Election meaningless unless we change for the better

User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by Tortoise » Mon Nov 23, 2020 4:55 pm

I think doodle's recent thread about the Netflix documentary The Social Dilemma really got to the crux of this matter of "two parallel realities" or what Scott Adams often calls "two movies, one screen."

Online and social media companies have created and inflamed much of this polarization by applying the following logic to their algorithms:

1. How do we make more money? By getting our users to engage with the platform more often.
2. How do we get our users to engage with the platform more often? By offering them content that they are most likely to click on.
3. What kind of content are our users most likely to click on? Topics that are maximally polarized.
4. How do we maximize the polarization of our content? Figure out which "side" each user is on, then offer them content tailored to entrench them even more deeply into that side.
5. Profit.

A similar line of reasoning was used by legacy media companies for ages, even before the Internet, in the form of "If it bleeds, it leads", but the subtle difference that online and social media introduced was user choice.

Back when most people consumed the same media, making things too polarized would drive away too many customers, so media companies mainly stuck to titillating (not polarizing) stories to sell the most content. But now, with online and social media, users have orders of magnitude more choices even on a single platform, so polarization no longer drives customers away -- it actually keeps them engaged and hungry for more.

Today, the way online and social media companies profit the most is by polarizing as many issues as possible and playing both sides against each other to the Nth degree.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:03 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 4:55 pm
I think doodle's recent thread about the Netflix documentary The Social Dilemma really got to the crux of this matter of "two parallel realities" or what Scott Adams often calls "two movies, one screen."

Online and social media companies have created and inflamed much of this polarization by applying the following logic to their algorithms:

1. How do we make more money? By getting our users to engage with the platform more often.
2. How do we get our users to engage with the platform more often? By offering them content that they are most likely to click on.
3. What kind of content are our users most likely to click on? Topics that are maximally polarized.
4. How do we maximize the polarization of our content? Figure out which "side" each user is on, then offer them content tailored to entrench them even more deeply into that side.
5. Profit.

A similar line of reasoning was used by legacy media companies for ages, even before the Internet, in the form of "If it bleeds, it leads", but the subtle difference that online and social media introduced was user choice.

Back when most people consumed the same media, making things too polarized would drive away too many customers, so media companies mainly stuck to titillating (not polarizing) stories to sell the most content. But now, with online and social media, users have orders of magnitude more choices even on a single platform, so polarization no longer drives customers away -- it actually keeps them engaged and hungry for more.

Today, the way online and social media companies profit the most is by polarizing as many issues as possible and playing both sides against each other to the Nth degree.
How many here remember what was the major cable news story for weeks (maybe months) just prior to 9/11....and whose coverage just disappeared after 9/11?

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by doodle » Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:27 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 4:55 pm
I think doodle's recent thread about the Netflix documentary The Social Dilemma really got to the crux of this matter of "two parallel realities" or what Scott Adams often calls "two movies, one screen."

Online and social media companies have created and inflamed much of this polarization by applying the following logic to their algorithms:

1. How do we make more money? By getting our users to engage with the platform more often.
2. How do we get our users to engage with the platform more often? By offering them content that they are most likely to click on.
3. What kind of content are our users most likely to click on? Topics that are maximally polarized.
4. How do we maximize the polarization of our content? Figure out which "side" each user is on, then offer them content tailored to entrench them even more deeply into that side.
5. Profit.

A similar line of reasoning was used by legacy media companies for ages, even before the Internet, in the form of "If it bleeds, it leads", but the subtle difference that online and social media introduced was user choice.

Back when most people consumed the same media, making things too polarized would drive away too many customers, so media companies mainly stuck to titillating (not polarizing) stories to sell the most content. But now, with online and social media, users have orders of magnitude more choices even on a single platform, so polarization no longer drives customers away -- it actually keeps them engaged and hungry for more.

