Null should take the fucking money and run gambling ads.

[Treasure Champs]

OR you could stop being such a fucking faggot and appreciate the one thing on the internet that lets you say whatever the fuck you want to say without taking advantage of your stupid faggotry for degeneracy gibs.

 

[mango_reseller]

What's the problem with running gambling or porn ads? If KF users are based and tradpilled then clearly it's just free money in Null's bank. If they aren't, then we're all just playing pretend and it's still free money. And that's if you're even browsing Kiwifarms without blocking all third party scripts + ads, which I mean I doubt most people aren't?

 

[Your Starter for 10]

OR you could stop being such a fucking faggot and appreciate the one thing on the internet that lets you say whatever the fuck you want to say without taking advantage of your stupid faggotry for degeneracy gibs.

You're...you're literally retarded, aren't you?

 

[cigint]

I mean is a gambling site really worse than running a Monster or bullshit VPS ad, from a moral standpoint?

Yes, without a doubt.

 

[mango_reseller]

Why is promoting gambling bad again? Because retards with no impulse control will lose their money? Do you also think we should ban guns?

 

[draggs]

Yes. I want every MATI to start with a speshul message from our sponsor STAKE DOT COM as read by Jewsh

GET IT TWISTED. GAMBLE. PLEASE START GAMBLING. GAMBLING IS AN INVESTMENT AND AN INVESTMENT ONLY. YOU WILL PROFIT, YOU WILL WIN. YOU WILL DO ALL OF THAT, YOU UNDERSTAND?! YOU WILL BECOME A BILLIONAIRE AND REBUILD YOUR FUCKING LIFE.

 

[Radiator Grilled Cheese]

Null should run gambling ads in the BossmanJack thread to create more gambling addicts Bossmen.

 

[cigint]

Why is promoting gambling bad again?

What I said is that it is morally worse than, say, promoting a VPS. This is because promoting gambling is promoting indulging in an impulsive desire that is destructive and addictive in nature, whereas promoting a VPS is not. I'm disregardng the gun banning comment since it's irrelevant.

 

[No. 7 cat]

Just go tor-only and run Slav darknet black market ads. Imagine you're scrolling a thread about some fat hoe and there's an ad for FRESH CHINK FENT at the bottom of the page, right under the little kiwis and eggs.

Also forged USD and Euro, plus some tablets.

 

[mango_reseller]

I'm disregardng the gun banning comment since it's irrelevant.

It wasn't irrelevant in my argument (i.e. if your issue is lack of impulse control, promoting guns is even worse because you could kill other people). But morally speaking, sure, gambling is morally reprehensible. So is this website though so

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Why is promoting gambling bad again? Because retards with no impulse control will lose their money? Do you also think we should ban guns?

It's not that, I don't want ads on KF period. Once you sell out to advertisers, they are the ones that control you and your site's content. Being independently self-funded is critical for a place like this.

If you think this place is worthwhile enough to spend time on you can afford giving some money to help keep it going.

 

[mango_reseller]

If you think this place is worthwhile enough to spend time on you can afford giving some money to help keep it going.

Unfortunately I don't have the ability to donate anonymously. There is 0% chance I donate eponymously or in any way that can ever be traced back to me. Therefore it isn't that simple.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Unfortunately I don't have the ability to donate anonymously. There is 0% chance I donate eponymously or in any way that can ever be traced back to me. Therefore it isn't that simple.

As opposed to giving external advertisers access to the site and its user data? Especially gambling sites, some of the shadiest, most corrupt companies on the entire Internet?

Once you become dependent upon advertisers for revenue they set the terms and can demand whatever information from this userbase they want. What are you going to do, say no? Where are you going to get the money to make up for the lost ad revenue from?

There is no risk to using the bill pay option.

 

[mango_reseller]

giving external advertisers access to the site and its user data?

Unless you live in a version of the web in which XSS was never solved, or if you're assuming Null is just going to have PIIs tracking users, I don't see how that could occur.

Once you become dependent upon advertisers for revenue they set the terms and can demand whatever information from this userbase they want.

