5 ms·

Another way of describing this - they find people lose interest almost immediately, and so if you want to actually show a consumer something new, you have to ge

by cm2012 8mo ago

Another way of describing this - they find people lose interest almost immediately, and so if you want to actually show a consumer something new, you have to get to the point with your ad.

WarmWash 8mo ago
...which has been known for at least a century
- daveguy 8mo ago
  And only recently could be optimized in real time, individually, for each target. I remember when there was a big moral scare about "subliminal advertising". People were appalled that an ad on TV could manipulate you without your awareness. That is 100% the business model of modern social media advertising. It's not embedded in a specific ad, but the entire operation of the promotion algorithms.
- RRWagner 8mo ago
  Here is an important difference. A century ago, the predator (seller) and the prey (buyer) were on equal evolutionary terms. Each generation of humans on either side of the transaction came into the world, learned to convince, learned to resist, then passed, and some balance was maintained. In this century, corporations and algorithms don't die, but the targets do. This means that the non-human seller is continuously, even immortally, learning, adapting and perfecting how to manipulate. The target, be it adult, adolescent, or child, is, and will be ever increasingly, at a severe disadvantage.
  - SR2Z 8mo ago
    Right, because we know that parents never pass down useful skills or life tips to their children, like skepticism of propaganda and advertising, and instead send their children into the world like sheep into a lion's den. There might come a day when advertising is too flawless for a human mind to resist it, but we're not there yet.
    - somenameforme 8mo ago
      Most of everybody thinks their behaviors and decisions are not meaningfully influenced by advertising. Companies spend literally trillions of dollars running ads. One side is right, one side is wrong. And advertising largely relies on this ignorance of its effects, or otherwise most of everybody would go to much greater lengths to limit their exposures to such, and governments would be more inclined to regulate the ad industry as a goal in and of itself.
      - cm2012 8mo ago
        Advertising is just companies saying "This is what you can purchase from me - it's awesome - please consider purchasing it". I have managed hundreds of millions in ad spend for major brands. None of them rely on weird ad magic to persuade people secretly - just showing off different aspects of the product or service.
        anonymars 8mo ago
        Um, off the top of my head: "You'll be happier if you purchase this thing" "You're not good enough as you are now, but you will be if you purchase this thing" "Other people you admire or respect have purchased this thing, and if you do too you'll be more like them" "Other people will like you more if you purchase this thing" "You'll be more attractive if you purchase this thing" "This thing will be worth more in the future so if you purchase this thing it will make you money" "This is your only chance to purchase this thing, so if you don't it now you'll miss out on this price" I don't think any of them has to do with how awesome "the thing" itself is. Obviously there's more to, say, an expensive watch, than its ability to tell time
        cm2012 8mo ago
        The only products that sell this in advertising actually provide those brand features. Essentially people pay money to increase their perceived status. Like, if you sell a luxury handbag. When people buy it, they know 70% of the value comes from the advertising saying "this is a high value product" as a status signal. I think that's really dumb, but that's what people want. It also existed a long time before ads itself did.
  - thrwaway55 8mo ago
    Ah yes because trade secrets were never a thing at any of these companies. The companies always shut down when it's founding members died wiping out all the knowledge it had built up. That is to say organizations have always had this edge on individuals.
  - jayd16 8mo ago
    What if I told you younger sales people were trained by more experienced sales people and its not a new thing.
Teever 8mo ago
I'm not sure that's a fair characterization of a policy that promotes ads that hook the user within the first 200ms. 200ms isn't enough time for significant information to be transmitted to a person and for them to process it. You don't 'get to the point' in 200ms. That means that the way to the user's brain and attention is with some irritating little jingle, a picture of a bunny beating a drum, cartoon bears wiping their asses with toilet paper, a picture of a caveman salesman or a picture of an absolutely artifical thing that looks like food but isn't. Stuff that stands out as unnatural. But that isn't enough. You gotta pair it with spaced reeitition. Let them think about this every time they take a shit in the office. Hammer them with the same shrill sounds and garish images on every commercial break. Or after every couple of songs they're trying to listen to on youtube. Or in institials that are algorithmically optimized to pop up in their feed as they mindlessly scroll looking for gossip about their neigbhours to scratch that social group animal itch in all of us.
- somenameforme 8mo ago
  Exactly, 200ms is rather different than 'get to the point.' Here is a 'reaction speed test' site: https://reactiontimetest.net/ https://reactiontimetest.net/ for somebody who doesn't intuit what 200ms is like. You will likely be unable to click the screen in response to a box turning green faster than 200ms. To hook somebody on something within 200ms is largely appealing to casino like stuff where every single jingle, color, flash of light, and other aspect of their games is carefully researched in order to maximize addiction on a subconscious level.
- jayd16 8mo ago
  > 200ms isn't enough time for significant information to be transmitted to a person and for them to process it. I think the point of the flyer is that, surprisingly, it is.
  - pahkah 8mo ago
    I think there are two different definitions of "significant information" at play here. I interpreted the GP comment to mean "information about the thing being advertised". The point of the flyer is that you need to get the person to process one bit of information in the first 200ms: scroll or stay. GP's point is that that has little, if anything, to do with the ostensible purpose of advertising, informing people about a product.
tremon 8mo ago
So, in order to put a more neutral spin on this practice, you immediately reduce all people to "consumers"? Aren't you just confirming the GP's characterization that all platform users are seen as prey?
- cm2012 8mo ago
  Consumer doesnt mean "prey" to me at all.
  - rogueparitybit 8mo ago
    Okay, good luck with that mantra in a decade! I think it's very obvious that programming abilities are being destroyed from the inside out, but sure, tell me in a decade I was right when everything is collapsed.

by cm2012 8mo ago

Another way of describing this - they find people lose interest almost immediately, and so if you want to actually show a consumer something new, you have to get to the point with your ad.

