I honestly still don’t get, what exactly all this is for.
Why are companies pumping more and more money into advertising? What do they expect us to do? Most people can’t spend more money and if you have to increase prices because of your overblown ad budget, they’re even less likely to do so.
And what exactly are they thinking they’re getting from companies like Google and Meta? The amount of ads I get that are actually relevant and not super-obvious is miniscule. Ad tech does not work even remotely as well as advertised.
That’s because you’re not a typical consumer. Average consumer those ads target is a mindless capitalist zombie with the sole goal of owning more stuff. Especially in US (but not only) people are trained by their capitalist master that ‘you are what you own’ and spending money is a way of living there. I’m sure you see it everywhere. People go absolutely crazy over brands like Marvel or Star Wars and spend thousands of dollars on useless gadgets. People go crazy over snickers and buy hundredths of pairs. People go crazy over phones and and take credit just to own the latests model. And the ads are there to program those people into wanting more and more things.
I, too, am curious if there’s an advertising bubble. I hope so.
I’ve noticed something about my wife, though. She’s not a “mindless capitalist zombie with the sole goal of owning more stuff”, but she does pay attention to advertising a lot. We need more diapers? Well, it just so happens there’s some new startup app that’s advertising a free first month, so if she signs up for that up, we could get free diapers, and we’d only have to keep the membership for another two months, and they have deals on peanut butter, and we’d get access to their free streaming service and they have Disney, so it’s probably worth it overall.
And so it goes, with a million of these deals. The thing is, each “deal” is so complicated that it’s extremely difficult to know which ones we’re actually saving money on. The cynical would say “you’re never saving money: everything’s rigged”, but that’s clearly not true. Some of these deals clearly do work out for us (and some of them cause the startup to immediately go bankrupt). But most of them aren’t clearly better or worse for us: we’d have to spend several hours going through hypothetical scenarios to do the full CBA, which we don’t do.
I do wonder, on balance, how much it’s costing us. I also wonder how many of these deals are specifically (personally) targeted at my wife because they know what she needs and what her habits are.
deleted by creator
Or, bear with me, just send a massive amount of spam mails to leaked mailing lists. Maybe 1 in a million reacts and you scam them (cfr all the “Nigerian prince” scams.
A looooot less work because the victim’s will contact you themselves. No need to go and “compare which phones show up together and them figure out why they were together and then figure out if it was an affair or not and then contact them in the hopes they care enough to pay ransom”
I guess your username makes sense.
deleted by creator
Will Mulder rescue me then?
Seriously, that sounds like such a bullshit approach. It’s uneconomical for the criminals. It’s super involved and doesn’t pay that much. Why would anyone do that, if regular fraud is right there to commit.
deleted by creator
But not like that. And not on a scale that would justify all that investment. These crimes only happen in your mind.
deleted by creator
I don’t think that the issue is that people don’t know; people don’t care. They don’t understand how horrible the loss of privacy is, and think that the marginal convenience of being able to control your thermostat from your workplace, or have your refrigerator add milk to your shopping list outweighs the negatives of them being turned into botnets, or monetizing all of your data to squeeze every last penny out of you.
I agree. There are far too many people with the “if I’m not doing anything wrong, then what have I to hide?” mindset. I’ve seen people unironically say that all Tor users must be engaging in illegal activity, and I don’t think it occurs to them that in many parts of the world, freely accessing information is an illegal activity, and by adopting this mindset we’re empowering that type of state.
I like the way a coworker put it to me, it’s the same reason we have locks on our doors and curtains on our windows, it’s not because we have something to hide, but a right to privacy that tech giants have widely ignored.
I also feel many don’t understand the full extent, either. They’re used to using fairly secure devices in their everyday life (often not realizing how much the software they install is also spying on them), so why wouldn’t these IoT things also be secure?
In my experience, it’s all very vague and ethereal until the risks are highlighted for them. “So what if Google can read all of my emails? What could they possibly do with that information, anyway; why should I care?” is an example of a portion of a real conversation I’ve had.
What’s really maddening is realizing that secure spying is still spying.
Removed by mod
The difference is the part immediately after you stopped quoting:
They don’t understand how horrible the loss of privacy is…
What OP is saying here is that people know abstractly that smart devices are not privacy friendly, but they don’t understand how big a deal that actually can be.
Removed by mod
I know that a car pollutes…
Removed by mod
Exactly, they aren’t the same.
Security risk is the bigger concern IMHO. These devices are often a security weak point for networks. Putting them on their own wifi network and then isolating that network is critical.
Soms don’t even care.
