It makes sense. Poor people can't pay for privacy, now that it became a feature instead of a right.
Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
21–30 of 72 posts
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#22I think it's asinine "free market" religious nonsense. If we had done this ~100 years ago with phones being rolled out to rural areas, the free market would have said pay $1000 a month for phone service. Instead the government forced everyone to pay a subsidy so it'd be cheaper in rural areas, and even cheaper for poor people anywhere including cities.
No one complained about this.
So now the idea is privacy is a commodity to be purchased, and freedom from ads is a commodity to be purchased. It's every man for himself, that leads to more distrust, less cooperation, and more acrimony and I think it's incompatible with a civil society. This classist variety of Republican/conservative/capitalist - whatever label to put on it - is vile. It's neo-aristocracy, and it's anti-democratic.
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
They know what product I'm going to buy... after I've bought it. They've almost got it right; all they need is a time machine.
I love it when I've bought jewelry for my wife and every damned ad is for the same jewelry store. Hard enough hiding a gift, now I have to hide my browser like I'm sneaking around watching porn.
That's just what either private browsing or ad/tracking blockers are for now. Under the coming regime, they'll track where you've been but you'll still (for now) be able to block the resultant ads.
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#24Ads over privacy?
Why can't we have Ads vs. Privacy? Income for Comcast can come from either at the cost of serving ads OR at the cost of privacy--not both. What the fuck?
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#25It makes sense. Poor people can't pay for privacy, now that it became a feature instead of a right.
First there is strong bias here, so we actually do not know really if it is true.
Second, lets imagine that poor people would prefer whipping instead of imprisonment (they can return to work sooner) or fine.
Should we follow the same logic here then and accept it?
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#26How about ads with privacy? They are not mutually exclusive.
> How about ads with privacy? They are not mutually exclusive. Yeah, but internet advertising fetishizes "personalization" and quantitative metrics, which are predicated on invasions of privacy. Advertisers could put those toys down, and go back to more traditional, privacy-preserving advertising, but I don't think they have the maturity and willpower to do so on their own.
you're asserting that the reason why advertising organizations who are competing to deliver the most valuable advertising product to their clients end up invading people's privacy is a lack of maturity and willpower? You're insane if you believe that this problem is not systemic.
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#27They'd probably also agree to slavery to get food and shelter
I can't imagine what they would be willing to do for a luxury like health care!
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#28Them wanting people to believe that this will lower the cost of internet service is laughable. Have TV ads lowered the cost of cable?
We need to think of the internet as a public utility. How absurd would it be if every time you used water in your home, you heard an advertisement playing from a speaker in the faucet.
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#29How about ads with privacy? They are not mutually exclusive.
> How about ads with privacy? They are not mutually exclusive.
Mozilla attempted this on the Firefox home page. Nobody understood the point (partly Mozilla's fault for poor messaging) and it was roundly criticized for putting advertising in the browser, instead of providing a solution to funding websites without violating privacy.
Re: Comcast-Funded Civil Rights Groups Claim Low-Income People Want Ads Over Privacy
#30Them wanting people to believe that this will lower the cost of internet service is laughable. Have TV ads lowered the cost of cable? We need to think of the internet as a public utility. How absurd would it be if every time you used water in your home, you heard an advertisement playing from a speaker in the faucet.
> Them wanting people to believe that this will lower the cost of internet service is laughable. Have TV ads lowered the cost of cable?
It's a very important point; this false argument is often used. In truth, in the marketplace, goods are not priced at 'cost-plus'; i.e., they aren't priced by taking the cost to the vendor and adding a profit margin.
Goods are priced at the point that will maximize profit for the vendor; economists would say at the point that maximizes marginal profit. Colloquially, they charge as much as they can.
The fact that the vendor has another stream of income from Product B doesn't cause them to reduce their prices for Product A. Microsoft doesn't cut the price of Windows because they are making so much from Office.