This Privacy Ruling Against Facebook and Instagram Could Spell the End of Targeted Ads
This Privacy Ruling Against Facebook and Instagram Could Spell the End of Targeted Ads
Man, this is actually something I'm not a huge fan of. Sure, targeted ads and feeling as though you're being spied on is lame. Totally. I get it. But facebook is an opt-in platform. It's not a public utility like a library, it's a business. I don't see how any government can force a business to give away access to a commercial platform for free.
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give away services supposed to do? Charge for accounts? I guess?
i would prefer they not target people and follow us around everywhere.
if ending targetted ads does that, that would be nice.
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give away services supposed to do? Charge
i would prefer they not target people and follow us around everywhere. if ending targetted ads does that, that would be nice.
Eh, it's an opt-in service. I'm not all about having the government regulate online services
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they were anticipating that.
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give away services supposed to do? Charge
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they were anticipating that.
The left 2023: "It is not ok for governments to interfere with legic private business such as Facebook and destroy their revenew model".
This is not the left I remember. Leftists destroyed the left.
Eh, it's an opt-in service. I'm not all about having the government regulate online services
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they
were anticipating that.
People seems to be very happy when some new regulation screws me over,
so while I don't agree
(in principle) with these sort of regulations, I am ready to go out the street with a whiskey
bottle and celebrate.
The left 2020: "It is ok for Amazon and Google and Apple to collude and destroy Parler. It is
the market taking care of itself."
The left 2023: "It is not ok for governments to interfere with legic private business such as
Facebook and destroy their revenew model".
but if it was spreading disinformation about covid you wanted action taken, right?
The left 2020: "It is ok for Amazon and Google and Apple to collude and destroy Parler. It is
the market taking care of itself."
Nobody owes a platform to anyone else. Someone wants to make a right wing cesspool? Good luck getting some company to host it.
but if it was spreading disinformation about covid you wanted action taken, right?
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The government did not compel this.
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The government did not compel this.
i thought the govt paid them all the do it. didn't they unearth that.
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
Quoting Arelor to Esc <=-
Re: Re: ..the End of Targeted
By: esc to MRO on Mon Feb 20 2023 11:27 pm
The left 2020: "It is ok for Amazon and Google and Apple to collude
and destroy Parler. It is the market taking care of itself."
The left 2023: "It is not ok for governments to interfere with legic private business such as Facebook and destroy their revenew model".
This is not the left I remember. Leftists destroyed the left.
Quoting Mro to Arelor <=-
Re: Re: ..the End of Targeted
By: Arelor to esc on Tue Feb 21 2023 11:39 am
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give away services supposed to do? Charge
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
Quoting Esc to Arelor <=-
The left 2020: "It is ok for Amazon and Google and Apple to collude and destroy Parler. It is
the market taking care of itself."
Nobody owes a platform to anyone else. Someone wants to make a right
wing cesspool? Good luck getting some company to host it.
The left 2023: "It is not ok for governments to interfere with legic private business such as
Facebook and destroy their revenew model".
Correct. For an opt-in service that they host themselves.
I don't see what's controversial here. Sounds like some hurt feelings going on?
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they
were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they
were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give away services supposed to do? Charge
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they wer anticipating that.
they would never do that.
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
Re: Re: ..the End of Targeted
By: Arelor to esc on Tue Feb 21 2023 11:39 am
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they we anticipating that.
Interestingly, Twitter turned off SMS MFA on my account, as it's only availa ---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
People seems to be very happy when some new regulation screws me over, so while I don't agree
(in principle) with these sort of regulations, I am ready to go out the street with a whiskey
bottle and celebrate.
Interesting perspective
The left 2020: "It is ok for Amazon and Google and Apple to collude and destroy Parler. It is
the market taking care of itself."
Nobody owes a platform to anyone else. Someone wants to make a right wing ce
Yes, this is the market taking care of itself.
The left 2023: "It is not ok for governments to interfere with legic private business such as
Facebook and destroy their revenew model".
Correct. For an opt-in service that they host themselves.
I don't see what's controversial here. Sounds like some hurt feelings going
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
but if it was spreading disinformation about covid you wanted action taken, right?
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The governme
Just like nobody was willing to host Parler. Free market, baby!
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The government did not compel this.
i thought the govt paid them all the do it. didn't they unearth that.
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The government did not compel this.
i thought the govt paid them all the do it. didn't they unearth that.
Nope
Re: Re: ..the End of Targeted
By: MRO to Arelor on Tue Feb 21 2023 06:27 pm
I have heard Facebook was rolling a paid account system. I guess they were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
Well, they're testing it right now for $12/month in Australia & New Zealand?
https://about.fb.com/news/2023/02/testing-meta-verified-to-help-creators/
were anticipating that.
they would never do that.
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
I heard something in the news a couple days ago that Facebook was considering a paid tier because their ad revenue had been dropping and they
They are. it's similar to Twitter's system. you get verified, a blue checkmark, and a few extra features along with a potential "boost" to your posts.
