Double-screen ‘free’ TV will show you ads, even when not in use | Hacker News Reader

Double-screen ‘free’ TV will show you ads, even when not in use

arstechnica.com

13 pointsdoodlesdev16 comments

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when someone quickly figures out how to block the ads - other than at the network level. Seems like it will be very hard to enforce their TOS.

I can imagine a market for businesses with waiting rooms like doctors and dentists that could be quite valuable for targeted advertising. I wouldn't be surprised to see one on the wall of a local takeaway, garage or hair dresser perhaps if they come to this country.

This really feels like one of the ideas a tech exec would come up with in the Silicon Valley TV show.

This is about Telly TV being the "First TV Paid for by Brands", as discussed here a couple days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35953491

I like this - not as a user, but as an observer as to what it will do to the rest of the TV market.

Currently in most consumer-grade TVs, the model is "buy the TV and see ads/be tracked". If this product enters the market and is proven to be viable, it will kill that business model.

In the long run it should make paid TVs ad-free (and ideally tracking-free) because otherwise there wouldn't be many reasons for people to buy them over just going for this free product.

I feel like the only thing that will change is the current offering will be reframed to “buy the tv to see _fewer_ ads”.

I feel like it would be bad luck to invest in someone named Pozin. But if you get in and out early, good for you?

TV's are cheap enough now and people are using tv's less. I don't think this is viable.

I think it's not viable for exactly the opposite reason: the average american still watches tv for more than 3 hours a day. That's 3 hours of having constant ads - I think if it was less, something like this might be tenable, but I think people are going to be willing to pay for a TV that isnt annoying

3 hours of total personal screen time maybe. Not 3 hours of TV.

according to numerous studies and data gathering, it's about 2-4 hours of TV, depending on who you ask.

I hope it'll show headlines about how consumerism and the production of e-waste continue to accelerate despite the fact the earth is burning up and the point of return comes closer and closer.

Can it show ads if you unplug it from the wall or switch it off with a power bar?

It has HDMI ports: plug in your streaming device, and then you're just subject to the same old spying you're used to with that device.

So, a billboard in your home that you also pay for?

You don't, technically speaking, pay for it, which is why it's making news lately. They give you a free TV crammed with ads and trackers.

(It's a little amusing to me to see this discussed on Ars Technica, a site that is also crammed with ads and trackers. This is really just the physical real-world model of every crummy ad-supported site out there.)

It's a funny thing that you remind me of just now - I seem to recall, quite some time ago - 10+ years ago, probably - an exasperated article on Ars Technica arguing against ad blockers, when literally within the past few weeks I'd only just installed one for the first time, because I was fed up with the gigantic banner ads plastered all over... Ars Technica. Of all sites, at probably the peak of "Around the web..." scumlinks even, they pushed me over the threshold.

Yeah, I'm conflicted about Ars. They present themselves as firmly on the side of user-friendliness and privacy, but they're not above scummy ad/tracker practices, autoplaying videos, and obnoxious popups. They also charge you to delete your account.

I've pretty much stopped reading them because I was losing respect for the people who ran the site.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com