![](https://infosec.pub/pictrs/image/f40b8104-b35a-440c-82f9-f17ed708ea65.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.one/pictrs/image/0f5e05b5-d351-4add-9667-1df4c43091b4.png)
Of course ad-supported services are infringing on your privacy in a way but if you’re not ready to call Facebook a publicly-funded utility, it’s childish to act like it’s so essential that it should be entirely ad-free with no paid tier.
Threat/abuse tracking, History/Geopolitics thonking, Misinfo/Grift fan, PDX based
openpgp4fpr:EC93911D412ACAE8779B8222588C793376B5F13C
Of course ad-supported services are infringing on your privacy in a way but if you’re not ready to call Facebook a publicly-funded utility, it’s childish to act like it’s so essential that it should be entirely ad-free with no paid tier.
Only cause they can’t interject ads while driving lol
The point was that it’s apples to oranges. Monetization is kinda the key issue here unless you’re ready to declare Facebook a utility and publicly fund it. Personally, I’d rather we be rid of it entirely.
And that is totally unreasonable collection, of course. It’s also completely incomparable to pretending that Facebook is as necessary as a car (at least in America).
But there’s also no ad-supported cars.
I appreciate that responsiveness!!
I don’t really disagree with you at all but repeatedly reminding us all that you’re “not surprised” isn’t the savvy commentary you think it is. Especially since it’s historically been the case that any service you pay money to has said “no, you own your content”.
The marker has just moved gradually on this with companies slowly adding more ownership clauses to their Terms of Service in ways that aren’t legible to average consumers. Now they’re cashing in on that ownership.
While you’re not wrong, the social contract we’ve adapted to is that paying means you have some sense of ownership. It’s unreasonable to expect folks to read every Terms of Service with their legalese. Perhaps the new reality we need to accept is that there is no such thing as a good actor on the internet.
Interesting and all but boy, Threads sucks as an environment. It’s just the worst algorithm and their stance on “political content” is misery.
It stinks that what seems like the most critical reporting lands behind paywalls.
You pay for WordPress.com though. That’s crazy to offer a paid service and use that data in AI training.
Yeah, I don’t like a guy who consistently tries to embody “move fast, break stuff” in the places I least want that to be the case.
These companies are just miserable to talk to, trying to stay out of the legal handling themselves by being mum, passing along the reports.
You all can downvote me but if you’re not interested in living in the land of facts, demonstrating any attempt at backdooring Fediverse products beyond “bad money in a think tank”, then there’s literally not even the smoke to indicate a fire.
Can you share anything that indicates that understanding governance is even tangentially related to backdooring these products or the teams behind them? Is the best response really “wait four years and see”?
That hardly means they’re investigating how to take over instances… These egghead think tanks will do research on anything that matches a couple buzzwords and this is one of them.
Someone’s researching governance in a federated environment and that’s scary because…?
It’s about the intersection of their app, their rewards systems and the dark patterns in the whole system that lead to them accruing a lot of money that they don’t really deserve. That’s pretty much a tech story.
Fun device but I feel like we’ve most past the longing for physical keyboards.
Badass!
That is a valid, nuanced take that this article and (seemingly) the legislation don’t get into.