I’ll probably be crucified for this but I think the free w/advertising model is not fundamentally evil, and gives poor people access to lots of shit that they otherwise wouldn’t have, keeps the rest of us from death by 1,000 monthly subscriptions.

▲

AlecSchueler 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> gives poor people access to lots of shit that they otherwise wouldn’t have

Addiction is a precursor to poverty. If we accept the domino theory of "online advertising -> addictive design" then the fundamental evil becomes clear. Holding people in poverty in order to profit from their time and attention.

▲

mschild 2 hours ago | parent [-]

But the most valuable ad targets are people with money unless my product specifically targets low-income individuals (pay day lenders, etc).

	▲	AlecSchueler an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I think that's debatable, there's arguments like quantity over quality to be made, but I also think it's somewhat beside the point of "ad supported services are a favour to the poor."

▲

mschild 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree. I think the main problem is personalized advertisement that incentivizes companies to record as much data as possible. I'd prefer if they worked like they do in print magazines. Every reader sees the same.

Lets say I'm reading a laptop review. Show me adds from the laptop manufacturer or of websites that sell said laptop. People reading the review are likely in the market for a laptop so it makes sense to show it. At most you could probably narrow it down to the country so a German doesn't get shown a Best Buy ad but thats as far as I would go.

▲

thfuran an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>I think the free w/advertising model is not fundamentally evil

I think it's fundamentally anti-competitive.