• archchan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    The Ad Algorithm

    It knows when you are sleeping It knows when you’re awake It knows when you’ve been bad or good So consume for goodness sake

    Fuck this.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      nodding off? time for a bright ad with super saturation and lots of brightness variability, they’ll strobe you into paying attention.

      how much do you have to pay to turn the fucking thing off?

  • MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    For those of you contemplating ways of covering up the ads:

    This is the same airline that beat the shit out of that doctor because the airline overbooked the flight. For your own safety, do not cross this airline.

    • Eheran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The Chicago Department of Aviation did that. The same way if the police ends up killing someone, it was not the person calling the police.

      • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        United was booting passengers to make room for employee transfers though, the situation was shit before dept of aviation even got the call.

        • Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sure, but telling someone to leave their plane for some oddball reason is “only bad” not outright crazy like what happened then.

        • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Those employees could have stood. Frontier and Spirit give vouchers out when they intentionally overbook…which before the pandemic was everyday. If nobody takes the bait, they up the voucher value. For them it’s essentially monopoly money.

          If United couldn’t get anybody to bite at the vouchers, then the employees should have stood the whole flight. Instead, they beat a man who was not fighting back physically. He only insisted that he get to his patient. They LITERALLY dragged him off the plane. By his ankle, as he tried to grab onto anything he could.

          • aeharding@vger.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            If United couldn’t get anybody to bite at the vouchers, then the employees should have stood the whole flight.

            Yeah, that is not a solution. The FAA is salivating at the thought of this. Everyone must have a seat for takeoff and landing.

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        it was not the person calling the police.

        At this point anyone calling the police in the US is a necessary accomplice, and guilty of conspiracy to commit murder, aggravated battery, and probably several other crimes.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Overbooking should be a mandatory minimum compensation of the greater of 1000x the ticket price or $20k. It’s a truly fucked up practice to disrespect people’s time like that.

      • reversebananimals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        “If you don’t like it don’t fly”

        Seriously just shut up.

        Edit: LMAO just saw your other comment where you actually said this sincerely. You’re a parody of yourself.

      • Drusas@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Have you ever turned a screen off on one of these planes? They turn back on. So you turn them off again. Sooner or later, they turn back on. And repeat.

        • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I have. It usually stays off until they rig the cabin for final approach. Comes back on for landing but hey, whatever?

          I’m getting beaten up for my stance here, but seriously: if all it takes to put you over is some midflight ads the do the rest of us a favor and don’t fly. Take a train or whatever.

          Y’all are acting like they’re gonna strap us down and tape our eyes open like that Alex Whasisname kid in A Clockwork Orange. I assure you that doesn’t happen for another 22 years in this timeline (give or take).

          • mriormro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            People like you constantly give corporations an inch because “it’s not a big deal” and here we are.

          • Drusas@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I don’t think you’re being beaten up for it. I certainly am not beating you up for it. But usually, yeah, the screen does come back on during the flight. I think they turn it back on automatically every time there’s an announcement. As somebody who finds screens like that very distracting and even migraine-inducing (the “busyness” of that sort of thing is a big trigger), it’s really frustrating.

          • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I honestly couldn’t care less how many adverts they show me, they can have a constant stream of adverts the whole flight if it means that some shitty corporation is paying a portion of my travel coats.

            People really need to grow up about stuff like this, if you don’t want adverts then pay for a premium service - I’m poor, I’ll accept the adverts.

            • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Here’s the thing: companies have learned they can add ads to make additional money without passing any of that on to their customers.

              If you think you’re going to get a better rate for having ads, you’re fooling yourself. They’ll always charge as much as they can get people to pay and that amount isn’t affected by ads most of the time.

              • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                This is thinking based on emotion not reality, most of the internet is free because of adverts so your belief that it’s not used to lower prices is clearly silly. Yes companies love profit but they often increase profits by lowering prices to attract more business, it’s a perfectly valid business model to use adverts to reduce the cost to the customer and increase customer volume.

            • wagoner@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              That money isn’t subsidizing your flight cost, it’s increasing corporate profits.

        • redisdead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Shouldn’t be that far away from them in the first place if you actually cared.

          • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            This is fucking hilarious. Do you know that sometimes, people go elsewhere for economic opportunities? Then they bring their children after they get settled in?

            Sometimes they go back, and leave the children there.

            Do you think those kids should be stranded?

              • cole@lemdro.id
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                sometimes people don’t want to live in the middle of nowhere forever. not many engineering jobs there. we all want economic mobility too

                • redisdead@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  The ultimate quest for wealth is worth destroying the planet.

                  Also vast majority of people take planes for leisure, I’m sure we can deal without them. People used to travel the world in sail boats and they still managed to get where they wanted to go.

  • mysticpickle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Remember when the assholes at United overbooked a flight and sent someone to knock a doctor’s teeth out and carry him off a plane? The doctor refused since he was on his way to oversee the opening of a clinic he founded for veterans.

    He and his wife started the clinic as a way to thank American servicemen and women, because he was plucked out of ocean waters by the U.S. Navy as he fled communism in his home country of Vietnam about 44 years ago, he said.

    Fuck United Airlines.

    https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/story/doctor-dragged-off-united-airlines-flight-watching-viral-62250271

    • DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      United will kill your dog, bust up your guitar, and knock down and drag out your doctor. They’ve made the headlines for all three of those. And the guitar guy made a song about United.

      Unfortunately, the other airlines aren’t much better.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Targeted, individualized, advertising should be illegal. This will gut a lot of the motivations for the privacy invasions and data harvesting. This is how advertising worked for thousands of years. I think it could continue to be just fine.

