• LumidaubEnglish
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    1 year ago
    link
    fedilink

    Nobody said “good”, but if it keeps existing, it works or at least isn’t harmful. Bit like evolution.

    • RodeoEnglish
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      1 year ago
      link
      fedilink

      Or there are people with an interest in keeping it that way.

      I don’t think there’s any big conspiracy about YouTube titles, but let’s not pretend thing like wealth inequality still exist because they’re not harmful.

      • LumidaubEnglish
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        1 year ago
        link
        fedilink

        What “interest” would they have to keep it that way if it wasn’t working?

        Wealth inequality exists because it works for the people who have the power to control it. In a way, it’s not harmful ENOUGH to change evolutionarily.

        • RodeoEnglish
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago
          link
          fedilink

          Are you serious? You literally answered your own question with the very next sentence.

          • LumidaubEnglish
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            1 year ago
            link
            fedilink

            What? The original argument was “Just because it exists doesn’t make it good., implying that it (click-bait thumbnails) doesn’t necessarily work. To which I said that the fact that it exists means it works. To which you seemed to object by saying that there may be people who have an interest in it existing - like they want it to exist despite it actually not working. I’m confused about what it is you’re saying.