: Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
In 2016, this was tested on PIA: https://torrentfreak.com/vpn-provide...i-case-160312/ Inversely, other services do lie. For example, PureVPN: https://www.extremetech.com/internet...ternet-stalker Multiple VPN services have been audited by 3rd parties to verify their claims. Not logging literally takes less energy and time than setting up logging. I do not understand why you think otherwise. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You can choose: - to log everything - to log nothing - to log only what you want to log A log is just record keeping. You don't write down what isn't needed. You can log non-identifying data for both optimization and security. IP address logging is not required to log those. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
IT is an ever-changing field, with many niches, and so I don't expect anybody to know everything anyway. However, don't pretend you do (ala Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory, Mr. Expert of everything that doesn't know what Radio Head is). I've been doing IT tasks for about 25 years now, some of which involved cutting-edge hardware and software. I'm far from expert on everything, but I do know some things about some things. VPNs is one of said things. Again, the no-log status has been independently audited and verified, as well as legally tested. PIA, amongst others, has no identifying logs of user activity. To say otherwise, and insist everybody is lying about logging, is just wacky conspiracy theory. I agree, this is getting off-topic, we've scared off the OP. :unsure: |
... and we're done. :lock:
|
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.