3 ms·

> I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise Advertising does not require invasive and p

by troupo 3mo ago

> I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. There's no world in which a b2c company needs my precise geo location for 12 years: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1817122117093056541 https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1817122117093056541 Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and think "are we going too far?"? 1984 wasn't an instruction manual.

lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago
> Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following. > Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and think "are we going too far?"? 1984 wasn't an instruction manual. Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens while social networks definitely are. For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images in the post you linked because I deleted my account as soon as Musk completely enshittified it and I'm doing just fine without it.
- troupo 3mo ago
  > Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following. Because advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. The better question is: why are you so happy defending 24/7 surveillance of everything you do? > Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens What you're proposing isn't opt in either. You're proposing "pervasive and invasive tracking, or pay an arbitrary sum randomly defined by the tracking industry". That is, literally pay for access to internet without tracking, or else. All based on a completely unproven assumption that tracking is required for ads to function. It's not. > while social networks definitely are. Indeed. Because tracking is happening only on social networks. > For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images Here's a direct link. And no, this pop up wasn't on an "opt out social network". It was on a random site (can't remember now which one): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=900x900 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=...
  - lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago
    > Because advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. Okay, so just ignore tracking-advertisement supported option and sign up for payed account. What is your issue with this again? > What you're proposing isn't opt in either. You're proposing "pervasive and invasive tracking, or pay an arbitrary sum randomly defined by the tracking industry". That is, literally pay for access to internet without tracking, or else. This is incorrect. GDPR already forbids tracking without consent, so services you didn't sign up for (the whole internet) can't legally track you. Obviously, then everything would cost you actual money not just social networks. > Here's a direct link. And no, this pop up wasn't on an "opt out social network". It was on a random site (can't remember now which one): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name= https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=... This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. GDPR already forbids random sites and ad networks from tracking you without your explicit consent.
    - troupo 3mo ago
      > Okay, so just ignore tracking-advertisement supported option and sign up for payed account. What is your issue with this again? Somehow the only option you propose and defend is: "pay, or be tracked". Why would I want a world where the only way not to be tracked is to pay? Moreover, your whole premise is based on the completely unsubstantiated claim that tracking is required for advertisment and for the poor hapless b2c companies. > This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. GDPR already forbids random sites and ad networks from tracking you without your explicit consent. You're literally saying that in your vision you are either tracked, or have to pay for access.
      - lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago
        Besides paying or accepting being tracked you also have the option of not using web services that require that. Some things you can self-host (email, Mastodon instance, etc), others are sponsored (HN). I still don't get why you expect to dictate to businesses how to price their products - voting with your wallet has always been the way to express your disagreement, not "EU mAkE eViL Zuck serVE mE fOr fRee!!!11".

by troupo 3mo ago

lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago

> Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following. > Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and think "are we going too far?"? 1984 wasn't an instruction manual. Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens while social networks definitely are. For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images in the post you linked because I deleted my account as soon as Musk completely enshittified it and I'm doing just fine without it.

troupo 3mo ago
> Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following. Because advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. The better question is: why are you so happy defending 24/7 surveillance of everything you do? > Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens What you're proposing isn't opt in either. You're proposing "pervasive and invasive tracking, or pay an arbitrary sum randomly defined by the tracking industry". That is, literally pay for access to internet without tracking, or else. All based on a completely unproven assumption that tracking is required for ads to function. It's not. > while social networks definitely are. Indeed. Because tracking is happening only on social networks. > For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images Here's a direct link. And no, this pop up wasn't on an "opt out social network". It was on a random site (can't remember now which one): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=900x900 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=...
- lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago
  > Because advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. Okay, so just ignore tracking-advertisement supported option and sign up for payed account. What is your issue with this again? > What you're proposing isn't opt in either. You're proposing "pervasive and invasive tracking, or pay an arbitrary sum randomly defined by the tracking industry". That is, literally pay for access to internet without tracking, or else. This is incorrect. GDPR already forbids tracking without consent, so services you didn't sign up for (the whole internet) can't legally track you. Obviously, then everything would cost you actual money not just social networks. > Here's a direct link. And no, this pop up wasn't on an "opt out social network". It was on a random site (can't remember now which one): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name= https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=... This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. GDPR already forbids random sites and ad networks from tracking you without your explicit consent.
  - troupo 3mo ago
    > Okay, so just ignore tracking-advertisement supported option and sign up for payed account. What is your issue with this again? Somehow the only option you propose and defend is: "pay, or be tracked". Why would I want a world where the only way not to be tracked is to pay? Moreover, your whole premise is based on the completely unsubstantiated claim that tracking is required for advertisment and for the poor hapless b2c companies. > This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. GDPR already forbids random sites and ad networks from tracking you without your explicit consent. You're literally saying that in your vision you are either tracked, or have to pay for access.
    - lII1lIlI11ll 3mo ago
      Besides paying or accepting being tracked you also have the option of not using web services that require that. Some things you can self-host (email, Mastodon instance, etc), others are sponsored (HN). I still don't get why you expect to dictate to businesses how to price their products - voting with your wallet has always been the way to express your disagreement, not "EU mAkE eViL Zuck serVE mE fOr fRee!!!11".