[flagged]
facebook is luring by giving away free groceries and taking pictures of your toes when youre close to sell to toe-loving private customers. thats not a proper way to pay for groceries.
spying and profiling users is not ok, crazy that this is so hard to enter on some dense-skull brains
Meta's services are far from essential.
I personally use and prefer Nextcloud, and it's actually better than the mainstream alternatives in some ways. E.g. You do not have to use Apple's notes app if you do not want it. I am tremendously irritated by the proprietary bloat that is being forced down users throats, mainly by companies such as Apple and Microsoft.
But still, why insist on dictating what other website owners and companies should do with their platforms? In our part of the world, I like the idea that this is "for each themself to decide" (at least to an extent). Interoperability and compatibility with other platforms is important to strive for.for security (Apple devices texting Android devices for example, https://www.android.com/get-the-message/).
Undeniably, however, proprietary communication platforms are not really necessary for anyone to use, because free software alternatives exist that are often better and more secure.
I can't believe people still argue this... Cutting off facebook today means that I cut myself off from my families message group, a way to message my grandma (I live abroad) and lose access to pretty much all shops where you have to book online. I've lived in places before where literally everything from finding apartments to events to buying second hand was done through facebook.
Once we have an interoperable standard then we can talk. Right now Facebook has complete domination and you severly hinder yourself in some places by not using it.
Because certain business models are exploitative and we've decided to ban them as a society.
Those are the rules now, you're welcome to stop doing business in the EU if you can't meet these basic requirements.
That really depends on where and in which community you live.
metas service is not essential. respecting your privacy is essential.
Do you work in adtech?
Personal information and attention are not currencies to pay for services with. Your entire business model needs to be declared illegal and dismantled.
By my privacy is so nobody can require me to pay for things with it. What point are you trying to make?
That's true.
So they can charge everyone and respect everyone's privacy rights, if they think that's the best business model for them.
What they're trying to get away with here is trading money for fundamental rights.
I can't legally pay Facebook to assassinate me, to take an extreme example.
You want to organize a protest? Create a Facebook event. You want to keep up with news in your town or neighborhood? Join the local Facebook group. You want to chat with someone? Add them on Facebook Messenger.
also interesting, the US and Israel keep voting against establishing a right to food:
https://geneva.usmission.gov/2017/03/24/u-s-explanation-of-v...
We can have targeted ads and privacy, and to an extent we already do, so that is not the issue.
How? Where do we have it?
I can use the store and not flash my membership card if I don't want them tracking a particular purchase.
This option doesn't exist with Facebook, you can't opt in and out from click to click. And they share the information with any number of outside parties.
Furthermore the charge that Facebook is levying vastly exceeds the value of the information they're forgoing if I pay them.
You might have more trouble than that. Did you use a payment card for the secret purchase? Have you ever used the same card while providing your membership information?
There is no exchange going on, quite literally, and users get a service, basically for free. Whatever definition you make up to describe the business model does not change this fact.
In addition, so-called tracking is not the problem in itself, and especially so since users are anonymized. It is things like political misinformation and resulting manipulation that is problematic – not targeted ads themselves.
Risks continue to be profoundly exaggerated, and people, even those in the know, seem bend on propagating such misinformation. Please, let's stick to a factually based discussion.
Derailing the discussion with grotesque and perverted irrelevant comparisons of organ trading is not helpful.
Because getting free food is not a fundamental right either, isn't it?
Personal data is a toxic asset. It also needs to be disposed of.
My attention is mine. It's part of my mind's inalienable cognitive functions. And yet you would sell it over to the highest bidder for profit without my consent. I call what you're advocating for mind rape.
> There is no exchange going on, quite literally
Total bullshit. If there was no exchange, Meta wouldn't be offering users a "Pay or Okay" take it or leave it deal. The mere existence of this thread is evidence of the fact they were extracting value from people's personal information and attention. The existence of an alternative is evidence of the existence of the other exchange.
Yes. I complain. Because I don't want a pay-or-be-targeted world. I'd rather then not have the services. And I have absolutely no problems with that meaning (for example) that a huge fraction of the web's "free" services and sites just disappeared. Or huge companies like Facebook either tanked or left the EU. Zero. None. I applaud this (noyb + the EU regulations) because I think it's the right way to go. That is: I think it's better to effectively outlaw entire branches of the online ecosystem, than to end up with pay-or-be-tracked.
It seems Google is also working on making the "tracking" more or less client-side, in the browser, which should also measure into considerations in these discussions.
Regardless, in public spaces. E.g. Streets, restaurants, banks, I expect increased surveillance is more or less inevitable, and in the future, AI will also be leveraged to track people. There is a slight double standard in all this, because people are demonizing online tracking while tolerating tracking and surveillance in the physical world. Or, worse, they are simply flat against tracking, ignoring the necessity of it.
Let us say, even if Meta offered a completely ad-free experience, your data would still sit on their servers, and by definition you would still be tracked even when opted out. The only difference would be that your data would not be used to target you with ads. That is a pretty whimsical accomplishment imo.
Offering a service devoid of tracking is close to being a physical impossibility with current technology. Not even decentralization would sufficiently destroy your unique signature while using the internet, and you would not want it to, because if it did, it would also be hard for others to trust that you are the person you claim to be.
Political parties and governments could use your data against you, and even data collected by companies. Potentially political entities could use this for malicious purposes, and that is personally something I am more concerned about than tracking itself (or being shown targeted ads by individual companies for that matter).