3 ms·
The addictive design is in service of ads. Instead of regulating software, tax ad revenue to disincentivize building a business model around user profiling and
by EPWN3D 3mo ago
The addictive design is in service of ads. Instead of regulating software, tax ad revenue to disincentivize building a business model around user profiling and tracking.
- d4ng 3mo agoTax ad revenue. Increase advertising prices. Advertisers pay more to sell their wares. Consumers pay more to consume their wares.
- YurgenJurgensen 3mo agoVendors won’t see RoI on their ad spend and will stop buying. Simples.
- d4ng 3mo agoGovernments see reduction in tax income and GDP and repeal taxes. In UK: Signal "mansion" tax on properties valued above X price to collect recurring Y pounds total tax. Market adjusts valuations based on probability of tax. Number of houses still worth at least X now diminishes. Now cannot collect recurring Y pounds. "Mansion" tax delayed. You have this complex system that has reached some sort of relative equilibrium based on say a set S of ten sorts of tax rates, along with a set F of factors (size millions), with the government's tax revenue R being one of those outputs. Then some guy in the government called G signals to the government and public that he can increase R by X by fiddling with a member of S, or maybe adding a member to S (of size say ten). Is G stupid, or does he just lean towards retaining the public's affection, his relatively low salary, potential under the table payments and whatever networking opportunities his job provides? I lean towards the latter.
- d4ng 3mo agoVendors now cannot get X pounds with Y pounds advertising outlay to make Z pounds per unit of wares. To continue making Z money per unit of wares, with previous S pounds price charged to consumers per unit, add significantly more than reduction in Y advertising per unit to S to offset reduced "brand" "awareness".
- YurgenJurgensen 3mo agoBrand awareness is a Red Queen’s race. Attention is a finite resource, and ad spend mainly exists to counteract the spend of your competitors.
- d4ng 3mo agoNo one buying shit anymore. People still buying shit elsewhere. GDP and tax revenues fall relative to others. Deflationary aspects. Market leaders complain through lobbying groups. Repeal. Back to square one.
- YurgenJurgensen 3mo agoThat’s just a restatement of your previous point. Pretend I restated my response.
- d4ng 3mo agoI don't agree. They are two separate depictions of what might happen as a result of applying a tax on advertising. They may well coincide with each other, however. Saying that the second is a restatement of the first is like saying two interpretations of Piero Manzoni's "Artist's Shit" are restating the same fact.
- WarmWash 3mo agoThe downside to this is that services become class based again then. Instagram is the same service for everyone, regardless if you are homeless or a billionaire, it is exactly because it is an ad based model. Same for google and facebook. These models are "classless business" incarnate, and people absolutely hate them. It's part bewildering and part bemusing.
- bratbag 3mo agoWhy instead of? Do both.