News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by Retric on Sunday January 14, 2018 @06:40PM (#16147263)
It works very well for moderate changes. Look into the history of Boycotts and they have actually changed quite a bit about how several industries work.

Antibiotics is actually a fairly minor benefit to the meat industry, so it's a winning strategy assuming significant popular support.

Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by barrkel on Sunday January 14, 2018 @07:03PM (#16147396)
Boycotting isn't individual choice, however; boycotts, when they work, usually work due to PR and reputational effects rather than market effects.
Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by fpoling on Monday January 15, 2018 @03:21AM (#16149278)
Boycotting works through the stubborn minority rule [1]. Sometimes even less than 1% of the total population can enforce their rule for the whole country. This works as long as the rest of population finds the rule does not bother them match.

[1] http://fooledbyrandomness.com/minority.pdf

Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by TeMPOraL on Monday January 15, 2018 @05:14AM (#16149660)
Wait, wait, wait.

I thought it was universally acknowledged that boycotts, generally, don't work, because you can almost never find and coordinate enough people that care.

Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by fpoling on Monday January 15, 2018 @07:43AM (#16150131)
The case of Kosher wine from the link shows how about 0.3% of population forced almost all wines in US to be Kosher by boycotting non-kosher wines. The important thing is that the minority should be distributed across the whole population uniformly.
Re:Chile’s salmon farms may use more antibiotics than any ot... by Retric on Sunday January 14, 2018 @07:35PM (#16147538)
A call to action on a public forum might not mean much on it's own, but it's still advertising the idea.