4 ms·
Sounds like companies that aren't interested in garishly monetizing it will have their market carved out for them. There are far more clever and profitable way
by xvector 2y ago
Sounds like companies that aren't interested in garishly monetizing it will have their market carved out for them.
There are far more clever and profitable ways to monetize MR than to shove ads in your face wherever you look.
I very much doubt a modern company would take an approach this dumb when they could likely make much more money doing something much more subtle.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago> There are far more clever and profitable ways to monetize MR than to shove ads in your face wherever you look. There are, but the problem with ads (and surveillance) is, they're purely additive on the margin. Any of the clever and profitable thing you do to monetize MR, you can get a bit more money if you also put in ads. Then the competition puts more ads. Rinse repeat, eventually ads overwhelm the experience - but not before you make bank. That's the cancerous nature of advertising. It metastasizes to every new medium, feeds on it, and ultimately consumes it.
- xvector 2y ago[flagged]
- account42 2y ago... and then the ads move to those alternatives as well. Look, we have been through this cycle multiple times now. It's not hypothetical. And not, ad-free experiences are not always available. Not even close to it - consider for start the subject of TFA: public spaces covered with ads.