I think it's pretty obvious. The unemployed are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to things like negotiating salary. If you're hiring someone that's employed, IN GENERAL (not always) you have to meet or beat their current salary. If you're hiring someone without a current job, anything looks better than unemployment benefits, so you can pay them less than you would have to otherwise. Makes business sense, even if it is soulless and cruel. (I find that a lot of things that make 'business sense' are that way.)
Marketers without anything to market are useless. Programmers without marketing still produce important work, they'll just have to get the word out by reputation instead of glossy print. Is it harder to succeed without good marketing? Sure. It's just that it's *impossible* to succeed if you don't have something to sell.
I don't think anyone is saying marketing doesn't matter at all. I think people are saying that those who work in Marketing need a dose of reality, as well as a 50% reduction in headcount. That way the people who do Real Work (tm) can have more resources, while the (still important) work of Marketing still gets done; they'll just have to "work smarter", like everyone else. Why should they get treated differently?
Then let them work with half as many employees as they need, like every other division in every company in America these days.
Corporate profits are way up, yet there's no jobs. People are being forced to do the work of two or three, lest they be fired into an (artificially) terrible job market.
In some states, an employment contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. They're unenforceable. Anyone can be fired at any time for any reason, or for no reason whatsoever, without severance. The only thing the ex-employee is entitled to is any vacation pay accumulated (which is considered wages under MA law) and a flyer on how to apply for unemployment benefits.
You don't live in the USA, do you. Employers don't want people that use their brains. Employers want people that do what they're told without any complaining about 'working conditions' or 'fair pay' or 'being treated like human beings'.
Perhaps its time we, as a group, get over ourselves.
Try supporting a family on 65k/yr in one of the highest cost-of-living areas in the country. 65k is practically poverty level for a family of three here, let alone four or five.
And before you tell me to move to somewhere where the COL is lower, you have to remember that the salaries are correspondingly lower, the standard of living is lower, and the COL is lower because nobody wants to live there. Plus, my job is here, my family is here, and I like it here.
If you're referring to electro-convulsive therapy (ECT, formerly known as 'shock therapy'), they still use it to treat mental illness. It's done as a quick outpatient procedure. Seems barbaric, but apparently it works.
You know, if all the time and effort spent on finding new and interesting ways to annoy people with advertising were spent on something more important (like, say, curing AIDS, or even sleeping) we'd all be a lot better off.
Oh no! A company is trying to target it's advertising so that I'm not bored with useless ads!
They don't have the right to exploit my privacy to do so. THAT is what I have trouble with here. All I want is to be able to walk down the street (ride the train, etc) without someone trying to sell me something. What the hell has happened to the world where that's not possible anymore?
Why is it ok for a human to do it, but not a machine?
It isn't ok. If your product or service isn't good enough to attract customers on its own, then You're Doing It Wrong. Good products sell themselves, they don't need shithead MBAs who can't tie their own shoes to tell the great unwashed what they want.
In general terms, the point of most advertising is to either introduce an unknown or new product to the public or to inform the public of benefits of using said product.
When I find myself in need of a product or service, I am perfectly capable of seeking out said product or service. If you need to tell me about it to convince me that I need it.. I don't need it.
As such, if you don't know about a product, how would you know you don't need to be told about it?
I don't need to be told about it if I don't need it. 99% of the time I'm marketed to, it's a product that I have no interest in. I'm not about to give up some (even tiny) measure of privacy to improve that ratio.
Which means, you know you don't know so you don't need to know, therefore not knowing means you know enough about it to not need to know
I know enough to know that if I need something, I can find it, I don't need to be whacked in the face with it 900 times when I don't need it.
Your analogy is flawed. If you ride the Tokyo rail system, essentially you are a captive audience for this kind of surveillance. And if some lunatic is ranting about the end of the world on the street in front of my place of business, I can't exactly avoid them either.
Would it bother you if they instead paid a person to sit out there and write down the gender and approximate age of every person that walked past?
Yes, actually, it would. It's none of their business, leave me alone.
the ideal advertising is when you only tell people who are interested in a product about the product.
If I'm interested in a product, I don't need to be told about it. If I want to find it, I'll find it, I don't need it thrown in my face constantly like a monkey hitting a typewriter.
Slashdot Mirror
Ron Paul wasn't marginalized by anyone, he was a looney who was seen as such.
