And you might say, "Not everyone wants to see ads!" And totally agree! But like, the people who have to look at this eyesore now have to deal with a different eyesore.
Why not, "This garbage ad remived from your view by hacking group X, you're welcome" and show some pet photos or something? Or like, get clever with it? Run onion or infowars style satire.
Egypt is one of them. There is value in most of the value being in the shock value. Egypt has already done the sorts of things you suggest. It doesn't work. Putting up porn actually makes a lot of sense from a decision matrix perspective here. First of all despite the pretense otherwise Egyptians watch a lot of porn (like most countries). It's sort of a great "in your face" mirror to a country rife with hypocrisy.
It's not like the authorities give much breathing room for more nuanced protest anyway. They're already in for a very unwelcome visit to the slammer if they are caught. Might as well go as transgressive as possible while you still can.
Show a cute picture of Big Bird telling people to eat more pizza, and the company will just reset some passwords. Show a couple of choice scenes from Brazzers and the CEO just got a call from a government minister and suddenly the leaky hardware is getting replaced at breakneck speeds.
Works well too if the goal is just to get people to object to digital billboards.
My point is that many Arab men wont have a single meaningful interaction with a woman outside their family this year. Presenting women as sex objects to those men isn't going to have great effects. Similar to incels and porn.
I find it far more offensive that you wouldn't even be able to post this headline without self-censoring in the major social media apps for fear of The Algorithm. How far the internet has fallen.
Our daughter is 8. As her father, I’d rather she not be exposed to pornography, and I know my wife would agree with me on that. Of course, she’s sure to somehow be introduced to it eventually, but I hope not until she’s significantly older.
– for observers on the road, make them more likely to film this and share on social media;
– for news agencies, make them allocate as much coverage as possible for this incident;
– for regular readers, simply to more likely grab theirs attention.
Showing a nice animal or a 'you're welcome' message achieves the goal of removing the ad, but falls short of fixing the root of the problem: the billboard existing. As long as it exists, the temptation and incentive to put ads on it also exists.
That’s why across the world we should ban blanket advertisements like these. They’re a dumb eyesore.
Porn just exposes what is obviously annoying. But advertisements themselves are a sort of mind-virus you can’t opt out of. I can choose to not buy cable TV. I can’t (reasonably) choose to not walk outside in the public space.
> – It was clear what had been done. The media player's cord had been ripped out and its own content had been played.
To me, it's more an act of vandalism than hacking.
In addition to computers, other common obsessions were lockpicking (mechanical computing), model railroads (electricity + switches + relays), and Chinese food menus (language skills).
Nothing against porn, but given a platform that's what you pick to blast into the world?
We did the same thing back in the 80's.
The scenario was usually "Oh, wow! We got access! What do we do before someone notices in the next ten minutes?!"
Political people want to make statements. Hackers just want their hacks to be noticed.
I wonder how this goes over in conservative countries like Egypt. Is it a scandal of some sort with ample pearl clutching or is it mostly a non-event?
None of these would happen in places that are not invaded by speed of technology and connectedness. Slow is good, not sometimes, but always. Human life is not compatible with things moving at speed of electricity.
But you gave the controlling power to children. The children with science toys want more and more speed, just for fun and profit. They, unfortunately, control the future of human race.
Currently the yearly global death toll for cars is at 1.16 million and climbing
Well, that's OK, then.
What is the exact number when it's no longer acceptable? Is is 1,001? 10,001?
Exactly how many deaths are perfectly fine in the name of progress? How many people are we allowed to kill for the sake of convenience?
Currently the yearly global death toll for cars is at 1.16 million and climbing
No need to compare. Both can be bad at the same time.
Traveling the same distance without rail or air (i.e. on foot, horse, car) is also relatively deadly and the alternative (of living in small communities and not traveling long distances) is also not great for multiple reasons
You’d have to calculate how many lives speed saves. How many people had an organ delivered just within the safe transplant time? How many people were able to eat because a grain shipment could be diverted after a bad harvest? How many people didn’t contract cholera, because it takes minutes to manufacture pipes?
Translation: Money is more important than human lives.
Got it.
Ask any cowboy. The fastest way to move a cow is slow.
The trade-offs are worth it and humankind continues to accept those trade-offs. Yea 60+ people died in a train crash. So what? Tens of millions ride high-speed trains on a weekly/monthly basis without any issues. So why would we overreact to anomalies when by and large the technologies we’ve invented are pretty awesome?
I’m no opponent to the “slow life” and I have a lot of critical comments regarding modernity (cars, social media, modernist art) and overpopulation but we don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water here.