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

401–410 of 442 posts

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

#401

Post by chaostheory »

lightspot21 wrote: post #384
chaostheory wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not as endemic as you make it out to be or there would be a public outcry. Banking and social media are also two very different industries. One is essential while the other is mainly bread and circus with a myriad of alternatives

> It’s not as endemic as you make it out to be or there would be a public outcry. It's a matter of time. Even if it's not endemic in the US (which I severely doubt) it's endemic elsewhere. Don't underestimate the public's ability to put up with things, especially if they are mostly kept in the dark about the most sinister effects. > Banking and social media are also two very different industries. One is essential whi…

Facebook’s brand has been all but destroyed. The Quest 2 is prime evidence for that. It’s an amazing device at an amazing price that didn’t have as many adopters due to meta’s past reputation.

Social networks are not an essential service. There are other social networks and there are other forms of communication including SMS which is standard on all phones. If you’re not willing to pay for a better service like iMessage instead of an ad supported one, that is your problem

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

#402

Post by Dylan16807 »

xvector wrote: post #343
Dylan16807 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a potential privacy violation. Distinguishing "it violates privacy" and "it could violate privacy if the code was changed" is not naive.

Are you seriously saying it should be Meta's job to continuously reverse engineer a third party client (that doesn't even have a privacy policy ) to figure out if it violates users' privacy? That's absurd. Far more sensible to just ban it and call it a day.

I didn't say that.

What I said is that the two scenarios are very different.

ipsum2 is accusing the devs of already violating privacy.

Also their privacy policy is here: https://www.theogapp.com/privacy

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

#403

Post by Dylan16807 »

ummonk wrote: post #391
nobody9999 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The app is by definition acting as a proxy, and therefore the developers can intercept and see the data, though they might not be doing so currently. You're making an assumption here that hasn't been confirmed. That assumption being that any app accessing user data from Meta is proxying (i.e., streaming the requested data to the app publisher's servers and then passing that data along to the end user) that data thro…

I (and the person who wrote that) made no such assumption. A client side proxy is still a proxy. That’s why, for example, Charles Proxy is a proxy.

Charles Proxy is proxying requests to your browser.

If you use the built-in dev tools to do the same thing, then there is no proxy.

An alternative client for something is (usually) not a proxy. It connects directly.

But more importantly, "a proxy where the app developers can intercept and see all data" is not referring to a client-side proxy. Even if there was a client-side proxy involved somewhere, that would make the initial claim wrong.

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

#405

Post by 93po »

bobsil1 wrote: post #54
lmz wrote: post #3

These companies can ban the US President from their platforms. What makes you think they can't ban yours - you don't even have any nuclear launch codes...

*These companies can ban a terrorist from abusing their platforms as a terrorist control channel, banning him years too late due to their corrupt incentives.

Is this the narrative now? Tr*mp is a terrorist? Are we holding the same standards against previous presidents, too? Is drone striking Americans without due process also a terrorist move? Or are we only going to focus on the one president that said mean things on Twitter?

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

#406

Post by Dylan16807 »

chaostheory wrote: post #399
josephcsible wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember when Nestlé gave new mothers free trials of baby formula, that lasted just long enough that they'd stop producing breast milk? Was that okay too, since the mothers could have declined but made the personal choice to accept?

It’s a bad analogy because in this case, the alternatives never went away. If you don’t want to pay for a service upfront with money, you need to pay for it with ads on the service provider’s terms. That is your personal problem stemming from your personal choices. There are alternatives.

There's no way to pay for these services upfront and not have the ads and tracking, is there?

Alternatives aren't real alternatives if you can't get to your friends.

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

#407

Post by geysersam »

Nextgrid wrote: post #376
geysersam wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how it works. If a badly configured NSA server displays confidential data on your screen, you're still a criminal if you make use of that to access data. > it shouldn't matter According to? That's an ethical stance one can take, but it isn't how our laws work.

> If a badly configured NSA server displays confidential data on your screen, you're still a criminal if you make use of that to access data. If a badly configured NSA server gives you data, intentionally accessing it (and/or then misusing the data) would be the crime. I don't think it matters whether you view that data in a browser, a terminal or some third-party client. Here, the third-party client is accessing the…

Of course it wouldn't be a breach if the data just popped up on your screen without you actively trying to access it. But if you, knowingly, access material you shouldn't have access to, it could be a breach of ToS.

> Breach of ToS != crime.

Breaching a contract is not generally a crime either. But it might lead to a civil case.

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

#408

Post by Ajedi32 »

likpok wrote: post #366
josephcsible wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I send you something, you should be able to copy and distribute it as you see fit, no matter what I wish you would and wouldn't do with it, and my recourse should be limited to not sending you more things in the future.

In this interpretation, FB should not have been fined for CA. While it’s a cogent theory, regulators disagree with you and they have guns backing them up.

Thankfully many of us here live in countries where the pen is mightier than the sword. If regulators' opinions don't match up with those of the people, then maybe we need some new regulators.

Not trying to imply there's any sort of consensus here, of course. Just that "regulators disagree" certainly isn't the end of the discussion in any country with a functioning democracy.

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

#409

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

chaostheory wrote: post #181
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without control of the client, it gets much harder to fight abuse.

Meta isn't some utility people can't live without. It's optional. If you're worried about abuse, then don't use it.

Meta is worried about abuse because if 99.999999% of posts on Meta are spam, people stop using it.

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

#410

Post by chaostheory »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #406
chaostheory wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a bad analogy because in this case, the alternatives never went away. If you don’t want to pay for a service upfront with money, you need to pay for it with ads on the service provider’s terms. That is your personal problem stemming from your personal choices. There are alternatives.

There's no way to pay for these services upfront and not have the ads and tracking, is there? Alternatives aren't real alternatives if you can't get to your friends.

They are alternatives because your friends can also switch services. The problem is that you are not willing to pay either money up front or with watching ads. That is not a meta problem, that is problem with your personal preferences no matter how you want to spin it. There are many alternatives available right now and they didn’t disappear like your bad analogy. What you’ve written is clearly disingenuous because you’re not willing to pay for SMS, which everyone including your friends still has access to. It’s not fair to blame meta for that
Post reply on HN