this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
229 points (86.8% liked)

Technology

59446 readers
3622 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hellequin67@lemm.ee 165 points 1 year ago

Ad-free != Privacy

[–] CriticalMiss@lemmy.world 129 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just because you're paying $10 a month does not mean that Meta will stop farming your data. Sure, they won't shove you any ads, but they will stockpile data for the day you decide that $10 (it's not really $10.. they will increase this price 2-3 years down the line once they feel they had gathered enough users, the Silicon Valley way) and then pump you with ads that cater you.

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also I'm sure they will sell your data to whoever can pay for it.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They don't directly sell data, nor does Google. They analyze and use that data to sell targeted ad space.

There are data brokers that gather a ton of data and openly sell it, but Facebook isn't one of them. Their customer data and the resulting ability to sell extremely specific ad space is probably their single most valuable; why would the sell it itself when they can sell the access it grants instead?

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think Meta very much wants to sell data.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/facebook-to-pay-90-million-to-settle-data-privacy-lawsuit "Specifically, the plaintiffs’ alleged that Facebook used cookies and various plug-ins in order to track and save information about its users’ visits to third-party websites and then sold to advertisers."

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/privacy-and-data-security/facebook-in-payment-spat-over-725-million-privacy-settlement "Consumers sued Meta in 2018 after it became public that the British research firm had gained access to the data of at least 87 million Facebook users without their permission in connection with its work for Trump’s campaign."

[–] kalleboo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

They sell access to data (i.e., ads) - that is far more lucrative than selling the data itself. Only companies that are bad at tech just sell the data (credit card companies, retail, etc)

Cambridge Analytica was far more stupid - that was them just giving away data for free. Their old Facebook Apps APIs were wide open to collect whatever for free for anyone who would use your app (CA made those "do this fun quiz and invite your friends!" kind of FB games) and the APIs just said "we require you to delete this data when the user is done with the app" with no way to enforce it

[–] paprika@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

That's what they claim, but they are liars. We know from the Cambridge Analytica settlement that they let them have direct access to user data, including private messages. And they did that for over a decade. And now they say they've changed, cross my heart, and you believe them?

[–] sic_semper_tyrannis@feddit.ch 95 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A pay-to-see-no-ads is not the same as pay-for-privacy.

[–] maniel@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They do point out they won't use your personal info in ads if you pay, by choosing the free option you consent for personalized ads

[–] sic_semper_tyrannis@feddit.ch 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Doesn't mean they won't collect your info anyways. What has Meta done to prove that they are worthy of our trust? Nothing.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It pretty much makes it clear that they are absolutely going to continue collecting your data -- they just won't use it for ads. They wouldn't have needed to specify that otherwise.

[–] killeronthecorner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

They won't use it to personalise their ads, they'll just sell it to their approved data vendors who all happen to be in the business of personalized ads.

This is paying to not think about a problem, not to solve the problem.

[–] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Like the personal ads is the only issue :')

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That $10 won't give you any real privacy. They will still collect every bit they can about you.

The $10 will just not give you targeted ads. Most likely, they will still select things for you based on your profile and also sell information from that profile to the real customers.

[–] themurphy@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Bingo. They don't give you targeted ads through their own platform, but the info is for sale for everyone else to do so.

[–] Zaphod@discuss.tchncs.de 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No! It's actually free: Simply stop using Facebook!

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You also need your family to not use Facebook (if they ever mention you they will collect that information)

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago

Guarantee you pay $10 and your privacy still isn't protected.

[–] livus@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Not getting killed by online mob == free lunch

What do they always say about free lunches?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Considering their ceo is Jewish and Nazis still congregate on there, probably not

[–] notannpc@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Buts it’s probably not gonna give you any privacy, they’re still harvesting and selling your data, you just don’t see the ads on meta platforms.

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is to appease regulators, it is not a viable solution for their users.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 points 1 year ago

Regulators that seems to have already unformally shoot down the proposal given that it seems to be against the GDPR.

[–] Substance_P@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So much for the

"It's free and always will be"

I can never understand how selling one's information isn't considered a form of payment.

[–] jockyrickyrock@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

well thats mark zuckerburg for you, but even then your data is still gonna be sold ig

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Spider89@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[–] Jajcus@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

This paymemt does not even stop their crappy 'recommended for you' suggested content on user's wall, which is even more annoying than the ads.

[–] Destraight@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh in Europe only. Not in the US. The news article should have specified that in the title

[–] DarkwinDuck@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

Nah, American news also fail to specify "only in the US" every time. So it's kind of refreshing to see the tables flipped for once.

[–] setto@fed.dyne.org 5 points 1 year ago

"It's free and always will be"

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Sure, I'll pay that - as soon as they pay me $15 per month for the data they're stealing from me.

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] vodkasolution@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, not paying even if it's 9.99€

I'd take it at €5 if I used Instagram a lot. The current asking price is too high though, almost like the data is worth so much to them that they put the price tag high enough that it's unreasonable.

[–] eddietrax@dmv.social 1 points 1 year ago

I’ll give them a one time payment of $10 to fuck off