7 ms·
While you're right, the AI part is almost irrelevant. I think it's immoral that states can advertise their lotteries full-stop. True, the AI part will make thi
by SamBam 3y ago
While you're right, the AI part is almost irrelevant. I think it's immoral that states can advertise their lotteries full-stop.
True, the AI part will make this worse, especially if states get into really targeted advertisements. But the morality line is already being crossed daily.
- JTbane 3y agoI don't have a problem with state lotteries because it's essentially charity towards public works. You could argue that the gambling aspect makes it addictive, but it's basically entertainment.
- vouaobrasil 3y agoWell, there is a fine line betweeen entertainment and a drug. That is precisely what makes entertainment so protected by modern governments and corporations: they know where that line is, and how to cross it.
- walthamstow 3y agoA massively profitable charity towards public works funded exclusively by poor and lower-middle working people who are addicted to waiting for their numbers each week
- nerdjon 3y agoI would buy this argument until they advertise it. Everyone knows what the lottery is, there is basically zero reason to do any advertising for it. Advertising it is encouraging addictive behavior. I think it is fine that the state runs it, but not the way that many do. It being a charity doesn't absolve them from bad behavior, plenty of charities have been... controversial.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago> While you're right, the AI part is almost irrelevant. I think it's immoral that states can advertise their lotteries full-stop. Well, it does highlight the fact that AI will make this sort of manipulation so much easier and faster. Imagine a world where there the only vehicles are bicycles and people crash frequently. Now, the first car is introduced and someone crashes at 100MPH -- would you really say that the car is irrelevant to the situation because people have been crashing for decades? Yes, you are right: the root problem is the way we view people's minds as a resource to be exploited through psychological manipulation, but that does not make irrelevant the very real new danger of AI.
- ToucanLoucan 3y ago> would you really say that the car is irrelevant to the situation because people have been crashing for decades? The tragic irony being that's basically what we did and continue to do.
- jprete 3y agoI understand why you might say that - particularly at a societal level - but individual drivers: * Must be licensed * Must have a minimum level of liability insurance that covers other participants in an accident * Can be fined, get higher insurance premiums, and lose their licenses for breaking driving laws * Can be put in jail for felonies for sufficiently reckless driving that has the potential to endanger others As I understand it, commercially licensed drivers usually have even higher requirements and lose their licenses more easily for driving infractions. GenAI makes a lot of creative actions much easier, faster, automatable, and available to everyone, and "everyone" includes a lot of people with no foresight or discipline whatsoever.
- Swizec 3y agoNone of this was true when cars were first introduced. Back in the early 20th century it was considered fairly normal that drivers would just sort of plow through pedestrians if they’re in the way. Big societal battle over who gets to be in streets – the people who have always been there, or the cars. Eventually jaywalking was invented as a concept by the car lobby. > And then the automobile happened. And then automobiles began killing thousands of children, every year. https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-moloch/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern...
- dhosek 3y agoWorse still, because it’s a state-run lottery, it’s not subject to truth in advertising laws so they can advertise the jackpot that you would receive over 30 years as if it were the lump sum payment that you’d receive for winning.
- robin_reala 3y agoWhy are they not subject to those laws?
- verisimi 3y agoIts one thing for a human to pay another human to call up leads or whatever, and an entirely other thing to create a factory to do the same job and hit thousands/millions at a lower cost than someone would pay the single human. The scale difference is significant, albeit I also agree that neither is moral.
- hackerlight 3y agoI go further than this. It's immoral to weaponize someone's evolved dopamine system against their own long-term interests. Whether that's fast food, alcohol, social media, loot boxes or gambling. It's fine to have products in these loose categories, but we've clearly gone overboard when people are fat and depressed because their evolved circuits have been so thoroughly hacked like moths to a flame. At some point we're no longer in the paradigm of voluntary consumer choice.
- apantel 3y agoThat’s… most media, most products, most services.
- hamburga 3y agoExactly :/ Not illegal, but immoral
- hackerlight 3y agoThat's forcing things into an artificial binary when it's more appropriate to think of it as a spectrum, with unambiguously aligned products (e.g whole foods that improve user health) on the one hand and unambiguously exploitative products (e.g krokodil) on the other.
- logicchains 3y ago>when people are fat and depressed because their evolved circuits have been so thoroughly hacked like moths to a flame People in America are fat and depressed because of a culture of looking to blame biology for poor self control rather than take responsibility for their own behaviour. Advertising is just as much of a thing in East Asia but it doesn't have the obesity problem that the west has, because there it's regarded as a personal failing. Advertisement was just as much a thing in America 50 years ago as it is now, but people weren't fat and depressed then, because people were told to take responsibility for their diet and their state of mind. Willpower is like a muscle, it's been proven to strengthen with use. Letting people get away with blaming advertisement, biology or whatever for their failures prevents them ever needing to develop their willpower.
- diydsp 3y ago> immoral that states can advertise their lotteries full-stop. State lotteries are a compromise: They inhibit underground lotteries. The goal of the state lotteries is to divert people away from the danger of the underground while keeping itself from being overly attractive.
- edgyquant 3y agoWhy do they need to be state controlled for this? This is the same argument for casinos but states don’t run those.
- Err_Eek 3y ago> This is the same argument for casinos but states don’t run those. In most (or at least a lot of) countries states regulate casinos _so much_ than it becomes almost a technicality that casinos are privately owned. Also with lotteries you have the scale factor -- in order to have an attractive lottery, you need a ton of ticket buyers, so if you have a national level lottery you can definitely make neighborhood lotteries way less appealing. Blackjack and poker tables don't scale the same way.
- whiterknight 3y agoWe have seen how well this argument holds up with sports betting, which went from something people do in Vegas on vacation to a significant portion of 20-30 year old males pay checks. Accessibility and marketing matters.
- iamthirsty 3y agoI don't know where you grew up, but in almost every college guy's social network (usually already consisting of sports guys) we all knew a guy and didn't just bet in Vegas on vacation. It has always been a significant part of 20-30 yo male paychecks, now it's just acceptable to advertise on ESPN.
- noolean 3y ago
- Intermernet 3y agoCan I take this a step further and say that advertising is the true problem here? I tend to think most things should be legal, but advertising most things should be banned. It seems that society can't delineate between accepting a practice and promoting a practice.
- bartonfink 3y agoPot, meet kettle.
- Fubarberry 3y agoWhat would you recommend as an alternative to advertisements? I do think a lot of ads go too far, but I think some form of advertisement is necessary to get new awareness of new brands and products. Otherwise only the pre-established large brands and products will ever get sales, which would lead to a lack of competition and all the negatives that come with that.
- n4r9 3y agoIn a civilised society, among other regulations, advertisements would be shown only to people that have pro-actively searched for a service or product.
- stuart73547373 3y agothis would be great if everyone was rich enough to afford to pay for their services with money. but it would cut off a lot of services and opportunities for everyone else who is able to pay with their attention (to ads) instead
- secstate 3y agoI mean, we're basically heading towards a basic minimum income at that point, where you truncate the top 5% of the tax ladder and redistribute it to the bottom 25%. At that point, people could pay for services. Dig a little into the idea that people can "pay" with their attention (and with their poor health, crappy buying decisions, personal freedoms) might fit the dictionary definition of sinister.
- cryptonector 3y ago> I think it's immoral that states can advertise their lotteries full-stop. Is it advertising lotteries that is immoral, or the lotteries themselves?