Ads that get right on your tits

[Yak]

Welcome to the forum, GigerPunk.

Scientology TV ads in the UK? They'll be opening a centre in Wales next!

They are gaining way too much influence and false credibility. I think it's time for the church to find its ballocks and stage a western style holy war against them- I'm technically COE so I could join in

It's all basically a big lie anyway. Scientology is dying on its arse. Recruiting new people is becoming increasingly hard for them in an Internet-connected age when anyone can just look online and find out what a bunch of old toss it is. They spend a fuckload on promotion and in buying buildings and tarting them up (the whole "Ideal Org" thing that Miscavige is pursuing and which is actually not at all what LRH would have wanted). They are spending loads just to give the *appearence* of being in Affluence whilst internally stats are crashing.

Scientology public is getting fed up of the constant "regging", or demand for "donation", which is neverending and which is getting worse. Even the very wealthy and stupid such as Cruise and Bart Simpson are growing increasingly annoyed at always having to be giving out more and more for stuff that never happens. Super Power still isn't close to being delivered. the Freewinds has been "preparing for the release of OT IX and X" since the late 1980s.

Those who do actually believe in the Tech are growing increasingly disaffected by the governance of Miscavige and I wouldn't be surprised if at some point there was a schism and an en masse decampment to the Free Zone.

The main thrust of actual Scientology "expansion" efforts is towards third world countries in areas where there still exists a wealthy elite who might be able to be leeched off but where the populace in general isn't anywhere near as connected and aware as most people. Hence Scientology's redoubled efforts in areas like parts of Africa and South America, notably Colombia.

I reckon there has to be some implosion of it some time fairly soon - whether it'll be completely destroyed I don't know. I suspect that the organised CoS under COB RTC will likely go away and that independent practitioners of Ron's tech will find their own ways to carry on if they do so. At the very least I expect to see Miscavige deposed from a position he blatantly usurped in the first place. Plenty of Scilons don't like DM much at all.

[zip accident]

independent practitioners of Ron's tech

It's not really tech though, is it?

[Yak]

independent practitioners of Ron's tech

It's not really tech though, is it?

Well "tech" in this context is just a Scientology term that basically refers to the body of practices and beliefs that comprise Scientology - that is the Tech. Practices that modify the core laid down my LRH are considered "out-Tech" and are to be deplored - although RTC itself seems content to alter Ron's books every now and again, and re-sell them to gullible Scilons as the true, "rediscovered" Tech.

Amusingly enough the term for one who practices egregious out-Tech is a "squirrel". Attempting to expand on or modify "standard Tech" is called "squirreling the Tech".

[Col]

The carspotter adverts are so cheap and annoying, shit company, actors, everything.

Oh, and those ridiculous Ocean finance adverts, the ones where they have lightbulbs strapped to their heads, they piss me off too.

[Alarm]

A current ad. has an elderly woman tell her grandson about a car deal or something and he doesn't believe her ("do they put real wine in these wine gums now, gran"). She protests that it is true, then puts a newspaper down on a table with an ad. for the deal. Why didn't she just show it to him?

[GigerPunk]

What do people think of these ones?


Admittedly, my problem's not so much the ads as the product itself.
Basically, the way I understand it (from the adverts alone, not really looked into it yet), they're selling this credit card as being so easy to use you just swipe it near a reader and it automatically debits the correct amount of money from it?
You don't have to fuss about signing things or having to type in a PIN. Just be near a reader.
That's really nice and easy isn't it?
And lets ignore how much nicer and easier it is for people who've mugged you for your card.
Or people having remote terminals just walking round automatically emptying the accounts of anyone they walk past who ahs one of these cards (or just staying in one place with a static terminal and billing anyone who walks past with one of these in their pockets).

Seriously, am I being overly paranoid here or is this just a really bloody stupid idea? Someone else must have raised thsi already, surely?
I must have missed some obvious security flaw. I must have. I just don't see any in the adverts...

[Orava]

Last night I was idling through the Jesus-channels on Sky. You should see some of the adverts there. and and indeed.

For example the was a man/organisation selling a piece of green cloth that you hold as he holds his and prays for you. Do not remember what it was called, something stupid like Jesus-connector-cloth.

[gilesgoat]

I suspect that as much as way for you to SPEND money increase and so the EASYNESS of doing it, so much following
a reverse curve the easyness to get loans/collect money for you DECREASES.