Today, the way online and social media companies profit the most is by polarizing as many issues as possible and playing both sides against each other to the Nth degree.
I think that's a pretty accurate description of our quandary....what options exist to mitigate the effects of this before China and Russia get to gleefully watch as America tears itself to pieces? How do we get the cream to rise to the top? How do we get people to turn away from the lizard brain tribal feel good us against them motif?
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by Tortoise » Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 pm

doodle wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:27 pm
I think that's a pretty accurate description of our quandary....what options exist to mitigate the effects of this before China and Russia get to gleefully watch as America tears itself to pieces? How do we get the cream to rise to the top? How do we get people to turn away from the lizard brain tribal feel good us against them motif?
Incentives are extremely important, so my hunch is that one way or another, incentives will have to change.

Currently the incentives in online and social media seem to be driven by the advertising-based business model in which the users are the "product". Maximizing everyone's eyeball time on the screen maximizes the price that advertisers are willing to pay for the "product". Over time, I think this has proven itself to be a polarizing, addictive, and toxic business model that needs to be replaced.

I find it interesting that the ad-based business model is so ubiquitous, because I recall Scott Adams mentioning on one of his shows that the ROI for advertising is much lower than most people assume. He claimed that most big companies have an advertising department largely due to organizational inertia -- not because it's profitable to have an ad department. I don't recall all the details, but that was the gist of it. Maybe that's why there's such a hard push by social media companies to perfect their algorithms: They can actually make advertising profitable by manipulating their users' behavior in certain ways.

Off the top of my head, one possible solution might be to extend consumer privacy laws in a huge way. Make all of a user's data -- all personal information, everything they click, how long they view things, other people they're associated with etc. -- totally private and the sole property of that user. Users could opt in to let companies use that data for various purposes, but opt-out would be the default for everyone.

With such strengthened user data privacy laws, it seems like much of the current ability of social media companies to mine data and manipulate users to make them maximally valuable to advertisers would be crippled, so they'd be forced to find a new business model to remain profitable.

TL;DR -- Massively strengthen user data privacy laws to effectively make social media companies ditch their toxic, polarizing ad-based business model.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by doodle » Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:19 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 pm
doodle wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:27 pm
I think that's a pretty accurate description of our quandary....what options exist to mitigate the effects of this before China and Russia get to gleefully watch as America tears itself to pieces? How do we get the cream to rise to the top? How do we get people to turn away from the lizard brain tribal feel good us against them motif?
Incentives are extremely important, so my hunch is that one way or another, incentives will have to change.

Currently the incentives in online and social media seem to be driven by the advertising-based business model in which the users are the "product". Maximizing everyone's eyeball time on the screen maximizes the price that advertisers are willing to pay for the "product". Over time, I think this has proven itself to be a polarizing, addictive, and toxic business model that needs to be replaced.

I find it interesting that the ad-based business model is so ubiquitous, because I recall Scott Adams mentioning on one of his shows that the ROI for advertising is much lower than most people assume. He claimed that most big companies have an advertising department largely due to organizational inertia -- not because it's profitable to have an ad department. I don't recall all the details, but that was the gist of it. Maybe that's why there's such a hard push by social media companies to perfect their algorithms: They can actually make advertising profitable by manipulating their users' behavior in certain ways.

Off the top of my head, one possible solution might be to extend consumer privacy laws in a huge way. Make all of a user's data -- all personal information, everything they click, how long they view things, other people they're associated with etc. -- totally private and the sole property of that user. Users could opt in to let companies use that data for various purposes, but opt-out would be the default for everyone.

With such strengthened user data privacy laws, it seems like much of the current ability of social media companies to mine data and manipulate users to make them maximally valuable to advertisers would be crippled, so they'd be forced to find a new business model to remain profitable.

