I’m not watching 100th video on why that new Ferrari is ugly

The video is not about that. You are literally prejudging a video because of the thumbnail. It's your loss.

You will not find anything more privacy oriented than Njalla.

Be careful what you wish for.

By valuing only efficiency and utility, you end up creating a world where everything follows the same bland cookie-cutter style, where every city looks the same and where corporations can easily shape and control our needs and wants.

Ferrari does things primarily to sell cars, because it’s a company, a for-profit organisation.

Toyota sells more cars than Ferrari. Do you think that if Ferrari should starts building more cars like Toyota it will be good for them long-term?

Are you familiar with the doorman fallacy?

According to data they seem to be doing fine

So is McDonald's.

The argument is not that things stopped being popular. It's that they are becoming uniformly similar in a bland way.

Why should anyone care if the answer is seemingly an uninspired “stop liking things I don’t like”?

If you actually watch the video, perhaps you can understand why. But it seems you are more interested in sticking to your preconceived notions than listening to someone with opinions of their own.

Not the point. He also talks about how all coffee shops ends up looking the same, how house decor all adopt the same bland style, etc

Status symbols not having a common appeal

You really should watch the video instead of arguing past the point. The main thing about the car is not that is lacks a "common appeal", but exactly the opposite. It takes no risks, it ends up lacking any distinguishing feature and becomes a regular consumer product. "Common appeal" is all it has.

My guess is that Ferrari as a business cares only about taste of people who can afford their products.

The people who can afford and actually buying the Luce are not doing because the car is sexy or a unquestionable example of "cool". They are buying it to signal status. They don't care about "taste".

Watch the video, and you see he argues that being a commercial success does not mean it is cool. Quite the opposite: it means that the companies are only creating products that are "safe" and follow a formula that has been proven to work.

If you don't have trouble using the terminal, I'd recommend Beets.

He is a jackass. He is also the least important thing about this video.

Title is clickbait-y, but just tries to show how cheap it would be to build with clay. The "$300" figure come from the assumption that getting to build a brick from clay is ~0.03, so a large home with 10000 bricks would cost $300.

If all participants guessed correctly whether they took the actual thing or the placebo, maybe just give everyone the thing but with varying doses?