3 ms·
Except, it's not optimized if I never wanted it in the first place. And by the way, I already pay over $150 for monthly internet, when I combine phone and cabl
by downer63 8y ago
Except, it's not optimized if I never wanted it in the first place.
And by the way, I already pay over $150 for monthly internet, when I combine phone and cable/fiber, and I pay for about ten premium services including The New York Times, HBO, Hulu, iTunes, Amazon, Youtube/Google and Netflix, and I still see ads, so what's going on here? What does an ad-free life actually cost?
Tell me, I want to know. Or was that simply an unrealistic option never actually on the table to begin with?
- lwansbrough 8y agoNot sure where you get this sense of entitlement that nothing you use should cost money to use, when it costs money to build/maintain/run. "I already pay for gas, why should I have to pay the stores I drive to?" No, free (as in beer) has never been on the table. Free doesn't exist. I suppose an ad-free life costs what the market dictates, which it never has because of ads, thank goodness. I think if people had to pay for everything they use there would be a lot less innovation and certainly far fewer options.
- beagle3 8y agoPeople pay for everything they use, if they didn’t the economy would break. They just pay indirectly - a cent of each sofa can distributes between the newspapers, product placement tv spots and internet sites that show ads for that soda producer. If everyone paid directly for what they used the world would surely be a very different place but I see no reason for less innovation or less options.