TL;DR -- Massively strengthen user data privacy laws to effectively make social media companies ditch their toxic, polarizing ad-based business model.
That stops them from tailoring your online experience to reinforce your established bias by making you an unidentifiable node on the network (an important first step for sure) but it doesn't address the polarization that happens independently through Facebook groups or instagram feeds or through our manipulative media conglomerates. Correct me if I'm wrong but while different societies or clubs used to exist in Americas past that catered to political fringe groups the vast majority of our country got their information from a few established newspapers and tv stations that by and large stayed pretty neutral on the subject of politics. At the very least it was a far cry from most tv network news today which I'd say is over 3/4 pure opinion based political punditry. The networks have created a sharp divide with very little overlap on stories...they are essentially crafting two disparate realties where the other side is literally anti-american scum. Its great for ratings and keeps people angry and engaged but it makes for a very volatile society. Short of some bipartisan regulation targeting honesty and truth in information I don't know how this divide mends itself when the present state of affairs is such a lucrative business model.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by Libertarian666 » Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:39 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:29 pm
Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 4:55 pm
Online and social media companies have created and inflamed much of this polarization by applying the following logic to their algorithms:

1. How do we make more money? By getting our users to engage with the platform more often.
2. How do we get our users to engage with the platform more often? By offering them content that they are most likely to click on.
3. What kind of content are our users most likely to click on? Topics that are maximally polarized.
4. How do we maximize the polarization of our content? Figure out which "side" each user is on, then offer them content tailored to entrench them even more deeply into that side.
5. Profit.
Are you suggesting Xan hired a bunch of liberal shill instigators to polarize these forums and increase click rates? And that Xan is making millions off the ad revenue from this place, laughing himself to the Swiss vault he stores his gold bullion?

Seems a bit preposterous but I will say Xan has increased the number of sub forums here by 17% recently.

I think I could be swayed to believing Xan masterminded this whole thing if you made a 3 hour YouTube video that included ominous music with intercuts of photos of the Egyptian pyramids.
Only if they have the eye near the top, though.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by doodle » Tue Nov 24, 2020 9:23 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:43 pm
Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 pm

Off the top of my head, one possible solution might be to extend consumer privacy laws in a huge way. Make all of a user's data -- all personal information, everything they click, how long they view things, other people they're associated with etc. -- totally private and the sole property of that user. Users could opt in to let companies use that data for various purposes, but opt-out would be the default for everyone.
Perhaps and I am sympathetic of this bipartisan cause, however anytime I catch myself saying, “there should be a law...” I have a rubber band on my wrist that I flick. And I start to consider alternatives that take personal responsibility.

What I propose sounds extreme but is actually something I do. And personal responsibility is the only way I know for sure I’m protected from whatever evil it is I’m worried about.

Stop using all social media completely. Manually delete every post and wait a month and then delete the account permanently. Just deleting might leave reside of old posts they keep in case you change your mind. Waiting a month means maybe the backup servers rolled over. I’m not a data scientist but it seems like it might help, with minimal effort added. The main effort is manually deleting every like and photo and comment. I did it over a month, in 30 minute increments. A decade ago.

Stop using google and google services. Everything on the internet uses google trackers. So if you have a Gmail account, now the tracker is linked to you personally, rather than a random unique ID.

Use a VPN for everything. Get a PFsense home firewall and put a VPN on there. No traffic will leave your house that isn’t VPNed. Netflix and other streaming services will stop working. Learn how to pop a temporary hole for that service in your VPN if this will lead to divorce.

Use a prepaid cell phone paid for in cash that you never give out the number. Use a voip app instead. Use encrypted messaging apps like Wire or Signal or Session.

Stop using unencrypted email. Use ProtonMail. Yes if sent outside of ProtonMail, it’s not encrypted, but at least it’s not stored unencrypted on your server.

Don’t use the same email or username on different forums.

Lots of other stuff can add a bit more privacy. Is this easy? Not for most. Is it a hassle? Yes.

