Hacker News Reader

Comment by esseeayen | Hacker News Reader

There goes the argument "if you're not paying for the product then you are the product" because ring and associated services aren't cheap.

View on HN

> There goes the argument "if you're not paying for the product then you are the product" because ring and associated services aren't cheap.

Not really. If you aren't paying for the product, then you certainly are the product. If you are paying for the product, then you may still be the product, but you also may not. It all boils down in that case to how trustworthy and greedy the vendor is.

I think the OP's point is that the latter is so common nowadays that it makes more sense to not give the benefit of the doubt and assume that paying for something gives you privacy and makes vendors less data-hungry, and I think that's probably becoming good advice.

You could buy a TV worth several thousand dollars and they'll still show you advertisements. Also in Samsung's case they'll take screenshots of what you're watching to find out what you like. There's always money in the advertising revenue stream.

Are you talking about smart TVs? Because ads only show up on real TVs if you tell them to. It's the cable you plugged into it or the ads at the beginning of the movie you just paid money for. It's not the TV. The TV is dumb as hell. It only shows you what you tell it to show you.

This has IMO been gone for ages.

I remember buying a PS4 and still had to opt-out of data collection and then change like 20 settings on their bullshit social network I don't even want to use.

Windows 10 is paid and yet it has ads and insane data collection.

The car entertainment systems that have LTE connections tend to also phone home a lot lol.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com