Big Data

[laklak]

That they're stupid? Probably a combination of stupid parents, poor upbringing, and McDonalds. But at the end of the day everyone is responsible for their own actions and decisions, blaming "Big Data" for their poor choices is like blaming Ted Bundy's mum for his penchant for chewing on coeds.

[pErvinalia]

You can't separate actions and decisions from what's lead up to that point in time. Unless you believe in magical fairy souls that can act independent of their environment.

[laklak]

Might be true in a philosophical sense, but we still fried Ted. I figure if it looks like free will, walks like free will, and talks like free will - it's probably free will.

But then again my deepityist thoughts generally don't extend beyond the bottom of the tinnie.

[pErvinalia]

It's not philosophical. It's physical reality. What is philosophical is believing in an independent soul (which is what one has to believe in to believe in actually "free" free will).

I know that last bit is going to cause debate from some. I don't care. I've discounted all arguments against that point as magical thinking. People may as well try and convince me that God is real.

[Brian Peacock]

Psychologists talk about a concept called 'cognitive ease'. Things we are at ease with we are more likely to take as true, and we become more at ease with things if they are repeated to us. This is how advertising and other messages get under our skin. We might feel like we're clever enough to spot when we're being manipulated by adverts, dogmas and political slogans etc, but the more we are exposed to the stuff, and particularly the more distinctive it is (even if it makes us cringe), the more at ease we become with it, and the more likely we are to accept it.

[laklak]

I'll agree that one's past has a bearing on any decision made in the present, how could it be otherwise? I'm sitting here suffering from a massive flare of arthritis, because I got shitfaced on Saturday night. Happens every time I get shitfaced, because alcohol is fucking terrible shit and triggers some sort of inflammatory response that results in a shitload of pain. But the decision to have that 3rd and 4th and 5th et. al. rum and pineapple juice was mine alone. I wasn't forced, by my past actions and decisions, to do it, I just wanted to get shitfaced and play loud music. I could have chosen to go another route, like fire up a couple of Js and drink soda water. Done that many times too, in fact I do that far more often then I open the next rum bottle.

Many times I haven't got shitfaced, many times I have. So how do you account for my decision without invoking free will (or at least the illusion thereof)? What differed, presumably in the last week, that made me decide on the rum when the week before I decided on the weed?

[Brian Peacock]

You're obviously allergic to pineapple lak.

[laklak]

I'll switch to tequila and soda and science the shit out of it.

[LucidFlight]

It's not just gambling, but the gaming (i.e., video games) industry that employs big data. The idea is perhaps described to end users as a way of improving their gaming experience. Cynics tend to see it as a means of reporting the best times for games companies to dangle a loot box in front of a player, preferably a player with a good micro-transaction history.

[JimC]

It's all part and parcel of the No Personal Responsibility Movement. They're everywhere. Everyone is an "addict" - sex addict, gambling addict, weed addict, drunk, name it. IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT! You've been manipulated! You've been exploited! Big Pharma! Big Booze! Big Data! Big Fossil Fuel! Every bad thing is someone elses fault, and you deserve COMPENSATION!

There's no need for serious polarisation in this issue, IMO. The tenor of Lak's post is that any problem involving addictive behaviour is really the individuals fault, as against the polar opposite, the straw man he has erected of the PC sociologists who wish to blame all problems on manipulative corporations, and that the individuals concerned are utterly without blame.

People do need to take some personal responsibility, they need to be stronger-willed, more robust, and more discerning rather han being passive consumers.

But equally, it is abundantly clear that corporations involved in this area chase a dollar as hard as they can, and that they deliberately attempt to manipulate people to consume their product (booze, gambling, whatever...). They know that people lie in a bell curve in terms of their ability to resist, so if only in that sense, their manipulative media messages truly target those with the lowest ability to resist.

Both of the arguments contain some truth...

[PsychoSerenity]

If, as some conspiracy theorists believe, governments or evil corporate conglomerates were using chemicals or drugs in the water or sprayed in the air from planes – to make people suggestable, addicted to certain products, to control their behaviours and make them into compliant workers and consumers etc. it would be considered utterly abhorrent.

Yet with advertising, and particularly the way it’s now going with big data, AI, personally targeted ads, that’s pretty much where we are. The only difference is that, rather than using drugs, the manipulations enter our minds from the screens that are constantly around us.

But you rarely see the likes of Galaxian ranting about advertising because the control has been so effective that they’ve normalised it. Most people rarely stop to think how odd it is that they allow themselves to be psychologically bombarded potentially thousands of times a day from screens they can hardly bear to put down.

[Brian Peacock]

In my view there's no substantial difference between gambling and alcohol in terms of addiction. If brewers and outlets used big data profiling to deliberately target freebies and special offers at those predisposed to alcohol dependency and/or a history of alcohol dependency I'm sure most of us would consider that a bit much.

[mistermack]

Gambling is basically legalised robbery. They try to dress it up as "entertainment", because it gives people a buzz. But you could say the same about cocaine.

If I was dictator, I would ban all forms of bookmaking and lotteries, with massive penalties for illegals.

If I was just Prime Minister, I would insist that the education of kids included a full understanding of how gambling rips off the punters, and how punters can never win, with bookmakers setting the odds.

I would also insist on kids learning about the value of money, and how to make it go as far as possible, and how not to get taken in by advertising of anything, but to examine for themselves the true value of rip-offs like replica shirts of Manchester United first team, etc etc etc.

When you think of the time wasted on Shakespeare, or Latin, or Greek plays, it's a scandal that kids don't get educated on life skills like spotting a rip-off, and getting value for their money.
I studied all of the former, and none of the latter.

Some parents teach their kids about value for money, and it's the best lesson they could ever learn.
Other parents can't, because they never learn't it themselves.
It shouldn't be left to parents. It's too important.

[pErvinalia]

I'll agree that one's past has a bearing on any decision made in the present, how could it be otherwise? I'm sitting here suffering from a massive flare of arthritis, because I got shitfaced on Saturday night. Happens every time I get shitfaced, because alcohol is fucking terrible shit and triggers some sort of inflammatory response that results in a shitload of pain. But the decision to have that 3rd and 4th and 5th et. al. rum and pineapple juice was mine alone. I wasn't forced, by my past actions and decisions, to do it, I just wanted to get shitfaced and play loud music. I could have chosen to go another route, like fire up a couple of Js and drink soda water. Done that many times too, in fact I do that far more often then I open the next rum bottle.

Many times I haven't got shitfaced, many times I have. So how do you account for my decision without invoking free will (or at least the illusion thereof)? What differed, presumably in the last week, that made me decide on the rum when the week before I decided on the weed?

That we may or may not be able to precisely identify it doesn't change the fact that your present decisions are a result of everything that has gone before that point.

[pErvinalia]

In my view there's no substantial difference between gambling and alcohol in terms of addiction. If brewers and outlets used big data profiling to deliberately target freebies and special offers at those predisposed to alcohol dependency and/or a history of alcohol dependency I'm sure most of us would consider that a bit much.

Indeed. In Australia (well, QLD at least) they banned free "happy hours" in most cases, as it just promotes a person to have (and buy) more over the night than they may have intended or preferred.