Group 1 - The article discusses the definition of a "good product" and emphasizes the importance of understanding what constitutes a good product before attempting to create one [2][14] - It uses the example of the hovering chair from the movie "WALL-E" to illustrate that a product can be technically perfect but still have negative long-term effects on users [5][6] - The article argues that a good product should ultimately grant users greater freedom, reflecting the creator's love and care for the users [14][21] Group 2 - The article critiques platforms like Douyin (TikTok), comparing them to the hovering chair, as they may lead to negative societal impacts despite their commercial success [22][23] - It highlights the psychological effects of free, random, and infinite offerings, which can lead to addiction and decision fatigue among users [26][34] - The article stresses the shared responsibility of technology companies, users, and regulators in addressing the negative consequences of excessive convenience and content consumption [41][42] Group 3 - The author proposes a formula for evaluating a product based on four dimensions: practical function, emotional experience, cost, and universality [72][75] - It emphasizes the need for a holistic view of both short-term and long-term benefits and costs when designing or purchasing products [73] - The article concludes with a wish for companies to create good products that enhance user freedom [74]