5 ms·

> What the broader public thinks is disturbing and what actually is unethical are two very different things. Maybe there are some things that may be unethical

> What the broader public thinks is disturbing and what actually is unethical are two very different things. Maybe there are some things that may be unethical without being disturbing, I'm not sure the opposite is true; if the majority thinks it's disturbing then it's most likely unethical.

cm2012 8y ago
Facebook lets you target people for advertising based on the job titles Facebook users enter into their profiles. So you can advertise Bingo Card Creator to teachers. Or swimming suits to lifeguards. A few dozen people put gross things like "jew hater" as their job titles. So, if you trawled hard, you could target these "jew haters" on Facebook. Some blogger screenshotted this and it became a national uproar about the evil Facebook profiting from hatred. None of the popular articles pointed out the nuance. And in response, FB nerfed the job title feature to hell, which means its harder to actually put relevant ads in front of people. So that's an example of something that disturbed the public but was completely misunderstood.
- Rjevski 8y ago
  > put relevant ads in front of people I'd say the main problem is this. Nobody has ever asked for ads to begin with. The unethical part is not better ad targeting, it's simply the fact that advertising exists and is depriving the world of millions of man-hours that could be put to better use.
  - cm2012 8y ago
    People ask for varied content, but don't want to pay for many providers, so ads help provide the content.
    - Rjevski 8y ago
      Maybe people don't pay because they didn't want the "content" and it isn't good content anyway, but are merely being manipulated into watching it (through "feedback loops" like social media "likes", etc) by the creators of this garbage content for the purpose of getting ad views?

5 ms·

> What the broader public thinks is disturbing and what actually is unethical are two very different things. Maybe there are some things that may be unethical

by Rjevski 8y ago

cm2012 8y ago
Facebook lets you target people for advertising based on the job titles Facebook users enter into their profiles. So you can advertise Bingo Card Creator to teachers. Or swimming suits to lifeguards. A few dozen people put gross things like "jew hater" as their job titles. So, if you trawled hard, you could target these "jew haters" on Facebook. Some blogger screenshotted this and it became a national uproar about the evil Facebook profiting from hatred. None of the popular articles pointed out the nuance. And in response, FB nerfed the job title feature to hell, which means its harder to actually put relevant ads in front of people. So that's an example of something that disturbed the public but was completely misunderstood.
- Rjevski 8y ago
  > put relevant ads in front of people I'd say the main problem is this. Nobody has ever asked for ads to begin with. The unethical part is not better ad targeting, it's simply the fact that advertising exists and is depriving the world of millions of man-hours that could be put to better use.
  - cm2012 8y ago
    People ask for varied content, but don't want to pay for many providers, so ads help provide the content.
    - Rjevski 8y ago
      Maybe people don't pay because they didn't want the "content" and it isn't good content anyway, but are merely being manipulated into watching it (through "feedback loops" like social media "likes", etc) by the creators of this garbage content for the purpose of getting ad views?