Is it good to be completely immune to advertising? Sometimes I’ll have used a product or service and then see an ad for it and have a strong urge to stop using the thing, because for me part of how I achieve ad resistance is active: I look for what reactions could possibly be valuable for the advertiser and try to have the opposite. Seeing an ad for something usually gets it banlisted for me, and when it does look worth looking into further, I’ll try to buy from a competitor first. But even with all that filtering sometimes an ad is how I first hear of something that is actually relevant to my interests and passes quality tests.
(My main approach is no zuck websites and ublock origin, though.)
I think “completely immune to advertising” would mean it has no effect on your behavior either way. This sounds like advertising has an anti-effect. Which, you know, can be a good thing for game theory purposes. But it is a different thing.
Particularly deplorable are the struggles of these children against dull or otherwise unworthy adults in authority. The very gifted child or adolescent, perceiving the illogical conduct of those in charge of his affairs, may turn rebellious against all authority and fall into a condition of negative suggestibility—a most unfortunate trend of personality, since the person is then unable to take a coöperative attitude toward authority.
A person who is highly suggestible in a negative direction is as much in bondage to others around him as is the person who is positively suggestible. The social value of the person is seriously impaired in either case. The gifted are not likely to fall victims to positive suggestion but many of them develop negativism to a conspicuous degree.
The highly intelligent child will be intellectually capable of self-determination, and his greatest value to society can be realized only if he is truly self-possessed and detached from the influences of both positive and negative suggestion. The more intelligent the child, the truer this statement is. It is especially unfortunate, therefore, that so many gifted children have in authority over them persons of no special fitness for the task, who cannot gain or keep the respect of these good thinkers. Such unworthy guardians arouse, by the process of “redintegration,” contempt for authority wherever it is found, and the inability to yield gracefully to command.
Thus some gifted persons, mishandled in youth, become contentious, aggressive, and stubborn to an extent which renders them difficult and disagreeable in all human relationships involving subordination. Since subordination must precede posts of command in the ordinary course of life, this is an unfortunate trend of personality. Cynicism and negativism are likely to interfere seriously with a life career. Happily, gifted children are typically endowed with a keen sense of humor, and are apparently able to mature beyond cynicism eventually in a majority of cases.
Is it good to be completely immune to advertising? Sometimes I’ll have used a product or service and then see an ad for it and have a strong urge to stop using the thing, because for me part of how I achieve ad resistance is active: I look for what reactions could possibly be valuable for the advertiser and try to have the opposite. Seeing an ad for something usually gets it banlisted for me, and when it does look worth looking into further, I’ll try to buy from a competitor first. But even with all that filtering sometimes an ad is how I first hear of something that is actually relevant to my interests and passes quality tests.
(My main approach is no zuck websites and ublock origin, though.)
I think “completely immune to advertising” would mean it has no effect on your behavior either way. This sounds like advertising has an anti-effect. Which, you know, can be a good thing for game theory purposes. But it is a different thing.
Semi-related: