The Rich See a Different Internet Than the Poor

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Alright, I'll let you guys decide if this guy is onto something or just on something.

As a result, 99 percent of us live on the wrong side of a one-way mirror, in which the other 1 percent manipulates our experiences. Some laud this trend as “personalization”—which sounds innocuous and fun, evoking the notion that the ads we see might appear in our favorite color schemes. What we are talking about, however, is much deeper and significantly more consequential.
Click to expand...
 
It seemed more like a "Things are being tailored to you and not allowing you to see everything" article. I don't see where a Rich (monetary) can search google any differently than a monetarily poor person.
 
So the problem is advertises go after the rich? What's the problem again? If I need something, item or credit offers, I'll find it. Let the rich get blasted with nonsense.
 
Rich vs. poor might be more of a consequence of buying history (the company thinks you can afford more since you spend more) or (bad) geolocation that believes you're in a more affluent area. I don't doubt that e-tailers try to extract the maximum possible price from every transaction (it's the seller's dream--being able to price discriminate everyone without monopolizing).
 
I agree with others, this is a non-issue ... the only people who are being "filtered" from anything on the internet are those who aren't too motivated to look ...

as to the dynamic pricing phenomenon, well welcome to the 21st century of capitalism ... dynamic pricing is just a more targeted version of supply and demand ... there is no rule that says everyone has to pay identical prices for something, and if you aren't shopping around for the best price on what you want then shame on YOU

this just sounds like a variation on the hipster internet conspiracy theorist to me ;)
 
This has nothing to do with "rich vs. poor" at all.

You financial worth has nothing to do with this. What this article talks about is part of what I've been saying for some time now. Over the years, I've done a good bit of shopping at Tiger Direct. I just haven't bought much from them in a while. I went back because I was in the mood to make a purchase only to realize that ALL the graphics are no longer part of Tiger Direct but are now coming from highspeedbackbone.net. With just a little research, this change is related to Systemax acquiring Circuit City, Tiger Direct, and CompUSA. What stands out for me is that also part of this is a separate (but not separate) company called onrebate.com which handles all rebates for all these names. Onrebate.com is known for selling information of users/consumers on the cheap. Rebates are getting harder to get while your information is getting easier to sell.

It's all in the code behind the webpages......in places very few people will look. There is no conspiracy or rich vs. poor here. The only thing here is those that see and understand vs. those that don't.

The rich and the poor see the same internet. If the rich and the poor see anything different...it's a vision of what can be done to other people and how to make it happen.
 
What a load! If anything, customized views divide the Internet into dozens of flavors, not just rich and poor. And the customization applies mostly to the ads that appear, not the information.

Of course, terms like "the 99%" and the implication that your civil rights are being violated if a bank doesn't advertise its loans on your search page tell us what we need to know about the ideological underpinnings of this pandering article.

I wonder if the author is paranoid and leftist enough to actually believe his own scare-mongering, or if it was just a cynical exercise in self-publicity.
 
Too bad none of you has actually read the article, since Steve likes to link to things behind a pay wall. A bit fitting considering the topic.
 
I guess if you actually pay attention to advertising in the first place then this might actually matter.
 
Dreaz said:
Too bad none of you has actually read the article, since Steve likes to link to things behind a pay wall. A bit fitting considering the topic.
Click to expand...

The Scientific American article linked to wasn't behind a paywall for me ... unless there was another article here ... and yes, I did read it ;)
 
this has nothing to the with the 1% controlling the "poor" cause when "rich" people log on the net they also have their own personal data archived to dictate what advertisements pops up on their browsers... while its true that these big companies have our data and can predict accurately what were interested in by no means are they making choices for us they'r simply showing us products that were most likely to buy. If you sum this up its just another advertising scheme not some pseudo mind controlling conspiracy.
 
more leftist pablum, drivle, and plain 'ol BS

those damn pesky rich , they pay most of the taxes , and don't even leave my poor azz any internet
yes , sarcasm , by the time the leftist morons in this country get done they will rule the internet as they see fit , big government leftists are who you should be afraid of
 
Incomprehensible premise. From the article:

But increasingly, data collection is leapfrogging well beyond strict advertising and enabling insurance, medical and other companies to benefit from analyzing your personal, highly detailed “Big Data” record without your knowledge. Based on this analysis, these companies then make decisions about you—including whether you are even worth marketing to at all.

As a result, 99 percent of us live on the wrong side of a one-way mirror, in which the other 1 percent manipulates our experiences.
Click to expand...

So, first the "1%" was an actual number(anyone making over $340,000 a year), then it became an abstract concept(it now referred to "the rich"...except for rich people who also belched out this sound byte), and now...it's the advertising industry?

Pretty sure that whatever internet Donald Trump, Bill Gates, and Barack Obama use still peddles them every kind of shit imaginable. This is nothing more than trying to squeeze a few more drops out of stupid, reckless class warfare bullshit post-election.

If it had been talking about the Tor network, it might have been interesting, and even had a point...but no. Just catering to a dead movement.
 
Dreaz said:
Too bad none of you has actually read the article, since Steve likes to link to things behind a pay wall. A bit fitting considering the topic.
Click to expand...

No paywall for me, and I rarely read Scientific American, whose editor selectively deletes comments from the articles because "there's no need for debate on well-established facts". Yet another variant of "the science is settled"...a lazy catchphrase for pseudointellectuals who can't explain the very fundamentals of their arguments without getting cornered.
 
Poor effort at sewing class warfare. Advertisers have tailored ads to their market since before last century. Shockingly, that's the most effective means of advertising. Derp.
 
Dreaz said:
Too bad none of you has actually read the article, since Steve likes to link to things behind a pay wall. A bit fitting considering the topic.
Click to expand...

Well apparently the internet must think you're rich enough to pay to read it, since none of us had to pay a cent.
 
I read the first paragraph and stopped. What he's describing is what already happens in the world. Any place you go this is already happening. The fact that it happens on the internet is just an extension of how the real world already works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top