3 ms·

Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there.

account42 3y ago
> Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? Because you want others to believe that that is a bad solution. If its the only available effective solution then it isn't bad. > It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there. How many gas station chains do you have to choose from near you and what makes you think that the others won't just put on the same annoying ads? Voting with your wallet is meaningless for issues where most people will begrudingly put up with something because there are only so many options and there are more important differences to them (mostly price).
- infecto 3y ago
  The "only effective solution" for gas station ads? There is no counter point to incredible statement.
photonthug 3y ago
At some point property damage really is self defense if said property is actively engaging in what amounts to assault. And vote-with-your-dollar is silly advice when we cannot assume there are available alternatives, and when the "disruptors" and "marketing wizards" involved with this crap are explicitly reaching for captive-audiences, do not provide volume controls or off buttons, etc. Sometimes the gas station ads start up blaring noise after you've already paid, so you can't tell when you're going to get hit with them. And good luck finding a taxi or an airline without a screen blasting at you, effectively further monetizing people even though they are already paying for a service. Even first-class passengers everywhere are subjected at minimum to a litany of "join our miles club" crap every time they fly. If passengers aren't force-fed this stuff on the screen in front of them, it will be on the PA system, which really ought to be reserved for actual information/emergencies and not used as part of "captive audience" shenanigans to improve someone's margins. This behavior is sickening and should really be illegal. Since it's not illegal to engage in assault-through-advertising though, property damage starts to look like the only way for consumers to speak a language that corporations understand, i.e. by affecting bottom-lines and margins.

account42 3y ago

> Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? Because you want others to believe that that is a bad solution. If its the only available effective solution then it isn't bad. > It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there. How many gas station chains do you have to choose from near you and what makes you think that the others won't just put on the same annoying ads? Voting with your wallet is meaningless for issues where most people will begrudingly put up with something because there are only so many options and there are more important differences to them (mostly price).

infecto 3y ago
The "only effective solution" for gas station ads? There is no counter point to incredible statement.

photonthug 3y ago

At some point property damage really is self defense if said property is actively engaging in what amounts to assault. And vote-with-your-dollar is silly advice when we cannot assume there are available alternatives, and when the "disruptors" and "marketing wizards" involved with this crap are explicitly reaching for captive-audiences, do not provide volume controls or off buttons, etc. Sometimes the gas station ads start up blaring noise after you've already paid, so you can't tell when you're going to get hit with them. And good luck finding a taxi or an airline without a screen blasting at you, effectively further monetizing people even though they are already paying for a service. Even first-class passengers everywhere are subjected at minimum to a litany of "join our miles club" crap every time they fly. If passengers aren't force-fed this stuff on the screen in front of them, it will be on the PA system, which really ought to be reserved for actual information/emergencies and not used as part of "captive audience" shenanigans to improve someone's margins. This behavior is sickening and should really be illegal. Since it's not illegal to engage in assault-through-advertising though, property damage starts to look like the only way for consumers to speak a language that corporations understand, i.e. by affecting bottom-lines and margins.