You’d pay more money for a something you can do free right now, just in case a hypothetical product in the future does that?

Just thinking, I bet capitalism is ready and willing to provide if there are a lot of likeminded. I expect the current TV manufacturers would make smart TVs internet-only if a dumb TV company succeeded, then undercut that company with slightly cheaper dumb TVs of their own, Amazon style. That’s a win-win for them: they get to charge more for what we have for free currently, and demand more advertisement money since the audience of the cheaper smart TV is now captive. Their profit margin would still be higher than the dumb TV company because they’re already making them, too.

I don’t see a version of events where existing manufacturers lose if this happens. This feels like a road to hell paved with good intentions.

Edit: to be clear I’m very much on your side with “fuck the tv makers and fuck advertising as a whole”. I just truly fail to see how this could be anything but free market research for the existing manufacturers and an acceleration of the enshittification (hey, an accurate use!). I’m quite open to alternative theories.

Fair, but I don’t think we should want to pay a premium for a dumb TV in fear of a hypothetical future. Perhaps worthwhile if it ever happens, but until then buying a subsidized smart TV and keeping it dumb seems fully better to me.

Can you provide an example of one that only works online? I have never heard of that.

Why not purchase one subsidized by ads then just not connect it to the internet? Seems like a win-win

One downside is that Teslas are uncomfortable. I liked them a lot circa 2016, the Model S used to be my favorite vehicle. They simply haven’t held a competitive advantage, or in the case of the 3/Y, are genuinely quite bad. I’d rather pay more for something better, and that was before the CEO became this.