I pay for Twitter Blue, but only because it gives me some features I think are worth paying for (I don't give a flying fuck about the blue checkmark, I'd rather not have it, but it won't actually let me turn it off).
That said, it seems like Facebook's paid account system is going to lean heavily into the "verified" realm, with few extra features. It's more geared towards creators who want to build some kind of e-following or whatever.
DaiTengu
only if it was for business and i dont think that worked out either.
Yes, they weren t going to make it universal. As far as I have heard, it was some business plan, a bit like Twitter s verified accounts.
Facebook stopped the spread of covid disinformation themselves. The government did not compel this.
i thought the govt paid them all the do it. didn't they unearth that.
The government colluded with Twitter, that is what was unearthed. A professor who is a "COVID believer" out at Stanford (?) posted a piece
about his concern regarding children being out of school so long. He got
Tell us what you really think of conservatives...
I don't see what's controversial here. Sounds like some hurt feelings going on?
Yours? Or Arelors...
Maybe your political party has protecting group A from group B (which is really, really messing up with group A). Group A is attacked one day by group B, you release an statement in support of A, condemn the attack, phone the representatives of group A to show them support...
... and group A tells you to eat shit and die because you are a fascist communist (what usually happens is some other political party has bought them)
The left used to be anti-corporativist and I kind of miss those times. Right now it looks like they are ready to be pro-corporativists as long
as the particular evil corporation in question is cool enough.
Well, Facebook being blocked from delivering targetted ads is our Governments protecting us from the abuse of an evil corporation. That
used to be a Good Thing for the Das Kapital brigade.
I have already ran into some people who thinks Government should prevent abusive corporative behavior that is not very different from Facebook s here, but somehow Facebook gets a free pass? They cannot have it both ways. If governments should interfere to prevent abusive prices for
phone subscriptions (which are opt-in) then you cannot defend Facebook
is a legit company being victimized by the evil governments of doom.
I mean, the real school lefties had principles. The Sex Pistols dude got bankrupt tryig to prevent Disney from using his stuff because he didn t want Sex Pistols to belong to (and I quote) Mickey Fucking Mouse.
the govt paid over a billion dollars for boosting vaccine 'confidence'
and social media got a slice of the pie.
so they had a great interest to follow a specific narrative.
And facebook is crooked as fuck. and so are their 'fact checkers'
whoever those people are. So was twitter.
Well, Facebook being blocked from delivering targetted ads is our Governments protecting us from the abuse of an evil corporation. That used to be a Good Thing for the Das Kapital brigade.
I'm very leery of the government deciding that protecting people like this eventually turns into the government regulating what people can talk about. I'd much rather a company try to make what they believe to be the right moral/ethical/business decision where we can debate it in the court of public opinion, but as soon as a government gets involved, I get a bit dismayed.
the govt paid over a billion dollars for boosting vaccine 'confidence' and social media got a slice of the pie.
Where did you dig up this chestnut?
so they had a great interest to follow a specific narrative.
Yeah, like, persisting the human race, since ~2 billion people login to Facebook every day. It's called taking some moral responsibility. Plus, it was probably a business decision; key advertisers might abandon your
people DO need protection from facebook though. or facebook should just be transparent about what it does. yes, they arent forcing you to use
it, but it's mainstream and they have been pulling bullshit evil shit
for years. ---
Where did you dig up this chestnut?
i'm pretty sure it's been out there for quite some time.
oh come on now. facebook being moral? that's bullshit.
they did all this stuff because they cared?
abusive corporative behavior that is not very different from Facebook s here, but somehow Facebook gets a free pass? They cannot have it both ways. If governments should interfere to prevent abusive prices for phone subscriptions (which are opt-in) then you cannot defend Facebook is a legit company being victimized by the evil governments of doom.
Interesting perspective, but a phone is basically a critical need in this da ee to disagree I suppose.
want Sex Pistols to belong to (and I quote) Mickey Fucking Mouse.
I mean...he's like, one person, who is pretty fringe on the left. Can't expe
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
If you disagree with fact checkers, or think they're up to no good, maybe en
Yes, they did. Who do you think works there? The people Facebook hires are t
writing lines of code like you seem to think.
Arelor wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
TOTP is theoretically safer than SMS verification, but for practical purposes, it is more of a headache. I think the average granny is more likely to set SMS auth than TOPT, and is she sets TOTP, she is more
likely to lose her acess tokens and suffer.
Yes, they did. Who do you think works there? The people Facebook hires are those smart college kids that want to "make the world a better place". Their entire pitch and mission with recruiting is connecting people. There aren't these evil boogeymen people writing lines of code like you seem to think.
people DO need protection from facebook though. or facebook should just be transparent about what it does. yes, they arent forcing you to use
it, but it's mainstream and they have been pulling bullshit evil shit for years. ---
Can't say I agree but respect your opinion nonetheless.
i'm pretty sure it's been out there for quite some time.
Care to find some proof? All I found was salacious articles, none of which appear to come from any trusted news source.
