Xiaomi Admits To Putting Ads In the Settings Menu of Its Phones (theverge.com)

Xiaomi, the world's fourth largest smartphone maker, was caught by a Reddit user for placing ads in the settings menu of its smartphones. The ads reportedly show up in Xiaomi's MIUI apps, including the music app and settings menu (MIUI is the name of Xiaomi's skinned version of Android). The Verge reports: When The Verge reached out to Xiaomi for confirmation on this matter, the company responded with the following statement, while also clarifying that it only applies to its devices running MIUI and not its Android One phones: "Advertising has been and will continue to be an integral part of Xiaomi's Internet services, a key component of the company's business model. At the same time, we will uphold user experience by offering options to turn off the ads and by constantly improving our approach towards advertising, including adjusting where and when ads appear. Our philosophy is that ads should be unobtrusive, and users always have the option of receiving fewer recommendations."

Comments

Nothing

[markdavis]

Nothing quite says "you don't really own your device" more than forced advertising. And their answer is pretty weak/non-specific. And I wonder if they advertise/disclose this to potential purchasers.

Re:Nothing

[LynnwoodRooster]

My Kindle Fires have ads on them. Of course I got a pretty sweet 8" full HD tablet for $59, so I guess that's the price I pay - ads on the lock screen.

Re:Nothing

[rtb61]

The appropriate response for end users. I know exactly what would cut back on shit ads, lets make companies, any company that promotes products, financially liable for the products they promote. See, they fucking called it a recommendation, they are recommending the product by intent and for profit and thus should be legally liable for any failure of the product or service.

Want to see change in the advertising model, makes those selling advertising, legally liable, by Xiaomi's own mouth, for the products they recommend. Every company, every blog, anyone who shows a product or service recommendation for profit, liable for the failure of that product or service.

Why the fuck should companies who profit by recommending shit product be free from the legal liability for that failed product, how the fuck did they escape that, they are selling it, they should be liable for it. So when companies are sued for failed product, those who advertised it, are also sued and all the victims have access to their pockets as well. Why can't you sue google when it recommends crap on it's advertising platform, they are selling it to you, targeting your personally, manipulating your choice, where the fuck is their legal responsibility for the qualities of the products or services they sell on their advertising platform, corruptly absent it would seem.

Even when they sell it directly https://www.smh.com.au/money/b..., they still claim innocence. Google should be hit in the courts for this, right alongside the fraudster, the executive who approved the sale, should enjoy a custodial sentence for their criminal negligence or were they paid to allow the product to be sold, well they were paid, they are professionals, they are experts and they were 100% criminally negligent and should get a major fine, a major civil suit by those banks for damaged reputation and a custodial sentence for whom ever at Google was involved.

One reason I quit U-Verse

[Snotnose]

They put ads in the channel menu. You could remove those channels (it was a royal pain in the ass), but they'd pop up again after a few days.

Hey U-Verse, if you can't make money charging me $140/month for lowest tier cable, then fuck you. I don't want to see your fucking ads when I channel surf.

tldr; Last May I canned U-verse, went from $140+/month to Cox cable basic internet for $15, and I'm not missing a thing. Then again, I spent about $300 one time charge for hardware (cable modem, pi 3B+, router) and am pretty good with bit-torrent. I figure 4-5 years before "pirating" stuff gets hard to do, but by then I plan to have 10-15 years of stuff on my NAS to watch. I'm old, if I'm not dead in 15 years I'll come up with a plan B.

Why are ads worth any money?

[OrangeTide]

Aren't people becoming desensitized to ads? You'd think the free market would have driven the price advertisers are willing to pay so low as to not be worth the 10 seconds it takes a developer to paste the support code into an application.

There are metrics on who clicks the ads, and that is still conceivable worth money if the data is good. But if half the people accidentally click an ad trying to access the brightness setting for their phone, that's worthless data and advertisers ought to learn not to pay for garbage.

P.S. I was really disappointed when the market for banner ads crashed in the late 1990's and it didn't completely die. I hoped they would finally ceases and go back to TV, radio, newspaper, etc. Instead we got pop-ups, then pop-unders, then overlays. And Google came in on the upswing and turned web advertising in a trillion dollar industry.

Re: How about...

[postbigbang]

For every new ad breakthrough, there will be a blocker.

Even if we have to find the source IP and null route it, we'll do so. The Internet is not one huge playing field for the Direct Marketing Association and Google Adwords.

I'm blocking 19 scripts on this page alone. When I find ways to block more, I will. And I'm sure I'm not alone.