this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
2714 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59590 readers
5389 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What "interest" would they have to keep it that way if it wasn't working?

Wealth inequality exists because it works for the people who have the power to control it. In a way, it's not harmful ENOUGH to change evolutionarily.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you serious? You literally answered your own question with the very next sentence.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What? The original argument was "Just because it exists doesn’t make it good.", implying that it (click-bait thumbnails) doesn't necessarily work. To which I said that the fact that it exists means it works. To which you seemed to object by saying that there may be people who have an interest in it existing - like they want it to exist despite it actually not working. I'm confused about what it is you're saying.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can go and read my comment again if you're confused. It's pretty clear that I was saying your original argument might apply to YouTube titles, but doesn't apply in many other parts of life.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Since Youtube is what we were talking about, I see no reason to assume that wasn't what you were talking about. Also, I do think that the principle can be applied in most situations, some more easily, some less.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Me: "thing like wealth inequality"

You: "oh he must still be talking about YouTube!"

Please

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Your original comment said nothing about wealth inequality.