171–180 of 185 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't seem worse to me. Apple is free to make and sell accessories for its own hardware products. It would be a problem if Apple sold its smart watch while also breaking iPhone's compatibility with third party smart watches.
It's also a problem that Apple sells its own phones while breaking the Apple Watch's compatibility with other phones.
> The report states that, “conditioning access to a product or service in which a firm has market power to the use of a separate product or service is anticompetitive.” I agree with this. I shouldn’t have to have a social media account in order to use a product that isn’t directly related to social media. Accounts like Microsoft aren’t the same as Facebook IMO because they tie products and services I’ve purchased to…
(which I also think is a behaviour that should be stopped)
I was very excited about the Oculus Quest, was considering buying it and suddenly the Oculus Quest 2 came up. Then I dug deeper and I saw I needed a facebook account (which I don't have nor want). So because I don't have a FB account Oculus/Facebook has lost hundreds of dollars for me. How does that even make sense?
Because you don't want a FB account, you missed out on an incredible VR experience. How does that even make sense?
That's how it makes sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue isn't with being forced to use social media, it's being forced to use only facebook's network. Privacy is a separate issue. They could just make Oculus also connect to other social networks including facebook's competition. Then the anticompetitive complaint is gone as Oculus's market share no longer gives Facebook an advantage. Yet the creepy privacy-violating continues more than ever. Sort of like IOS and…
> The issue isn't with being forced to use social media, it's being forced to use only facebook's network. Yes it is, read the article. The report states that regulators take issue with the fact that users have to log into an account that has nothing to do with gaming in order to use a gaming product. This isn’t about using one social media network over another, it’s about requiring users to hand over personal consum…
Assuming we are talking about the same tiny article, you are oddly confident in your interpretation. The "conditioning access" quote is not directly about Facebook. The 400-page linked document talks about conditioning access in reference to google pushing search use via its android apps, analogous to what I stated above with facebook pushing their network.
As for the statements specifically about Facebook which the linked article did quote, they describe Facebook doing exactly what I said is the problem, namely not allowing competitors to use its platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried to look this up, and I found people saying you don’t need an Xbox Live account, but you still need a Microsoft account. Would appreciate any authoritative source that can answer the question.
You need a Microsoft account to do anything with an Xbox One or Xbox Series, including playing offline games. If you don't have one, you get a series of prompts to create one. Doesn't need to be linked to anything, not even an email. If this is being used to bypass a ban, the console will get banned.
I don't understand why Oculus, being owned by Facebook, should not be allowed to require a Facebook login. I don't like it much, but it is their company. They invested shitloads of money in it, too. It's also not the only VR headset in town.
It is the only standalone VR headset in town that’s 1) currently supported and 2) available/affordable for individuals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if they sold it as "Facebook Oculus"?
That wouldn’t change anything. The issue is that Oculus is a gaming platform, and gaming platforms don’t need social media data to play games. It’s an arbitrary requirement that has no practical function beyond collecting user data. Imagine needing to log into Facebook in order to use your TV, refrigerator, etc. This is what regulators are trying to get ahead of.
Hasn't the exact same thing been happening already for a long time with Google accounts?
I don't understand why Oculus, being owned by Facebook, should not be allowed to require a Facebook login. I don't like it much, but it is their company. They invested shitloads of money in it, too. It's also not the only VR headset in town.
> It's also not the only VR headset in town. It is the only standalone VR headset in town that’s 1) currently supported and 2) available/affordable for individuals.
Also, then don't go standalone. Yeah it's a nice feature. Facebook paid for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangentially related: newly-created Facebook accounts are a whole lot harder to keep up these days if you’re just using them for a single purpose, like following events. I created an account last year to get more socially involved in my community but I didn’t want to post any personal information and my account kept getting disabled unless I added pictures and filled out certain sections of my profile. Not sure if it…
twitter did the same thing to me, but worse. they let me create an account and then locked it and wanted to know my phone number before they would unlock it. I can't even go delete it without giving them personal information.
however, i managed to unlock it somehow, first i sent them a trouble ticket asking why i could not tweet anymore (which immediately got me an email that said my account was locked for "suspicious activity" and that i needed to confirm my identity with phone number), then i requested all the data they had on me through the profile options, waited 3 days for them to do the archive then when i logged back in to download it they would only ask for a recaptcha challenge to unlock my account
perhaps they consider bots unable to request gdpr data ?