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

171–180 of 442 posts

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

#171

Post by josephcsible »

etchalon wrote: post #158
josephcsible wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one that says meaningful competition will exist.

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.

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

#172

Post by voidwtf »

voidwtf wrote: post #162
notjtrig wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a comedian is deplatformed should they ban the production team, ban Alex Jones' sound guy maybe, what about the people who voted for Trump, willing participation? I could imagine certain protests being demonized and their attendants removed from meta for violating terms of service. The real question is do they virtually round up the avatars for public deletions, or do they just disappear them? I think a lot of peo…

I was careful in my choice of the word participated. I chose to use that word as I intended it to only include people who worked on the product. If anyone at the company who did not work on the development of the product was banned then I wholly disagree with their suspension. Also, while I enjoy your alliteration, it’s also an extremely steep “slippery slope” argument. It’s certainly not an argument I was trying to…

p.s. to entertain your comedian argument, I think there are some situations where that may be correct.

If a comedian tells vile racist jokes, I believe the writer of the joke, the talent manager who knew the comedians content, the person who booked the comedian knowing the content, and the venue who knowingly provided the platform for the content should all be similarly shunned.

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

#173

Post by cortesoft »

amatecha wrote: post #94
ummonk wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta doesn’t have the ability to monitor its users’ computers to see if any of them end up having data sent to a server.

Again, I'm asking _the person in the thread above_ who made these claims that the app is stealing user data to provide any supporting evidence, perhaps via the methods I described in my last comment. I'm not talking about Meta.

Yes, an individual can do that.

That is not the point. The person you replied to wasn't saying they know for sure they were stealing user data, just that Meta has no way of knowing they aren't, and even if they aren't right now, no way of knowing if they will start in the future.

It doesn't matter what the app does at this moment, it can be changed at any point.

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

#174

Post by amatecha »

cortesoft wrote: post #147
amatecha wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, that's fine by me. Or even "video content is restricted to 240p unless you have a paid subscription, then you can see videos in 1080p". Right? It's 1000% possible to come up with totally fair business models that aren't so blatantly exploitative. Right now "the user is the product" on ANY free service. Previously there was App.net, which was effectively "Twitter but you pay for access". It had a free tier which…

Ok... what if they said, "it is free if you use our app and let us advertise to you, or you can pay us and use any client you want"?

That would be awesome. Right now, you usually get an even less favorable choice than that! For example with Spotify, you either use their app and see ads, or you pay and don't see ads, but still are forced to use their app.

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

#175

Post by TobyTheDog123 »

It is absolutely incredible to me that people are defending Meta in this thread.

- Yes, Facebook had the right to do it. They're terrible for doing it, though. Meta is terrible? No way!

- I'm extremely exhausted of the "tough luck, it's a private company" shtick when it fits someone's personal interests, but cry corporate capitalistic Hell when it doesn't.

- There is nothing I've seen in the Apple Developer Guidelines that would warrant it being removed, though I'm open to this (it's been a while since I've read the full thing)

Perhaps we should ban accounts over iframes next?

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

#176

Post by [deleted] »

abigail95 wrote: post #133
ipsum2 wrote: post #4

Privacy proponents should cheer for this. Legally Meta must take down the app to comply with FTC's order (obligatory not a lawyer): https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2019/07/ftcs-5-bi... > Another way the FTC says Facebook violated the order was by failing to adequately assess and address privacy risks posed by third-party developers. Other than getting developers to click an “I agree” terms-and-conditions b…

Are Firefox/Chrome third-party developers too? What's the difference between me creating my own web browser that renders instagram according to my own rules vs Chrome?

[deleted]

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

#177

Post by dleslie »

josephcsible wrote: post #150
dleslie wrote: post #138

Many folks on here might be too young to remember, but there was an era where cable companies served premium channels with a scrambled signal to all customers, and sold access by way of attaching the appropriate filter. In fact, all channels were protected in this way, with your cable box holding the necessary filters. Albeit, some were merely hidden by a band pass filter and not scrambled. Anyhow, those arguing that…

If a third party can build a box to decrypt your encryption without you providing a key, then instead of suing the third party out of existence, you should pick a new encryption algorithm that's actually secure. Consider this analogy: should Master Lock be able to sue companies that make padlock shims, since several of their locks are vulnerable to shimming attacks?

Building and owning circumvention devices is generally legal; using those devices to access things protected by locks, which you are not authorized access, is generally not legal.

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

#178

Post by int_19h »

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.

> 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?

They're welcome to find a different business model. Why should we sacrifice interoperability for everyone for their sake?

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

#179

Post by xwowsersx »

minimaxir wrote: post #8

It's worth noting that the app received $1M in preseed funding: https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/27/og-app-promises-you-an-ad-... It's also worth noting that the Instagram API is extremely locked down for typical users (which is the reason why there hasn't been a clone like this) as it is limited to Businesses and Creators, but the app demonstrates features not available by the official API: https://developers.facebook…

How did they get pre-seed funding for this? Unless I'm missing something, any angel who would invest $1M into a company that is building an alternative, ad-free Instagram client has to be one of the dumbest people around, no?

How could anyone even conceivably think this could go on indefinitely?

I'm asking genuinely because I don't get how anyone could've thought this would end any way other than by Meta putting the kibosh on this.

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

#180

Post by amatecha »

nilssonanders wrote: post #151
slimsag wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter itself has never made a client as good as TweetDeck or TweetBot, and invariably never will. tweetdeck.twitter.com exists and I use it regularly, what am I missing?

Twitter bought Tweetdeck for $40 Million in 2011.

Exactly right - I meant the "real" TweetDeck of 2008-2010 lol :) Multiple columns of custom user groups, so straightforward. Oh yeah, no ads!
Post reply on HN