423
You’ve just spent $400 on a baby monitor. Now you need a subscription | Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn’t making quite enough money... (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
74 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

You’ve just spent $400 on a baby monitor. Now you need a subscription | Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn’t making quite enough money...::Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn't making quite enough money...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 133 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Subscriptions are a plague on our society. No wonder piracy is on the rise when even simple apps require a fucking subscription.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 68 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Or when a product requires an app to function instead of just putting some buttons on the thing. The apps also tend to want access to everything too. 🙄🤦‍♂️

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Because the device you bought is just a gateway for the company to access the real product, you. You're paying them so they can access your information.

    The sad reality of today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Solvable: just put these apps on an old smartphone with nothing else on it and that you don't use anymore then put it on the guest wireless network without access to anything else 😁
    Good luck to look for something is not there...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Unfortunately they often force round trip to go through their Internet services, so the local app won't work without Internet and their device will be a paperweight when they retire their support

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No problem. The app would be able to connect to their internet services, it only do it connecting to your local guest network that is connected to internet but have not access to anything else on your local network using wifi, from a phone that has nothing else on it so so SIM, no contacts, no navigation cookies and so on. At least some other useless app like itself.

    It is not the perfect solution (which would be to not need an app) but at least you neutralize any kind of spyware/data harvesting since there is no data to harvest if not the one generated by the app itself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    How does that pan out when the company discontinues that product model or product line?

    A family member got a fancy device with zero buttons on it, and an app that basically provides '+' and '-' buttons that has to go through that companies cloud service. When their internet went down, they had to unplug it because it was set wrong and without internet, it couldn't be set.

    This wasn't some advanced capability. It didn't require massive data or computational power. It literally could have been handled with a 7-segment LCD panel and three buttons (+/-/Power). If you buy that device now, they require you pay a monthly subscription for the privilege of being able to do that (under the excuse that they use 'AI' to know the right values without being told, but conveniently even the '+/-' functionality is now locked to the subscription plan.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    How does that pan out when the company discontinues that product model or product line?

    It does not, but that is not the problem my suggestion would solve. The solution to this problem is to not buy these "advanced" devices

    A family member got a fancy device with zero buttons on it, and an app that basically provides ‘+’ and ‘-’ buttons that has to go through that companies cloud service. When their internet went down, they had to unplug it because it was set wrong and without internet, it couldn’t be set.

    This wasn’t some advanced capability. It didn’t require massive data or computational power. It literally could have been handled with a 7-segment LCD panel and three buttons (+/-/Power). If you buy that device now, they require you pay a monthly subscription for the privilege of being able to do that (under the excuse that they use ‘AI’ to know the right values without being told, but conveniently even the ‘+/-’ functionality is now locked to the subscription plan.

    Wrong choice in my opinion. And also terrible design of the device itself. But as long as people will look more to the design than to its usability, companies will continue to do these kind of devices.
    And I don't buy the "but all the companies do this and that, there are no alternatives": alternatives are present, people are just ignoring them to buy the last device sold with the lastest buzzwords.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent