HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

edwardbernays

no profile record

comments

edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
No, I'm going to continue watching YouTube while also avoiding their ads. If they want to engage in an adversarial relationship then I will as well. Until there's another competitor in the space that provides the same value, I will just take value from the only game in town. They don't owe me their service, but I also don't owe a bad faith monopolist anything. I do pay for premium, and I also block all of their analytics and ads at the network level.

EDIT: also, I think everyone should block ads. We should snub advertisers and surveillers all of the time. If they want to be hostile towards users, users should be hostile towards them.

Capitalists have had it too good for too long. It's time consumers stop caring about how the poor capitalist will make their dime.

Until the capitalists take the time to respect us, the consumers, we don't owe them anything.

It's time for reciprocity. If they're hostile, we reciprocate. If they're cooperative, we reciprocate.
edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
Personally, for my own value system, I consider the gambling ads to be as bad as scam ads. I think we'll soon come to see the social harm of gambling ads to be as bad as tobacco ads. We should strive for a culture where people see an ad for addictive services or substances and feel an instinctive, pre-conscious disgust. They are the dirty, disgusting, bloodsucking bedbugs of society.
edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
I'm not complaining that higher-quality advertisers aren't spending money trying to reach me. I'm saying the fact that the lowest common denominator ads are so hostile is reason enough to completely avoid them.

This might be a controversial take, but I don't want to see soft-core porn ads. I don't want to see scam ads. I don't want to see the worst of the worst. It is not a necessary state of affairs that the lowest common denominator ads are ads that are explicitly attempting to prey upon the least informed, most vulnerable members of society.

The fact that the worst ads are the way that they are is indicative of YouTube's willingness to engage in user-hostile activities.

If they were less willing to engage in hostile ads, there would be less hostility towards their ads.

YouTube's solution is extremely simple: vet ads and don't accept money to run hostile ads.
edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
I'm in America. I only see these scummy ads I talk about, and I assume it's because I'm extremely aggressive about preventing myself from being tracked and profiled. My friends made the horrible mistake of looking into cryptocurrency on Google while signed into their account, so they got targeted by scum crypto ads.
edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
I don't think it's a rationalization. I have two normie friends who were mostly fine seeing ads on the internet, until one night they saw one too many scum ads on YouTube. They asked me to help them install an adblocker. It was specifically the scumminess of these ads that got them to start using adblockers, which by the way the FBI recommends as a matter of course. People should buy YouTube premium for the convenience features it offers, but everyone should be blocking ads for their own safety and sanity. There is no reason to engage in the ad economy. Everyone should be blocking all ads.
edwardbernays
·năm ngoái·discuss
If they ran less hostile ads, people wouldn't be as hostile to watching their ads. Some of the ads they run are just ridiculous and awful. Ads for scams, soft-core porn ads, just the worst of the worst.