Live data from Hacker News

Amazon is bricking primary feature on $160 Echo device after 1 year

arstechnica.com

61–63 of 63 posts

Re: Amazon is bricking primary feature on $160 Echo device after 1 year

#61

How is "photos as home screen" not just a built-in feature? Like, every device with a screen that I've owned for 20 years has this in some form. No cloud services required. What a farce.

It was, until Alexa decided to charge for every "built-in" feature. It's similar to the "perks" of Amazon Prime.

Both products (Alexa and Prime) are subpar, predatory offerings. I've moved on from both. I encourage everyone to do the same.

Re: Amazon is bricking primary feature on $160 Echo device after 1 year

#62
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny thing is, if it wasn't Amazon that Alexa was ordering stuff from, you could bet your ass people would have been using it like that. But because Amazon sells used diapers, counterfeit items, can have gigantic price swings for some items, and has reviews that are gamed to the gills, no one would ever want to order from there blindly.

I don't think Amazon management is aware of how bad their site as gotten.

Amazon management is very aware. They just do not care. Legal has even instructed teams in this regard. I hope FTC will drop the hammer on Amazon.

Re: Amazon is bricking primary feature on $160 Echo device after 1 year

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, basically a legal form of extortion. "Pay up or we'll employ our best psychological manipulation techniques (invasive ads) to ensure you spend more money with us in the future". Paying to remove ads is such a grotesque result of hyper-capitalism.

Invasive ads are psychological manipulation? Which part is the psychological manipulation, the ads you chose (by not paying, but still using the service)? So the ads aren't really there to sell you something, they're there to punish you for not paying? I have so many more questions but this is a good start.

This line of thinking is very "yet you participate in society"-esque. It's disingenous to suggest that I explicitly "chose" ads when I dared to view a singular YouTube video out of the thousands I'm linked to or shown thumbnails of on basically every website or social platform. Yeah I can live in the woods and use a browser without JavaScript or images but that's not a realistic or feasible way to participate in modern society, to the extent that I effectively have no choice but to be subjected to the psychological manipulation of advertising, at some point or another. That's part of its coercive nature: the all-permeating ubiquitousness of it.
Post reply on HN