Yes, they did. Who do you think works there? The people Facebook hires are those smart college kids that want to "make the world a better place". Their entire pitch and mission with recruiting is connecting people. There aren't these evil boogeymen people writing lines of code like you seem to think.
I don't care how good the employees are. The power Capital has is they can take good people and abuse them and enslave them and make them work torwards the Capital's goals instead of the worker's. Facebook is no difference at a fundamental level. It is owned by the Capital and workers' output is taken and used as the Capital sees fit.
they've also manipulated information on covid, the covid vaccine and they've tried to manipulate the presidential election. those are all facts. ---
Hello Arelor!
** On Thursday 23.02.23 - 07:30, Arelor wrote to esc:
I don't care how good the employees are. The power Capital has is they c take good people and abuse them and enslave them and make them work torwards the Capital's goals instead of the worker's. Facebook is no difference at a fundamental level. It is owned by the Capital and worker output is taken and used as the Capital sees fit.
Sounds like what China is doing to its workers.
--- OpenXP 5.0.57
* Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTT
they've also manipulated information on covid, the covid vaccine and they've tried to manipulate the presidential election. those are all facts. ---
False. Anyway I'm done arguing, it's not going to do any good, not like I'll convince you of anything even if I'm the most persuasive person alive.
i'm not arguing.
<proceeds to type out a bunch of arguments>
i'm not arguing.
<proceeds to type out a bunch of arguments>
:P
they did all this stuff because they cared?Yes, they did. Who do you think works there? The people Facebook hires are those smart college kids that want to "make the world a better place". Their entire pitch and mission with recruiting is connecting people. There aren't these evil boogeymen people writing lines of code like you seem to think.
answer me this: since facebook is full of young people who
want to make the world such a great place, why don't they hire women?
why is it mostly white males?
those are facts.
you're just seeing it as an argument.
Yes smart indoctrinated college kids i'm sure.... I'm not going to say they are all like this but for some of the stuff Facebook , Twitter , Youtube and other Social Media Platforms have been doing....
all indoctrinated but i'm sure a lot of them are.
I'm not too familiar with Facebook's hiring policies, but I've been working as a software developer since 2003, and the whole industry is fairly male-dominated (at least, in the US). I doubt Facebook just doesn't hire women; it just seems that there are few women in the US who decide to go into tech jobs. I did work for one very large (multi-national) tech company and they did have women developers and engineers working there - but many of them were from other countries (mainly India or China).
you're just seeing it as an argument.
And you continue arguing ;) I'm not going to argue. This is silly.
MRO wrote to Nightfox <=-
I'm not too familiar with Facebook's hiring policies, but I've been working as a software developer since 2003, and the whole industry is fairly male-dominated (at least, in the US). I doubt Facebook just doesn't hire women; it just seems that there are few women in the US who decide to go into tech jobs. I did work for one very large (multi-national) tech company and they did have women developers and engineers working there - but many of them were from other countries (mainly India or China).
Not everyone at facebook or any social media company HAS to be a
white developer.
fb's demographics have been embarassing since the beginning.
the proof is in the pudding. and they have been using the same
receipe for a very long time. women can do these jobs, it's
sexist to think they cant. it's sexist to ignore the
demographics that fb has adhered to.
MRO wrote to esc <=-
you're just seeing it as an argument.
And you continue arguing ;) I'm not going to argue. This is silly.
i'm not trying to argue either.
i'm just pointing out facts.
This Privacy Ruling Against Facebook and Instagram Could
Spell the End of Targeted Ads
Man, this is actually something I'm not a huge fan of.
Sure, targeted ads and feeling as though you're being spied
on is lame. Totally. I get it. But facebook is an opt-in
platform. It's not a public utility like a library, it's a
business. I don't see how any government can force a
business to give away access to a commercial platform for
free.
So what's any company that relies on ad revenue to give
away services supposed to do? Charge for accounts? I guess?
drop by to see if there are any new postings from friends. I
don't contribute content myself.
Maybe they could provide the option to turn OFF the
presentation of ads if I don't want to see them, meanwhile,
they could still collect and analyse my activity on FB.
But I don't like the way the ads keep following me from site to
site.
Ogg wrote to esc <=-
One of the problems is that they use your activity data even
when you are not using FB. I've logged into FB for a few
minutes, check for some messages and then leave. But when I'd
visit another website, "targetted ads" based on what I was
reading on FB appear as ads on that other website! So,
clearly, FB is distributing my user activity/content info to
other parties.
I've seen people talking about a containerized browser for Facebook,
don't know if incognito mode would work. The mere fact that people need
to create a workaround to your company's privacy overreaches is a
serious issue that reflects the fact that you are their product, not
their customer.
Lmorchard wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
They do have kind of an insidious octopus of a service spread all
around. Sounds like tinfoil hat territory to accurately describe what
they do.
| Sysop: | Xerxes |
|---|---|
| Location: | Azle, Texas |
| Users: | 131 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 97:26:33 |
| Calls: | 3,190 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 195 |
| U/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| D/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| Messages: | 366,179 |
| Posted today: | 0 |