    The amount of resources humanity is spending on targeted advertising is extremely depressing when you consider the opportunity cost. There are thousands of engineers and product managers that spend all day on this stuff instead of anything useful.

  • SomeGuy69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This should count as violation of human rights. You’re chained to the seat for hours and have no other option than look at this screen or force your eyes closed. Holy shit, people should get really mad. Flashing ads on a screen you don’t look at directly are still very annoying, even if you look on your phone.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I need to start a business selling rectangular shaped covers for these displays. I’ll even make one that serves as a holder for an iPad, so you can substitute your own screen.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I fold the flight safety manual and hang it over the screen with a tab, inserted into the folding gap above the screen.

      • ediculous@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        In my experience, that’s only temporary. The screen will always wake up again on United flights.

                • redisdead@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Y’all behave like they put a gun up to your head and force you to watch them ads lmao.

                  It’s mental how the simple thought of maybe do something else than watch the ads is met with such hostility lmao.

                  You know what doesn’t have ads (yet, anyway)? Mother fucking books.

                  You know what you can take on a plane with you? A mother fucking book.

                  Read a book.

  • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    “I’m sorry ma’am but could you please remove your jacket from the seat? It’s obstructing the ads and we have a very clear policy about that”

    🙃

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      To begin the flight, please drink Mountain Dew Verification Can.

      Verification Can Invalid. Please drink Mountain Dew Verification Can.

      ERROR! Passenger attempting to steal Premium Ad-less Flying Option! Adding your name to the No Fly List and automatically deducting penalty fee from your credit card.

      ERROR! Credit Card Declined! Alerting TSA! Alerting FBI! Alerting Sky Marshals!

    • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They could come up with some bullshit like, obstructing your screen is interfering with the display of critical airplane safety information or something.

  • IzzyScissor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    And I’m sure this in no way will invade people’s privacy.

    “Hmm, why is the anti-queer politician sitting next to me being served dozens of male underwear ads? Hmmmm…”

    “Why is my daughter receiving ads for newborn diapers? Hmmm…”

    “Why is my neighbor receiving ads for anger management? Hmmm…”

  • Yosawya san@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    What’s the ROI on ads anyway? I feel like ads are just a way to funnel money between corps. People who are forced to see ads are really not even the point anymore. This is like corporations subsidizing other corporations. Don’t even matter that you buy that item being shown to you.

    • b_n@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I always wondered this too.

      Found a website saying Youtube adviews are $100-300 per 10k (ad views, not video views). That’s 1-3¢ per view. If we assume an ad is 10seconds, then your time is worth 0.1-0.3¢ per second, or $3.60-10.80 per hour.

      An A380 looks to be 380-615 seats. I’d imagine they’re more often optimising for space, so let’s say 550.

      Long haul flight, 10% of people at any time using inflight stuff, 8 hours, 4 ads per hour = 5500.18*4 ads watched. 1760 ads. There will be a massive premium for planes, but surely only one order of magnitude more (e.g. 10x). That’s equivalent to give or take 20k YouTube adviews which would be $200-600 per flight.

      There are a lot of planes in the sky every single day though…

      • Yosawya san@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The thing is, it’s only a ROI if any of those passengers converts to a buyer. The act of seeing an ad creates no value for the manufacturer unless they are converted to a buyer. What you are describing is a market that has the consumer (ad watcher) almost completely removed from the conversion of capital. Being forced to watch an ad, in this case, only benefits the airline by their receiving ad revenue. The passengers are nearly supflourous.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      About a decade ago Fox News got brought to court, and had to defend themselves against the idea that their content wasn’t actually factually accurate most of the time. Therefore not “news”.

      Fox responded by saying that their program wasn’t meant to be news. I forget the exact quote, I’m sure duckduckgo is your friend, but it was along the lines of “No reasonable person would ever consume Fox News content and believe it to be trustworthy accurate news. It is an opinionated entertainment show about the news.”

      I don’t remember their tagline at the time, but it was something along the lines of “Fox News is your only outlet for unbiased news!” Something to that effect. I just remember Jon Stewart calling out the hypocrasy of their tagline being the exact opposite of what they said in court.

      If Fox News is entertainment meant to push the agenda that the right is right, and if CNN is entertainment meant to push the agenda that the left is right, then I don’t see why The Onion can’t join them as entertainment meant to push the agenda that the whole world is fucking stupid.

      Still operating as a “real news source”, except it’s all bullshit like Fox News and CNN. Just entertainment.

  • sporks_a_plenty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    …that will now reflect the information United has compiled on individual travelers, like where they live and destinations they’ve traveled to.

    I, for one, can’t wait to have my personal info proudly displayed to whatever randos they seat next to me! /s

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        We tried that in the 80s already. Here’s how it went down.

        1980s comes along, and people had been seeing commercials on tv for years. So along comes this new concept. Now you can PAY to watch tv…without ads. GREAT!

        So people started paying for this new “cable tv”. Then the cable operators were like “I know they’re paying to not see ads…but what if we STILL showed ads, and STILL took their money???”

        So that happened.

        Then after some decades Netflix came around, originally with liscensed tv shows from all over tv…except now you could PAY to watch them, without the ads. And then they drastically lost their liscensed content, and produced their own original content.

        After a few decades, Netflix said “I know they’re paying not to see commercials…but what if we STARTED showing commercials, AND raised prices every few months.”

        Man, I can’t wait for the next guy to charge me money to not see ads. Only to inevitably show me ads a few years later…