Should we have to do all this IT security stuff to avoid being tracked and manipulated by corporations? Hell no! There should be a law! And let’s pass a law that makes murder and robbery illegal and we can abolish the second amendment as unnecessary. And make a law for fire rescue to be funded and equipped so we don’t need fire extinguishers at our houses and don’t need to learn stop the bleed or CPR.

Let’s pass a law that gas stations can’t raise prices on gas in an emergency so I can let my gas tank go to empty every 2 weeks and not worry if a natural disaster happens if I can get gas.

Let’s pass a law mandating supermarkets stock toilet paper! If they run out, a million dollar fine! I shouldn’t have to prebuy 6 months of toilet paper.

Personally, I’m keeping my gun, my VPN, my trauma medical kit, will refill my gas when it’s half empty, and keep my 6 month supply of toilet paper. But if y’all want to make a law, and that will help, then okay. I’ll be the crazy one with a faraday bag hat to block Bill Gates 5G signals.
Your solution to car accidents would probably be to walk everywhere rather than add speed limits, seatbelts and airbags. Why you gotta be so extreme?
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Tue Nov 24, 2020 9:34 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:43 pm
Tortoise wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:27 pm

Off the top of my head, one possible solution might be to extend consumer privacy laws in a huge way. Make all of a user's data -- all personal information, everything they click, how long they view things, other people they're associated with etc. -- totally private and the sole property of that user. Users could opt in to let companies use that data for various purposes, but opt-out would be the default for everyone.
Perhaps and I am sympathetic of this bipartisan cause, however anytime I catch myself saying, “there should be a law...” I have a rubber band on my wrist that I flick. And I start to consider alternatives that take personal responsibility.

What I propose sounds extreme but is actually something I do. And personal responsibility is the only way I know for sure I’m protected from whatever evil it is I’m worried about.

Stop using all social media completely. Manually delete every post and wait a month and then delete the account permanently. Just deleting might leave reside of old posts they keep in case you change your mind. Waiting a month means maybe the backup servers rolled over. I’m not a data scientist but it seems like it might help, with minimal effort added. The main effort is manually deleting every like and photo and comment. I did it over a month, in 30 minute increments. A decade ago.

Stop using google and google services. Everything on the internet uses google trackers. So if you have a Gmail account, now the tracker is linked to you personally, rather than a random unique ID.

Use a VPN for everything. Get a PFsense home firewall and put a VPN on there. No traffic will leave your house that isn’t VPNed. Netflix and other streaming services will stop working. Learn how to pop a temporary hole for that service in your VPN if this will lead to divorce.

Use a prepaid cell phone paid for in cash that you never give out the number. Use a voip app instead. Use encrypted messaging apps like Wire or Signal or Session.

Stop using unencrypted email. Use ProtonMail. Yes if sent outside of ProtonMail, it’s not encrypted, but at least it’s not stored unencrypted on your server.

Don’t use the same email or username on different forums.

Lots of other stuff can add a bit more privacy. Is this easy? Not for most. Is it a hassle? Yes.

Should we have to do all this IT security stuff to avoid being tracked and manipulated by corporations? Hell no! There should be a law! And let’s pass a law that makes murder and robbery illegal and we can abolish the second amendment as unnecessary. And make a law for fire rescue to be funded and equipped so we don’t need fire extinguishers at our houses and don’t need to learn stop the bleed or CPR.

Let’s pass a law that gas stations can’t raise prices on gas in an emergency so I can let my gas tank go to empty every 2 weeks and not worry if a natural disaster happens if I can get gas.

Let’s pass a law mandating supermarkets stock toilet paper! If they run out, a million dollar fine! I shouldn’t have to prebuy 6 months of toilet paper.

Personally, I’m keeping my gun, my VPN, my trauma medical kit, will refill my gas when it’s half empty, and keep my 6 month supply of toilet paper. But if y’all want to make a law, and that will help, then okay. I’ll be the crazy one with a faraday bag hat to block Bill Gates 5G signals.
I'd definitely rate all your admonitions extreme.

