> He also described the Firefly approach as a “win-win-win scenario” — not just for drivers and advertisers, but also for local businesses, nonprofits and local governments, to whom the company has committed 10% of its inventory.
It's interesting how he left customers out of this description. I guess "win-win-win-lose" probably didn't test well.
I'll avoid using any service that adopts this, and can only hope that there will remain at least one who doesn't.
> being advertised to at every possible moment is the price we pay for our societies' current modern development
It's the opposite - advertising is a parasitic phenomenon, leeching talent and resources that could otherwise be spent more productively, and what we get in return is an information environment skewed to make us spend money, and a landscape marred by this visual cancer.
But ads are in no way a fact of life we have to get used to - they can be defeated, or at least kept at bay. Some cities have banned them: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5338
I'm not totally sure how the rating system works but I think that behavior could get you locked out pretty quickly? I would think giving a low rating for the ride is still effective and doesn't jeopardize your ability to still use the service.
You could also just ask the driver to turn the screen off without threatening to cancel the trip as a first step.
With Lyft and Uber, maybe. Since I already don't use Uber and will no longer use Lyft, I am personally only concerned about the impact with real taxi services and didn't consider ride-sharing in my response. That was an oversight.
But, with real taxis anyway, this is what I will do.
> You could also just ask the driver to turn the screen off without threatening to cancel the trip as a first step.
Yes, that is the actual approach I'd take. It's always nice to start as nonconfrontational as possible. But since I won't be taking the ride if the screen is on, the entire exchange has to be complete before the ride actually starts.
this crud is dangerous for motorists and distracts drivers with images on motorways. Im surprised this is permitted in California, and not seen as a misuse of the laws that keep screens away from drivers. (ie no double DIN displays showing movies, cellphones, etc)
How much longer before they turn on the webcams on the tablets they'll be giving drivers (I assume this is how it'll work) to ensure that users are actually watching the ads?
It's interesting how he left customers out of this description. I guess "win-win-win-lose" probably didn't test well.
I'll avoid using any service that adopts this, and can only hope that there will remain at least one who doesn't.