Hacker News Reader

Comment by linsomniac | Hacker News Reader

They don't need to: they can read your mind.

My proof? Yesterday I was driving home and I saw an old Toyota Previa minivan and thought to myself "Oh, a Previa, you don't see those very often these days." When I got home, I started scrolling through my Google News and it showed me an advert for the new Previa.

I agree with Simon: you basically aren't going to convince someone that their phone doesn't listen to you and serve you adverts based on it, because they've run into instances where it seems like it.

View on HN

I think people are prone to believing that their phone is listening to them out of an instinct to believe they are a lot more unique than they actually are. A clash between western individualism and hyper-efficient consumerism.

That's not me taking a stance on whether it's true, though. There would be a lot of fame in it for a whistleblower, but on the other hand if Google or Meta figured out a way to do it with a low chance of it being proven, why wouldn't they?

> out of an instinct to believe they are a lot more unique than they actually are.

This is trivializing people in my opinion. The non-trivializing interpretation would be that for whatever reason people are skeptical that a black box that they don't understand very well, don't know how to audit, and don't know how to exert low level control over is doing things that they don't want it to do.

When framed that way it is immediately clear that this is an incredibly reasonable stance to take. The default assumption should always be that a third party who has a vested interest is pursuing it.

As an example. It is paranoia to assume that a 1970s era vehicle with almost no electronics in it is reporting on me to the manufacturer. It is willful ignorance bordering on delusion to assume that a vehicle manufactured in 2020 is not.

Seriously, a whistleblower in tech? In 2025?

“Be part of the richest portion of the middle class and never have to worry about money again orrrrr mysteriously die 6 months from now leaving no identifiable impact”

I think you're right on the money here. Most people are surprisingly predictable, and if your algorithm based on whatever works for at least 30% of people at least once a year, which is very low bar if you think about it, the population at large will notice

This is due to ad blindness.

The Previa ads were always there but that was the first time you noticed it because it was on your mind.

Baader-meinhof phenomenon

Alternatively, the Previas were always there, and they developed the memory of seeing it after having been exposed to the ad.

(To be clear, I'm not being facetious -- this is a viable possibility)

Had something similar happen to me. I wanted a mid sized ladder. Didn't search for it or even tell anyone that I was looking for a ladder but suddenly started getting a bunch of ads for ladders. Eventually I figured out that when I went hiking a few days earlier, I forgot to turn off my Fitbit after I got done. On the way home, I stopped at Walmart and looked at the ladders they had. I could see on my Fitbit account my path through the state park and through the Walmart, including the section with the ladders that I dwelled in front of for a while. That was enough to trigger some set of parameters somewhere and get me ladder advertisements.

> suddenly started getting a bunch of ads for ladders

The trouble is, what does "suddenly" and "a bunch of" mean? This doesn't sound very specific, let alone scientifically rigorous. How many ladder ads were you getting previously, and how would you know? Exactly when did the rate of such ads increase? Unless you have these details, it's highly possible you're estimating them inaccurately.

Or maybe there is a hidden variable that:

(A) Explains why you noticed the Privia. (B) Explains why you searched for something that might have triggered a Privia ad.

To a layman this might be indistinguishable from magic. So in some way maybe the phone really can read your mind :)

The hidden variable is the previa marketing budget. They have budget right now for a billboard and for online ads at the same time and they are focusing on your geography

They don't need to read your mind. The systems that push ads to you are also owned by the companies that are pushing contents and shaping how you see the internet. It's like how magicians incept ideas into your head then use it like they can read your mind.

Partially mind reading, but mostly mind control. You didn't think of the Previa out of nowhere. They led you to that thought.

For more consumption.

Try reading Qualityland, by Marc-Uwe Kling. It's SF (funny SF) about this exact premise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com