From my POV, there isn't a world in which advertisers could dictate terms, as Null would drop them/not sign a contract he disagrees with even if it meant shutting down the site.

There is no risk to using the bill pay option.

The bank knows who you're paying, and the bank knows who I am, so no thanks. Maybe if there wasn't blatant 4th amendment violations every other week I would consider it.

 

[Retrodogkiller]

People talk about gambling at normal work places.

Yeah and gambling is a destructive addiction. I dont care that its normalized.

 

[draggs]

It's not that, I don't want ads on KF period. Once you sell out to advertisers, they are the ones that control you and your site's content. Being independently self-funded is critical for a place like this.

If you think this place is worthwhile enough to spend time on you can afford giving some money to help keep it going.

I don't think CHEAP, FRESH CHINK FENT and CHEAP, FRESH CHINK MDMA (IT'S THE SAME CHEAP, FRESH CHINK FENT) vendors are going to be interested in controlling the site's contont

 

[Preacher ✝]

I would turn off my uBlock Origin for KF.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Unless you live in a version of the web in which XSS was never solved, or if you're assuming Null is just going to have PIIs tracking users, I don't see how that could occur.

From my POV, there isn't a world in which advertisers could dictate terms, as Null would drop them/not sign a contract he disagrees with even if it meant shutting down the site.

It's not the initial contract that matters, it's what happens when the contract is up for renegotiation. Or if they decide the juice is worth the squeeze and just cancel it unilaterally...marketers can afford a lot more in terms of legal resources than we can.

The bank knows who you're paying, and the bank knows who I am, so no thanks. Maybe if there wasn't blatant 4th amendment violations every other week I would consider it.

They don't care, it's just another bill payment going to some legally registered LLC. I use a small credit union myself.

Banks and credit unions also can't just reveal their legitimate customer information willy-nilly, there are exceptionally strong laws around this.

And lastly, honestly, get real, you're not that important and neither am I...nobody is going to waste their time going after you or me or anyone else who donates to the Farms. And if that ever reaches that point where we are genuinely threatened, it really doesn't matter what you did or didn't do because we're all on the list.

I don't think CHEAP, FRESH CHINK FENT and CHEAP, FRESH CHINK MDMA (IT'S THE SAME CHEAP, FRESH CHINK FENT) vendors are going to be interested in controlling the site's contont

Sure, but I doubt it'd be good to have Slav darkweb-style ads on the site either.

 

[mango_reseller]

They don't care, it's just another bill payment going to some legally registered LLC.

Banks also can't just reveal their legitimate customer information willy-nilly, there are exceptionally strong laws around this.

And honestly get real, you're not that important and neither am I...nobody is going to waste their time going after you or me or anyone else who donates to the Farms. And if that ever reaches that point where we are genuinely threatened, it really doesn't matter what you did or didn't do because we're all on the list.

On the first point, I disagree because they will in the future start to weigh your personal risk based on your de-facto social score algorithmically.

On the second point, I disagree because I don't trust that the laws apply to the government.

On the third point, I disagree because even if someone doesn't personally go after me, I fully expect their AI-enabled surveillance state to go after me. It would be an easy lay-up which I'm not willing to give
>but will you really live your life thinking of what the government will do in 10-20 years?
yes

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

On the first point, I disagree because they will in the future start to weigh your personal risk based on your de-facto social score algorithmically.

On the second point, I disagree because I don't trust that the laws apply to the government.

On the third point, I disagree because even if someone doesn't personally go after me, I fully expect their AI-enabled surveillance state to go after me. It would be an easy lay-up which I'm not willing to give
>but will you really live your life thinking of what the government will do in 10-20 years?
yes

And your solution to this is to allow ads from companies that are not only fully integrated into this future AI surveillance state but incredibly corrupt on top of it?

If you block the ads and trackers, you contribute nothing in revenue to the site, it's all about eyeballs, clicks and harvesting your data and the protections for that vs. your banking information are literally nonexistent. At least in the US, the EU is better about this with the GDPR but still not great. They will know you're here and will send that information to whoever requests it without any pushback.

Are you seeing why your position makes zero sense?