Roku is exploring ways to show consumers ads on its TVs even when they are not using its streaming platform: The company has been looking into injecting ads into the video feeds of third-party devices connected to its TVs, according to a recent patent filing.

This way, when an owner of a Roku TV takes a short break from playing a game on their Xbox, or streaming something on an Apple TV device connected to the TV set, Roku would use that break to show ads. Roku engineers have even explored ways to figure out what the consumer is doing with their TV-connected device in order to display relevant advertising.

  • FritzGman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    You know what people tend to forget?

    Shareholders = Consumers of the product too

    Marketing departments that come up with these assinine ideas are staffed with consumers of the product too.

    As long as enough people are making bank from this stupidity, it will not stop.

    The only right answer is not to give them your money. Hard to do that when they all do it and after purchase protests are kind of pointless since they already got paid. So, how to actually impact their bottom line? That’s the only language they listen to.

    • upandatom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      How’s that strategy working out for you? For us?

      Unfortunately “don’t give them money” doesn’t work. Bc commerce is global due to internet. There will always be uninformed buyers in every product space. And always buyers who don’t care.

      My solution, posts like this. We should be informing others of these practices and discussing ways to bypass, repair, or disable blocks and unintended behavior on the products and services we purchase.

    • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      You know what people tend to forget?

      Shareholders = Consumers of the product too

      I wonder how many of the people getting rich in the tobacco industry are smokers.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      purchase protests are kind of pointless since they already got paid

      But when the people who paid them can’t move their product because it has the Roku name on it, it all of a sudden becomes very pointful.

      • FritzGman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        To some extent yes. However, the problem doesn’t go away. It just becomes cyclical.

        Not many people out there are likely to say that they haven’t spent money on a number of brands hopping from one to the other until the enshittifcation catches up to the brand.

        When we run out of brands, then what? Amazon Firestick, Google Chromecast, Roku, Android TV, WebTV OS …

        I just think on top of not buying their products in the future, it would make sense to also fight the fight that will prevent others from doing the same thing now and in the future. Eliminate the need to turn away from a brand because they are allowed to screw us on the value of our purchase trying to milk us for more profit. TV prices might go up a few hundred or more (and if you want a new feature, it might cost you) but you know that what it does or doesn’t do when you get, it will still do it later on it’s it’s lifespan. Of course, this will be all moot once hardware becomes a subscription model. The lack of personal ownership of things in the name of perpetual profits is a thing coming …