Women Hifi owners...

[Marco]

Ah, so you've noticed it now! Admit it you missed that post before because you're weren't paying proper attention!



Anyway, I'll attend to your (somewhat tardy) response after lunch.

Marco.

[Marco]

In the meantime, please read post 77, specifically noting the following, plus what preceded it (including what Dennis wrote and I quoted and highlighted):

I've naturally never been prone to obsessive/compulsive behaviour, and as such easily addicted to things. All of that makes me *less susceptible* to being easily manipulated, brainwashed or controlled.

My (now) added emphasis. Note the words: "less susceptible". And I'd say that I'm probably much less susceptible than most, for reasons given.

I didn't say that I wasn't influenced to some degree or immune. That would be humanly impossible.

Marco.

[AJSki2fly]

As far as the internet goes I'd probably agree prima face that it has made it easier for a brand to influence. On the other hand if you look at success rates for internet advertising they are generally quite poor. Much less effective than television or print advertising are. Or were since both are now on the decline.

No question there is a lot more debt now than there was 30 or 40 years ago. Whether the internet is responsible I don't know. Credit became much easy to obtain over that period so I'd suggest that would certainly account for the lion's share of the reason. Hard to get into debt if no-one will lend you money.

As for the 'brainwashing' that is also as old as the hills. Religion and patriotism were always quite effective as a means of control. IME the greater mass of people are always looking for something to believe in or a leader to follow. Again I would say that is an innate part of what we are, not something that has been created in us, and certainly not a recent thing.

First point: Sorry I think you are wrong here, there is a huge amount of time and money put into advertising and e-Commerce sites across the world
to gain leverage and advantage over competitors in the the commercial world across all sorts of businesses. I would site the rise of internet shopping and the gradual demise of the high street as being one example of its success. Virtually every major player in the market place has a presence on the internet, if they don't then they are dead in the water.

Green point: Businesses and banks realised through the 70's, and 80's that to expand business and make money that the masses in the mass market had to be given a vehicle to own stuff, whether needed or not. So the ability to borrow money on loans and credit cards was made easier, in some cases this was even under-written by major manufacturers and still is today, they negotiate deals with banks to make available large pots of money for consumers to purchase their items at preferential rates. This is a win/win for both the retailer and the bank, especially if the product is and easy sell. Hence the so called 0% credits options, and PCP car loans etc. If any one thinks these type of deals cost the consumer nothing then think again, it is all built into the price. So in essence we all were given the opportunity to borrow to buy stuff to grow commercialism.

Blue point: Well yes, in history there are all sort of aspects where large masses of people have been lead or made to believe in doing something for the greater good or to fight evil as perceived. However looking at the commercial aspects of the retail world over the last 50 years then it can easily be seen that as technology has advanced the ability to invade someones free space and persistently implant the desire or belief that an individual must have a particular product has become much easier to achieve, ultimately subliminal brain-washing. It is a known fact that if you subject a human brain to something for long enough and for enough times they will be affected by that, be it desire, revulsion, belief or fear. That does not mean that allowing large corporations to do so is right, think about selling cigarettes and advertising of them.

[Marco]

However looking at the commercial aspects of the retail world over the last 50 years then it can easily be seen that as technology has advanced the ability to invade someones free space and persistently implant the desire or belief that an individual must have a particular product has become much easier to achieve, ultimately subliminal brain-washing.

I completely agree, Adrian (and also with the rest of your post). The bit above, however, is partly the point I've been trying to make to Martin (and also Joe) - and crucially - get them both to acknowledge, as unfortunately it's reality.

The fact is, both the Internet and other forms of modern technology (especially smartphones), have made it easier to subliminally brainwash people, by connecting to them via their smart devices. Think about that for a moment... Martin has admitted that it has made it easier for a brand to influence, and so quite simply, if it's easier for them to influence, then it's also easier for them to control your behaviour, for whatever purpose they desire, especially if you're easily led/susceptible to being brainwashed, as touched upon earlier.

And THAT, my friends, whether you care to admit it or not, is precisely (and ever-increasingly) what's been happening for years, ever since the dawn of said technology - and those behind the mind-control are getting ever better at it and less scrupulous! It's how the virtual world works, and indeed can also be misused.

The phrase "being connected" (as outlined above) is continually bandied around, whenever today's smart technology is discussed, but have you ever taken a step back, applied some lateral thinking, and wondered what they [the powers that be] might actually want you connected to...?

And therefore also why being 'off grid' [thus disconnected] is often frowned upon these days, perhaps because the powers that be are actively trying so hard to 'connect' everyone, and because being 'off grid' helps prevent the brainwash, and also acts as a possible antidote to it..?

