• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s happening now is recording everything you show a reaction to, whether enjoyable or not, and use it against the user.

    “Use it against the user”… For what? You make it sound nefarious, but it is just marketing. You aren’t being blackmailed. People are trying to sell you stuff. They’ve been doing that since forever.

    Again, “marketing” is not the problem with social media. The harmful part of social media is the fucking people. Especially for kids, who are trying to figure out how to get along with everyone, but haven’t yet learned that most people are assholes who should be ignored.

    • IllNess@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Marketing can be really broad. You can market a shirt or you can convince someone to join a cult. And you can find out if someone is more likely to join a cult through the gathered data.

      If you don’t see the dangers of propaganda and misinformation, like I said:

      Just saying cold calling and door-to-door is the same as the data gathering tactics now shows your ignorance on the topic.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        . And you can find out if someone is more likely to join a cult through the gathered data.

        Yeah. Data like “does this person respect arbitrary restrictions imposed by self-appointed authority figures?”

        • IllNess@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Parenting is “self-appointed authority figures” rather than being called “parenting” now? Lol.

          Data like “can we sell make up to minors because they only follow models? Looks like they are in the path to body dysmorphia, better send the results to local plastic surgeons.”

          Data like is “this teenager having issues with their parents and have no friends on their profile, so that makes them an easier target to join a welcoming group?”

          When parenting was still called parenting and not 'self-appointed authority" (lol), parents prevented their children from hanging out with the same groups that social media is pushing on to them.

          And you think the best things for developing minds to exposing them to these groups because according to you “it is just marketing”.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            In the context, yes: you’re teaching kids that someone else will be protecting them from harm, so long as they obey arbitrary rules and restrictions. That’s the exact mindset someone needs to have to be susceptible to a cult, and the exact opposite of the mindset needed for responsible interaction with the general public, either in person, or over a network.

            Better they be taught early that nobody can offer them complete protection against all harm, and show them how to protect themselves.

            Denying them access to because you can’t control what they see, or how they will use it? That sounds like the behavior of a cult leader, not a parent.

            And you think the best things for developing minds to exposing them to these groups because according to you “it is just marketing”.

            I think that by age 10, a kid should have a debit card and begin making some of their own purchasing decisions. I think they should be learning to budget their money early, when mistakes cost them tens of dollars instead of thousands.

            And before that, they need to understand the very kinds of marketing that you are talking about. They need to know that advertisements are inherently deceptive, and to evaluate them critically. Your “Delores Umbridge” approach to teaching defense against the “Dark Arts” of marketing isn’t going to cut it: they need direct, actual exposure.