The Dead Internet Theory

[BullDogsLipBrandClamjuice]

I wonder if in ten years everybody is just going to be segregated into small discord/(video game online friend chat/party)/skype clone, groups with no larger community. I think the Pandora's box of the internet has made the processes in which our masters operate and rule over us more frustrating and complicated. Lets say hypothetically you wanted to prevent autist on the internet who actively check for bots and ban people whom they consider shills from forming communities larger then 40, how would you do it?

Isnt that already happening to lesser degree with facebook, instagram, twitter? possibly reddit?
People are in their circles and if someone has an alternate view it's seen as trolling

 

[Bongocat]

I wonder if in ten years everybody is just going to be segregated into small discord/(video game online friend chat/party)/skype clone, groups with no larger community.

I have no hard data on this, but it seems like there's a lot less zoomers on twitter than there are millennials. I've heard secondhand that zoomers tend to prefer smaller/"private" groups like Discord rather than the giant pools like twitter.

From my experience, that seems true. And really it's not hard to see why. Twitter is just a gigantic trashfire hellscape that's dominated by "bad vibes". I know most of the US is brainwashed niggercattle, but even for them, there's only so much constant negativity you can take for days and years before you start getting naturally repelled from it.

 

[Knight of the Rope]

Just personally the only ads I can remember clicking on are ones where they show me a product I was already looking at, and I eventually decide to buy it. But it doesn't take a genius AI high tech big data apparatus to figure out people might want to buy things they keep looking at. And even then, it's often showing me stuff that I already bought so that's useless.

I once made the mistake of Googling around for vacuum cleaners, and then made the second mistake of clicking on one of the ads to go to a vacuum cleaner site.

Now Google is apparently convinced that I'm the "vacuum cleaner guy", and that one vacuum cleaner is not enough and that all I want to buy ever again is vacuum cleaners, and that when I'm scanning through the newsfeed on a lunch break what I'd really rather be doing is planning my next vacuum cleaner purchase.

 

[Bongocat]

I once made the mistake of Googling around for vacuum cleaners, and then made the second mistake of clicking on one of the ads to go to a vacuum cleaner site.

Now Google is apparently convinced that I'm the "vacuum cleaner guy", and that one vacuum cleaner is not enough and that all I want to buy ever again is vacuum cleaners, and that when I'm scanning through the newsfeed on a lunch break what I'd really rather be doing is planning my next vacuum cleaner purchase.

If it's not linked to your account, just try clearing cookies.

Also I have ghost memories of there being a way to wipe your ad data (thanks GDPR). Obviously the button isn't "real" in that they'll still have it all, but you'll probably stop seeing those ads.

 

[Knight of the Rope]

If it's not linked to your account, just try clearing cookies.

Also I have ghost memories of there being a way to wipe your ad data (thanks GDPR). Obviously the button isn't "real" in that they'll still have it all, but you'll probably stop seeing those ads.

It is linked to my Google account, yes. And I would look into clearing the data but I still find it too amusing.

 

[Kosher Dill]

Now Google is apparently convinced that I'm the "vacuum cleaner guy", and that one vacuum cleaner is not enough and that all I want to buy ever again is vacuum cleaners, and that when I'm scanning through the newsfeed on a lunch break what I'd really rather be doing is planning my next vacuum cleaner purchase.

Good, let them think that.

 

[melty]

Boomers do. Boomers will unironically sign up for mailing lists offering nebulous "promotions". I guess in their minds that means something like "cupins for The Walmart".

I don't know how well targeted ads work on normal people. What I do know is that it doesn't tend to work on us.

https://archive.md/w4SyC

Yeah, I'm being a little biased here. But there's some more evidence for it.

The new dot com bubble is here: it’s called online advertising

In 2018 $273bn was spent on digital ads globally. We delve into the world of clicks, banners and keywords to find out if any of it is real. What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

thecorrespondent.com

When this article first came out, I thought it was an exaggeration. But as time goes on, I've been seeing more and more that there's a lot of fuckery and there is a lot of truth here.
For example, this:

Brand keyword advertising, the presentation informed him, was eBay’s most successful advertising method. Somebody googles "eBay" and for a fee, Google places a link to eBay at the top of the search results. Lots of people, apparently, click on this paid link. So many people, according to the consultants, that the auction website earns at least $12.28 for every dollar it spends on brand keyword advertising – a hefty profit!

Tadelis didn’t buy it. "I thought it was fantastic, and I don’t mean extraordinarily good or attractive. I mean imaginative, fanciful, remote from reality." His rationale? People really do click on the paid-link to eBay.com an awful lot. But if that link weren’t there, presumably they would click on the link just below it: the free link to eBay.com. The data consultants were basing their profit calculations on clicks they would be getting anyway.

Happens ALL the fucking time to this day. I've specifically asked people to stop doing this and they don't want to do it, and they actually hide the fact that they are doing this so much unless you really dig into raw data, which they don't like. If really pressed, they will call it "defending the brand". Which I think there is some small amount of value in, but for the most part they are doing it to make their metrics look better.

Another thing is that digital advertising has its own set of metrics that aren't exactly common sense. Let's say that you launch a campaign for x product. How do you measure the success of the campaign? It's the sales for x product, right? Like if the sales increase, it worked, right? WRONG! you actually want to measure its success by a bunch of other bullshit that's couched in a million caveats about what the data actually means. At least one network reports on the sales for a campaign by just reporting the total sales in a period of weeks for anything you are selling that the customer who blocked on an ad bought. So for example you run a campaign for shoelaces and someone clicks on that ad. Then two weeks later they randomly buy a cabinet you're selling, but it has nothing to do with the ad for shoelaces, your just selling the cabinet really cheap and it showed up on a discount site. The ad network now reports that the campaign was an amazing success because that customer bought $500 of something after clicking on an ad two weeks ago. Big tech makes it sound like they can perfectly track this person's intent through the shopping journey, but if they can, they're not showing that at all, they are showing this rudimentary ass shit. I could give a million examples of this kind of thing.

