Another way to think about this is that the service is a static IP for $99/yr and the rest is "free", i.e., optional. Perhaps the majority of users will be attracted by the "free" stuff, but a minority might see a static IPv4 as having many potentially useful advantages for personal computing.^1
This is how I view the internet. I pay for access, and this gives me access to, among other things, the web, and various "free services" offered on the web by so-called "tech" companies.^2 There is no obligation that I have to use them. I can choose what I think is useful and ignore the rest.
1. Previously we have seen the static IPv4 address marketed by ISPs in the US as a "business account". Personal use is not contemplated.
2. But the IP addresses we get from ISPs suck for things like running a smtpd. We need solutions to this problem besides "tech" company middlemen.
This is how I view the internet. I pay for access, and this gives me access to, among other things, the web, and various "free services" offered on the web by so-called "tech" companies.^2 There is no obligation that I have to use them. I can choose what I think is useful and ignore the rest.
1. Previously we have seen the static IPv4 address marketed by ISPs in the US as a "business account". Personal use is not contemplated.
2. But the IP addresses we get from ISPs suck for things like running a smtpd. We need solutions to this problem besides "tech" company middlemen.