Facebook and Instagram launch a paid ad-free subscription
theverge.com
theverge.com
The notion of not seeing ads actually does kinda worry me because at least when you see an ad, you get a visual confirmation you are being monitored and parsed. I don't know that's a conversation anyone has or is prepared to address.
Edit: [Not crazy about some of the sentence structure here but you know what I mean]
Not so long ago we learned Google's toggle to turn off your history turned off your ability to see your history, not Google's collection of it, so you're right to be skeptical:
That document goes on to state: "Contrary to Mr Pichai's Congressional testimony, the founder of Google's Privacy and Data Protection Office testified in this case that he is 'not aware of any setting' that users can employ to prevent Google from collecting data related to their app activity."
Much of the issue, allegedly, is that WAA, rather than saving data when on and not saving it when off, simply saves data in a different place – not in the Google Account data set. Addressing the confusion about the bounds of Google Accounts, Hochman said, "So I'm aware that Google may save data in different locations, depending on where that WAA/sWAA switch is set. It is still collecting the same data and still saving it, but it may save it in different places."
https://www.theregister.com/2023/10/24/google_privacy_button...
Also not sure if it does not mean they will stop collecting data for non-ad purposes like AI training.
And of course they “suggested for you” and “more like” posts that invade your timeline will not be considered ads so it doesn’t help much.
That's a surprisingly expensive subscription.
More discussion over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38068635
I pay for Youtube premium which has a similar cost but it's for the whole family and the video ads are significantly more annoying. Maybe Meta is planning on making ads more intrusive?
Genuinely asking. I have no idea.