[throwaway713]

Do most people really want an internet without ads, flights with large seats and plenty of space, high-quality local food — or do most people just say they want that? Because when push comes to shove and these options temporarily become available for some reason (e.g., a new farmers market, a premium streaming plan that removes ads, etc.), most people don't spring for the higher quality option. The cheapest option still seems to consistently win out overall.

I'm certainly not saying "blame the consumer", but if people really don't like ads so much (to the extent that they stop clicking on them), really dislike the subpar streaming services so much (to the extent that they unsubscribe) — then why haven't they abandoned these products?

There are other countries where valuing quality seems to be more deeply embedded in the culture, and most people in these countries will reject subpar offerings altogether. I think the U.S. has had a uniquely precipitous fall in this regard — the average person just doesn't seem to care that much. Why this is the case, I'm not sure, but it's not surprising that since Silicon Valley is located in the U.S., the region simply optimizes on whatever (revealed) consumer preferences return the most. Tech companies are certainly not unique in this regard.

[Aurornis]

> I'm certainly not saying "blame the consumer”

Why not? You’re exactly right that people will rant and rave about wanting a higher quality option all day long, but as soon as one comes along very few people will actually pay for it.

This happens with niche product preferences too. For years it felt like the consensus across the internet was that phones are too big and if Apple would make a smaller phone it would sell like hotcakes. Apple finally did make a smaller phone and it had relatively few sales.

> I think the U.S. has had a uniquely precipitous fall in this regard.

I disagree about this, though. The more I’ve traveled and been exposed to other cultures, the more I appreciate how much choice and opportunity we have. I have slowly learned that U.S. consumers have some of the most insatiably high expectations, though. It leads to a lot of disappointment, but when you go below the surface you discover then wants are for something that checks all boxes without any compromises (good, fast, cheap) or they want we already have but think the cost should be negligible or even free. There’s another variation where we want quality to go up, the workers to be paid more, but the prices to go down.

[aleph_minus_one]

> I'm certainly not saying "blame the consumer", but if people really don't like ads so much (to the extent that they stop clicking on them), really disliked streaming so much (to the extent that they unsubscribe) — then why haven't they?

In my observation/bubble, people actually do:

- I rarely click on ads (though I admit the reason is typically much more mundane: nearly all ad networks don't really "get" my interests. When they (rarely) actually do, the common situation is that I recently bought such a product, and thus clearly don't need another one when the advertising networks realize my interest and show me ads).

- Many people install ad blockers.

- Many people that I am aware of who are annoyed of streaming either did cancel some subscription(s) or never got one.

[throwaway713]

> In my observation/bubble, people already do

Well I thought so too. I match those behaviors, and I don't even watch television. But then I worked at a tech company where I could see the actual data on consumer preferences and behaviors, and it's fairly undeniable: most people aren't like you, me, or the average commenter on Hacker News.

[WD-42]

People are choosing the cheapest option because they don’t have any money. It’s not that complicated.

[FractalHQ]

Exactly this. Because capitalism tells us to pay people the minimum (which isn’t enough) and charge them the maximum (which is too much) and suddenly living is unaffordable for the majority.

[ToucanLoucan]

I mean, my simple theory is people buy everything cheap because most people are broke. Small businesses die because as much as people want to support them, they can't spend more. They can only afford to buy goods from businesses that take advantage of economies of scale, and small businesses by definition are usually locked out of that.

[throwaway713]

That's a fair point actually, and perhaps we are only seeing these problems increase recently because "locally optimal" capitalism had historically sort of prevented the global algorithmic optimizations we're seeing now across industries. E.g., rental price fixing via algorithms.