Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jjulius 4097 days ago
I pay for Netflix and Spotify so that I don't have to deal with ads. I'll happily continue to pay for Uber and similar services for the very same reason.
2 comments

there's no reason we can't have both. Uber can always have an option to disable ads if the user isn't interested in saving money.
I thought you were going the other way around. There's no reason that we can't have both: Uber could charge us and still show us ads. It works for Comcast.
There is also heavy advertising on existing transit. Subways, buses, and taxis in New York are plastered with ads.
Oh absolutely. While I despise advertising for my own personal reasons, I know that there are plenty of people out there who would happily accept a free, ad-based version of these services (assuming it's possible for this model to actually generate enough revenue).
What would you do if Netflix/Amazon/Google/Apple started thinking it was acceptable to both display ads and charge you?
Those services will eventually add advertisements even for paying customers. It's just a matter of time. Cable's initial idea was TV without ads. Now all you see on Cable is ads.

In the future all companies will have to do is offer an equivalent service ad-free in order to be innovative.

> Cable's initial idea was TV without ads. Now all you see on Cable is ads.

Whenever I see people that believe that ads vs paid is a either/or proposition, I utter "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it". It is much more likely that Uber will both charge and display ads; than to give people alternatives on how to fund their ride.

I am old enough to actually remember cable without ads. Maybe this is the main reason I feel completely okay with the morality aspects of using ad-blockers or pirating movies/shows I can't get on my region, or even downloading songs and trying to support musicians by actually going to concerts.