No, but having a handful of people who will never see their ads devalues the whole package.

Imagine going to bat for Hamas, of all people.

How? How do they profit off someone who refuses to view ads?

Who would pay for data on a person you can’t advertise to?

The Aboriginal tribes didn’t slaughter civilians, or rape and murder aid workers, to be fair.

I don’t think they’ll care or miss you, to be honest. It’s not like they’re making money off you.

I wonder if there is a job where you test user interfaces by deliberately misunderstanding instructions? I feel I’d be good at it.

Where I live, we get a number of used vehicles imported from Japan, and for a while it was trendy to have English slogans on vehicles.

They frequently made little sense, I imagine our ones look the same to them.

Meh, I haven’t listened to FM in years. It’s just not a feature as far as I’m concerned.

The what now? What the hell takes an hour to update on a car?

So I could move to bumfuck nowhere and get paid to chill out in my car, while my coworkers pick up my slack?

No, that’s Alice’s problem.

It sounds like an incentive not to hire people who live too far away from the office to me.

Because the simplest option for the company is not to hire Bob.

Bob chose to live and work where he does, he can live with the consequences of his choices.

I don’t feel sorry for bob.

Who would hire Bob, in that case?

So either move house or move job then.

They have the choice of paying for the convenience of living close to work, or spending time commuting. That’s not something an employer will or should care about.

Is this their time as well, or just travel costs?

The answer is they don’t compensate them, because that would be silly.

Why would an employer care how far away their employees live, or compensate them for their travel?

Unless the employer also gets to decide where they can and can’t live, why should they compensate them?