Yet how many of our jobs wouldn't exist without advertising ... I'm not saying it's right or wrong just a fact. Advertising is foundational to many modern industries, especially digital ones. Social platforms, media companies, search engines, news, free apps, podcasts, streaming tiers. A ton of your daily internet exists because ads bankroll the whole mess. Without advertising, half the tech economy collapses into subscription-only fiefdoms. Unfortunately if advertising vanished tomorrow, lots of companies would die, tons of jobs would evaporate, and the economy would contort into something unrecognizable.
If advertising is no longer financially rewarding, is there not an argument that labor could transition into a different sector of the economy?
Companies based around advertising would die, yes, but they only exist in the first place because of how lucrative the activity is. Nobody is sitting around dreaming of how they could sell ads better than anyone else while not thinking of the financial compensation. At least I hope they aren't.
If someone was saying "many people have jobs in running offshore internet sports betting companies, if we put regulations on offshore internet sports betting, it would remove jobs" wouldn't the natural question be whether those industries are actually productive to have people employed in, or if it's a harmful industry overall? Generally in my view its somewhat sad that the system as a whole optimizes for advertising work rather than orienting in a way that everyone could be putting their work towards something they see as more fulfilling.
There is certainly more need for product discoverability broadly than something like online gambling, but I think the more relevant conversation is if the current advertising model is more like a local minima preventing progress towards a more economically viable method of handling product discoverability.
"We can't get rid of this toxic part of society because what if people lose jobs?" has never really been a great argument. Like, maybe society could find a way to financially support people who transition to a new career (although if you've made any sort of money from ads, I'd argue that uh... you should've saved more, but whatever. Labor rights, etc.). "We ban something and then you're just out of a job" doesn't have to be what happens, it's just what typically happens. We can get creative, though! Other modes of governing society are entirely possible. We can both support people and keep them happy and healthy, while also getting rid of things like advertising. We just need to imagine a better world.
The best digital services I use are without exception ones I pay for with money.
The services I pay for with attention are without exception ones I have a love/hate relationship with, which maybe fulfill some occasional need but just as often I return to out of addictive pattern. It's not hard to imagine better ways to fulfill those needs which are simply not viable as businesses because of the competition from attention-paid services.
The industry doesn't seem to have a problem doing the same with AI (it's questionable if AI can actually do it to any major society-changing extent, but it sure is what those same companies want to happen).
With GenAI, I suspect a lot that could be ad-supported will evaporate anyway.
How can you get a reputation for a high-quality well-researched podcast(/youtube channel) when your voice(/face) can be cloned by the advertiser who buys a slot somewhere in your podcast(/video) to sell some snakeoil?
Are those your friends you're seeing on social media enjoying ${brand} or supporting ${politician}? Or did your friends all leave the site years ago, and these are just fakes, legally licenced by the advertisers from the social media firm thanks to a clause in the TOS that's hard for non-lawyers to comprehend the consequences of?
Martin Lewis has struggled with scammers pretending to be him (a trusted consumer champion in the U.K.) for over 20 years. American platforms refuse to do anything to stop it though.
That’s not just advert, it’s fraud - fraud people like Zuck and Musk make a fortune from.
As an atheist if I saw this (levitation) in person I would very quickly become a believer. That said the lack of any real evidence is telling considering this would be the greatest marketing material for recruiting new members.
As an "eligle" (yes, you need permission to be spoken to in English) anglophone,born and raised in Quebecistan, relocation is becoming a real consideration. The amount of resources wasted on language issues while so many other more pertinent issues need addressing is unconscionable.
>> To build muscle, you need to eat more calories than you burn. You need to have a net calorie surplus.
>Not true, can be done, you can find examples on the internet.
>There is no need for a caloric surplus to build muscles. Muscles are build from amino acids, not "calories". The body "eats up" muscles LAST: it will go through your fat first.
Per the latest science, discussed at length in this podcast, and despite any anecdata, this is false. You cannot synthesize muscle without adequate protein (aprox. 1gr per lbs of bodyweight) and a caloric surplus unless anabolic steroids are used. If you have sources for your claim of body recomposition other than ancedata please do provide it.
was reading about this today https://www.lineup.supply/ and hoping for a non-apple version ... unfortunately all i got was the Internal Server Error... will check back later
Not only that, but a lot of the suggestions seem to ignore the "good scientific backing" part of OP's question. For example, omega-3 has been mentioned several times, but if you look at any of the sources that more responsible commenters have linked to it's clearly on the "slight" to "none" side evidence-wise. I have no opinion on omega-3 personally. It's fine if people take it. It's just not an answer to the question that was posed.
Born and raised here 40+ years ... The language laws are ridiculous and getting worse, the roads are horrible and getting worse, traffic is horrible and getting worse, salaries are not on par with the rest of Canada and our winters would be considered apocalyptic to anyone not used to it. If you're listening North America, nothing to see here move along. I would move in a heartbeat if my family roots weren't here.
Unlike glucose, fructose (sugar from fruit) is metabolized by the liver, and then converted to fat. Maybe fruit eaters were simply able to store more energy as fat which supplied the nutrition and/or extended survival required to evolve larger brains.
