And they say:
"Why not? We indicated in the TOS (on page 4) our ability to 'modify the program as needed to better support our customers or our services.'
"Also please note that our TOS, which incorporates our Privacy Policy, allows us to sell your wake-up time to third parties in real-time.
"And before you say you never agreed to our TOS, we say you did when you plugged the SuperSmartestAlarm into a power outlet (as clearly indicated on page 22 of the aforementioned TOS, which can be conveniently viewed in a 6" x 2" frame with vertical and horizontal scrollbars)."
[Since this is too close to the truth to be obvious satire: no, this is not happening AFAIK (right now).]
https://martechseries.com/mts-insights/guest-authors/why-ref...
It's from 2018, and no progress has been mad on this wonderous world for ad-subsidized fridges that I know of. Still, it's clear people are thinking along these lines.
And I remain adamant that any appliance I own like this must not have wifi or bluetooth functionality. After my TV started showing ads when I switched inputs, I'm done giving these people an inch.
And the wealthy will get their peace of mind as they buy out of the system while continuing to preside over and profit from it. It's just going to become another thing that poor people have to live with; subservience to the corporate overlords.
I remember asking the CEO why would someone pay $5/month just to control their fan and he basically responded that the idea seems ludicrous and this point in time, but eventually people will catch on, and then he made an allusion to Microsoft Office and how that it's becoming a subscription product despite initially being one-off purchase 15 years ago.
If you're willing to do some technical work, there is fantastic open source tooling in this space. Then you'll have a setup that isn't affected by the business desires or financial problems of others. As a bonus, you get better latency over lan.
https://tasmota.github.io/docs/Tasmota-IR/#sending-irhvac-co...
My only point was that even this server-based system is already selling without a subscription, and as you point out, the off-ramp to a system with no cloud dependency is pretty clear for those who want to avoid subscriptions (or dependencies in general).
Thanks for the pointer!
I was pointing out that even the parent comment's very example of a slow slide towards universal subscriptions that add no value didn't hold. It was framed as "I have inside knowledge of this nascent product category and its capture by useless subscriptions", while in reality this is already a market category that exists without any such issues.
This bizarre wild-eyed fearmongering about insane, lose-lose, somehow-inescapable business models is HN's version of QAnon.
Similarly, if ads partially fund a toaster, just....pay more for the toaster without ads? The expansion of ads to every product category doesn't warrant the assumption that it will _consume_ every product category, leaving no ad-free alternatives.
(a) introduce new products that require additional subscriptions (but eventually the company runs out of new products to introduce),
(b) raise subscription fees a tiny little bit every year (but there's a limit to how much any company can do that without angering customers too much), and
(c) break existing ad-free plans into new tiers of service, some or all of which have... ads.
None of the examples you gave (toasters, windows, paint, and shower-heads) are services. I used YouTube (a service) as an example, because we're not in a world where products are overrun with ads the way services are, but my point was that even the service market has started to offer alternatives to ads.
The idea that the market will bear every product getting service-ized but somehow not offer any ad-free versions is nonsensical, at least in the steady state.
Tangential, but you reminded me of it: it's truly fascinating how incredibly brain-damaging discussion of ads seem to be. Every single thread I've ever read on the topic is full of non sequiturs, nonsensical analogues, glaring logical inconsistencies, etc. The only other topic I can think of that makes people similarly insane is airlines (cf my "why should I pay taxes" uncle complaining about airlines no longer requiring other passengers to pay for transporting his suitcases).
As alternatives, you can buy commercial displays that are effectively TVs (with HDMI in), however they lag in specs and lack some features. You can also buy hospitality versions of TVs as 'dumb' TVs for a similar price, but these also tend to have lower specs. You can buy large format computer monitors (55" is about the highest I've seen) but they are substantially more expensive (roughly 3x more expensive) and typically use DisplayPort instead of HDMI.
I only learned about the options because I'm looking to replace my 2013 Plasma TV that has a power supply problem.
Adverts scorched into your toast. I sort of want this.
But adverts on my breakfast? Dear god please no.
Who's "we"? The advertising companies? Then no.
Smart condom with smart lubricant - pay as you use.
Smart pants - ads on ass, smart farts.
Such a high % of the population is clinically addicted to the phone though I can't blame anyone who makes a product to cater to these addicts.
Smart toasters that force you to watch ads before getting your toast in the morning?
Smart windows that display ads that block your view of your backyard?
Smart paints that display ads on your bedroom walls?
Smart shower-heads that play jingles as you wash yourself?
Smart brain implants that directly induce subconscious desire to buy certain products and services?
Is there some kind of limit at which we value the right to personal privacy and the right to peace-of-mind over the right to advertise?