3 ms·
I'm confused. Your first sentence states that ethics are irrelevant, while your second sentence gives an argument about ethics. Surely, if they are as irrelev
by MereInterest 7y ago
I'm confused. Your first sentence states that ethics are irrelevant, while your second sentence gives an argument about ethics. Surely, if they are as irrelevant as you say, making an argument about ethics would be pointless.
- manigandham 7y agoThe ads business model is legal and works for billions of people and millions of companies around the world. In the context of your specific complaint about "behaving ethically", that's entirely your subjective judgement and irrelevant because giving you the choice to do what you want is about as morally good as it gets. If you don't like the model then don't engage. But claiming that it doesn't behave ethically because you just don't like it is silly.
- MereInterest 7y agoSo, ethics are not at all irrelevant, and you are instead arguing that tracking somebody's every movement online and, increasingly, in the real world, is ethical?
- manigandham 7y agoYou’re repeating the same thing. There’s nothing wrong with advertising, ads and tracking are different things, and consent is the issue at hand which allows you to engage with what you feel comfortable — and that choice is indeed ethical by all measures.
- Nursie 7y ago> The ads business model is legal But tracking and targeting without consent are not any longer.
- manigandham 7y agoNobody is disagreeing.