This makes me wonder why people put up with targeted content whatsoever. I actually have a friend who works in game development, and he has a real chip on his should regarding the current attitude that the discoverable customer base has. For instance, he sees a lot of people who think developers are pushing things down people's throats, are making games bad or annoying on purpose just so that users get frustrated, etc. It's pretty disheartening to him since from his perspective everyone is just doing the best they can, sometimes with quite poor results given the constraints of the market. But ultimately, they really just want to make games that people love and are really try to do so.

My personal theory is that people broadly are becoming very thick skinned with regard to content being pushed on them, but at the same time it has not occurred to people to simply disengage. (ie, they're getting frustrated by the pushers, but aren't leaving forums, social media, youtube, etc. so that no one can push anything on them) I think in some of the darker corners of the web, you currently see this associated with the term "slop." I assume we're all familiar with metaphor. Most of our waking lives (assuming we're on normal platforms) someone is out trying to twist your arm to get your attention, to get you outraged or jealous; anything for attention.

I really think it's breeding an incredible amount of unthinking cynicism, and at least some of the negativity you find online is just related to all the different wars for attention. As noted, it's quite surprising just how many people won't step away from this crazy attention marketplace. It's easy to do in principle: Put down your phone, your computer, and read a book or take a walk. In practice, it's more like overeating; people were never built with impulse control against novelty and social outrage, and lacking the fundamentals most people fail this test.

Good point. Has me thinking: In any field, over time, there's R&D for it to become more effective. How this progression might apply to marketing:

1. Printed ads, newspapers, billboards, magazines -- You can explain your product and show a picture of what it looks like to demonstrate the value to customers

2. Television ads, black and white -- We can demonstrate the value to customers so well!

3. Wait a minute, if we put music in the TV ads, the songs get stuck in peoples' heads, this is good for our brand

4. Color TV Ads -- We have all the previous benefits but can get more attention with color!

5. We can target regional TV ads in different parts of the country!

6. Oh, we can target any ad based on demographics on social media? This will be effective

7. Ok, now we want to keep targeting ads, but we're gonna A/B test multiple versions of the ads in real time to maximize effectiveness

8. Ok, I need to maximize effectiveness of this ad, let me generate an AI mockup of the product I'm selling to create an illusion of the lifestyle my brand represents

My point is, marketing has been optimized over time and will continue to optimize for profit in the future, and the result has been a divergence in the actual goal of marketing: We've gone from "Demonstrate the value of our product" to "Create an illusion of our lifestyle".

I fully agree. Just to add some nuance, walking away means pulling back, but it doesn't have to entail completely abandoning all social media. Obviously, the advertising here on Hacker News is very mild, just Y Combinator launches. But even Facebook and Reddit and Twitter can convey useful information. You do need to curate your feeds, but more importantly, know when to step away when the muck and the outrage seep in.

Optimistically, the cynicism you describe could develop into a sophisticated ability to discern fraud.

> For instance, he sees a lot of people who think developers are pushing things down people's throats, are making games bad or annoying on purpose just so that users get frustrated, etc.

There are studios that churn out crap games to capture the casual games market, which is not the gaming industry that an avid gamer would be familiar with.

Watch a kid with a tablet navigate the mobile/casual game market, you will feel sick. They flick between two dozen games in an hour, 90% of each game is locked behind microtransactions, and they get about a minute or two before the unskippable ad shows up.

The ad is for another lootbox/microtransaction fueled game, or actual gambling sometimes, and it's only another couple of minutes before an ad shows up in that game too. Rinse and repeat.

Kids are having their reward circuits absolutely fried, and it is not game enthusiasts making these games, it's just regular old capitalist companies who are trying to squeeze an opportunity.

It is every bit the exploitive, uncreative industry your friend thinks it is, but I do believe it is not the same as the games industry. It's like the difference between a board game and a slot machine.

> My personal theory is that people broadly are becoming very thick skinned with regard to content being pushed on them

You mean thin-skinned?