But results for "Kodi" haven't been removed. Autocompletion when you type "kod" or "ko" has. I'm trying to think of a non-disruptive way to pop up "we would have completed this term with 'kodi' but oh hey nevermind you went on to type 'koala'" and I'm failing.
You could just spam channels on Telegram but for Whatsapp and Signal you'd have to get the phone number first, then be added by the receiver. I wonder how they did it. The aljazeera article is not really informative and I can't play the video here.
> I don't see why I couldn't do the same with Facebook.
Because it very likely won't be there anymore. Your grandparents had full control over their photo albums. You have nothing.
> Op dates users freely gave away their data, but now advertisers are stealing it? The same sentence can be said about the internet as a whole - but most people believe the benefits are worth it
Most people don't grasp the _extend_ of what they give to the advertisers. Not even in the slightest way. They still think that as long as they don't fill out a questionnaire, "they" won't know. Or what I give to Facebook, stays with Facebook and so on.
> Lots of people believe that to be true, but I don't think you can just call advertisers "the devil" without an explanation.
Their sneaky methods, lack of information and the whole attention stealing industry it is, is bad. Just the basic normal ad on the street is already exploiting us. The digital versions are even able to infect our tools. It's an uncontrolled mess. An anarchy of people who don't give a damn because they can. We'll never know the full extend of misuse happening with our data on daily bases. I don't see a reason to trust them. Do you?
Most people don't grasp the _extend_ of what they give to the advertisers. Not even in the slightest way. They still think that as long as they don't fill out a questionnaire, "they" won't know.
Right, it's like if you think about searching for some controversial thing and get as far as typing it into the search bar then think I don't want this in my permanent record and close the tab. Too late, every keystroke was already sent as you were typing! Surprise! Or an angry message that you think better of sending, the recipient might not have it, but it's still recorded and may or may not be used against you in some way in the future.
Yeah Facebook might not be around, but I'm sure there is an app that will archive everything so you could store it locally.
I don't understand your view though - you believe billboards are an exploiting everyone who sees them? That would mean all advertising should be stopped. I think many people, you included, misunderstand the economic benefit of advertising. It enables commerce that wouldn't take place if it was gone. If a Spotify competitor started out today with zero advertising it would never make it - how would you hear about it? How would anyone learn about it?
I work in digital advetising and see no reason to distrust the industry. Nobody is abusing data about you.. you are tossed into groups that contains millions of people similar to you. No advertisers cares who you are, about any of your data, any of your Facebook posts. They care that you just bought a razor and might want to try their new shaving cream.
I'm not sure what you mean by sneaky methods, but it's as simple as you visited a website or talked online about shaving, so now they know you're interested in shaving. Basic text analysis is most of it.
Edit - very true that most people don't understand it. But then again most people don't understand anything they use daily (the internet, any app, etc).
If a Spotify competitor started out today with zero advertising it would never make it - how would you hear about it?
I can remember when one of the killer advantages of online retail vs B&M was that in the former you didn't need to spend any dollars on TV and magazine and billboard advertising - word of mouth was sufficient. So I think that they would be fine.
> Yeah Facebook might not be around, but I'm sure there is an app that will archive everything so you could store it locally.
You've forgotten that those pictures belong to Facebook. So whoever buys them out from the remains of Facebook will do whatever they want with it. They may share it with you. They may not. Maybe they'll use it to train some AI and then discard it altogether. Maybe they'll put your head onto some porn star. Maybe China will buy it. Can you imagine, a Chinese man coming to your grandparents house and taking away their photo album? What would your grandpa do?
> I don't understand your view though
It's not a view. It's a fact. Did you even learn your job somewhere? Any scientific background to this "work in digital advertisement"? Ads steal your attention. You can't do anything about it and most of the time you don't even have any kind of profit from it. To say it in the new cultures terms: it's mind rape.
> I think many people, you included, misunderstand the economic benefit of advertising.
Please spare me that marketing talk. I do accept that there are ads on the internet. Sure. Some people even watch and click them. But just like the part you ignored in my previous comment you seem to intentionally forget about _extend_ here too. There is a huge difference between a cookie and a canvas fingerprint. There is a difference between a picture advertising a product and an autoplay video or malware infected script. There is an difference between an IP in your HPs log and a live track of a user.
The internet would have not gone bankrupt without the higher extend of advertisement intrusion. It's a lie to make advertising companies make even more money because that's what you do on the market. Their new product is data, profiles build upon that data (the more data about a single user, the more worth it is) and the continuous lie about the customer who WANTS their tips on where to spend money. I don't want those tips. I don't know anyone who wants them just like I don't know anyone who didn't want an adblocker installed. Think about it. The trust is gone. Forever.
> I work in digital advetising and see no reason to distrust the industry.
Of course you do...it's soothing for me though because such an amount of ignorance would be frightening.
> I'm not sure what you mean by sneaky methods,
Then you are a pretty shitty digital advertiser. You need to get some updates fast.
Edit@Edit:
> Edit - very true that most people don't understand it. But then again most people don't understand anything they use daily (the internet, any app, etc).
So you assume that this gives you a carte blance? I mean, this attitude by people from the ad industry is just another reason nobody trusts you.
Imagine, that I'd be tricking your grandparents into letting me into their apartment by brabbleing some tech bullshit about their cable. I wouldn't do any kind of work. They'd have no benefit at all but I'd have stolen their photo album.
With your world view, I had the justification to do it because they didn't understand a single word I told them to get in their house.
The top comment on that story about google points out the main problem:
> 2. On multiple recent occasions, police in North Carolina have quietly been successful in obtaining search warrants that force Google to turn over these records. Rather than "standard" search warrants asking for the location of a particular suspect in a crime, these "reverse" or "area based" warrants ask for time and location data for all users who have entered a geographical area during a time of interest. The records returned are initially anonymous account numbers, and the police then make followup requests for identifying information of the subset of accounts that they think are of interest to the case.