Two things I tremendously dislike in life are keys and passwords. Both of them waste a lot of time. Focusing on the latter....the time I've wasted because I was forced to change passwords (without even clearly being notified I needed to do so prior to being locked out) has been a far higher for real cost than the perceived extremely slight possibility of some future cost if I had not changed that password.

I am all for prevention and taking proper precautions (I am Mr. Backup when it comes to computer files and I'd confess some might call me extreme for owning about 40 external drives for that purpose). But doesn't it all come down when it comes to providing any kind of safety for yourself as to both what it is going to directly cost you in terms of time and money and how much you are going to give up or stop doing compared to the potential risks of ever suffering harm?

Whenever I read about privacy concerns....that reactive part of my brain almost never reacts.

I believe I have chosen what is appropriate for my level of concern.

For web sites that demand I have to login (for no apparent reason) I use the exact same password over and over and over again. Unless if they tell me it is too short, needs a capital letter, needs a number, needs a special character. Then it gets slightly changed.

This leads to me getting those extortionists emails wanting me to send them money because they know my password. Not concerned in the least. This same (or modified as needed) password is only used for meaningless web sites.

If any web site I go to involves my personal finances in any way or any real privacy reasons then I use passwords that you could not even torture out of me! That is because they are all included in a password program which itself is password protected. I go into that password program and just copy and paste the relevant password (which I believes protects me from ever having a key logging program installed on my computer?). For where I have my investing assets I also use the two factor authorization.

In sum, it seems to be the usual for we humans. Your way more highly protecting any possible privacy issues is what I'd consider extreme for me but for you it just right. For me, I extremely value never risking losing an electronic file so what I do to protect that from happening would be considered by most to be extremely and wasteful of both time and money but what I'm driven to do.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by Tortoise » Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:35 pm

I agree with Tom’s general sentiment that “there oughta be a law” is usually not the best solution, but I would argue that expecting the average person to jump through 1000 complicated hoops probably isn’t the best solution either.

Most of us on this forum are detail-oriented geeks who are relatively tech-savvy. But a very large chunk of the general population is not.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by doodle » Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:53 pm

[quote=Tortoise post_id=213553 time=1606253754 use

Most of us on this forum are detail-oriented geeks who are relatively tech-savvy. But a very large chunk of the general population is not......

With a lot of time on their hands....most people are just trying to make ends meet. They don't have time to debate philosophy and politics and research everything to the nth degree. They want a simple solution to a lot of complex problems. They want to know the food for their kids is relatively safe, that the labels are accurate, that the toys they buy don't have lead paint...I'm sure most would love to never have to try to figure out which health insurance plan is the best and all the weird terminology that goes along with that. The world is complex. We can't expect the average person with 100 IQ to work a full-time job, raise a family and figure everything else out as well....government in many cases and laws and regulations are a helping hand. They aren't perfect, but I don't think there is an alternative.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Tue Nov 24, 2020 4:13 pm

doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:53 pm
[quote=Tortoise post_id=213553 time=1606253754 use

Most of us on this forum are detail-oriented geeks who are relatively tech-savvy. But a very large chunk of the general population is not......

With a lot of time on their hands....most people are just trying to make ends meet. They don't have time to debate philosophy and politics and research everything to the nth degree. They want a simple solution to a lot of complex problems. They want to know the food for their kids is relatively safe, that the labels are accurate, that the toys they buy don't have lead paint...I'm sure most would love to never have to try to figure out which health insurance plan is the best and all the weird terminology that goes along with that. The world is complex. We can't expect the average person with 100 IQ to work a full-time job, raise a family and figure everything else out as well....government in many cases and laws and regulations are a helping hand. They aren't perfect, but I don't think there is an alternative.
As an alternative....for as much castigation as Amazon receive both here and elsewhere....they are a private business that has made life so much easier for me when it comes to making purchases.

