• D06M4@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Good stuff! I’d watch TV again if this was available there. I will say Ring’s Superbowl ad probably landed the point in a way average people would better understand it, albeit unintentionally.

  • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Damn, that ad is awful. Put yourself in the shoes of a normie seeing this and then evaluate it. Someone supremely high on the smell of their own farts made this.

    • ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      36 minutes ago

      If you think “Someone supremely high on the smell of their own farts made this,” then you are part of the problem with the world today and the reason why they’re able to get away with mass surveillance. This message is incredibly important, and you’re writing it off as pretentious. Fucking bootlickers.

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Glad I’m not the only one who thought so. I agree with the ad exclusively because I can project my own opinions about surveillance being bad onto it, but some of it makes no sense.

      • What do the people represent? (Anybody? Hackers? A nation-state?)
      • Why do they want to monitor AI?
      • Why do they want to monitor themselves? Is monitoring yourself as bad as monitoring protesters or women?
      • How is the average viewer supposed to react to the beginning, that these people want to monitor murderers, and pedophiles first?

      And if you’re able to come up with answers to all these questions, were you able to come up with all those answers in the time you were allotted to think about each mentioned group before the ad snapped to a new one?

      • kip@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        53 minutes ago

        this is more nitpicky than your points (which i agree with) and i know that as they’ve made an advert in english they’ll want to reuse it in all english speaking regions, but i’m not sure how a car full of americans talking about cilantro and president nixon is likely to endear them to UK customers

      • XLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        “Monitoring pedophiles in my area is probably a good thing. Wait, monitoring myself? Isn’t that my choice? Wait, now protestors? That’s bad, usually… Wait, graffiti artists? Well some of… Wait, women?”

        • chimp@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          But that’s the point of the ad, to convey that surveillance of a specific group of people will sooner or later be exploited to monitor anyone, no matter their involvement. Therefore you should invest in a VPN.

          • XLE@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            But the question is, are you translating it that way because you know what they were trying to convey, or because they actually conveyed it that way? Because the average person is going to just see good thing, bad thing, good thing, bad thing.

            And would you expect the average person to parse it correctly within the time it aired?

    • bearboiblake@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Yeah, it’s terrible. Made with AI is my guess too? Mullvad are good at VPN services but not so much video marketing.

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      15 hours ago

      A video file can never be too large. The more bits dedicated to image quality, the better.

      • Havatra@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        14 hours ago

        When there’s no particular need of high definition (nothing here that is small or hard to see, nor particularly pleasing aesthetics), the gains from a big file falls away. And the upsides of a smaller video is that people with poor internet speeds can stream it more easily, and it takes less space on the servers (which are not free to run here on the fediverse).

        Worth a smaller file size imho