3 ms·
>The best minds of the previous generation were thinking about how to kill Russians. I'd say it's an upgrade. At least the results of the previous generations
by GrumpyYoungMan 10y ago
>The best minds of the previous generation were thinking about how to kill Russians. I'd say it's an upgrade.
At least the results of the previous generations research went (largely) unused, whereas the results of ad clicking research is targeted against and used on people on a daily basis, to their considerable detriment. An upgrade? If so, it seems kind of dubious at best.
- debaserab2 10y agoOnly on HN would someone compare starting a nuclear war to click advertising.
- ben_jones 10y agoWell only one of those two things actually happened (thankfully).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- J_Darnley 10y agoGlobal nuclear war sounds immensely more fun than the present.
- placeybordeaux 10y agoSurely you're joking.
- J_Darnley 10y agoNo. I only hope I live long enough to see the apocalypse.
- rwallace 10y agoTo quote Douglas Adams: "No, not really."
- wpietri 10y agoAs somebody who lives a mostly ad-free life, I totally agree. I think it's somewhat hard for people used to ads to appreciate how pervasive and manipulative they are. And it seems impossible to get people in the industry to see that maybe, just maybe manipulating people for a living is kinda sinister. Even if it weren't, it's certainly wasteful. Advertising is mostly an arms race. Pepsi spends to challenge Coke. Coke spends even more to maintain hegemony. Neither is informing consumers, the perennial econ-theory justification for advertising. We all know those products exist. If we banned advertising tomorrow, consumers would be no worse off, and all those people could be doing something actually useful.