Ultimately the message is always the same "we want all your money" and possibly even more.

What I don't quite get is that all those ads seems to kinda imply they want you to spend MORE than what you actually
can afford, it looks like in some way they want to put you into a situation where you are into some serious overdraft or such.

Likewise I *HATE* down to bits all those bank ads about "financial advisors", I don't know if this is "the real situation" but
they make you feel like "everyone is an idiot spending MORE money than what he/she actually has without knowing it".

Also those "to always keep you on top of your finanaces" i.e. spend money to get a service to let you know how much
money you have, like if one would not be able to keep count of what ( few ) is into the bank.

Fundamentally they all seems to say "you are spending too much, we can tell you how to spend less" and/or "you are in
a super shit of debts we can tell you how to - appearently - end up in a little bit less of shit" but of course you'll have
to give something to us ( so you'll be still in shite don't worry ).

Likewise, even more shit those ads about "we can help you to manage your savings" .. WHAT SAVINGS ??!! That nowadays
with the cost of life and income is nearly impossible to save anything and then if you read carefully "the little notes" they
also say things like "assuming you have a deposit of 10K or so .. "

I don't even get insurances .. fundamentally they all seems to imply ( OF COURSE ) that you will NEVER, EVER claim anything.

Now .. I think that "if I am actually doing an insurance, someway I suspect something COULD go wrong so at some point
I WILL claim".

If I REALLY think "I am NEVER going to claim anything" then .. I DO NOT NEED an insurance AT ALL, I am just throwing
money out of a window otherwise, I'd better save it somewhere else.

Actually, that would be interesting .. "if instead of paying an insurance X a year or so I would save that X would not have
I maybe even more money in the end in case some shit happens .. and I would have it IMMEDIATELY with no fuss ?"

Banks are evil .. they fundamentally live on stealing stuff in more or less legalized forms, insurances are at all effects
legalized robberies as well.

I always wondered if "would it change much if I'd have a safe with cash in ?" .. probably not that much, considering the
quantity there would be in whatever % any bank of this world could give on it for whatever it would bet almost completely
irrelevant and miniscule.

Mah ..

"Un' evasione di gelato alla vaniglia per favore !" - Mafalda

[GigerPunk]

For example the was a man/organisation selling a piece of green cloth that you hold as he holds his and prays for you. Do not remember what it was called, something stupid like Jesus-connector-cloth.

Does it work in reverse too?
If I buy one and pray with all my heart whilst holding it, will every charlatan like him be (repeatedly) struck by lightning?

[sack]

I don't even get insurances .. fundamentally they all seems to imply ( OF COURSE ) that you will NEVER, EVER claim anything.

Now .. I think that "if I am actually doing an insurance, someway I suspect something COULD go wrong so at some point
I WILL claim".

If I REALLY think "I am NEVER going to claim anything" then .. I DO NOT NEED an insurance AT ALL, I am just throwing
money out of a window otherwise, I'd better save it somewhere else.

Actually, that would be interesting .. "if instead of paying an insurance X a year or so I would save that X would not have
I maybe even more money in the end in case some shit happens .. and I would have it IMMEDIATELY with no fuss ?"

I got a quote for a car warranty (of the 'your car needs to physically explode with just the right components causing it' variety) and it says 'the average car needs $VALUE of repairs each year'

then it says 'this warranty will cost you $VALUE'

okay... so if I have this straight in my mind some cars will cost more, others less and the net result for the company will be the same amount of cash they take in premiums going out as repairs. If you ignore staffing and admin overheads that's break-even, factor those in and they're running at a loss.

That seriously has to be 100% bollocks because nobody runs a business like that.

I'm just stashing $VALUE in a savings account - slight risk if I need to pay more, i'm no worse off if it costs the same, and I'm better off if it costs less. And I'm not likely to look at that cash when it happens and say 'actually this component doesn't count. tough shit', am I?

[zip accident]

I don't even get insurances .. fundamentally they all seems to imply ( OF COURSE ) that you will NEVER, EVER claim anything.

Now .. I think that "if I am actually doing an insurance, someway I suspect something COULD go wrong so at some point
I WILL claim".

If I REALLY think "I am NEVER going to claim anything" then .. I DO NOT NEED an insurance AT ALL, I am just throwing
money out of a window otherwise, I'd better save it somewhere else.

