This is my first exposure to this idea and it’s quite compelling. Couple that with the perceived tone being argumentative instead of inquisitive or ignorant and that’s a recipe for disaster.

The fact the algorithms only care about engagement, positive or negative, means rage bait takes over too so that doesn’t help the perception that a question is actually an attack.

Where’s your source for this? I’ve never noticed it so it must not be happening

Like this

Needs those mittens with the separate trigger finger

Lol I was going to post “you are what you eat” but thought it would be in bad taste. It definitely is, but I had to laugh at the audacity of going for it.

Yes, it wasn’t until the third panel did I notice the arms of the chair and suddenly the person was bald

Whoa o black Betty

That box art and the art in the booklet included in the case (and the art behind the discs) for FFVII is so good

Poor guy with the spray paint realizing it was supposed to be a 6

I’d be really curious how much my internet use “costs” to advertisers and if I could/would pay that amount instead.

Like, the advertiser paid $0.0005 to serve that ad to me so I’ll just pay that amount directly to the site and not be served the ad. Just incorporate it into my internet bill and I’d pay just like I do for power or gas. And would my willingness to not see ads make me more or less valuable to advertisers and affect the math?

I don’t like the subscription model as it seems like the price point isn’t based on actual cost at all and like they’re double-dipping by still selling my info. Charge me the actual cost plus a reasonable profit margin of 10%-20%. How much would that be? Is advertising really so valuable that I wouldn’t be willing to pay that amount? If so, are advertisers overselling the efficacy of their product?