Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 442 posts

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#321

Post by grnmamba »

z9znz wrote: post #216
felipellrocha wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I mostly agree with you, banning the personal accounts from their *team* is a bit much. Specially considering how that also includes access to Instagram, and WhatsApp, WhatsApp being the biggest issue here since in many countries that is considered a way of conducting business.

> WhatsApp being the biggest issue here since in many countries that is considered a way of conducting business. Absolutely the best reason why businesses should move to Signal. Imagine if your business gets cut off from Meta products, or if at any moment some of your customers get cut off. Facebook is an extremely limited and poor platform for representing a business, and it too should be avoided for the same reason…

Signal is another centralized platform which explicitly prohibits using 3rd party clients.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#322

Post by free652 »

nobody9999 wrote: post #293
geysersam wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they should be able to block 3d party clients. Just because it's technically possible to hijack an API, doesn't mean it's legal or ethical. If you don't want to be tracked, don't use Instagram. However, Meta blocking the developers fb accounts is basically harassment. Let the courts sort it out if their app is illegal. Meta shouldn't take things into their own hands.

>Of course they should be able to block 3d party clients. Just because it's technically possible to hijack an API, doesn't mean it's legal or ethical. If you don't want to be tracked, don't use Instagram. This is the bit that's confusing to me. If I want to access my FB/IG/whatever content, and present my credentials to the server along with a valid request for my data, why should Meta care how I do so? I could be us…

The data server via API isn't yours, that's FB's data. You can download YOUR data via a page on the FB site.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#324

Post by lightspot21 »

chaostheory wrote: post #287
jjav wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schools tend to be worst offenders, clubs, companies (heard of at least one company which only honors warranty support via facebook!).

Ask them to use something else, or get an exception by explaining that you were banned. It isn’t endemic and there are always options. After the Cambridge analytica scandal, Facebook no longer has unbreakable mindshare. This is especially true the younger the generation

>Ask them to use something else, or get an exception by explaining that you were banned. It isn’t endemic and there are always options

Good luck if it's a business or public org. Why change their process for what amounts to a minority of customers? It's not worth the cost. Whether these people can't do business with them despite these services being essential to everyday life... well tough luck for them I guess?

Own example: in $COUNTRY almost all banks use either their app or Viber to send 2FA. I refuse to use Viber out of principle, and also their app refuses to work on phones that don't use Google services. Should I be locked out of my banking because of me refusing to support the practices of other, unrelated services that happen to be 'popular'? Note that there is no other way to get the codes - other banks may use SMS but that is expected to be sunset next year and they will switch to the same methods.

IMHO it's disingenuous to say that there are options, when most of the time there aren't any.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#325

Post by Nextgrid »

Matheus28 wrote: post #143
bfdm wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't I be able to uae the software of my choosing? If i habe an account and have properly authenticated, the client I use is my choice. You can't reasonably make the "go elsewhere" argument with the monopoly hold FB has on much social data. We need to choose yo regulate them and others to force interoperability, or at the very least allow comcom explicitly (competitive compatibility).

So you want to consume their content, use their servers, but not display their ads?

Nothing prevents a third-party client from displaying ads.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#326

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

fzeroracer wrote: post #209
xmodem wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 3rd party is not making the API request though. I am, just using software that didn't come from the platform vendor. Many 3rd party twitter clients have expressed a willingness to display ads if provided an API to do so. As someone who has lost precious accessibility capabilities because of restrictions on 3rd party clients, I unfortunately have to point out that I don't really have a choice of what platforms I d…

Let me offer you a question then: Do you know how much data the OG App is taking from you while you authorize it to work on your behalf? How do you know it's not reading through your entire message history? Or building its own network graph of your friends to sell? How about security? How do you know it's securely storing your credentials? Or that it's not selling said credentials as well? Like in this scenario to Fa…

If you use the third party app, it might be doing all that stuff. If you use the official app, it will be doing all that stuff.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#327

Post by godmode2019 »

1270018080 wrote: post #37
tenpies wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give it a few. It's only a matter of time until the Leftist tech platforms ban a critical amount of content producers and make themselves irrelevant. After all, each creator you ban represents a multiple of monetizable viewers that you just partially or totally told "don't come to my site". Take Rumble for example. It still has a substantial amount of gristle, but a growing amount of mainstream content. It is also no…

I don't think there are any "leftist" social media platform. Maybe explicitly leftist subreddits if that counts? But overall, there are normal people platforms and right wing propaganda platforms. Is this the effect where anything left of fox news is "communism"? I hadn't heard of Rumble until now. But I'm just seeing some putin defense, covid conspiracy, and joe biden is a terrorist videos. And the UX is early 2010'…

Welcome to 2010 YouTube were adults can decide what information they want to consume.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#328

Post by yaddaor »

chaostheory wrote: post #166
josephcsible wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should phone companies get to force you to use phones you rent from them, instead of having the freedom to bring your own?

Meta isn't a utility that's been granted a legal monopoly / duopoly by the government, so it's not a great analogy.

Should websites be able to dictate which programs can access them? In a way a website is just an API too.

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#329

Post by cassianoleal »

franga2000 wrote: post #273
fzeroracer wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean from another perspective this is effectively a MITM style way of interacting with Meta's API. They are behaving as another unauthorized layer between the user and Meta's API. In actual secure systems involving third party clients the client usually authorizes itself on behalf of some user requests or permissions, so while it does things for the user there's a clear and secure delegation of permissions. Have yo…

> To put it in another way let's say there was a website that said it authorized with Steam. It asked you to put in your steam username and password. Is this secure? "Is this secure?" fully depends on what the attack vectors you're considering are. Breach of the server's database? Make it an app instead of a website and make requests directly. Malicious code in the client itself? Make it open source. Now it's even mo…

Moreover, exactly how does said 3rd-party app differ from a web browser? Is it not a 3rd-party that has full access to login credentials, cookies, etc? Do they prohibit certain browsers from using their websites and APIs?

Re: Meta has banned the personal Facebook accounts for everyone on our team

#330

Post by dylan604 »

hedora wrote: post #300
dylan604 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the site and advertiser care about a single thing I disagree. The site just wants the advertiser's money. The advertiser wants the human to see an ad.

The user wants to support the site, and doesn't want to see the ad. Why not have the browser /dev/null them, and click a few for the heck of it? It would be in the user's interest.

Isn't this what I stated in the original comment?
Post reply on HN