3 ms·

This doesn’t make sense. Why would any advertiser pay the same in such a scenario? They would obviously value your attention much less on average if that was

This doesn’t make sense. Why would any advertiser pay the same in such a scenario? They would obviously value your attention much less on average if that was a hard limit.

maujun 2y ago
It doesn't make sense financially. But money is not the only thing that matters. My emotions matter. If I see a scary person who is not my friend, I yell "put him down" in my head, and take actions. If that scary person knows more about me than I know about myself. I bark like a small dog. Arf! Arf! Arf! In English, that roughly translates to "Get out of my sight! Get out of my head! Then I'll feel fine again." If this doesn't make sense to you, then you are suggesting a world where money/truth matter more than emotions. But then why do people make money, if not just to survive? Arf! Arf! Arf! (This originally translated to: "Don't engage with me unless you value low-status people")
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  This still doesn’t make sense. Since everyone values emotions differently... there would still need to be some intermediary, like money, for emotions to have any agreed upon value at all beyond narrow circles. Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value?
  - ambicapter 2y ago
    "The only way to understand emotions correctly is through money" What a take.
    - pyrale 2y ago
      We need a market for emotions. Want a good laugh with your friends? That'll be $10. A moment of peace with your so? That'll be $100. Rewards of up to $.50 for people willing to be scared to death (or, you know, moderate social media content).
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - maujun 2y ago
    I like the idea. With money, we can value emotions. Since everybody has some money, everybody's emotions (outside of children) will have positive value. Relating to my original example: I, as a provider of PII, feel scared about my information being sold. If Google has a $100/year option to stop my PII from being spread, I would consider buying it. However, I predict now some people feel angry. They feel Google should not be allowed to do this. They won't pay Google to stop, they will go to the govt. Considering this problem, I wonder what is the next step we would need to do to ensure a world of positive emotions and money. > Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value? Well, I think a lot of people value my emotions negatively, especially angry people and corporations. In particular, corporations like to take money and make it time consuming for me to get a refund. As for people, I am at peace because I cannot change my skin color, face, or personality, but I can adjust my goals to be smaller/non-overlapping.
pclmulqdq 2y ago
I don't give a shit what advertisers want. I was merely pointing out to someone in the ad business that I don't want to see relevant ads when they made the statement that I do. This is something that people in advertising say a lot, but it's generally not true. I do not want or benefit from you having "better" ad targeting - I will find your product if I want it without the sales pitch.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  Why does your individual opinion matter to Google (or advertisers or their markets) then? It’s probably not even possible for decision makers to discern it from noise.
  - pclmulqdq 2y ago
    My individual opinion is (presumably) not unique. They also absolutely can tell who is a decision maker: around 2015, people used to serve facebook ads specifically to VCs to get investment in their startups. I'm sure targeting has only improved.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      This doesn’t make sense as a reply, it’s not relevant how many others share your opinion, because it’s not aggregations of people replying to each other on HN, but specific users. Each user’s comment has to stand up under its own weight so to speak
      - pclmulqdq 2y ago
        Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. The original point stands, though: not everyone benefits from better ad targeting.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        > Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. So then why did you reply if you already knew your comment and the rest of the comment chain was irrelevant?

This doesn’t make sense. Why would any advertiser pay the same in such a scenario? They would obviously value your attention much less on average if that was a hard limit.

maujun 2y ago

It doesn't make sense financially. But money is not the only thing that matters. My emotions matter. If I see a scary person who is not my friend, I yell "put him down" in my head, and take actions. If that scary person knows more about me than I know about myself. I bark like a small dog. Arf! Arf! Arf! In English, that roughly translates to "Get out of my sight! Get out of my head! Then I'll feel fine again." If this doesn't make sense to you, then you are suggesting a world where money/truth matter more than emotions. But then why do people make money, if not just to survive? Arf! Arf! Arf! (This originally translated to: "Don't engage with me unless you value low-status people")

MichaelZuo 2y ago
This still doesn’t make sense. Since everyone values emotions differently... there would still need to be some intermediary, like money, for emotions to have any agreed upon value at all beyond narrow circles. Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value?
- ambicapter 2y ago
  "The only way to understand emotions correctly is through money" What a take.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    We need a market for emotions. Want a good laugh with your friends? That'll be $10. A moment of peace with your so? That'll be $100. Rewards of up to $.50 for people willing to be scared to death (or, you know, moderate social media content).
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- maujun 2y ago
  I like the idea. With money, we can value emotions. Since everybody has some money, everybody's emotions (outside of children) will have positive value. Relating to my original example: I, as a provider of PII, feel scared about my information being sold. If Google has a $100/year option to stop my PII from being spread, I would consider buying it. However, I predict now some people feel angry. They feel Google should not be allowed to do this. They won't pay Google to stop, they will go to the govt. Considering this problem, I wonder what is the next step we would need to do to ensure a world of positive emotions and money. > Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value? Well, I think a lot of people value my emotions negatively, especially angry people and corporations. In particular, corporations like to take money and make it time consuming for me to get a refund. As for people, I am at peace because I cannot change my skin color, face, or personality, but I can adjust my goals to be smaller/non-overlapping.

pclmulqdq 2y ago

I don't give a shit what advertisers want. I was merely pointing out to someone in the ad business that I don't want to see relevant ads when they made the statement that I do. This is something that people in advertising say a lot, but it's generally not true. I do not want or benefit from you having "better" ad targeting - I will find your product if I want it without the sales pitch.

MichaelZuo 2y ago
Why does your individual opinion matter to Google (or advertisers or their markets) then? It’s probably not even possible for decision makers to discern it from noise.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  My individual opinion is (presumably) not unique. They also absolutely can tell who is a decision maker: around 2015, people used to serve facebook ads specifically to VCs to get investment in their startups. I'm sure targeting has only improved.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    This doesn’t make sense as a reply, it’s not relevant how many others share your opinion, because it’s not aggregations of people replying to each other on HN, but specific users. Each user’s comment has to stand up under its own weight so to speak
    - pclmulqdq 2y ago
      Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. The original point stands, though: not everyone benefits from better ad targeting.
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        > Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. So then why did you reply if you already knew your comment and the rest of the comment chain was irrelevant?