6 ms·

Perhaps you didn't read the text you just copied and pasted, but here it is for you: "I have never intentionally run pixel cleaning on this monitor and I never

Perhaps you didn't read the text you just copied and pasted, but here it is for you: "I have never intentionally run pixel cleaning on this monitor and I never will, I don’t care, and I would like for that overlay to go away forever." No need for ackshually, the guy is clear with what he desires. That is, by the way, the point of TFA. I want my devices to do what I want, not what a product manager wants or what a dude on hacker news wants. The author even dropped a comment here doubling down on his intent. That is the main problem, when the smaht guys think they know better, to a pathological extent where they tell other people what they ought to do with their things .

harry8 24d ago
>...the smaht guys think they know better, to a pathological extent where they tell other people what they ought to do with their things . Not just tell, actually nag, coerce and force, often in the teeth of their own total idiocy. "Your password needs to be between 8 and 15 characters and include an upper case letter, a symbol and a number. (And an actually good, strong password will be rejected). See that all the time, still, in 2026. So very smaht.
ryandrake 24d ago
The user should be the final authority over what his computer does. Not the computer manufacturer. Not the OS developer. Not the 3P app developer. Not some product manager at a software company. The end user. Even time computer says no, or does something without your permission, or does something counter to your wishes, or alerts you to do something, or urges you to do something, or makes you opt-out, is a failure.
- willdr 24d ago
  The end user disables pixel cleaning because the pop-up annoys them. They then start bitching about burn-in within 6 months, RMA the monitor even though it was their choice to do so, and spread negative sentiment about your brand going forward for being "prone to burn in".
  - cwillu 24d ago
    Cool story, bro.
  - flavelius 24d ago
    ..which then forces the manufacturers to develop better solutions - people who are annoyed by manual maintenance tasks or disruptions buy them - Not a bad scenario for both sides.
  - jcelerier 23d ago
    Yes? Are you a human or a corporation talking? Has Samsung achieved singularity status and is now posting on HN? Besides, the negative sentiment that OP shares here sis for me much stronger than any burned pixel, annoyances like this are a sure way for me to not buy a product if I read this in reviews
    - krsw 23d ago
      Why would Samsung care if he burns out his OLED panel? The alert is there only as far as shielding the manufacturer from legal culpability if the unit fails. If they can point and say "Nah, no RMA, this guy only did 3 pixel refreshes in a year or installed unauthorized firmware" then you're on the hook for a new display. Assuming that Samsung has any more investment in enforcing you to pixel refresh is inane. Do you also skip oil changes thinking "Fuck you, not today, Hyundai!"
  - deleted 23d ago
    [deleted]
  - StableAlkyne 23d ago
    OP wants his property to behave in a specific way, clearly knowing the risks. I'm not seeing how a hypothetical bad review about a $200B company is at all relevant here. The manufacturer's reputation is not in any way OP's problem. If you own the hardware, it is yours to abuse, break, and do all manner of things that would make the engineers who designed it cringe: you do not owe any allegiance to them.
- fluoridation 24d ago
  I think there are actions a user may sometimes wish to take that software should simply refuse, ideally. Some actions are, and can only be, mistakes. I don't think it's a bad idea for software and hardware to defend itself against misinformed, confused, or clumsy users.
inigyou 22d ago
What's the chance he would then get mad in a week when his monitor has visible burn-in, and try to return it?

harry8 24d ago

>...the smaht guys think they know better, to a pathological extent where they tell other people what they ought to do with their things . Not just tell, actually nag, coerce and force, often in the teeth of their own total idiocy. "Your password needs to be between 8 and 15 characters and include an upper case letter, a symbol and a number. (And an actually good, strong password will be rejected). See that all the time, still, in 2026. So very smaht.

ryandrake 24d ago

The user should be the final authority over what his computer does. Not the computer manufacturer. Not the OS developer. Not the 3P app developer. Not some product manager at a software company. The end user. Even time computer says no, or does something without your permission, or does something counter to your wishes, or alerts you to do something, or urges you to do something, or makes you opt-out, is a failure.

willdr 24d ago
The end user disables pixel cleaning because the pop-up annoys them. They then start bitching about burn-in within 6 months, RMA the monitor even though it was their choice to do so, and spread negative sentiment about your brand going forward for being "prone to burn in".
- cwillu 24d ago
  Cool story, bro.
- flavelius 24d ago
  ..which then forces the manufacturers to develop better solutions - people who are annoyed by manual maintenance tasks or disruptions buy them - Not a bad scenario for both sides.
- jcelerier 23d ago
  Yes? Are you a human or a corporation talking? Has Samsung achieved singularity status and is now posting on HN? Besides, the negative sentiment that OP shares here sis for me much stronger than any burned pixel, annoyances like this are a sure way for me to not buy a product if I read this in reviews
  - krsw 23d ago
    Why would Samsung care if he burns out his OLED panel? The alert is there only as far as shielding the manufacturer from legal culpability if the unit fails. If they can point and say "Nah, no RMA, this guy only did 3 pixel refreshes in a year or installed unauthorized firmware" then you're on the hook for a new display. Assuming that Samsung has any more investment in enforcing you to pixel refresh is inane. Do you also skip oil changes thinking "Fuck you, not today, Hyundai!"
- deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
- StableAlkyne 23d ago
  OP wants his property to behave in a specific way, clearly knowing the risks. I'm not seeing how a hypothetical bad review about a $200B company is at all relevant here. The manufacturer's reputation is not in any way OP's problem. If you own the hardware, it is yours to abuse, break, and do all manner of things that would make the engineers who designed it cringe: you do not owe any allegiance to them.
fluoridation 24d ago
I think there are actions a user may sometimes wish to take that software should simply refuse, ideally. Some actions are, and can only be, mistakes. I don't think it's a bad idea for software and hardware to defend itself against misinformed, confused, or clumsy users.

inigyou 22d ago

What's the chance he would then get mad in a week when his monitor has visible burn-in, and try to return it?