6 ms·

If you accept free speech then you accept advertisements. If you accept advertisements, then you might as well accept the obfuscation to preserve some semblance

If you accept free speech then you accept advertisements. If you accept advertisements, then you might as well accept the obfuscation to preserve some semblance of "privacy." Only the naive believe it's possible to not have advertisements. Advertisements even existed in Ancient Rome.

deely3 3y ago
I do accept free speech and also I accept possibility to block all and any advertisements from showing on my devices.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  Sure, but you can't block someone from saying, hey "Applications are open for Y Combinator Winter 2024". There you go, an advertisement, straight to your brain.
  - 93po 3y ago
    Sure I can. I can add filters for that or use hckrnews dot com
tomjen3 3y ago
I accept free speech as in I am free to listen to any speech of my choosing without interference from a third party. I do not accept that I have to hear any specific speech. The fact that reality lacks a good filter is a very serious bug that I hope gets fixed immediately.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Nullabillity 3y ago
Freedom to speak is not freedom to hire goons to shove it down people's throats.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  indeed!
johnnyworker 3y ago
https://www.learnancientrome.com/were-there-ads-in-ancient-rome/ https://www.learnancientrome.com/were-there-ads-in-ancient-r... > In 3000 BC, a slaveholder in Thebes, Egypt created the first-ever written ad. [..] The slaveholder was trying to find a runaway slave while also promoting their weaving shop. The more things change, the more they stay the same. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/11/can-cities-kick-ads-ban-urban-billboards https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/11/can-cities-ki... > Even David Ogilvy, widely considered the father of modern advertising, expressed his disdain for the medium back in 1963. “Man is at his vilest when he erects a billboard,” Ogilvy wrote. “When I retire from Madison Avenue, I am going to start a secret society of masked vigilantes who will travel around the world on silent motor bicycles, chopping down posters at the dark of the moon.”
- CatWChainsaw 3y ago
  The more things change, the more they stay the same.. indeed. The guy only wanted to put a bandage on the gaping wound he inflicted after he'd decided he'd made enough money from it. Reminds me of all the software engineers that leave FANG companies to start foundations promoting ethical software.
93po 3y ago
Free speech doesn’t protect people from causing harm. Advertising is inherently unethical and harmful.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  Advertising is not inherently harmful, lol
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    Yes it is, it preloads the viewer with ideas the advertiser tells them, in an effort to get them to buy something. That means they're trying to take resources from other people and profit. That's where the ethics fall to pieces.
    - endisneigh 3y ago
      that's not what advertising is. advertisements are promotions. promotions do not inherently involve purchasing something. simplest counter example to your point is an ad saying that you can get something for free without any purchase required. definitionally no harm could come from someone who took the offer.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        > definitionally no harm could come from someone who took the offer. Such offers are usually sneaky ways to collect personal information. Whether or not you consider that "harm" depends on your worldview, but a lot of people do.
        endisneigh 3y ago
        there are plenty of offers like that do not require you to give any personal information at all. go into any Costco and there are promotions for free samples. you can take them without even talking to the attendant. it's obviously an advertisement. idk why people bother saying things easily proven to be false. it is true that some advertising is harmful, yes. it is not the case that advertising in general is inherently harmful. it only requires a single counter example to prove false.
zlg_codes 3y ago
What's naive about believing it's possible to have a society without ads? I understand why you have that myopic a view if Rome is as far back in civilization you're willing to go. How's your work in adtech going? It seems only those who profit from ads are defending them.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  don't work on ads. society without ads is one without commerce. without commerce there's poverty and despair. not interested in that kind of life. if you don't like ads when do you go to a marketing forum?
JohnFen 3y ago
> then you might as well accept the obfuscation to preserve some semblance of "privacy." I don't accept Google's approach because it is intended to reduce my privacy from them. They are not trying to preserve some semblance of privacy, they are trying to preserve some semblance of their ability to spy on us. I reject their position entirely.
CatWChainsaw 3y ago
Ancient Roman advertisements didn't send out flying airtags to follow all of the people who passed by and collate a bunch of extra data about where those people went, how long they spent there and at what times, what the purpose of those places was, how the social webs of all the people interconnected.... So clearly it's possible to advertise without tracking, we just innovated that benefit away.