WarmWash 8mo ago

...which has been known for at least a century

daveguy 8mo ago
And only recently could be optimized in real time, individually, for each target. I remember when there was a big moral scare about "subliminal advertising". People were appalled that an ad on TV could manipulate you without your awareness. That is 100% the business model of modern social media advertising. It's not embedded in a specific ad, but the entire operation of the promotion algorithms.
RRWagner 8mo ago
Here is an important difference. A century ago, the predator (seller) and the prey (buyer) were on equal evolutionary terms. Each generation of humans on either side of the transaction came into the world, learned to convince, learned to resist, then passed, and some balance was maintained. In this century, corporations and algorithms don't die, but the targets do. This means that the non-human seller is continuously, even immortally, learning, adapting and perfecting how to manipulate. The target, be it adult, adolescent, or child, is, and will be ever increasingly, at a severe disadvantage.
- SR2Z 8mo ago
  Right, because we know that parents never pass down useful skills or life tips to their children, like skepticism of propaganda and advertising, and instead send their children into the world like sheep into a lion's den. There might come a day when advertising is too flawless for a human mind to resist it, but we're not there yet.
  - somenameforme 8mo ago
    Most of everybody thinks their behaviors and decisions are not meaningfully influenced by advertising. Companies spend literally trillions of dollars running ads. One side is right, one side is wrong. And advertising largely relies on this ignorance of its effects, or otherwise most of everybody would go to much greater lengths to limit their exposures to such, and governments would be more inclined to regulate the ad industry as a goal in and of itself.
    - cm2012 8mo ago
      Advertising is just companies saying "This is what you can purchase from me - it's awesome - please consider purchasing it". I have managed hundreds of millions in ad spend for major brands. None of them rely on weird ad magic to persuade people secretly - just showing off different aspects of the product or service.
      - anonymars 8mo ago
        Um, off the top of my head: "You'll be happier if you purchase this thing" "You're not good enough as you are now, but you will be if you purchase this thing" "Other people you admire or respect have purchased this thing, and if you do too you'll be more like them" "Other people will like you more if you purchase this thing" "You'll be more attractive if you purchase this thing" "This thing will be worth more in the future so if you purchase this thing it will make you money" "This is your only chance to purchase this thing, so if you don't it now you'll miss out on this price" I don't think any of them has to do with how awesome "the thing" itself is. Obviously there's more to, say, an expensive watch, than its ability to tell time
        cm2012 8mo ago
        The only products that sell this in advertising actually provide those brand features. Essentially people pay money to increase their perceived status. Like, if you sell a luxury handbag. When people buy it, they know 70% of the value comes from the advertising saying "this is a high value product" as a status signal. I think that's really dumb, but that's what people want. It also existed a long time before ads itself did.
- thrwaway55 8mo ago
  Ah yes because trade secrets were never a thing at any of these companies. The companies always shut down when it's founding members died wiping out all the knowledge it had built up. That is to say organizations have always had this edge on individuals.
- jayd16 8mo ago
  What if I told you younger sales people were trained by more experienced sales people and its not a new thing.

Teever 8mo ago

I'm not sure that's a fair characterization of a policy that promotes ads that hook the user within the first 200ms. 200ms isn't enough time for significant information to be transmitted to a person and for them to process it. You don't 'get to the point' in 200ms. That means that the way to the user's brain and attention is with some irritating little jingle, a picture of a bunny beating a drum, cartoon bears wiping their asses with toilet paper, a picture of a caveman salesman or a picture of an absolutely artifical thing that looks like food but isn't. Stuff that stands out as unnatural. But that isn't enough. You gotta pair it with spaced reeitition. Let them think about this every time they take a shit in the office. Hammer them with the same shrill sounds and garish images on every commercial break. Or after every couple of songs they're trying to listen to on youtube. Or in institials that are algorithmically optimized to pop up in their feed as they mindlessly scroll looking for gossip about their neigbhours to scratch that social group animal itch in all of us.

somenameforme 8mo ago
Exactly, 200ms is rather different than 'get to the point.' Here is a 'reaction speed test' site: https://reactiontimetest.net/ https://reactiontimetest.net/ for somebody who doesn't intuit what 200ms is like. You will likely be unable to click the screen in response to a box turning green faster than 200ms. To hook somebody on something within 200ms is largely appealing to casino like stuff where every single jingle, color, flash of light, and other aspect of their games is carefully researched in order to maximize addiction on a subconscious level.
jayd16 8mo ago
> 200ms isn't enough time for significant information to be transmitted to a person and for them to process it. I think the point of the flyer is that, surprisingly, it is.
- pahkah 8mo ago
  I think there are two different definitions of "significant information" at play here. I interpreted the GP comment to mean "information about the thing being advertised". The point of the flyer is that you need to get the person to process one bit of information in the first 200ms: scroll or stay. GP's point is that that has little, if anything, to do with the ostensible purpose of advertising, informing people about a product.

tremon 8mo ago

So, in order to put a more neutral spin on this practice, you immediately reduce all people to "consumers"? Aren't you just confirming the GP's characterization that all platform users are seen as prey?

cm2012 8mo ago
Consumer doesnt mean "prey" to me at all.
- rogueparitybit 8mo ago
  Okay, good luck with that mantra in a decade! I think it's very obvious that programming abilities are being destroyed from the inside out, but sure, tell me in a decade I was right when everything is collapsed.