Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    PayPal Honey extension has again "featured" flag in Chrome web store

    (chromewebstore.google.com)
    324 points dvh | 12 comments | 08 Mar 25 06:43 UTC | HN request time: 0.608s | source | bottom
    Show context
    jahsome ◴[08 Mar 25 08:26 UTC] No.43298548[source]▶
    I absolutely love how fired up the average YouTube commenter was about Honey... for about 72 hours. People completely unaffected in any way were demanding class action lawsuits, etc with seemingly no clue why they were even upset. Then the subject completely left their minds.

    This observation is of course entirely anecdotal, but manufactured outrage is so fascinating, even if it currently eroding the very foundations of society.

    replies(18): >>43298579 #>>43298600 #>>43298610 #>>43298640 #>>43298733 #>>43298933 #>>43298942 #>>43298977 #>>43299229 #>>43299390 #>>43299411 #>>43299451 #>>43299754 #>>43299776 #>>43300000 #>>43300017 #>>43300261 #>>43300604 #
    1. parasti ◴[08 Mar 25 10:12 UTC] No.43298977[source]▶
    It's not manufactured. The people affected were social media influencers who used affiliate links. So the incident affected a very small and specific segment of society that incidentally could broadcast this to a lot of people.
    replies(2): >>43299065 #>>43299430 #
    2. silvanocerza ◴[08 Mar 25 10:29 UTC] No.43299065[source]▶
    Not really, it was pretty clear from the investigation that some youtuber that I can't remember the name of that it wasn't just that.

    One of the big claim from Honey is that it finds for you the coupons with that make you spend the least amount of money, but that's false if they have an agreement with the seller to only show you certain coupons.

    So no, it doesn't affect just influencers, it affects also customers and vendors.

    replies(4): >>43299202 #>>43299208 #>>43299289 #>>43300581 #
    3. rzzzt ◴[08 Mar 25 10:56 UTC] No.43299202[source]▶
    Is it MegaLag's video that you are referring to? https://youtu.be/vc4yL3YTwWk
    replies(1): >>43303170 #
    4. oliwarner ◴[08 Mar 25 10:58 UTC] No.43299208[source]▶
    LTT certainly talked about Honey replacing other discount codes in baskets potentially making a basket more expensive, and injecting their own affiliate code when no discount was available.

    It was all thoroughly scummy and against the spirit of an affiliate referral.

    But I don't understand why YouTubers were so surprised. This thing is clearly generating revenue to pay off all the top shelf YouTubers and it's clearly doing that by inserting affiliate codes to generate revenue. There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.

    replies(1): >>43300579 #
    5. masklinn ◴[08 Mar 25 11:15 UTC] No.43299289[source]▶
    The point of GP is that some of the people specifically affected (through honey replacing their codes) were influencers / streamers, who thus specifically

    > could broadcast this to a lot of people.

    6. rcxdude ◴[08 Mar 25 11:42 UTC] No.43299430[source]▶
    The replacing affiliate links was older news (though still news to a lot of people). The new info in the video which blew up involved them also being scummy to the end users as well.
    replies(1): >>43299498 #
    7. ◴[08 Mar 25 11:58 UTC] No.43299498[source]▶
    8. ziml77 ◴[08 Mar 25 14:37 UTC] No.43300579{3}[source]▶
    How was it clearly doing that? I always assumed Honey's model was to sell detailed shopping information of users.
    replies(2): >>43301104 #>>43358284 #
    9. jahsome ◴[08 Mar 25 14:38 UTC] No.43300581[source]▶
    They were still getting coupons. Thus, for 99 percent of users, it wasnt a scam; It was just another crappy product.

    To anyone with a modicum of business savvy, it's not remotely surprising. You literally (don't) get what you literally (don't) pay for.

    10. oliwarner ◴[08 Mar 25 15:51 UTC] No.43301104{4}[source]▶
    It felt clear to me because that's where the money is. Even if you don't understand that, YouTubers would because that's how they paid from all their sponsored links.

    I also wouldn't expect PayPal to recoup this huge marketing investment from very partial purchase data. It'd be nothing compared to what VISA and the other big card companies collect.

    11. silvanocerza ◴[08 Mar 25 20:19 UTC] No.43303170{3}[source]▶
    Yup yup, him.
    12. ImPostingOnHN ◴[13 Mar 25 23:30 UTC] No.43358284{4}[source]▶
    That still comports with OP's statement:

    > There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.