Two identical TVs the same size and make, one “smart”, one not. The smart is $10 cheaper, people go for that.
One thing that I do wonder about is the value in adding AI and "Smartness", what if people don't use it? I know practically no one who uses their smart TV as anything but a monitor (and speakers). Everyone adds an AppleTV or a ChromeCast. My in-laws used Netflix on their Sony TV for a bit, but it was slow and two years ago Netflix stopped being supported on their TV and I gave them an old ChromeCast. Backed in AI could easily end up in the same situation. It's omni-present, but rarely used. That's a problem with the current logic behind innovation where little market research is done and companies are afraid to remove functionality as it may make them look less competitive (in the eyes of shareholders).
Someone point out that apparently Romanian online electronics retailers have a pretty nice selection of dumb TVs, at least they did a few years ago.
It totally would make sense in, e.g. art or photography (or, strangely, crocheting) circles to show that this image of a mouse was not vomited by an ML that had eaten too much LAION
It's fairly new, but with the mess around stock photo sites having undeclared AI images I wouldn't be surprised if it sites eventually showcase this information
I do not see this getting into consumer phone images, screenshots or such things.
Also, c2pa as done by Adobe simply records signed list of what AI tools were used, and, since they are pushing AI into everything, good luck deriving anything useful from that list of modifications.
Also, I've seen a few photographers on internet on one hand hating AI with all their might, and on other proudly sharing their "technique" of upscaling blurry mess photos to huge sizes using Topaz Labs. I mean...