Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

kotaku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 238 posts

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#221

Post by diogenes4 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #130
diogenes4 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And why American gun control laws have never matured despite all the evidence that proves the status quo isn’t viable. Tbh I don't think this has anything to do with marketing. Guns are just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want them to be or not. If we were capable of changing this we'd be capable of doing a hell of a lot of other things, too, instead of sitting on our hands and loudly babbling about…

And culture is driven by marketing. Which comes right back to the point I was making. If gun culture was so fundamental to peoples beliefs then the NRA wouldn’t need to spend as much on lobbying as they do. The entire reason that culture hasn’t changed in the last hundred years is because of marketing, not in spite of it.

> And culture is driven by marketing.

Sure but you haven't shown how advertising drives specifically gun culture. Someone's eighteenth gun? Sure, but that's a rounding error in terms of gun ownership.

> if gun culture was so fundamental to peoples beliefs then the NRA wouldn’t need to spend as much on lobbying as they do.

You're conflating marketing a product to a market and bribing politicians to not restrict the sale of guns. There isn't any overlap.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#222

Post by diogenes4 »

wiseowise wrote: post #113
diogenes4 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And why American gun control laws have never matured despite all the evidence that proves the status quo isn’t viable. Tbh I don't think this has anything to do with marketing. Guns are just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want them to be or not. If we were capable of changing this we'd be capable of doing a hell of a lot of other things, too, instead of sitting on our hands and loudly babbling about…

> Guns are just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want them to be or not. "Owning slaves is just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want it to be or not." And I know what you're thinking: "comparing owning guns to owning human beings is wrong". Yes, but saying that something is "our culture" and can't be changes is just plain silly. Especially when it comes to guns.

> Owning slaves is just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want it to be or not.

This was true for the confederate south.... Denying this doesn't seem to get us anywhere.

Anyway, my point was not that this can't be changed, that's what you brought to the conversation.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#223

Post by diogenes4 »

somsak2 wrote: post #164
wiseowise wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Guns are just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want them to be or not. "Owning slaves is just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want it to be or not." And I know what you're thinking: "comparing owning guns to owning human beings is wrong". Yes, but saying that something is "our culture" and can't be changes is just plain silly. Especially when it comes to guns.

owning people was never part of the bill of rights

Owning handguns ain't either.

Anyway, the constitution was written to specifically enable slavery, so your point is moot.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#224

Post by diogenes4 »

nojvek wrote: post #214
diogenes4 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And why American gun control laws have never matured despite all the evidence that proves the status quo isn’t viable. Tbh I don't think this has anything to do with marketing. Guns are just a part of our culture regardless of whether we want them to be or not. If we were capable of changing this we'd be capable of doing a hell of a lot of other things, too, instead of sitting on our hands and loudly babbling about…

Guns are part of constitution, really really hard to take it off. It needs super majority, not even a majority suffices. Amending the constitution is legit really hard.

They actually aren't in the constitution at all. You have a right to bear arms. You do not have a right to purchase, wield, and use a handgun (which, by the way, would be hilariously ineffective in an uprising against the government and is mostly good for killing the people in your house). We just have spineless politicians on our hands.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#225

Post by hnlmorg »

diogenes4 wrote: post #221
hnlmorg wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And culture is driven by marketing. Which comes right back to the point I was making. If gun culture was so fundamental to peoples beliefs then the NRA wouldn’t need to spend as much on lobbying as they do. The entire reason that culture hasn’t changed in the last hundred years is because of marketing, not in spite of it.

> And culture is driven by marketing. Sure but you haven't shown how advertising drives specifically gun culture. Someone's eighteenth gun? Sure, but that's a rounding error in terms of gun ownership. > if gun culture was so fundamental to peoples beliefs then the NRA wouldn’t need to spend as much on lobbying as they do. You're conflating marketing a product to a market and bribing politicians to not restrict the sa…

> You're conflating marketing a product to a market and bribing politicians to not restrict the sale of guns. There isn't any overlap

I disagree. In the case of gun ownership, lobbying creates the market, and the more generalised marketing helps to grow it. They're two tines of the same pitchfork.

Lobbying is, after all, just highly focused marketing at specific demographics (politicians) and in often underhanded ways.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#226

Post by slashdev »

Tade0 wrote: post #185
gardenhedge wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we have advice from the government or your HN comment to go on. There needs to be more substance to your claims

To quote our pediatrician: "do you believe in UFOs? That's roughly in the same ballpark in terms of connection with reality". This part of the reply to my SO's question about this. Later he explained that it's mainly drunk/high people who suffocate their children like that. You only need a sufficiently wide bed and separate covers for the parents - that's it.

> mainly drunk/high people who suffocate their children like that.

That's a lot of people!

> You only need a sufficiently wide bed and separate covers for the parents

Why even take the risk.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#227

Post by diogenes4 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #225
diogenes4 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And culture is driven by marketing. Sure but you haven't shown how advertising drives specifically gun culture. Someone's eighteenth gun? Sure, but that's a rounding error in terms of gun ownership. > if gun culture was so fundamental to peoples beliefs then the NRA wouldn’t need to spend as much on lobbying as they do. You're conflating marketing a product to a market and bribing politicians to not restrict the sa…

> You're conflating marketing a product to a market and bribing politicians to not restrict the sale of guns. There isn't any overlap I disagree. In the case of gun ownership, lobbying creates the market, and the more generalised marketing helps to grow it. They're two tines of the same pitchfork. Lobbying is, after all, just highly focused marketing at specific demographics (politicians) and in often underhanded way…

> They're two tines of the same pitchfork.

If we're discussing the market, there's several billion other tines you missed.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#228

Post by permo-w »

peruvian wrote: post #73
permo-w wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there really are a lot of "yes big oil may be bad, but here's why they aren't as bad as you think:"-type comments in this thread. maybe it's just a prevailing wind on HN though perhaps this is just my bubble, but I don't think I've ever met a person in real life who tries to defend oil companies

I’ve noticed HN users in general enjoy being contrarian and argumentative. It’s a “I must be doing something smart if I’m going against the grain” attitude.

this is true, but I'm like 80% sure there's significant astroturfing on HN. look at any post that mentions relations with China. flooded with comments in similar formats to the ones here. I thought China was ..., but then ... and now I'm not so sure"

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#229

Post by osigurdson »

djhn wrote: post #211
osigurdson wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. Everyone should have a zero emission Buggati and private jet if they want, that is the future we should be shooting for. However, what I mean is degrowth, Greta type gen z people seem to be somewhat rare.

I feel like this must surely be an observation made from a skewed sample or from within some sort of bubble? Tbh I don't have any research or polling data on hand, but I seem to remember gen Z being FAR more conscious of the environment (climate change and plastics pollution), their own health (drinking/smoking) and global social issues.

I’m basing this on popularity of various YouTube personalities. They are largely very kind and very rich.

Re: Shell using Fortnite, TikTok, etc. to convince kids fossil fuels are cool

#230

Post by nojvek »

diogenes4 wrote: post #224
nojvek wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are part of constitution, really really hard to take it off. It needs super majority, not even a majority suffices. Amending the constitution is legit really hard.

They actually aren't in the constitution at all. You have a right to bear arms. You do not have a right to purchase, wield, and use a handgun (which, by the way, would be hilariously ineffective in an uprising against the government and is mostly good for killing the people in your house). We just have spineless politicians on our hands.

The Supreme Court ultimately rules what “bear arms” means, so not just the politicians.

The constitution is vague, so it’s upto interpretation. And Supreme Court judges aren’t elected.

Post reply on HN