Specific examples of the data being used for morally dubious things, or just generally better responses? I always struggle with this idk why

  • CopsDyingIsGood [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Ads are psychic violence. We should want them to be as ineffective as possible

    • KiaKaha [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Best part of DPRK: no ads.

      It’s physically disgusting that so much of the world’s artistic potential is dedicated to propaganda to encourage consumption.

      You could ban all advertising with minimal impact on the real economy.

  • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]
    ·
    3 years ago

    GOD I HATE IT SO MUCH WHEN I VIEW BAD, UNDERACHIEVING ADS

    IT RUINS MY WHOLE WEEK

  • ImSoOCD [they/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Google is not as large as it is because it’s a useful service to us as citizens or consumers. It’s large because it makes mass surveillance cheap for world governments. So those same governments look the other way when they start doing anti-competition measures. Feel free to remind people that “better ads” means “more effective manipulation”. Ads do not work by matching those looking for products with brands providing those products. They work by taking someone who previously did not have a need and creating that need in them. It’s kind of like systematized negging. And the people most vulnerable to that manipulation are people going through a major life change, people who have an untreated mental health problem, or people who have impulsive/addictive personalities. Basically, if a cult recruiter would target a person, that person is an advertiser’s ideal consumer

  • AFineWayToDie [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    The state could use that data do to... state things, and Google will fold like laundry day if the state asks for it. Corporations will sell you out along with your entire family if it saves them some slight inconvenience.

    Anyone who's worked in customer service knows the labyrinth of procedures and steps needed to speak to an actual manager. This is because managers will do everything in their power to avoid customers, including caving to their every demand.

    The state is the ultimate Karen.

  • OgdenTO [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    If Google were improving ads, why are they still so awful?

    It collects trillions of data points a day. If this made ads better I think they would be by now.

    • The_Walkening [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      If Google were improving ads, why are they still so awful?

      This is a good point - that game didn't make me cum in 5 seconds!

      • OgdenTO [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        It told me to try not to cum, bit it seemed that the goal of the game was to cum. Poor game design.

    • ImSoOCD [they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      This. It’s the difference between someone guessing your favorite food because they’ve got Sherlock Holmes levels of deduction and someone guessing your favorite food because they’ve been in the bushes watching you walk into the same McDonald’s after work every day for a double quarter pounder. One is impressive intuition. The other is just stalking and making simple inferences

  • Owl [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Equivalent statement: Google only collects data for "better ability to lie to people."

  • thisismyrealname [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    there's no such thing as a "good" or "ethical" advertisement. the entire field is the application of psychology towards getting you to buy shit you don't need or subscribe to a service you'll forget about

    sidenote: if you use newpipe (alternate youtube client for android) and want sponsorblock (extension that skips the sponsor segments in videos), there's a fork which adds support for it. the mainline devs refused to merge because they consider sponsorships to be "ethical", which is a complete load of shit

    • wantonviolins [they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I know someone who is like “man that was a really good/useful ad, thanks google”

      trying to convince them of anything, on any subject, is an impossible battle. They just can’t see past the illusion.

      • cosecantphi [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        That's interesting because you'd think the type of person who thinks ads are useful and informative would also be the type of person who adopts the thinking of whoever they last spoke to.

        • wantonviolins [they/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          they do, but “person” is replaced with “authority” in most instances, which is why they’re resistant to ideas from sources like their peers

          • cosecantphi [he/him]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Yes, that makes sense. Always fun dealing with this type of person and the variety of sources each considers an authority. Nuh uh! CNN says this!

  • Phillipkdink [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    You say "even if that were true, all that means is they're getting a betterROI on the billions they spend on psychologists to put hooks in your ape brain, ultimately to manipulate you to part with your money for no reason." Then ask them to imagine a world where advertising for private interests was illegal.

    Or maybe "more effective advertising won't make you happier, it will only transfer more of your wealth to billionaires."

  • Shitbird [any]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    pul down yur pants & shet on thm

  • The_Walkening [none/use name]
    ·
    3 years ago

    They share this data with foreign governments: and publish these requests:

    https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=en_US