101–110 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This and messenger are the only reasons I haven't closed my account.
Same, but recently discovered you can continue using Messenger if you deactivate your account.
Great, if anyone has any spare cycles - please rip out Events from Facebook into another app so I don't have to open Facebook anymore.
This! Similar events is the only thing I miss about fbook. I was told that an app / site "bandsNearMe" or something like that would replace.. but I don't think it's gets the smaller acts / DJs / events that I would really like to attend. Meetup does a better job of notifying me. As long as people are going to use fbook to post about upcoming events it would be nice to have access to things coming locally, since I rar…
Facebook is a software company and any successful software built on top of it will be copied and integrated into the core platform. They are just looking for their next "inspiration"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They put an enforceable promise in there that they wouldn't do that. Wait no, they could have but didn't.
Why would a company ever impose binding restrictions on itself?
I want to like this move, but a platform is only as good as its API, and for years their API offers have been poor. The Cambridge Analytica scandal didn't exactly help in this regard.
This feels like a mixed message. One of wanting to be open, but also one of knowing that they can't allow access to personal data because they cannot (or will not) police its use. The cynic in me (and everyone else it seems) believes this is a regulation thing, and nothing to do with letting people build on their platform.
> The move will significantly reduce the risk of building on the Facebook platform. What's to stop them from reversing the policy change? Once bitten, twice shy.
Anybody that builds an app on a "platform" that can be taken away overnight is a fool. Facebook has made it clear that if they want to change a policy, they could care less about your "business".
Off topic, but as a non-english native speaker the phrase "could care less" always bothers me as I read it literally to mean someone does indeed care, since they can care less. Is this one of those cases where the meaning changes through actual use like "literally" now meaning not necessarily "to be taken literally"?
Anybody that builds an app on a "platform" that can be taken away overnight is a fool. Facebook has made it clear that if they want to change a policy, they could care less about your "business".
Off topic, but as a non-english native speaker the phrase "could care less" always bothers me as I read it literally to mean someone does indeed care, since they can care less. Is this one of those cases where the meaning changes through actual use like "literally" now meaning not necessarily "to be taken literally"?
It’s like when someone says that the enemy was “decimated”. The prescriptivists would say that means they lost 10%. The descriptivists would say they lost a lot.