I think it's pretty obvious. The unemployed are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to things like negotiating salary. If you're hiring someone that's employed, IN GENERAL (not always) you have to meet or beat their current salary. If you're hiring someone without a current job, anything looks better than unemployment benefits, so you can pay them less than you would have to otherwise. Makes business sense, even if it is soulless and cruel. (I find that a lot of things that make 'business sense' are that way.)
"Other terrorist groups"? Seriously?
People still need to be told that not every Muslim is a terrorist? Really? Even W got that one right.
Marketers without anything to market are useless. Programmers without marketing still produce important work, they'll just have to get the word out by reputation instead of glossy print. Is it harder to succeed without good marketing? Sure. It's just that it's *impossible* to succeed if you don't have something to sell.
I don't think anyone is saying marketing doesn't matter at all. I think people are saying that those who work in Marketing need a dose of reality, as well as a 50% reduction in headcount. That way the people who do Real Work (tm) can have more resources, while the (still important) work of Marketing still gets done; they'll just have to "work smarter", like everyone else. Why should they get treated differently?
Then let them work with half as many employees as they need, like every other division in every company in America these days.
Corporate profits are way up, yet there's no jobs. People are being forced to do the work of two or three, lest they be fired into an (artificially) terrible job market.
In some states, an employment contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. They're unenforceable. Anyone can be fired at any time for any reason, or for no reason whatsoever, without severance. The only thing the ex-employee is entitled to is any vacation pay accumulated (which is considered wages under MA law) and a flyer on how to apply for unemployment benefits.
You don't live in the USA, do you. Employers don't want people that use their brains. Employers want people that do what they're told without any complaining about 'working conditions' or 'fair pay' or 'being treated like human beings'.
That I'm lazy, or looking to make an excuse for anything.
There's "reading between the lines" and then there's what you said. You assume an awful lot.
That's what the PR flacks want you to believe. At the end of the day, whoever is cheaper gets the job.
No, most companies pay with money.
The funds could come out of, say, executive bonuses. After all, the company comes first, right?
Try supporting a family on 65k/yr in one of the highest cost-of-living areas in the country. 65k is practically poverty level for a family of three here, let alone four or five.
And before you tell me to move to somewhere where the COL is lower, you have to remember that the salaries are correspondingly lower, the standard of living is lower, and the COL is lower because nobody wants to live there. Plus, my job is here, my family is here, and I like it here.
If you're referring to electro-convulsive therapy (ECT, formerly known as 'shock therapy'), they still use it to treat mental illness. It's done as a quick outpatient procedure. Seems barbaric, but apparently it works.
Lots of people do care, and IMNSHO you should care too. Personally, I don't need a reason to want my privacy and personal information protected..
Google "Plug-in Hybrids".
Sorry, can't let this one go. "Naivete"
You know, if all the time and effort spent on finding new and interesting ways to annoy people with advertising were spent on something more important (like, say, curing AIDS, or even sleeping) we'd all be a lot better off.
Screw you AND your ads. Adblock ftw.
They don't have the right to exploit my privacy to do so. THAT is what I have trouble with here. All I want is to be able to walk down the street (ride the train, etc) without someone trying to sell me something. What the hell has happened to the world where that's not possible anymore?
I'm perfectly capable of typing, for example, "Blue Jeans" into a search engine and reading the result.
It isn't ok. If your product or service isn't good enough to attract customers on its own, then You're Doing It Wrong. Good products sell themselves, they don't need shithead MBAs who can't tie their own shoes to tell the great unwashed what they want.
I don't want to see ANY ads. Period. I don't want to be marketed to. At all. Nobody has a RIGHT to market to me if I don't want it.
When I find myself in need of a product or service, I am perfectly capable of seeking out said product or service. If you need to tell me about it to convince me that I need it.. I don't need it.
I don't need to be told about it if I don't need it. 99% of the time I'm marketed to, it's a product that I have no interest in. I'm not about to give up some (even tiny) measure of privacy to improve that ratio.
I know enough to know that if I need something, I can find it, I don't need to be whacked in the face with it 900 times when I don't need it.
Your analogy is flawed. If you ride the Tokyo rail system, essentially you are a captive audience for this kind of surveillance. And if some lunatic is ranting about the end of the world on the street in front of my place of business, I can't exactly avoid them either.
Yes, actually, it would. It's none of their business, leave me alone.
If I'm interested in a product, I don't need to be told about it. If I want to find it, I'll find it, I don't need it thrown in my face constantly like a monkey hitting a typewriter.