201–210 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consoles are unique in that they sell the hardware initially at a loss which they recoup through game sales and future production efficiencies. If you allow people to install third party software without Sony's approval then you deprive them of this revenue stream and make the platform basically like a PC. Which us console gamers do not want. Android manufacturers make their money from the hardware so it's irrelevant…
Yes, Sony won't make profit on games unless you actually want games. I don't see what the problem is. Sell a more expensive, unlocked version of the PS5 I can do whatever I want on. What's the issue?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You kind of took it off the deep at there with the last sentence. Sure the Trump dept of education has been especially bad, but you can't blame all of the past decades of US public education mediocrity on corporate interests. Don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
Don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence. Or unions. While teachers unions have been great for teachers, they've been lousy for teaching.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wasn’t this closed in response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal?
The scandal in Cambridge Analytica was roughly that they were able do this stuff after FB made it officially against the rules.
FB never built technical countermeasures, merely asked app devs to pinky-swear not to siphon user data.
I’m all for how these changes are going to negatively affect Facebook and advertisers. But I just can’t also escape the feeling in the long term I’m giving up control of the devices I own and the actual act of computing to get to this result. If it came to destroying advertisers or free open computing I want free computing.
I'm all for bashing Apple for some of their more restrictive policies but what about THIS decision is making you uncomfortable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple absolutely does abuse their power as a monopoly. I'm not sure how that's related to asking users for permission to share data with third parties, which is what this was about.
Apple is exempting itself from this policy, keeping its own tracking on by default: https://twitter.com/eric_seufert/status/1291730115253145600?... Previously, Apple and third-party tracking were both controlled by the same opt-put setting. Using your power as platform owner to turn your competitor’s ad tracking off by default while keeping yours on? Sure seems abusive to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure about "healthy", but un-targeted advertising is a total waste of money, unless you're some big generic brand. High-value advertising revenue generally comes from very specific brands targeting very specific users. Of course you can do certain kinds of targeted advertising without user profiles, but I don't see how that would work on Facebook.
In this case how does real-world advertising in magazines, public transport, TV, etc manages to have such a high price despite the targeting capabilities being orders of magnitude lower than online? Maybe the problem with online ads isn't the targeting or lack thereof but that the well has been poisoned by allowing even the worst possible scum and the users reached their breaking point and learned to ignore them, whi…
Some companies are willing to pay that much more for the prestige of showing up in the "real world", just like some brands might maintain unprofitable flagship stores.
Another reason is "because they have to charge that much". Which means that if fewer companies are willing to pay that much, more classic media outlets go out of business, as they can not lower prices further.
Lastly, you can't accurately measure how inefficient these forms of advertising are, whereas online advertising makes it easy to see whether ads are a net loss or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm honestly interested about this, Facebook is a big company. Is there no case of FB screwing over its partners? Like locking or limiting an API that they had offered in the past, etc. One thing that comes to mind immediately is that Facebook Messenger used to be accessible through XMPP and then they blocked that.
You used to be able to fetch public events (not for a user, not private events, just public events that you can easily browse to anonymously) and I had made a site that showed everything that was going on in my city. It was fantastic, you could see all concerts/gigs/plays for each day at a glance. One day, Facebook just killed that endpoint for "privacy reasons". Anyone can still open a web browser and visit the even…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is exempting itself from this policy, keeping its own tracking on by default: https://twitter.com/eric_seufert/status/1291730115253145600?... Previously, Apple and third-party tracking were both controlled by the same opt-put setting. Using your power as platform owner to turn your competitor’s ad tracking off by default while keeping yours on? Sure seems abusive to me.
In what way is Apple a competitor to Facebook or Google Ads?
I think the purpose of this change is to redirect the revenue from FB to Apple.