deely3 3y ago

I do accept free speech and also I accept possibility to block all and any advertisements from showing on my devices.

endisneigh 3y ago
Sure, but you can't block someone from saying, hey "Applications are open for Y Combinator Winter 2024". There you go, an advertisement, straight to your brain.
- 93po 3y ago
  Sure I can. I can add filters for that or use hckrnews dot com

tomjen3 3y ago

I accept free speech as in I am free to listen to any speech of my choosing without interference from a third party. I do not accept that I have to hear any specific speech. The fact that reality lacks a good filter is a very serious bug that I hope gets fixed immediately.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Nullabillity 3y ago

Freedom to speak is not freedom to hire goons to shove it down people's throats.

endisneigh 3y ago
indeed!

johnnyworker 3y ago

https://www.learnancientrome.com/were-there-ads-in-ancient-rome/ https://www.learnancientrome.com/were-there-ads-in-ancient-r... > In 3000 BC, a slaveholder in Thebes, Egypt created the first-ever written ad. [..] The slaveholder was trying to find a runaway slave while also promoting their weaving shop. The more things change, the more they stay the same. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/11/can-cities-kick-ads-ban-urban-billboards https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/11/can-cities-ki... > Even David Ogilvy, widely considered the father of modern advertising, expressed his disdain for the medium back in 1963. “Man is at his vilest when he erects a billboard,” Ogilvy wrote. “When I retire from Madison Avenue, I am going to start a secret society of masked vigilantes who will travel around the world on silent motor bicycles, chopping down posters at the dark of the moon.”

CatWChainsaw 3y ago
The more things change, the more they stay the same.. indeed. The guy only wanted to put a bandage on the gaping wound he inflicted after he'd decided he'd made enough money from it. Reminds me of all the software engineers that leave FANG companies to start foundations promoting ethical software.

93po 3y ago

Free speech doesn’t protect people from causing harm. Advertising is inherently unethical and harmful.

endisneigh 3y ago
Advertising is not inherently harmful, lol
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  Yes it is, it preloads the viewer with ideas the advertiser tells them, in an effort to get them to buy something. That means they're trying to take resources from other people and profit. That's where the ethics fall to pieces.
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    that's not what advertising is. advertisements are promotions. promotions do not inherently involve purchasing something. simplest counter example to your point is an ad saying that you can get something for free without any purchase required. definitionally no harm could come from someone who took the offer.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > definitionally no harm could come from someone who took the offer. Such offers are usually sneaky ways to collect personal information. Whether or not you consider that "harm" depends on your worldview, but a lot of people do.
      - endisneigh 3y ago
        there are plenty of offers like that do not require you to give any personal information at all. go into any Costco and there are promotions for free samples. you can take them without even talking to the attendant. it's obviously an advertisement. idk why people bother saying things easily proven to be false. it is true that some advertising is harmful, yes. it is not the case that advertising in general is inherently harmful. it only requires a single counter example to prove false.

zlg_codes 3y ago

What's naive about believing it's possible to have a society without ads? I understand why you have that myopic a view if Rome is as far back in civilization you're willing to go. How's your work in adtech going? It seems only those who profit from ads are defending them.

endisneigh 3y ago
don't work on ads. society without ads is one without commerce. without commerce there's poverty and despair. not interested in that kind of life. if you don't like ads when do you go to a marketing forum?

JohnFen 3y ago

> then you might as well accept the obfuscation to preserve some semblance of "privacy." I don't accept Google's approach because it is intended to reduce my privacy from them. They are not trying to preserve some semblance of privacy, they are trying to preserve some semblance of their ability to spy on us. I reject their position entirely.

CatWChainsaw 3y ago

Ancient Roman advertisements didn't send out flying airtags to follow all of the people who passed by and collate a bunch of extra data about where those people went, how long they spent there and at what times, what the purpose of those places was, how the social webs of all the people interconnected.... So clearly it's possible to advertise without tracking, we just innovated that benefit away.