[nkozyra]

> Exchanging money for goods and services is the entire basis of the economy.

Sounds like advertising meets that description.

It's a transaction of value - potential future customers via the service of advertising.

[diffeomorphism]

Sounds like it doesn't and you missed the point. There are two parties that matter: the reader and the website.

Instead of addressing that you introduced a third party, which works for the website as a service. Correct, but irrelevant.

[arrosenberg]

It does not. Attention is a limited good, not capital. Capital is capital.

[nkozyra]

You've changed your definition.

Advertising is a service, it is fundamentally no different than any other service. We may find it annoying or distasteful, but it is a natural good from natural actors in a capitalist system.

[arrosenberg]

Subsidizing products with your attention span is not a natural thing in a capitalist system. What a ridiculous idea. Advertising is a service, it should be paid for with capital, not used as a subsidy or alternate form of payment.

[nkozyra]

> Subsidizing products with your attention span is not a natural thing in a capitalist system

You're looking at the wrong thing as capital and the wrong thing as the service.

The service is customer sourcing and the capital is literally capital.

It is a very natural capitalist creation, self-evidently so.

[arrosenberg]

I don't think I am. Internet users are not being fairly compensated for their data and unless you block the entire Facebook and Instagram namespaces, they track you whether or not you have consented.

The platforms are acting like feudal landlords, not capitalists.

[nkozyra]

First, I think you've simply identified a key feature of capitalism: exploitation of a resource.

Second, the market has spoken. Some of us feel we're being exploited by having our data harvested for the transaction of advertising, but most do not.