10 ms·

Funny that this comes up. Donald J. Boudreaux wrote an entry just earlier on the same topic in response to Akerlof and Shiller's recent book: http://cafehayek.c

Funny that this comes up. Donald J. Boudreaux wrote an entry just earlier on the same topic in response to Akerlof and Shiller's recent book: http://cafehayek.com/2015/12/the-role-of-market-forces-in-protecting-against-phishing.html http://cafehayek.com/2015/12/the-role-of-market-forces-in-pr... There's also a bit of a double standard about how advertising is perceived. Banner ads, editorials and similar are frowned upon. Yet it's quite likely you'll interpret someone promoting a work in the comments section of a site you frequent as a friendly recommendation, never mind it's still signaling availability of something in a manner identical to many less invasive ads.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
> Yet it's quite likely you'll interpret someone promoting a work in the comments section of a site you frequent as a friendly recommendation The difference is intent. People directly advertising in comments get downvoted, promoting something relevant as a friendly favour are upvoted, and people doing the former while pretending to do the latter are considered sleazy bastards and subject to being pruned from community if it is to stay healthy. It really is simple. It's about trust.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  The difference is actually subjective gauging of intent. Particularly your latter case of the "sleazy bastards" is often an intrinsic gray area and of course in the best case indistinguishable from a mere recommendation without special interests.
makomk 11y ago
There's a subtle but critical mistake in the very first paragraph of that blog post. It doesn't create profitable opportunities for entrepreneurs to help consumers avoid being phished for phools, it creates profitable opportunities for entrepreneurs who can convince consumers that they're helping them avoid being phished for phools. This is an important distinction because consumers suffer from the same information asymmetries when deciding who to trust as they do when deciding what to buy.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

> Yet it's quite likely you'll interpret someone promoting a work in the comments section of a site you frequent as a friendly recommendation The difference is intent. People directly advertising in comments get downvoted, promoting something relevant as a friendly favour are upvoted, and people doing the former while pretending to do the latter are considered sleazy bastards and subject to being pruned from community if it is to stay healthy. It really is simple. It's about trust.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
The difference is actually subjective gauging of intent. Particularly your latter case of the "sleazy bastards" is often an intrinsic gray area and of course in the best case indistinguishable from a mere recommendation without special interests.

makomk 11y ago

There's a subtle but critical mistake in the very first paragraph of that blog post. It doesn't create profitable opportunities for entrepreneurs to help consumers avoid being phished for phools, it creates profitable opportunities for entrepreneurs who can convince consumers that they're helping them avoid being phished for phools. This is an important distinction because consumers suffer from the same information asymmetries when deciding who to trust as they do when deciding what to buy.