We are all familiar with the current obsession of collection information, any information, about peoples' preferences, habits, personal data, etc, to be used in targeted sales activities.
How about exploiting peoples' ingnorance? For example, if you are a used car salesman, it would be of value to know that your customer knows f*ck all about cars.
This idea has been tested by John McAfee, the antivirus czar and US presidential hopeful.
A thought experiment with John McAfee | Spectator USA
What ye think?
Jan
How about exploiting peoples' ingnorance? For example, if you are a used car salesman, it would be of value to know that your customer knows f*ck all about cars.
This idea has been tested by John McAfee, the antivirus czar and US presidential hopeful.
A thought experiment with John McAfee | Spectator USA
What ye think?
Jan
Lets extend this concept (of ignorance as a resource). Suppose you are a large audio interlink manufacturer and you are looking at the best way to find prospective customers.
I posit that it would be very valuable to have a database of customers who are technically ignorant. You can then weave a nice story and start raking in money.
Jan
I posit that it would be very valuable to have a database of customers who are technically ignorant. You can then weave a nice story and start raking in money.
Jan
I like the consensual part. Fortunately, no whales have been raped in the process. But a lot of people are f****d by their ignorance, often amplified by their preconceptions, in the world of audio. I see signs that some professionals on this site might even feed these preconceptions, whereas one would assume that they knew better. Pavel's point.
The question then becomes whether it is ethical to take advantage of people's ignorance. In this age of universal knowledge at anyone's finger tips, one could assume that ignorance is a personal decision, a way of life. In that case, why am I not allowed to take advantage of it?
Is it unethical of the Bybee's of this world to take a ride on peoples' ignorance and translate that into a Bentley?
Jan
Last edited:
Because your mind, your way of thinking would not allow for this. As you have already said, it is a personal choice, maybe a personality choice.
Just as an aside- McAfee is totally nuts himself, a heavy drug user, likely complicit in cryptocurrency pump and dump schemes, and is suspected of murdering his neighbor in Belize.
Even though this concept is valid I have a hard time taking anything he says seriously.
I’d consider it unethical, but it’s pretty harmless as far as scams go. Presumably BQP buyers are not exactly poor, and the devices don’t pretend to do anything serious or health and safety related. He’s just crowdfunding a Bentley from other Bentley owners. Still unethical, but at least it’s not preying on the sick and desperate like so many others.
I am reading something, and it is really irrelevant who said it, I try to think about it and judge it on the contents. I am surprised you would judge something on who said it rather than what was said.
Jan
Last edited:
Yeah but embezzling a rich guy is still embezzling, no? And I am not sure it's only the rich.
Jan
To help salve your ethical conscience, consider that money needs to circulate to be of any use to anyone. Also, maybe you should consider become vegan, if not already, talk about exploitation of ignorance
Last edited:
I agree, you’re right, it doesn’t matter who said it.
I should have selectively quoted the part about antivirus czar and presidential hopeful (wishful thinking since he’s a fugitive). I’m also not too thrilled with giving him clicks, but that’s another matter.
Yeah, I did still say it was unethical. It might not be quite as unethical as most similar schemes.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.