yep, agreed. The problem is not "bone cancer charities must have a way of getting their message out!" therefore "they should be able to bug you about it while you're reading an article". The problem is that the things bugging you while reading an article is bad for your mind (and even worse if they are manipulative, which they are). If you get rid of these exploitable mediums for messaging, other mediums will appear which -- hopefully -- are more just and healthy. Particularly if they're things we value as society. And if some things we don't value die because invasive advertising was the only way they could survive? Fine.
> If you get rid of these exploitable mediums for messaging, other mediums will appear which -- hopefully -- are more just and healthy.
I like that! Would be hard to be absolutist (“never mention children’s cancer unless I ask directly, read a related article, or we’re friends”) but sure, can imagine a better way than today.
yep, agreed. The problem is not "bone cancer charities must have a way of getting their message out!" therefore "they should be able to bug you about it while you're reading an article". The problem is that the things bugging you while reading an article is bad for your mind (and even worse if they are manipulative, which they are). If you get rid of these exploitable mediums for messaging, other mediums will appear which -- hopefully -- are more just and healthy. Particularly if they're things we value as society. And if some things we don't value die because invasive advertising was the only way they could survive? Fine.
> If you get rid of these exploitable mediums for messaging, other mediums will appear which -- hopefully -- are more just and healthy.
I like that! Would be hard to be absolutist (“never mention children’s cancer unless I ask directly, read a related article, or we’re friends”) but sure, can imagine a better way than today.