Pando Daily has this up on a technology that takes pictures for advertising numbers…but has much deeper violations of privacy.
It is presented as being innocent…but we all know by now it doesn’t end up that way.
This is outrageous. Plain and simple violation of a person’s right to move about in public without being subjected to an intrusion such as being photographed.
There are so many holes in this guy’s theory it could be Swiss cheese.
For one–just because a person looks at an advertisement does not mean they will purchase that product or service. For instance, I may look at an advertisement on a professional bug killer service, but there is no way that I’m calling that service. The advertisers use bright colors, flashing words or lights, and the usual “grabs” of sex, fear, anger, and love. All of these factors may draw the human eye towards the advertising, but not mean the person will buy it.
It never ceases to amaze me how psychology is used to interpret a person’s thoughts by outward gestures or appearances, when that psychological conclusion is dead wrong.
I went online looking for Rodolfo Saccoman and found this disturbing video:
It is alarming that they are using “feel good” emotions to justify the psychology software program. They’re there to “help” with an impersonal, flawed science (in that psychology has sprouted from misogyny and bullying mindset). Saccoman states that this software will “help” those suffering from PTSD from committing suicide…but methinks that instead it will be used to either label someone as mentally ill who might be having a rough day and just need someone to talk to–not a freaking impersonal computer. Or it will be used as a tool by Big Pharma to force someone to take unproven and unsafe psychotropic drugs. I feel it in my gut that this is what is driving this “help”. I’d like to know if his brother is invested in Big Pharma…it’s not such a big leap when you consider that Saccoman mentions he loves the stocks and even built this software on that model. If they could get more poor souls buying Big Pharma drugs, well, that’s just more money for them.
And then as the video keeps rolling, we get to the *bingo!* moment…when he says he worked for Morgan Stanley. An investment banker who thinks greed is good and screw the public. He claims to hate it, but then goes on to say that he made money…so he couldn’t have hated it too much.
He looks at billboards and says they don’t have any intelligence. You don’t know if anyone is reading them. Really? Because I can think of several instances where folks have become upset at messages on billboards…so obviously people are paying attention to them.
Privacy never comes out of his mouth when speaking about how great this is and how money is being *lost* by not seizing the opportunity for yet more advertising dollars.
He attended a Tony Robbins show, er I mean, inspirational speech, where he claims they “tear you apart, then put you back together” Sounds like psychological abuse to me.
Then he shows commercials for getting people to sign up for this. Note that the target audience is the young, who don’t have the experience to understand how this violates privacy and the ramifications of that. The ignorance of the youth on their right to privacy is appalling.
They have concerns about paying for college (understandable), so this is marketed to them as being a way to pay for college. The subtle play on emotions with their “love story” also reels people in. They also use the “everybody” is doing it schtick with the line “all our awesome friends are also doing it.” Again, invading someone’s privacy and their part in it is never mentioned.
Saccoman repeatedly portrays standard advertising as “old school” dinosaurs. This is another tactic used very successfully by the marketing gurus–nobody wants to be “left behind” so they will buy the latest to be seen as keeping up with the world. This tactic really took hold in the 70s when there was plenty of money in the middle class to buy the “latest”. Thank God I have broken myself of that brainwashing.
Another aspect to this way of advertising is driving around to get the “face” quota. Using gas, spewing fumes into the air, creating more crowded roadways, and possibly causing accidents by distracting people from watching the road and the vehicles around them. Just yesterday, I saw three people talking on cell phones on Indy’s busiest roadways…and they were driving in ways that showed they were distracted and not paying attention to their own driving or those around them.
Again, the emotional tug is used when the fake “son” talks about how his fake “Mom” inspired him. It has nothing to do with the software or the advertising, but is snuck in there to give one the “warm and fuzzy’ feelings.
And the one thing I don’t see when looking at Saccoman’s actual backpack? A sign in big bold letters saying “YOUR FACE IS BEING COLLECTED FOR ADVERTISING PURPOSES” on the backpack.
Near the end, he makes an odd statement to “push” for what you want…but then he gets philosophical and says if it flows, it flows…so which is it? Does one push or just let things “flow”?
Lastly, he admires Steve Jobs and Apple. Given their illegal wage-fixing, and this response by Jobs over getting someone fired, well, it kind of speaks of character…why would one admire someone so contemptible?