Actually, that would be interesting .. "if instead of paying an insurance X a year or so I would save that X would not have
I maybe even more money in the end in case some shit happens .. and I would have it IMMEDIATELY with no fuss ?"

I got a quote for a car warranty (of the 'your car needs to physically explode with just the right components causing it' variety) and it says 'the average car needs $VALUE of repairs each year'

then it says 'this warranty will cost you $VALUE'

okay... so if I have this straight in my mind some cars will cost more, others less and the net result for the company will be the same amount of cash they take in premiums going out as repairs. If you ignore staffing and admin overheads that's break-even, factor those in and they're running at a loss.

That seriously has to be 100% bollocks because nobody runs a business like that.

I'm just stashing $VALUE in a savings account - slight risk if I need to pay more, i'm no worse off if it costs the same, and I'm better off if it costs less. And I'm not likely to look at that cash when it happens and say 'actually this component doesn't count. tough shit', am I?

The crafty bit where they make their money is they probably run the garage, so they get the work done at cost, whereas if you bring your car in to be repaired, you will pay recommended retail price plus full labour, and you won't save any money on doing things that way.

[Baggypants]

Seriously, am I being overly paranoid here or is this just a really bloody stupid idea? Someone else must have raised thsi already, surely?
I must have missed some obvious security flaw. I must have. I just don't see any in the adverts...

Maximum transaction value of £15. Will occasionally ask for PIN number if transactions especially if you don't match your general shopping pattern.
Not that they want you to know that. it's a big secret. No information anywhere you can't even google it

[pogo]

Seriously, am I being overly paranoid here or is this just a really bloody stupid idea? Someone else must have raised thsi already, surely?
I must have missed some obvious security flaw. I must have. I just don't see any in the adverts...

Contactless cards have been around for a long time, in e.g. Hong Kong and London. In each case they replaced existing pre-payment travel cards, worth say £10 or HK$§100. In theory they can be used for things other than transport but I think the take-up on this has been really slow. Barclaycard adding it to their cards might help push the widespread adoption of it. It sounds at least as secure as existing contactless cards, maybe more so as if lost and used it will be easier to trace it back to you.

[GigerPunk]

Maximum transaction value of £15. Will occasionally ask for PIN number if transactions especially if you don't match your general shopping pattern.
Not that they want you to know that. it's a big secret. No information anywhere you can't even google it

Ok, fair point, taken.

2 things in response though;
1. To be fair, I DID say

"not really looked into it yet"

so I'd kind of hoped it wasn't as bad as I was wondering and was basically soliciting other people's knee-jerk reactions to the product/adverts to see if anyone else had thought the same.
No, as it turns out. Seems everyone's fine with it and I'm just over-reacting.

2. I still don't like the idea of people being able to remove money from a card without authorisation.
If the terminals have limited power so you HAVE to remove your card from your wallet and put it nearby (like how an oyster card works I believe?), fine. But how long before someone finds a way of boosting the reader's strength and starts 'distance-debiting' directly from your bank account? £15 quid from one person may not seem like much (though I wouldn't want someone taking 'up to' £15 from my pocket without asking; would you?) and I'd guess multiple transactions on one account in a short space of time would ring alarm bells at the bank pretty damn sharpish (if not immediately - sods law then meaning it'll happen when you're using it repeatedly yourself and getting your card blocked), but what about a dodgy merchant account scanning crowds of people walking past a shopfront on a busy street and debiting up to the maximum amount from everyone who goes past?
Ah, I'm sure it's all fine and I should just stick my head back in the sand and not worry about it. It's just that, if I've thought of it then <adopt Richard Burton voice> minds immeasurably superior to ours (well, mine anyway) have certainly thought of it and are <Richard Burton> slowly, and surely, drawing their plans against us.

It sounds at least as secure as existing contactless cards, maybe more so as if lost and used it will be easier to trace it back to you.

How so? (the tracing back to you being easier part, that is) I'm sure it's every bit as secure as fish/cushion, it's just the 'without my explicit permission' bit that I don't like.

[Rubisco]

It's not completely insecure no, but it is less secure than chip and pin. Only a little bit less, but it only brings a little bit of convenience. The advert is totally misleading, you won't be able to just swipe and fuck off. You'll have to wait around for authentication and to be told whether or not you'll need your pin this time. Saving a grand total of minutes each year. Not worth it.