Quite simply because, if you're 'off-grid' then you can't be connected to and perhaps controlled. "Smart devices" indeed, and of course everyone wants to make the smart choice, and be considered as smart [great subliminal mind-control there, which is why they play on the word 'smart'] - but one wonders mostly "smart" for whom?

Food for thought perhaps...

Marco.

[Macca]

First point: Sorry I think you are wrong here, there is a huge amount of time and money put into advertising and e-Commerce sites across the world
to gain leverage and advantage over competitors in the the commercial world across all sorts of businesses. I would site the rise of internet shopping and the gradual demise of the high street as being one example of its success. Virtually every major player in the market place has a presence on the internet, if they don't then they are dead in the water.

.

I agree there is a huge amount invested in on-line advertising however it is a fact that it's effectiveness as an advertising medium is in question - see this article here https://medium.com/digital-vault/the...n-75b3ea7027e9

I'd suggest that people use internet shopping because it is less bother, and often less expensive, than physically going to a shop to buy the item. In other words there is a genuine gain to be had. I don't agree that the rise of internet shopping is a result of internet advertising. It has become popular because it is cheaper and more convenient.

In general I have never been keen on arguments that go along the lines of 'This insidious practice does not affect me because I'm smart, but what about all the stupid people? Something must be done!'

The smart people are not as smart as they think they are and the stupid people are not as stupid as the smart people reckon.

[Joe]

Accepting for the sake of argument the premise that smartphones 'control behaviour' and that their near-ubiquity is all part of some vast conspiracy, what is the aim? What precisely are we being 'controlled' into doing, and for what purpose? Smartphones are a tool, and can be/have been used for arranging anti-authority events such as the 'Extinction Rebellion' protests and the Hong Kong demos against China. It's no coincidence that authoritarian regimes want to limit citizens' access to the Internet, which they see as a threat to their ability to control people.

[Marco]

In general I have never been keen on arguments that go along the lines of 'This insidious practice does not affect me because I'm smart, but what about all the stupid people? Something must be done!'

The smart people are not as smart as they think they are and the stupid people are not as stupid as the smart people reckon.

See my last paragraph on post 104, for my view on "smart"

Marco.

[Marco]

Accepting for the sake of argument the premise that smartphones 'control behaviour' and that their near-ubiquity is all part of some vast conspiracy, what is the aim? What precisely are we being 'controlled' into doing, and for what purpose?

Google for [key exactly the following into your search box] "How the world really works - Rothschild". And do some research into the subject - with an open mind - and a genuine willingness to challenge and question your current beliefs.

Marco.

[Marco]

This is also an interesting article, in terms of highlighting the sort of 'power games' played by the establishment and elite, and how they get together to manipulate the rest of the world for their benefit [yet more power and financial gain]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ks-973817.html

It touches upon the controlling of behaviour Adrian and I have been referring to, by utilising and misusing today's technology - and how if you have enough power and influence over others, you can achieve ultimate rule. That is the world that the elite seek to create in future, and we are simply their disposable pawns in the whole corrupt system.

Marco.

[AJSki2fly]

Accepting for the sake of argument the premise that smartphones 'control behaviour' and that their near-ubiquity is all part of some vast conspiracy, what is the aim? What precisely are we being 'controlled' into doing, and for what purpose? Smartphones are a tool, and can be/have been used for arranging anti-authority events such as the 'Extinction Rebellion' protests and the Hong Kong demos against China. It's no coincidence that authoritarian regimes want to limit citizens' access to the Internet, which they see as a threat to their ability to control people.

Virtually any tool including a SMARTphone can be used for good or bad, a good use example is when it is connected to a SMARTwatch that monitors heart rate, and can take an ECG and if anything bad is detected notifies the person or a doctor, the Apple products and a specific app are capable of doing so and is in use in the USA and I believe is under trial in the UK. There are many other examples of good use, a bad use, IMO, is when apps and operating systems have code imbedded in them which learn/monitor what you do on the internet/device and then bombard you with adverts and email from commercial organisations to show you stuff to entice you to buy. We are all familiar with pop-ups on computers, it has now moved on where what you see on web pages, and social media pages is based on what you look at on phones and computers. Another aspect of this is if you search for a particular product, say and air flight to find the best price and you repeat this over several days you will discover that the price with different parties will actually increase, why is this you may ask, it is because the more interest that an individual shows in an item then the more the seller will try and charge for it, true commercialism, so another bad use, market manipulation.

A bad tool I can think of is an Atom or Hydrogen Bomb, not much use really apart from killing several million people in one hit and leaving the area it hits radioactive for many years, but I am sure there are some out there that will argue it has its good uses.