This is incentivized at every level. Companies know they need to do "something" with digital ads. Digital ad agencies know that companies don't know what they are doing and think big tech is performing a bunch of magic. The few people that do know, their jobs depend on these things performing anyway so they go along with it. And yeah, they do work to some extent... all this stuff works. It just doesn't work nearly as well as is claimed. They want to say you are getting 10x return when in reality it is probably more like 2.5x. I'd also surmise that the returns have been diminishing over time; in the early to middle days of the internet, these things were probably more effective than they are right now. But everybody still wants those juicy gainz and the ad industry is happy to tell you that you can have them. Just don't look too close.

P&G Pulls Away From Some Digital Ads, Talks Traditional Plans.

Procter and Gamble is bucking the trend of brands shifting large swaths of their marketing budgets to digital media. The world’s largest advertiser cut more than $100 million in digital

www.insideradio.com

A large amount of online ad impressions are bots: https://www.ana.net/content/show/id/38432

Now Google is apparently convinced that I'm the "vacuum cleaner guy", and that one vacuum cleaner is not enough and that all I want to buy ever again is vacuum cleaners, and that when I'm scanning through the newsfeed on a lunch break what I'd really rather be doing is planning my next vacuum cleaner purchase.

Pretty amusing anecdote, I've had very similar experiences. The almighty Facebook was tricked by me.. changing my gender and job description. Then it marketed me a bunch of shit related to that gender and job. Amazing! So glad they recorded what I ate for lunch 5 years ago so they could specifically target me with their amazing technology.

 

[Just Dont]

I believe that the internet has a memetic agent that infects people with autism.

Is really weird how in less than 5 years the autistic population grew so much they could infiltrate government institutions and private companies. Not to mention degeneracy like troons, BLM, furries and the like.

 

[seri0us]

I wonder if in ten years everybody is just going to be segregated into small discord/(video game online friend chat/party)/skype clone, groups with no larger community. I think the Pandora's box of the internet has made the processes in which our masters operate and rule over us more frustrating and complicated. Lets say hypothetically you wanted to prevent autist on the internet who actively check for bots and ban people whom they consider shills from forming communities larger then 40, how would you do it?

It's already happened

 

[BootlegPopeye]

Pretty amusing anecdote, I've had very similar experiences. The almighty Facebook was tricked by me.. changing my gender and job description. Then it marketed me a bunch of shit related to that gender and job. Amazing! So glad they recorded what I ate for lunch for 5 years forever so they could specifically target me with their amazing technology.

Searching for some French books on ebay for a couple of days caused Google to think I was a middle aged French man - and the thing that I, as a middle aged French man, needs more than anything is an arab mail order bride. It lasted for months - if I happened to get an ad that came through on my mobile, it was almost always in French and maybe half that time about how I needed an arab wife.

 

[mickey339]

US is brainwashed niggercattle

HAH!
I like that one.

 

[moocow]

I know most of the USworld is brainwashed niggercattle

FTFY

I once made the mistake of Googling around for vacuum cleaners, and then made the second mistake of clicking on one of the ads to go to a vacuum cleaner site.

Christ, man, that's like Rule #1 of the internet: never click the ads.

 

[Grundlejungle]

I once made the mistake of Googling around for vacuum cleaners, and then made the second mistake of clicking on one of the ads to go to a vacuum cleaner site.

Now Google is apparently convinced that I'm the "vacuum cleaner guy", and that one vacuum cleaner is not enough and that all I want to buy ever again is vacuum cleaners, and that when I'm scanning through the newsfeed on a lunch break what I'd really rather be doing is planning my next vacuum cleaner purchase.

Google is convinced that I am a diabetic 70 year old white woman who spoils her grandchildren.
Why? Because I googled a diabeetus medication for my uncle once like 3 years ago.

 

[JohnDoe]

One thing you have to remember is that money is not the goal, the goal is control. All that data they collect helps them shape and target propaganda and narrative more effectively. Advertising is barely an afterthought when you have the mechanisms to deliver votes and reshape narratives.

 

[Enig]

There is genuine proof over time of this theory being true, as people noticed that during a somewhat recent outage for Google Code that posting activity and thread creation on /pol/ dropped by a lot during the few hours GC was down. The botting is a way to try and force genuine people to think their way and for some reason they keep sinking cash into 4changanistan.

 

[Maurice Caine]

There is genuine proof over time of this theory being true, as people noticed that during a somewhat recent outage for Google Code that posting activity and thread creation on /pol/ dropped by a lot during the few hours GC was down. The botting is a way to try and force genuine people to think their way and for some reason they keep sinking cash into 4changanistan.

Why 4chan of all places? That place's creatively bankrupt.

 

[Kosher Dill]

as people noticed that during a somewhat recent outage for Google Code that posting activity and thread creation on /pol/ dropped by a lot during the few hours GC was down.

That's because the people posting on /pol/ all work at Google, and when the outage hit they had to scramble and do some actual work.

 

[need shoeonhead nudes]

This is truly horrific stuff here.

Why 4chan of all places? That place's creatively bankrupt.

It didn't used to be, newfag.
How can you start a thread like this and even be so retarded? Do you not understand the implications of this? The whole purpose is to drown out real human voices and create a "creatively bankrupt" atmosphere that is boring and no one wants to engage with.

They did that with /pol/

 

[Madre Muerte]

It didn't used to be, newfag.

 

[need shoeonhead nudes]

View attachment 2193649

holy shit imagine being this dumb