151–160 of 734 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe this impacts all apps using Facebook's SDK.
There are apps left using this after Facebook hard broke them REMOTELY twice? I think they got it coming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting there is no difference between targeted and non-targeted advertisement?
Yup. Ebay for example gained revenue when they stopped buying targeted ads. More information here. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-2/
What spin. "This will hurt small businesses in TV and Radio." Really!? That's the best argument they can come up with?
The actual quote: Facebook has also launched a website and taken out full-page advertisements in newspapers, in addition to a recent TV and radio ad push, to put a spotlight on how many small business owners depend on targeted ads. This is definitely a true statement. The vast majority of small businesses who advertise on FB will be hurt by this change. The best estimate to date is a 20-30% drop in marketing efficien…
In the long term, I think Facebook is the biggest loser in this scenario, not the small businesses.
The hypocrisy and dishonesty of this statement! Nothing comes from the new consent requirements that directly stop you from keeping your app free. Can't do it because commercially not viable? Well then, how much are users paying you right now?
I wish journalists wouldn't refer to Apple's app store cut as "tax" ; it's a service fee. That is the price Apple charges for providing payment-related services on its platform. It is not a tax.
There is no opt out, and price is a function of earnings rather than value added.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a nice bit of semantic ju-jitsu to say "they take this data and sell a service that wouldn't be possible without it" isn't the same as "selling this data," isn't it? Especially given that the targeting mechanisms don't have any k-anonymity guarantees, and I'm aware of at least one paper showing information leaks through the ad portal [1] https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_events/122...
It isn't the same. At least only FB has my data instead of thousands of advertisers who paid for a copy. Leaks may be an issue, but it still isn't the same as selling the data to anyone who will pay.
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 really weird. 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, whe…
Nicotine is as hard to quit as heroin. The fact that we still punished smokers through public shaming, exclusion and excessive fines just shows how unsympathetic our culture is to perceived "moral failings."
https://www.heart.org/en/news/2018/10/17/why-its-so-hard-to-...
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…
Isn't it opt-in by using their platform? Or is your argument that targeted ads are not common knowledge to Facebook users? I likely wouldn't use Facebook or Google etc. if I had to pay cash; fine with paying with personal data; but for people who aren't fine with that, they shouldn't use it.
I realize that any attempt to discuss this is inviting downvotes, but I just ask for a quick comment if you do choose to downvote. I try to be very open minded.