this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
894 points (95.8% liked)
Funny
16757 readers
25 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you feel the need to advertise like this you are a bad person and your product is shit. Like this actively breeds contempt towards your product, how can this be an intelligent move?
Because someone took a photo in anger and uploaded it and it's being advertised for free on every social media platform that this gets posted - and reposted - to. That's the game. It's all about getting eyeballs on your ad.
but i now hate the product.
Doesn't matter, attention is attention
Except it isn't.
Bad ad campaign have destroyed brands in the past, hope it happens here.
Only if the public remembers, and in this 4-second attention economy...
in a space as saturated as crypto, attention is the minimum to get in the door. And after that, if you keep gaining attention until the whole world knows your name, then it doesn't matter if 80% hate you, the other 20% will be giving you enough money to monopolize the market. Then you can enshittify and the hate doesn't matter (see Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc).
You're skipping a lot of what made those companies happen.
Google was actually good once. They had a clean, usable website in an era of pop-ups and overused animated GIFS. Also, their search actually worked. They also had a bunch of cool programs and tools that they've since killed.
Facebook was also sort of good. But not really. Most of that was a sort of first mover advantage. Myspace existed, but didn't catch on, and then Facebook comes along, and it has a bunch of free games (that steal all your data). Since Facebook was most people's first social media, and their family's first social media, they get locked in.
Bill Gates' Mom was on the board of directors at IBM and forced the company to use her son's OS.
That's basically what I'm referring to here. Facebook wasn't the first social media platform but they were the first to capture enough users to monopolize the space. Yes all these companies had technical innovations too, but if you dig into Polymarket you can probably find some too. All of that doesn't matter if you can't get enough attention to reach critical mass though.
The difference is, polymarket is a betting app in a saturated space.
It provides no useful service, just betting.
I'm not sure that matters in the attention economy.
They got my attention. I hate them and will never remotely consider using their product.
Were you even considering using it in the first place?
No? Then you're just a vector for the advertisement to spread, now as am I, and everyone who commented and upvoted this post.
Meanwhile the restaurant probably eats the bullet and probably got review bombed. Rightfully so but yeah everyone got played here. Corporate tech continues to be a blight that moves fast and destroys things.
Yup!
I saw a post recently about how a business owner was mad about getting bad reviews because customers didn't like that they were getting facebook DMs from clicking on an ad
and, like, no shit? who the fuck wants a DM because they allegedly clicked on an ad while scrolling? fuck anybody who advertises like that
It's an infuriating dark pattern that Facebook themselves have created.
I don't think most business owners realize what's even happening when they post their ads. I've had it happen a few times now where I saw a slightly interesting image in an ad and wanted to zoom in (e.g. to read the specs of a laptop being advertised), but when I tapped it BAM redirect to a Messenger conversation.
Classic enshittification: there's a spreadsheet somewhere in Meta HQ that some dickhead middle-manager made proving that it increased conversion numbers, but doesn't measure how pissed off it makes their users, or how long-term toxic it is to the brands using that feature.
We're talking about it right now, which means people are thinking about it. That means they successfully got to us.
I’ve tried not thinking about Polymarket and the situation as it currently exists occurred. I don’t think ignoring it works.
It's a gambling company their customers don't have critical thinking skills.
It also works, suckers people in when they see it everywhere and then they're hooked on gambling.
It may be shit but everyone is addicted to it. People who see this negatively and have the power to resist it are not the target audience.