From violations of privacy, to the mainpulation or even maliciousness at its core, I think marketing at it’s current state is poison to society. But I also think it might be a necessary evil. What would be a good alternative implementation of advertising look like? Or do we even need it? If the former, how would advertising look in a non-capitalist society?
No company has an interest in that happening and since politics only cares about business (there’s fascism in every “democratic” country in the world except perhaps small states like Iceland) it’s not going to happen. If there were a population of well organized politically active individuals, then it might happen, but what you have is a population craving for more bread and games.
You are too optimistic, because while there exist humans that might be able to build such services and while it might be best for society (you know the kind of thing governments should care about, but don’t), it is not going to happen, because governments only are concerned with maintaining power. If a lot of people protest, they might consider to do something about it, but even then only when it doesn’t interfere with their goals.
The expertise required to evaluate a product is also easy to underestimate. A company like Michelin probably has a setup to evaluate new wheels of their competitors, but they aren’t going to disclose that information. The easiest solution would be to make any such knowledge freely available by law (for example as a part of trade deals) and also mandate that every large company has such a facility (which they have anyway). The problem you get with that is that perhaps all the good tire companies are within the EU, which means that you would be giving away free knowledge to the Chinese, which then might outcompete those companies, and so on.
Ultimately, if you want to know something, you are going to have to invest into the science yourself for decades and then you might finally be able to efficiently evaluate just the tires of a car. Now, only 29,999 components to go (not counting some model that says how to sum those values (for example by building a simulator driving the car for a decade)).
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
To me the one about scientific research sounds hard but not impossible to achieve. Maybe I’m just optimistic though.
No company has an interest in that happening and since politics only cares about business (there’s fascism in every “democratic” country in the world except perhaps small states like Iceland) it’s not going to happen. If there were a population of well organized politically active individuals, then it might happen, but what you have is a population craving for more bread and games.
You are too optimistic, because while there exist humans that might be able to build such services and while it might be best for society (you know the kind of thing governments should care about, but don’t), it is not going to happen, because governments only are concerned with maintaining power. If a lot of people protest, they might consider to do something about it, but even then only when it doesn’t interfere with their goals.
The expertise required to evaluate a product is also easy to underestimate. A company like Michelin probably has a setup to evaluate new wheels of their competitors, but they aren’t going to disclose that information. The easiest solution would be to make any such knowledge freely available by law (for example as a part of trade deals) and also mandate that every large company has such a facility (which they have anyway). The problem you get with that is that perhaps all the good tire companies are within the EU, which means that you would be giving away free knowledge to the Chinese, which then might outcompete those companies, and so on.
Ultimately, if you want to know something, you are going to have to invest into the science yourself for decades and then you might finally be able to efficiently evaluate just the tires of a car. Now, only 29,999 components to go (not counting some model that says how to sum those values (for example by building a simulator driving the car for a decade)).