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

411–420 of 442 posts

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

#411

Post by 1270018080 »

godmode2019 wrote: post #327
1270018080 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Adults most vulnerable to right wing propaganda, the demographic famous for making good decisions for themselves and those around them.

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

#412

Post by Dylan16807 »

chaostheory wrote: post #410
Dylan16807 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 y…

> The problem is that you are not willing to pay either money up front or with watching ads.

> clearly disingenuous because you’re not willing to pay for SMS

Why are you saying this??

I am fully willing to pay that much. josephcsible also sounds fully willing to pay that much.

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

#413

Post by phendrenad2 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #41
ipsum2 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you accusing these developers of violating privacy? Yes, the app is downloading private user messages (ostensibly to show a modified messaging interface) and private photos, according to their feature list. This isn't a simple DNS-level ad-block, its acting as a proxy where the app developers can intercept and see all data. Their website doesn't even have a privacy policy, just a dummy link: https://www.theogap…

An app downloading on behalf of the user isn't a privacy issue. Are their servers acting as a proxy? Whether that's a privacy issue depends on how they configure/limit/audit their servers.

Someone didn't read the GDPR...

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

#414

Post by amatecha »

blandflakes wrote: post #351
Matheus28 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. No one has the right to use facebook/twitter/etc as they wish, or even at all. They're not necessary for modern western society. SMS and phone calls are always an option. We aren't like China where if you don't have WeChat you can't do anything.

On the flip side, then, no government organizations should use Twitter as their primary form of disseminating information. I should be able to get this information without creating an account on these platforms (looking at you, MBTA).

Yeah, I totally believe this -- no government organization should be allowed to post public announcements/information to a proprietary platform gated behind a ToS without also posting that information on publicly-accessible unencumbered locations like a basic, low-resource-usage website.

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

#415

Post by etchalon »

josephcsible wrote: post #171
etchalon wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how a service which just regurgitates the content of another service is "competition".

I'm not saying it is. I'm saying that today, social networks are an oligopoly and lack meaningful competition. That makes it not a free market, which means the social media companies shouldn't get to do everything that companies in a free market can, and should instead be regulated like other things that aren't free markets, e.g., utilities.

Social networks are by no means an oligopoly. There are a LOT of social networks out there. There is a lot of competition. There are few, if any, real barriers for an end user to switch to a different social network – beyond convincing their friends to do so.

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

#416

Post by bobsil1 »

93po wrote: post #405
bobsil1 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*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?

*that tried to lynch VP, Congress via tweets

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

#417

Post by nobody9999 »

fzeroracer wrote: post #398
nobody9999 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Tell me, for the OGApp what is the monetization scheme? How do they intend to make money? By default if you don't see anything upfront you should assume that your data is what is being monetized. And your data in this case includes everything the app can pull down from Instagram while it's acting as a proxy. I have no idea. I'd never heard of this app as I don't ever use whatever functionality it provides. I'm not s…

Yes, you can choose whatever software you want to run, but Meta would be in full rights to ban you for using third party clients. And Meta has a vested interest in ensuring that people aren't using clients that scam their users out of their credentials because said users don't exist in a vacuum. They have friends, family, private messages and so forth that other users did not consent to have stolen or taken by a thir…

>And Meta has a vested interest in ensuring that people aren't using clients that scam their users out of their credentials because said users don't exist in a vacuum.

Did this specific app actually "scam users out of their credentials?"

I'd expect that they didn't "scam" anything. The end user installed the app and voluntarily provided their credentials in order to access their content.

How is that a scam? If I'm using an Android phone and sideload an app to access say, HN, whether that's an apk from a publisher's website or from F-Droid, have I been scammed out of my HN credentials by that app's publisher?

If the app claimed to be the "official" app from Meta and used phishing techniques to get folks to install the app and/or reveal their credentials, that would be scamming.

But a deliberate choice by a user to use a specific app for a specific purpose, with the app in question actually serving that specific purpose doesn't seem like a "scam" to me.

Sure, Meta doesn't like it for a bunch of reasons. And it doesn't surprise me that they took action to smack these guys down. But characterizing this app as a "scam" doesn't seem to reflect reality.

Or am I missing something?

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

#418

Post by nobody9999 »

geysersam wrote: post #374
Nextgrid wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data served via the API is ultimately what's displayed on the screen of the official client - if they're displaying it to you, they're happy for you to be seeing it and it shouldn't matter whether you're seeing it in the official client or third-party.

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.

>According to? That's an ethical stance one can take, but it isn't how our laws work.

What law? Please be specific here as I'm not clear what you're getting at.

If you're referring the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA)[0], it states:

   The law prohibits accessing a computer without authorization, or 
   in excess of authorization.
WRT NSA servers, accessing classified information (assuming you don't have clearance and/or a need for that information) would violate the CFAA and possibly the Espionage Act[1].

However, in this particular case, an end user is accessing data (with appropriate credentials that have access to no more and no less than the data they are authorized to access) for which they have appropriate authorization. As such, it can't be a violation of the CFAA. So, where's the "crime" here?

I'm not sure how you're getting from point A to point B here. If you could help me out, I'd appreciate it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917

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

#419

Post by hedora »

simiones wrote: post #358
dylan604 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this what I stated in the original comment?

Doing that is borderline fraud - I believe that GP meant to highlight this. If it gets counted as actual clicks, it's actually explicitly defrauding the advertiser.

Is it though?

Most people sometimes leave the room while ads play on TV. The advertisers know that and work the percentage of pepole that do that into their pricing, etc.

Also, non-organic click fraud is rampant already (and maybe even the majority of clicks). /dev/null + click would at least route ad income to reputable sites that at least have some human readers to view future ad impressions.

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

#420

Post by LocalH »

Matheus28 wrote: post #83
amatecha wrote: post #45

Oh wow, this app got pulled from everything because it's an unofficial 3rd party client for Instagram? I'll say it again, companies should be legally forbidden from blocking 3rd party clients. They don't have to explicitly support them, but taking action to explicitly thwart them (and writing ToS that forbids them) should be outlawed. There's no reason I should have to be subjected to untold tracking, snooping and ad…

Why should 3rd parties be allowed to make unauthorized api requests? Additionally, some apps are only monetized through advertisement, and 3rd party apps don't display them. How do you expect the 1st party to stay in business? I don't align with Meta on a lot of issues, but they should be able to control what apps interact with their platform. Don't like it, don't use it.

Why should 3rd parties be allowed to sell unauthorized devices to be connected to the telephone line?

Additionally, phones are only monetized through leasing, and 3rd party phones aren’t leased. How do you expect the 1st party to stay in business?

I don’t align with AT&T on a lot of issues, but they should be able to control which phones connect to their network. Don’t like it, don’t use it.

Post reply on HN