There are many times when I want to buy something but would have zero idea how to make a choice. With Amazon by finding what has a lot of reviews and a high average rating I can oftentimes make a purchasing decision in 5-10 minutes.

Many call for government regulation of Amazon? Or, better put some government actions towards Amazon?

Wouldn't my case be an example of the government not being involved in improving my experience, but, instead, that experience enhancement being a result of the actions of many other individuals making their own independent choices?

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by doodle » Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:10 pm

vnatale wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 4:13 pm
doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:53 pm
[quote=Tortoise post_id=213553 time=1606253754 use

Most of us on this forum are detail-oriented geeks who are relatively tech-savvy. But a very large chunk of the general population is not......

With a lot of time on their hands....most people are just trying to make ends meet. They don't have time to debate philosophy and politics and research everything to the nth degree. They want a simple solution to a lot of complex problems. They want to know the food for their kids is relatively safe, that the labels are accurate, that the toys they buy don't have lead paint...I'm sure most would love to never have to try to figure out which health insurance plan is the best and all the weird terminology that goes along with that. The world is complex. We can't expect the average person with 100 IQ to work a full-time job, raise a family and figure everything else out as well....government in many cases and laws and regulations are a helping hand. They aren't perfect, but I don't think there is an alternative.
As an alternative....for as much castigation as Amazon receive both here and elsewhere....they are a private business that has made life so much easier for me when it comes to making purchases.

There are many times when I want to buy something but would have zero idea how to make a choice. With Amazon by finding what has a lot of reviews and a high average rating I can oftentimes make a purchasing decision in 5-10 minutes.

Many call for government regulation of Amazon? Or, better put some government actions towards Amazon?

Wouldn't my case be an example of the government not being involved in improving my experience, but, instead, that experience enhancement being a result of the actions of many other individuals making their own independent choices?

Vinny
That used to work...and I'm not knocking amazon...I like what they offer...but A LOT of the reviews are fake nowadays. That said, their return policy is so easy it's pretty easy to put it right back in the mail.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by Tortoise » Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:37 pm

doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:10 pm
That used to work...and I'm not knocking amazon...I like what they offer...but A LOT of the reviews are fake nowadays. That said, their return policy is so easy it's pretty easy to put it right back in the mail.
When I return Amazon products, I no longer even have to print out a return label or find an envelope. I just walk into my neighborhood Kohl's, walk up to their Amazon returns counter, hand them the item and let them scan the QR code on my phone, and I'm done. Couldn't be faster or easier.

The best long-term solution to the user data privacy problem is probably for one or more private companies to offer customers a simple turnkey solution that somehow protects the privacy of all of their online data.

Given the current patchwork nature of the Internet, however, I have no idea what such a turnkey solution would look like. And it doesn't seem forthcoming. But there does seem to be a growing need for it, and necessity is the mother of invention.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Tue Nov 24, 2020 6:46 pm

doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:10 pm
vnatale wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 4:13 pm
doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:53 pm
[quote=Tortoise post_id=213553 time=1606253754 use

Most of us on this forum are detail-oriented geeks who are relatively tech-savvy. But a very large chunk of the general population is not......

With a lot of time on their hands....most people are just trying to make ends meet. They don't have time to debate philosophy and politics and research everything to the nth degree. They want a simple solution to a lot of complex problems. They want to know the food for their kids is relatively safe, that the labels are accurate, that the toys they buy don't have lead paint...I'm sure most would love to never have to try to figure out which health insurance plan is the best and all the weird terminology that goes along with that. The world is complex. We can't expect the average person with 100 IQ to work a full-time job, raise a family and figure everything else out as well....government in many cases and laws and regulations are a helping hand. They aren't perfect, but I don't think there is an alternative.
As an alternative....for as much castigation as Amazon receive both here and elsewhere....they are a private business that has made life so much easier for me when it comes to making purchases.

