“How do I choose not to share my account information with Facebook?”

Post by ori_b » Thu, Aug 25, 2016, 7:14 PM UTC

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #34

Man, remember the late 90s and early 2000s, when the IM scene was a mess of incompatible networks like ICQ and AIM and MSN Messenger, and people were like "fuck this" and came up with this protocol that was interoperable with all the others through gateways and also it was extendable, and we could all be happy together?... /grump The worst part is that WhatsApp is actually based on Jabber >:(

Post by dest » Thu, Aug 25, 2016, 7:20 PM UTC

geofft wrote: post #106

erlehmann_ wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author of Signal (Moxie Marlinspike) seems actively hostile to not only federation efforts but also compatibility with other clients, even one that only removed the dependency of Signal on Google Play Services: http://news.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/posts/signal-lock-in.ht...

Federation and security is a hard problem. The code is there for anyone to use, but it's an entirely reasonable and prudent security decision to announce your lack of support for a forked version using the same servers. (Also, does Telegram have a version without Google Play Services?)

Post by ffggvv » Thu, Aug 25, 2016, 7:25 PM UTC

geofft wrote: post #100

0xmohit wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most don't like hearing this: if you don't want your personal information to be shared, don't use these "social media" tools. I suspect that you'd be familiar with LinkedIn dark patterns [0] too. [0] https://medium.com/@danrschlosser/linkedin-dark-patterns-3ae...

That's like saying "If you don't want to eat horse meat, don't eat fast food." Your solution works, but it's entirely reasonable for a consumer to want to get the positive parts of a good or service (even a good or service you don't like) without the negative parts. Market pressure and regulation are both good ways to make it happen.

Post by throwanem » Thu, Aug 25, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

ffggvv wrote: post #134

throwanem wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, yeah, that's easy to say and all, and it makes you feel special and everything. It's also horseshit. The problem is not that your friends don't care enough about you to keep in touch by means other than Facebook. The problem is that Facebook has so completely insinuated itself into and throughout a billion people's interpersonal relationships that your friends don't even think about keeping in touch by means…

It's your fault too, you know? Why give the fault to a corporation when we are giving them pieces of our lives? Fights aren't easy, but this fight is important for our society and our children. > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. This is a fight, our fight. For freedom, free speech and privacy. > I mean, yeah, that's easy to say and a…

Post by 0xmohit » Thu, Aug 25, 2016, 7:31 PM UTC

ffggvv wrote: post #135

geofft wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like saying "If you don't want to eat horse meat, don't eat fast food." Your solution works, but it's entirely reasonable for a consumer to want to get the positive parts of a good or service (even a good or service you don't like) without the negative parts. Market pressure and regulation are both good ways to make it happen.

In this case, market pressure derives from users deleting their accounts. For a long time people where saying that ads/tracking is good because nobody is willing to pay for software/service/social media. Well users were paying for whatsapp. There was no need to sell it to facebook, nor there was a need for facebook to use these dark patterns with whatsapp. Regulation should be an exception. Free markets work pretty w…