I'm rather surprised it took Meta this long in the wake of X introducing subscription plans quite long ago now.
Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
471–480 of 533 posts
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#472Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can accomplish "no ads" and arguably substantially less tracking without Premium, though, with (e.g.) firefox and ublock origin. The only downside is an occasional ignorable warning that you're "seeing interruptions".
How does that get money to the people making the videos I like watching?
I'd suggest getting them money through patreon, kofi or whatever patrons system they use instead. That's much safer for them than YT ad money and helps them feel less pressure when they get demonetized or whatnot.
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#473Earlier quoted context omitted.
Email is not chat and it's certainly not Instagram. Your suggestion will only work for people who are not really users of WhatsApp or Instagram.
No, the suggestion "only" works for those of your friends who truly value you. If they want to connect with you, they'll find a way. If they don't, they won't.
Ah, yes, "truly value". The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle. Needless to say, I disagree.
I value my (various groups of) friends more than I value moving out of WhatsApp, and for what anyway? WhatsApp is perfect for our needs. If it becomes paid-only, we'll move out of it, but not before. I don't need dealing with this kind of nerdy crusade. And I need to have WhatsApp installed anyway for different family members [1] and the parent school groups and official comms from school.
Sorry, but that suggestion is a no-go in the real world. It only works in the micro-bubble of HN.
---
[1] Let me preempt your likely "but convince all of your family of using instead...". No. Just no.
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#474Earlier quoted context omitted.
I pay YouTube Premium and get no ads there. It's totally worth it for me. I get that they aren't performing less tracking on me, and they've labeled me as "will pay subscriptions for stuff". But I get so much out of YouTube that's it's a no-brainer.
You can accomplish "no ads" and arguably substantially less tracking without Premium, though, with (e.g.) firefox and ublock origin. The only downside is an occasional ignorable warning that you're "seeing interruptions".
there's still an annoying pause in there on video load (and sometimes video skip/scrub) due to how youtube tries to thwart ad-blockers
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#475Earlier quoted context omitted.
You paying just signals that you're someone to push more ads to and to harvest more data on, since it means you have disposable income to spend on something as useless as instagram or facebook. Meta isn't going to stop harvesting all your information just because you pay for a subscription, they'll harvest and sell your data AND take your money.
"Meta isn't going to stop harvesting all your information just because you pay for a subscription, they'll harvest [and sell] your data AND take your money." (Meta sells access not data) Google has been doing this for a while with YouTube The data collection and surveillance will of course be used to support online advertising services. The ads can be delivered outside YouTube by other Alphabet business units or part…
I don't subscribe to "YouTube Premuim" and I get no ads there
I avoid using Google's Javascript to play other peoples' uploaded videos
I get so much relief out of avoiding the Javascript, telemetry, data collection, behavioural surveillance, "recommendations" and ads, and whatever nonsense Google is doing behind the scenes
It's totally worth it for me
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#476I'm going to go against the grain here and say this is probably a positive thing for Meta products, and honestly every other "free" service to provide these kinds of revenue avenues. How many times do we hear things like "if the product is free, you are the product" - well, the consequence of that is development resources tend to be pulled into directions that benefit advertisers. By having material subscription reve…
> How many times do we hear things like "if the product is free, you are the product" Do their subscriptions give people an ad free experience? Does it give them extra privacy? To me it sounds like they no longer are making enough money, so now they are asking people to pay to be the product
> they no longer are making enough money
Have they ever made enough money according to their own desire?
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#477Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#478Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, pay them to keep doing what they already do?
Yes. The difference is now the money is coming from you rather than selling your data. Which is what you want. Of course, they could still sell your data anyway. That's why it's important to pay attention to their T&C.
s/rather than/as well as/g
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the suggestion "only" works for those of your friends who truly value you. If they want to connect with you, they'll find a way. If they don't, they won't.
Ah, yes, "truly value". The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle. Needless to say, I disagree. I value my (various groups of) friends more than I value moving out of WhatsApp, and for what anyway? WhatsApp is perfect for our needs. If it becomes paid-only, we'll move out of it, but not before. I don't need dealing with this kind o…
>The measure of how much one is valued is whether people are willing to move out of a chat app due to some sort of nerd principle.
Why do they have to be "willing to move out"? They're free to continue to use whatever they want, but how they get in touch with you might be different. Also, what's up with using "nerd" as a pejorative? Why the hostility?
But at the end of the day, yeah, it's not all that off-base. The measure of how much someone values staying in touch with you is generally going to be reflected in how much effort they put into doing so.
>Sorry, but that suggestion is a no-go in the real world.
What is "the real world"? Is there a standard definition that is applicable to everyone everywhere? I live in "the real world", too, and have no issue conversing with all of my family, parents from my kid's school, and official notifications from school without WhatsApp or social media. Texts, phone calls, emails, regular in-person meets/activities all work wonders, as does the school's communication system that can be accessed via a browser, or the notices/bulletins my kids bring home on paper that typically cover most of what's communicated via the browser (but I digress).
>It only works in the micro-bubble of HN.
No, it works where it works, and it doesn't where it doesn't. The thing that a lot of people in the comments in these types of threads seem to miss is that this is very obviously a "YMMV" situation, wholly dependent upon what's around you. Sure, fine, use WhatsApp because you need important information from your kid's school(s) if that's literally the only way they communicate - I'm a reasonable individual who won't criticize such a move, because your hands are tied. C'est la vie.
>[1] Let me preempt your likely "but convince all of your family of using instead...". No. Just no.
There's no pre-empting necessary on your part because I had no intention of it, but, uhh... thanks for the assumption, I guess? You don't have to bother convincing anyone. "Here's how to reach me," one time is all that needs to be done. If they want to reach you, they'll reach you. No extolling of virtues required, and trying to convince someone not to use something is not necessary.
Re: Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions
#480Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am living in spain and I never used whatsapp professionally. I've had a few messages sent by medical clinics to confirm appointment, delivery workers to drop a package or some others pros but if you don't have whatsapp they just call you anyway so it is not necessary. Most people in Spain still rely and prefer voice calls than messages anyway. I believe half the country must still be illiterate as they manage to se…
Absolutely inaccurate. I am nationalized Spaniard living here 2+ decades. Almost no one over 50 calls on the phone and when they do they almost always send a message first. The large public institution I work in is removing landlines completely because they get too little use to justify the cost. I am (mostly against my will) in multiple professional and personal Whatsapp groups. Use is constant and daily and unavoid…
Removing landline only means people have mobile phones, not how they use them.
I am in andalusia, hardly the most modern area if you discount the migrants that call themselves expats.