81–90 of 734 posts
The fact that Facebook appears to consider user consent an existential threat to their business model tells me everything I need to know about them right now.
It's not just them. Anyone who still has the wrong assumption that targeted advertising even works is in for a massive revelation.
Apple should be applauded for this. Their revenue does not depend on software to clandestinely steal and sell users data. One day, we will look back at history and see facebook similar as to how people view myspace now (junkyard of software). Good on Apple not selling devices with a facebook backdoor in them. I know apple probably has deals with malicious governments regarding data access, but at least they are stand…
Between this privacy fight and the form factor of the iPhone Mini, there's a 90% chance my next phone will be an iPhone after more than a decade on Android. I'm done with this ad-sponsored trash ecosystem.
I waited a long time for a new small iPhone and eventually got to the point where I had to buy a new phone, because my SE lasted about 15 minutes & I needed to carry around battery packs just to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple just wants to be exclusive gateway to Apple customers. We are a product to both companies, even if Apple appears the lesser evil.
Except Apple doesn't track you all across the internet at every possible opportunity without you knowing about it.
The fact that Facebook appears to consider user consent an existential threat to their business model tells me everything I need to know about them right now.
I don't think the "threat" is the obvious one... Nobody trusts Facebook -- many, if not most, people honestly believe they listen to their conversations already. The real message is how emotional and immature the leadership is to a perceived slight.
A message that said "Cigarettes will kill you" didn't stop smokers, and some label won't stop Facebook users or meaningfully impact Facebook. Hell, when Microsoft faced anti-trust breakup, the company didn't sit and whine. They fought the threat and sold billions of dollars of software and solutions to their antagonist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just them. Anyone who still has the wrong assumption that targeted advertising even works is in for a massive revelation.
Why do you say this? What evidence? There are hundreds of thousands of businesses that happily pay for ads on Facebook over other platforms and see improved results after tweaking the targeting. The issue is the privacy loss we get, not the efficacy of targeting.
"This discouragement, this is going to have a real impact on the Internet as we know it, which is increasingly going to move to a paid experience, which again, benefits Apple's bottom line..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just them. Anyone who still has the wrong assumption that targeted advertising even works is in for a massive revelation.
Are you suggesting there is no difference between targeted and non-targeted advertisement?
More information here. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-2/
Apple seems to be doing nothing legally wrong. So, I'm guessing FB is trying to sway public opinion. But, does the public really care that much about the health of small businesses who advertise on Facebook?
The fact that Facebook appears to consider user consent an existential threat to their business model tells me everything I need to know about them right now.
It's not just them. Anyone who still has the wrong assumption that targeted advertising even works is in for a massive revelation.
Regardless of its efficacy, the legality should be out of the question.
Thank you Apple for being one of the few protecting privacy
Apple would be a hero for threatening _its own_ significant revenue streams with a pro-privacy decision, not someone else's.