The meme of "if you're not paying, you are the product" is, of course, true, but it doesn't acknowledge the host of cases when you are the product even if you're paying. This guy basically paid to be spied on.
Which is why this meme is a half-truth. Other examples include old-world companies like magazines and banks selling our data despite us paying for the service.
Even in areas other than privacy, my bank mistreats me far worse than Internet companies like Google and Twitter.
Not to mention that in a multi-sided ecosystem, Internet companies need to keep both users and advertisers happy, so even if you're not paying, your desires still factor into the decision.
To be clear, I didn't say this meme is a lie, just that it's a half-truth. It makes sense to some extent.
You should write it up in a blog post or something. Given the climate around Facebook right now, it’s not inconceivable that it could get enough attention that your bank stops doing this.
my bank mistreats me far worse than Internet companies like Google and Twitter
Oh boy is this true, I'm on my fourth bank for my UK business and they have all been appalling. I'm not very happy with the current one but have given up on the idea that any other might be better.
Read it again, you are falling in a logical fallacy. The phrase is only saying that "if you are not paying", it doesn't make any claims to what happens when you are paying.
I'm fairly certain the smart features are what's subsidizing current TVs and making them relatively cheap. Last time I checked dumb TVs were reserved for the more high end part of the maker's lineup (if at all available).
So, yes, you're still paying, but you get a price cut in exchange for being … productized?
I bought a 32-inch dumb TV just a couple of weeks ago. It was only $77US, on clearance at Walmart from $129US. The brand is Element, which I'm unfamiliar with, but it works nicely and has absolutely no smart capabilities. So you can find dumb TVs on the low end these days if you look for them.
So, a small, 720p TV? In other words, a TV most people don't want? I fail to see how that's an alternative when I'm looking for a 60" 4K model, not to mention I have no idea what the quality of the device will be.
Ive heard great things about swedx, never had one myself however. Theyre also not IPS/HDR.
Also, its important to use the pixel policy 1, there are some dead pixels otherwise.
Non-smart TVs from the major brands are reserved to their enterprise line-up, that's why they're more expensive.
I worked at Samsung and given how much they poured into Tizen and the various in-house services for SmartHub, I guarantee they aren't making any significant money from them. They have zero leverage with apps for services that people consider a given (like Netflix). And a lot of smaller partnerships don't end well (see Peel for instance).
I'm not sure about brands that went with Android TV, but Google is pretty smart in such partnerships and fully takes advantage of the fact that OEMs like Sony don't have the internal resources to come up even with a half-decent OS.
Questionable updates that push things like samba.tv are probably a (poor) afterthought.
First day I used my Pixel 2 XL I saw ads in the Gmail app. I mean, this is not some $100 phone. I paid 1k for it and Google still showed me ads in Gmail.
The ads are there because you're using gmail the service, not because you're using gmail the app. If you use "gmail the app" with your own imap server or a paid google apps account, you will not see ads.
On the other hand, if there was special code running in the Gmail app to detect if you're on a google phone and behave differently, would you also be annoyed?
