41–50 of 156 posts
signing away their rights to their photos? making psychopaths filthy rich?
if the surveillance glasses are coming, these people will also have signed away the commons, which are not theirs to give away
"I'm uncomfortable" Should have read the terms and conditions
Is Meta abusing its users a problem? Yes. Does the TOS allow for it? Yes. Can people decide to just create a shell account and not actually participate? Sure. One of the real insidious problems with Instagram and to some extent Facebook is that they provide a free, low friction way for business to communicate with current or potential customers. As a result many small businesses use Instagram as replacement for a pub…
You can't create shell account on fb/meta anymore. They will ask to turn on camera and rotate your head.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In what scenario would pulling in a friend's profile photo create a useful ad? Exactly in the scenario you just described. You still remember it and you are actively talking about it years after the fact.
But it didn't bring clicks to the website nor goodwill toward the company. No one remembers who ran the ad. Even if we did, it would only be in a negative light due to a weird and off-putting advertising approach.
There's a difference between awareness campaigns and click / conversion campaigns and if there's some ads for a garden chair and your friend is sitting on it you'll definitely remember it more than some random model. Or clothes that are advertised on your body. Not saying that's the future we want, but it would definitely work for a while.
Many years ago (back when Facebook still had sidebar ads), my sister was presented with a dating ad for "Hot Christian Singles" accompanied by a photo of our brother. It was hilarious, but also mind-boggling. In what scenario would pulling in a friend's profile photo create a useful ad?
> In what scenario would pulling in a friend's profile photo create a useful ad? Exactly in the scenario you just described. You still remember it and you are actively talking about it years after the fact.
Useful ad for Facebook. They made money on it. The advertiser didn't.
Is Meta abusing its users a problem? Yes. Does the TOS allow for it? Yes. Can people decide to just create a shell account and not actually participate? Sure. One of the real insidious problems with Instagram and to some extent Facebook is that they provide a free, low friction way for business to communicate with current or potential customers. As a result many small businesses use Instagram as replacement for a pub…
You can't create shell account on fb/meta anymore. They will ask to turn on camera and rotate your head.
I feel like having an account on a Meta site is today’s equivalent of being a smoker.
There isn't better analogy. I hope it spreads and we will see the same effect and social pressure as smokers faced.
Is there actual proof that they are doing this. Theres not much to go on in the tweet.
Besides the proof in the screenshot? What more do you want? Do you think this user is faking it?
Didn't Facebook do this years and years ago? Yes, 2013: https://mashable.com/archive/facebook-ads-photo#ggcKnNfAUaqy > According to Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities: > You give us permission to use your name, profile picture, content, and information in connection with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us. This means, for example, that you pe…
> If you don't want this, delete your facebook account What? I thought I could just paste a paragraph of all-caps legalese to my profile, and it would solve this!