|
|
|
|
|
|
by shurcooL
4398 days ago
|
|
|
Well put analogy. My guess is that most people would not be okay with that and choose to opt out. But my question/argument is, would that be a rational decision? I don't see a lot of benefit for the customer to deny the store those options, so why do it if there's nothing to be gained from denying. > attempting to stitch your actions on the internet to store visits to more effectively sell advertising I think this is the key factor. If people see themselves as susceptible to such manipulation, then it does benefit them to deny such behavior to prevent stores from affecting them negatively. |
|
|
Does that matter? We[1] live in a capitalist democracy. One of the tenets of capitalism is that consumers should be well-informed and "vote with their dollars/feet", and the core principle of democracy is that the individual citizens get to decide how their society is run. We don't live in a LessWrong-ocracy where the world is run based on somebody's idea of rational objectivity or whatever.
I'm in politics so I know exactly how frustrating it can be when the average Joe doesn't necessarily agree with your vision of a rational decision, but if that's the case, the solution is to change their minds, not to circumvent or obfuscate to get around them.
[1] - I'm thinking Westerners in general, but I'm American, so I may be over-generalizing, we're good at that :-)