4 ms·

Google/YouTube is making money from your addiction, so...no, not difference in kind.

eropple 11y ago
You have a very long row to hoe to establish that incidental advertising revenue is the same as literally taking money out of the pockets of the fixed-income elderly. Feel free to start, but 'till then I'm going to have a powerfully hard time taking your argument seriously. And Wikipedia doesn't have advertising at all, so don't throw out your back lugging them goalposts.
- waterlesscloud 11y ago
  LOL at "incidental" You know, it's just Google's main revenue stream. By several orders of magnitude.
  - eropple 11y ago
    incidental, adj.: accompanying but not a major part of something. Which is why I picked the phrasing I did; advertising is completely and inarguably incidental to the consumption of the content that somebody is on YouTube to actually see. Is it Google's main revenue stream? Sure. Is it significantly impactful to the consumer? No, not really. But let's take a step back. Do you actually intend to defend your assertion that advertising is the same in kind as literally taking money out of somebody's pocket? Or is this just the tacit admission that, no, you can't, so let's play definitional games?
    - waterlesscloud 11y ago
      There's no question whatsoever that Google/Youtube would not exist if they didn't have advertising revenue. This is not in any way a debatable point. It's not even a little bit "incidental". My point, no matter how you attempt to recast it, is that Google/Youtube depend on an addictive dynamic. They do. You keep coming back. You keep watching the next video. they make money when you do that. You can try to recast that all you want, but if people didn't keep clicking on the next result or next video, Google/YouTube wouldn't make money. Why do you think there's a related videos sidebar on YouTube? Why do YouTube videos end with more links to other videos?
      - reinhardt 11y ago
        Google et al. make money from advertisers, not from "addicted" people clicking on cat videos on Youtube. If you can't see the difference from the slot machines business model, I don't know what to tell you.
- alanfalcon 11y ago
  The elderly have limited lifespans in addition to limited income, taking their time could be more costly than taking money in some cases. Money isn't the only thing of value in this world. I don't come down on the side of Google being responsible for YouTube addictions, nor of F2P game makers being resposible for IAP addictions in a general universal sense.

You have a very long row to hoe to establish that incidental advertising revenue is the same as literally taking money out of the pockets of the fixed-income elderly. Feel free to start, but 'till then I'm going to have a powerfully hard time taking your argument seriously. And Wikipedia doesn't have advertising at all, so don't throw out your back lugging them goalposts.

waterlesscloud 11y ago
LOL at "incidental" You know, it's just Google's main revenue stream. By several orders of magnitude.
- eropple 11y ago
  incidental, adj.: accompanying but not a major part of something. Which is why I picked the phrasing I did; advertising is completely and inarguably incidental to the consumption of the content that somebody is on YouTube to actually see. Is it Google's main revenue stream? Sure. Is it significantly impactful to the consumer? No, not really. But let's take a step back. Do you actually intend to defend your assertion that advertising is the same in kind as literally taking money out of somebody's pocket? Or is this just the tacit admission that, no, you can't, so let's play definitional games?
  - waterlesscloud 11y ago
    There's no question whatsoever that Google/Youtube would not exist if they didn't have advertising revenue. This is not in any way a debatable point. It's not even a little bit "incidental". My point, no matter how you attempt to recast it, is that Google/Youtube depend on an addictive dynamic. They do. You keep coming back. You keep watching the next video. they make money when you do that. You can try to recast that all you want, but if people didn't keep clicking on the next result or next video, Google/YouTube wouldn't make money. Why do you think there's a related videos sidebar on YouTube? Why do YouTube videos end with more links to other videos?
    - reinhardt 11y ago
      Google et al. make money from advertisers, not from "addicted" people clicking on cat videos on Youtube. If you can't see the difference from the slot machines business model, I don't know what to tell you.
alanfalcon 11y ago
The elderly have limited lifespans in addition to limited income, taking their time could be more costly than taking money in some cases. Money isn't the only thing of value in this world. I don't come down on the side of Google being responsible for YouTube addictions, nor of F2P game makers being resposible for IAP addictions in a general universal sense.