There are many times when I want to buy something but would have zero idea how to make a choice. With Amazon by finding what has a lot of reviews and a high average rating I can oftentimes make a purchasing decision in 5-10 minutes.

Many call for government regulation of Amazon? Or, better put some government actions towards Amazon?

Wouldn't my case be an example of the government not being involved in improving my experience, but, instead, that experience enhancement being a result of the actions of many other individuals making their own independent choices?

Vinny
That used to work...and I'm not knocking amazon...I like what they offer...but A LOT of the reviews are fake nowadays. That said, their return policy is so easy it's pretty easy to put it right back in the mail.
I will generally read the first two to three pages of reviews. I think I can easily tell which ones are NOT fake. I don't put much stock into the one or two line reviews.

Plus, I'd have a hard time believing that there could be 200, 300, or 1,000 fake reviews. Otherwise every product would have that many.

I never bank on the returns because the travel time alone for me would be 45 to 60 minutes plus the time spent preparing for a return. Neither are my thing.

Vinny

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Tue Nov 24, 2020 6:47 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:37 pm
doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:10 pm
That used to work...and I'm not knocking amazon...I like what they offer...but A LOT of the reviews are fake nowadays. That said, their return policy is so easy it's pretty easy to put it right back in the mail.
When I return Amazon products, I no longer even have to print out a return label or find an envelope. I just walk into my neighborhood Kohl's, walk up to their Amazon returns counter, hand them the item and let them scan the QR code on my phone, and I'm done. Couldn't be faster or easier.

The best long-term solution to the user data privacy problem is probably for one or more private companies to offer customers a simple turnkey solution that somehow protects the privacy of all of their online data.

Given the current patchwork nature of the Internet, however, I have no idea what such a turnkey solution would look like. And it doesn't seem forthcoming. But there does seem to be a growing need for it, and necessity is the mother of invention.
You don't live in a rural area. As I just stated, it'd be a minimum 45 to 60 minute round trip for me to deal with bringing it to where I'd need to return it. Plus, having to spend time finding parking and paying for the parking.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Election meaningless unless we change for the better

Post by vnatale » Tue Nov 24, 2020 7:01 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 6:54 pm
vnatale wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 6:47 pm
Tortoise wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:37 pm
doodle wrote:
Tue Nov 24, 2020 5:10 pm
That used to work...and I'm not knocking amazon...I like what they offer...but A LOT of the reviews are fake nowadays. That said, their return policy is so easy it's pretty easy to put it right back in the mail.
When I return Amazon products, I no longer even have to print out a return label or find an envelope. I just walk into my neighborhood Kohl's, walk up to their Amazon returns counter, hand them the item and let them scan the QR code on my phone, and I'm done. Couldn't be faster or easier.

The best long-term solution to the user data privacy problem is probably for one or more private companies to offer customers a simple turnkey solution that somehow protects the privacy of all of their online data.

Given the current patchwork nature of the Internet, however, I have no idea what such a turnkey solution would look like. And it doesn't seem forthcoming. But there does seem to be a growing need for it, and necessity is the mother of invention.
You don't live in a rural area. As I just stated, it'd be a minimum 45 to 60 minute round trip for me to deal with bringing it to where I'd need to return it. Plus, having to spend time finding parking and paying for the parking.

Vinny
You can also return to the UPS Store. There has to be one of those reasonably close by, no?
That'd be a minimum 30 to 45 minutes to get there and back and conduct the transaction. Plus, if I have to make it by a deadline there would be all the time necessary just to get out of the house. Add in another 30 minutes.

I generally cut all kinds of corners in my life that "normal" people do so that I spend the time doing what I enjoy doing.

I don't "run errands". I generally only get gas or buy food when it it on my way home from work. Did not use to make any special trips for either of those or anything else. Tried to combine with anything else I was already out doing.

One of the benefits for living the life of an eccentric.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Post Reply