Sure you can delete your account on reddit. They'll still track you as if you have one just like the facebook buttons or all those creative new tracking shit we regularly read about here.
In the end, you don't have to be an extremist. Just don't post everything and keep in mind that you are being tracked. This is the internet for you today.
My favorite example is a popular German light bulb brand, Osram, which is also known in Poland. In Polish it means roughly "I'll put my excrement [on it]" :P
In some circles it was never a negative term to begin with. In other circles it will remain a negative term forever, regardless of what you do.
One interesting consequence of the Internet is that we're becoming very aware that for every label you could ascribe to yourself, there is some group out there who holds a deep, visceral hate for that label, so deep that they wish you would just cease to exist. I guess this was probably the case beforehand, but without instantaneous global communication, you generally weren't aware of the people who hated you. I remember that when I was growing up, terms like "American", "patriotic", "tolerant", and "generous" were unambiguously good, but now for each of those there is some group who considers them a dog-whistle for people they despise.
The term itself was hardly known/in use to the general public before the crash 2008 and occupy. Since then it was only known as basically a different word for greed.
As another commenter (who obviously decided to delete his comment) wrote here, I also doubt that a re-branding will ever be successful. It's not like coming up with a new term in economy is something hard to do.
I doubt any of that matters to Stripe, whose customer base consists of small-to-midsize businesses who need to accept payments over the Internet, oftentimes for marketplace-based business models. By virtue of the problem that they want solved, this group is going to skew towards free markets, free trade, globalization, and all the tenets that r/neoliberalism embraces. They may not themselves want to adopt the label (particularly in front of their own customers, who bring their own baggage associated with it), but they'll be sympathetic to the ideas.
Also, the term is still not known/in use to the general public. The set of people who are politically active via Occupy, Tea Party, Trumpism, #Indivisible, etc. is a small subset of all people, and relatively disjoint from the set of people with successful Internet-based businesses.
You did not have to be active in Occupy or any of the other groups to hear the term. Hell, my mother knows is and won't connect anything good with it. The main reason is what happened 2008 and for those who cared a little bit: deregulation. People who take neoliberalism are not necessary anti free market. Those would be the extremists again.
> They may not themselves want to adopt the label (particularly in front of their own customers, who bring their own baggage associated with it), but they'll be sympathetic to the ideas.
So you agree that there was no rehabilitation then?
I still don't understand why you wouldn't just come up with a new term. Is this bad marketing knowledge or intentional?
FWIW, my mother certainly doesn't know what it is, and I just asked my wife and she has no idea. I'd heard the term in the rehabilitated, Sam Bowman sense, but had to go look up the Wikipedia page to see what the controversy was about. I don't particularly identify with any of the labels of mainstream (is there such a thing anymore?) political movements.
It's a really common mistake to assume that the people you hang around with are representative of all people. The U.S. (let alone the world) is a really big place, and we don't all read the same media anymore.
Alright, let's say here in Europe...although that doesn't make you and your wife look quite good here. I guess this is where the Europe vs. US memes grow. I mean, do you watch news? How could you have missed what were the poster words back then?
However,
> They may not themselves want to adopt the label (particularly in front of their own customers, who bring their own baggage associated with it), but they'll be sympathetic to the ideas.
still stands here. Just from a quick lookup on wikipedia, you got to this statement. So if this is even obvious to you, we don't really have to talk about any kind of rehabilitation. The real issue would be some terribly bad informed people.
Both my wife and I watch (well, read) plenty of news. Sometimes even German news. Neither of us particularly care how we'd look in Germany or the rest of Europe, though, since we have no intention of living there.
I'm reminded of something that I think I read here on Hacker News: if you want to see how you're being manipulated, read another country's newspapers. Not because they tell the truth, but because the propaganda in them is directed at the country's own inhabitants, and so it'll have no emotional importance for you. I look at the term "neoliberal" and view it neutrally, because the propaganda around it never really caught on in the U.S. out of certain very niche circles.
There are undoubtedly similar terms & issues in the U.S. where we get very much up in arms but an outsider would be "what's the big deal?" You could probably tell me what they are a lot better than I could (assuming you read U.S. news media), but I'd bet that things like "single payer", "gun control", and "social democracy" make the list, where half the U.S. population considers them a dirty word while most of the rest of the developed world is like "Duh, these are obviously good ideas. Why do you kill your own citizens?"
I don't consider myself or my mother a person that would have gone to the Occupy events back then.
> things like "single payer", "gun control", and "social democracy"
You may be aware that many over here are interested in US politics and culture. It's a historical thing but it's also quite entertaining. I can say that I'm more interested and know more about what's going on in the US then in France or the Netherlands. At least most of the time. We are aware that those three things are being perceived differently by pretty much half of your population. This is nothing abstract here.
Occupy came from the US the crash happened there first.
But yes, as we see above, there are people who probably don't watch news or watch selective news? I don't know. It's weird.
Good we have the Öffentlich Rechtlicher Rundfunk I guess ;)
Look at the posts there, it's people having fun with people who identity as neoliberal without any sense of irony. Neoliberal is a dirty word among pretty much every group of contemporary politically minded folks.
I understood you very well. But maybe we are not talking about the same "elites" because I have no idea how you get the idea. They didn't care about the connotation back then. Why should the negativity of it be relevant today?
My company had to switch from Microsoft to IPhones. I hear Siri every day. Usually followed by swearing.
When I got mine, I was trapped in some Siri -> Lock Screen -> Siri combination. "Siri go away" and "Siri show me the home screen" didn't help either. I just wanted to get on the home screen but since there is no Back-Button...well it's disabled now.
