• @dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    524 months ago

    The article is even more wack than the price for the domain. They want to launch a $99 necklace that listens to everything you say while it “forms its own thoughts” about it. Then instead of talking to you, it just texts you when IT “wants” (read: on a timer or based on a system prompt)

    The monetization is a one-time $99, no subscription. That’s … suspicious from a privacy perspective.

  • @Thorry84@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    204 months ago

    Please note the title is misleading. The domain was sold for 1.8 million, but with a payment plan. So that 1.8 million gets spread out of a longer time. Sure some of the initial funding paid for it, but it’s misleading to say it spent most of their funds.

  • @jonsnothere@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    194 months ago

    That honestly seems pretty low for friend.com

    Although the fact they’re developing hardware on less than a million dollar budget is bananas, let alone the other whack ideas

    • @kandoh@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      104 months ago

      I remember when the place I worked at changed names and some Russian guy was sitting on the domain name, wouldn’t let it go for less than a million.

      The CEO signed off on it after a day of consideration. Really changed my perspective on how much money these companies were sitting on.

  • @smeg@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    154 months ago

    “People just don’t get consumer, I view this as saving money. Much less money needs to be spent on marketing, it’s a one time thing,” Schiffmann said.

    The fact that we’re now reading this article and talking about it kind of proves his point!

    • @MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      114 months ago

      Speak for yourself; I’m not going to read the article and just assume it’s silly garbage based on comments and having seen a few garbage products in my day.

  • TehPers
    link
    fedilink
    English
    64 months ago

    Looks like the article requires an account. Is there an archived version?