lud

Yes but that doesn't affect any of us.

Of course it is illegal for the providers.

As far as I know they were somewhat like cruise ships in their luxury.

The (enormous) problem is weight. Everything needs to be as light as possible, it's a balloon after all.

That's neat.

Try Chrome.

Pretty sure they are actually telling the truth.

I'm honest so I will tell the truth: I like cheap stuff.

Yes, games can be addictive for some people but it's comparably very rare. "Punishing" the huge majority of non gaming addicts based on that seems extreme. And I don't think it would matter for addicts anyway.

Addicts would find a computer to play on anyway because they are addicted. In some ways it could be argued that it might even help addicts because using this thing they could get away from their homes and so stuff outside while still having easy access to something they like.

Another difference between smoking and gaming is that smoking harms and annoys everyone around you, while gaming doesn't actually harm anyone. Except if you refuse to eat or something but that would be even more rare.

Lol, games are far far far less addictive than cigarettes. Cigarettes has nicotine which is an actual addictive drug. Games are fun.

Even comparing them at all is fairly disingenuous.

It's not distracting anyone, I doubt it could even be played if you are in a queue that is moving at 0,3 m/s

Lol, I'm not saying Google is or isn't doing that. I'm just saying that you are just spewing bullshit without any evidence whatsoever.

I take that as a no.

Just take this in mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation

People usually don't think about the times that the ads haven't matched up.

For example a person I know got an ad for a specific ice cream she was talking about earlier. What she didn't think about is that it was summer and ice cream ads are incredibly common in summer and so is talking about ice cream.

She likely got many similar ads the days before and after, but she didn't think about them because they didn't match her theory that phones (specifically Facebook in her case) are listening.

I personally think it's extremely unlikely that phones are listening anywhere close to that degree. At absolutely worst they might try and gauge your mood or something, but that feels unlikely too.

First of all there would be a lot of actual evidence (like with network sniffing) of it happening if it were happening and the public and legal fallout that would come after someone figured it out would be enormous

So no

"To be fair, if they did the exact opposite of what they did it's amazing."