Darnell Clayton :verified:
#Meta should just offer people in #Europe (& the rest of the planet) a simple option: either opt in to have your personal information sold to advertisers, or pay a fee to use #Facebook, #Instagram, #WhatsApp & #Threads.
It works for #YouTube (I pay them to avoid ads), as well as other news organizations. It’s really that simple.
👉🏾 Meta could face further squeeze on surveillance ads model in EU | TechCrunch https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/25/meta-ads-data-retention-ag-opinion/
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@AndyGER Companies use Meta’s services because it is cheaper than using their own home grown versions (storage, bandwidth, security, maintenance, upgrades, etcetera).
As far as the bigots go, yes those people are everywhere. I think it took 40 days & nights of blocking (give or take a week) to remove those trolls 🧌 from my timeline.
Andreas M. Heitmann :batman:
@darnell After some time of absence I tried again Facebook and Threads. With Threads came Instagram (users are brute-forced to connect to instagram).
This whole social network is absolutely aweful, horrible and full of crap. It is filled with hatespeech, racism and antisemitism.
There is absolutely no reason to be there!
I can not understand why companies still want to use #meta
It's a horrible place to be ...
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@john Yeah, but then the ads would suck & no one would click on them, resulting in advertisers leaving & the company losing money.
Basically Twitter ads & Instagram ads when Apple blocks their tracking behavior. 😂
John Conway
@darnell You can do ads without tracking. That's what they would do if tracking were just flat illegal.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@wonkothesane That’s a good question that I have yet to see an answer for (my guess is no). I do know YouTube analyzes our info to serve recommended content, but aside from that I am not too sure.
Michael Santaly
@darnell Does YouTube stop selling your data if you pay for it though? I’m a YouTube premium member and would love to have that confirmed
AJ Sadauskas
@darnell Many years ago, I worked for a paywalled news site.
One day, I straight up asked the person responsible why they didn't offer an ad-free option to subscribers.
The answer was because the people who are willing to pay $10 a month are *precisely* the people who advertisers are most interested in, because they've shown they're willing to pay for premium services.
I mean, if you're an ad buyer, do you want your ads going to the lady who's willing to pay $10 a month for the premium version? Or the guy who will put up with or ignore the ads so he doesn't have to pay?
That's not to defend Meta.
But, playing devil's advocate, that is the commercial reality they're dealing with.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@ajsadauskas That does make sense. Most of the news I am paying for still have ads, although I usually ignore most of them as they are trying to sell me products that I would never consider using: sunscreen, Android phones, portable weapons that look harmless but might get me arrested at the airport (I see the latter on Instagram frequently).
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@john It looks like the European Union 🇪🇺 is agreeing with you here. Here is an article from @TechCrunch about this: https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/17/consent-or-pay-decision-report/
John Conway
@darnell Ads can be fitted to content, so it's not like they will be completely irrelevant. TV, radio, and until recently podcasting got by without ad tracking. Meta and Google are massively profitable. Non-tracked ads can be considerably less effective and the'd still profit.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@madargon We also do not have a right to use their services either. We usually pay to use services, whether it be phone, flying, movies, etcetera.
The same applies here too.
Mad A. Argon :qurio:
@darnell No, privacy is human right, not thing to put a price tag on it and sell. Nobody should be coerced to pay for not being psychologically manipulated and exploited.
And this only apply to ads in their awful serviced. Paying users wouldn't be free of tracking, only data would be used for other purposes. This is big horrible con.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@madargon People find them useful so they exist. The ad business model is for those who want to freely use their services.
Hosting & using social networks costs money, & without a way to generate revenue most of the Internet would not exist.
Paying to not see ads or have your info siphoned off is a great alternative.
Mad A. Argon :qurio:
@darnell If their business model rely on exploitation, manipulation and general disrespect these companies shouldn't exist at all.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@madargon Using their services is a choice. If you do not like or trust them, do not use their platforms (it is that simple really).
Years ago I had issues with #Facebook’s ad policies (I think they code named it beacon) so I stopped using their services & eventually deleted my account.
I did the same for #LinkedIn as well. If #YouTube ever gets to the place where I do not find value in the platform, I will leave.
These services are option, not critical for my life.
Mad A. Argon :qurio:
@darnell But data are STILL siphoned off - there's a big lie paid tiers are free of tracking. Only there is no ads visible. And displaying ads shouldn't require invading poeople's private lives and activities. There wers context ads for example.
Maybe it's good time to finally separate first thing from the second.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@BeAware @madargon You analogy does not make any sense as using any of these social networks is optional. If you do not like a service, then just leave & do not use it.
I have left #Facebook & #LinkedIn over disagreements with their ad polices or (with the latter) the “premium spam” I was receiving (companies at the time could pay to harass you with spam).
These platforms are at best tools. If the tool is not to your liking, stop using it.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@BeAware @madargon I had friends & business contacts on both #Facebook & #LinkedIn.
But guess what! I could always reach out to those friends & family via iMessage, email, phone calls or FaceTime.
I do not need social networks to connect with friends, family or colleagues.
Social networks are the icing on the cake, but the cake is being able to contact them via email or phone.
BeAware
@darnell @madargon that's good that you have those options. Not everyone does unfortunately. Sometimes these platforms are the only ways some people can connect. But it doesn't matter, this debate is kinda pointless cause they won't stop stealing data and I won't go back to those platform, no matter how much I miss people.🤷♂️
Darnell Clayton :verified:
@madargon If your family or coworkers need to contact you, they will use the other messages if communicating with you is valuable.
When I left Facebook & LinkedIn, it upset people, but I told them to use their phone if they want to stay in touch.
Now I am bombarded with phone calls, messages & emails. 😂🤣😂
Mad A. Argon :qurio:
@darnell Yes, I absolutely don't trust them and don't use. I cut from my life few of them and never touched the rest. And I block connections to their services if I find them. Never thought they are critical.
But there are people who don't use it voluntarily but because of external factors (employers, stubborn families, various service providers refusing to use other communication channels) forcing them. And they don't deserve to be "punished".
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.