> 1. they are selling you as a target.
This is why people sign up for LinkedIn.
They want to be targeted by companies for jobs. Or when theyâre applying for a job, they want to be easily found by people at that company so they can see more information.
If you donât want those things, you donât need a LinkedIn page.
> Do the corporations that participate in this scheme provide mutual economic benefit? Do they contribute to the common wealth or are they parasitical?
You wrote a long hand wavey post but you stopped short of answering your own question.
The corporations who pay LinkedIn are doing so to recruit people for jobs. Iâve purchased LinkedIn premium for this purpose at different times.
After âtargetingâ those LinkedIn users, I eventually hired some of them for jobs. Thereâs your mutual economic benefit. This is why people use LinkedIn.
> It is a long causal change, so it is fair to ask whether there is any empirical evidence. If this is true we would expect to see ...? Well how about prices going up? Well how about in general people are less able to afford housing, food, cars, etc.
You think the root cause of inflation is⊠social media companies? This is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. Youâre just observing two different things and convinced theyâre correlated, while ignoring the obvious rebuttal that inflation existed and affordability changes happened before social media.
> Somehow the fundamentals of places like linkedin, gmail, google, facebook, etc have eluded people.
I think most people understand the fundamentals of LinkedIn better than you do, to be honest. Itâs not a mystery why people sign up and maintain profiles.
You assume that targeting is to find the best worker for the correct pay.
What if it's just to find the most desperate worker for the lowest pay possible?
Iâm not assuming anything. Itâs a job market. Like all markets they operate on supply and demand.
In your example, so what if they give the job to the most desperate worker instead of a different one at a higher price? Are we supposed to prefer that the desperate worker does not get the job and instead it goes to someone else at a higher rate?
If someone is desperate for a job because they really need work, Iâd prefer that a platform help them get matched with jobs. Wouldnât you? I think youâre so focused on penalizing corporations that youâre missing the obvious.