14 ms·

One time I saw a fascinating article about how scientists were working to grow skin complete with natural looking hair from stem cells for burn victims and such

by Teever 6y ago

One time I saw a fascinating article about how scientists were working to grow skin complete with natural looking hair from stem cells for burn victims and such. I thought the article was really neat and I was in a hurry so I emailed a the link to myself. The next time I logged into my gmail to read it I happened to be at a machine without adblock and I saw that google was serving me ads for garbage treatments for male pattern baldness. Fuck you Google and your shitty advertising. There's nothing wrong with going bald and I don't need you to try and make me feel insecure about my hairline when I'm trying to read about scientists helping burn victims.

dna_polymerase 6y ago
The ad probably promoted a product that could regrow hair for bald people. You just took that B̶a̶n̶k̶s̶y̶ Sean Tejaratchi quote and applied it to them. You chose to be offended by it. Sure baldness isn't wrong. But a lot of people like hair better and therefore a market exists for this type of product. Nothing wrong about that.
- Teever 6y ago
  Repeated viewing of these kinds of ads is precisely what introduces the insecurity in people that makes them seek out the kinds of products being advertised. It's the same thing with skinny models and anorexia in girls. Advertising is the cause of the 'problem' that they can conveniently solve. Besides some of these 'cures' for baldness have alarming side effects and there should be regulations around advertisement for these products. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-exclusive-idUSKBN2A32XU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-ex...
lupire 6y ago
Why are burn survivors unacceptably ugly to you, but baldness survivors are acceptable looking?
- Teever 6y ago
  I used to deliver food to a burn unit in a hospital. I'm not going to deign this question with a response.
- throwawayboise 6y ago
  "Baldness surviviors" That's a new one for me on the victimhood trivialization scale.
BeetleB 6y ago
> Fuck you Google and your shitty advertising. I really don't get this response. Since very soon after Gmail launched, Google has been very open and public about mining user's emails to serve ads to them. This isn't some kind of dark pattern. There was a lot of fuss, to the point of politicians threatening to hold hearings about it. And then people sign up for Gmail and complain about the ads. I can understand complaining about cookies tracking you all over the Internet, and how hard it can be for the average Joe to avoid them. But Gmail and their ilk? It's trivial to use something else.

by Teever 6y ago

dna_polymerase 6y ago

The ad probably promoted a product that could regrow hair for bald people. You just took that B̶a̶n̶k̶s̶y̶ Sean Tejaratchi quote and applied it to them. You chose to be offended by it. Sure baldness isn't wrong. But a lot of people like hair better and therefore a market exists for this type of product. Nothing wrong about that.

Teever 6y ago
Repeated viewing of these kinds of ads is precisely what introduces the insecurity in people that makes them seek out the kinds of products being advertised. It's the same thing with skinny models and anorexia in girls. Advertising is the cause of the 'problem' that they can conveniently solve. Besides some of these 'cures' for baldness have alarming side effects and there should be regulations around advertisement for these products. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-exclusive-idUSKBN2A32XU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-ex...

lupire 6y ago

Why are burn survivors unacceptably ugly to you, but baldness survivors are acceptable looking?

Teever 6y ago
I used to deliver food to a burn unit in a hospital. I'm not going to deign this question with a response.
throwawayboise 6y ago
"Baldness surviviors" That's a new one for me on the victimhood trivialization scale.

BeetleB 6y ago

> Fuck you Google and your shitty advertising. I really don't get this response. Since very soon after Gmail launched, Google has been very open and public about mining user's emails to serve ads to them. This isn't some kind of dark pattern. There was a lot of fuss, to the point of politicians threatening to hold hearings about it. And then people sign up for Gmail and complain about the ads. I can understand complaining about cookies tracking you all over the Internet, and how hard it can be for the average Joe to avoid them. But Gmail and their ilk? It's trivial to use something else.