3 ms·
The reason for the article is not to give a good recommendation to people but to promote Tuta (looks like an ad campaign that started about 2 weeks ago: https:/
by poszlem 3y ago
The reason for the article is not to give a good recommendation to people but to promote Tuta (looks like an ad campaign that started about 2 weeks ago: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=tuta.com https://hn.algolia.com/?q=tuta.com).
- rollcat 3y agoGreat point. I think this brings up the question of ethics in advertising - how far are you willing to mislead your audience in order to support your claim? It's likely that Tuta didn't even mean to intentionally mislead (10 is a nice round number, so why not throw in something completely random), but they should be held to a higher standard, considering they're speaking from a position of authority. Going a bit offtopic, in my opinion this supports the argument that users should in general be free to block ads, on the basis of being able to filter the content they consume, based on the credibility of the source. Establishing the credibility of the advertiser seems impossible even for the websites (ad network: "just load this 10mb JS from our CDN"), so blocking ads entirely (or allowing them selectively) seems like a reasonable recourse.
- RamblingCTO 3y agoJust came to comment this. Didn't they have a breach or something? Was also on hackernews. Pretty pathetic article, no idea why this content lands here. @dang any insights if this is authentic?