madargon, 13 days ago

@darnell No, privacy is human right, not thing to put a price tag on it and sell. Nobody should be coerced to pay for not being psychologically manipulated and exploited.

And this only apply to ads in their awful serviced. Paying users wouldn't be free of tracking, only data would be used for other purposes. This is big horrible con.

darnell, 13 days ago

@madargon We also do not have a right to use their services either. We usually pay to use services, whether it be phone, flying, movies, etcetera.

The same applies here too.

madargon, 13 days ago

@darnell If their business model rely on exploitation, manipulation and general disrespect these companies shouldn't exist at all.

darnell, 13 days ago

@madargon People find them useful so they exist. The ad business model is for those who want to freely use their services.

Hosting & using social networks costs money, & without a way to generate revenue most of the Internet would not exist.

Paying to not see ads or have your info siphoned off is a great alternative.

madargon, 13 days ago

@darnell But data are STILL siphoned off - there's a big lie paid tiers are free of tracking. Only there is no ads visible. And displaying ads shouldn't require invading poeople's private lives and activities. There wers context ads for example.
Maybe it's good time to finally separate first thing from the second.

darnell, 13 days ago

@madargon Using their services is a choice. If you do not like or trust them, do not use their platforms (it is that simple really).

Years ago I had issues with #Facebook’s ad policies (I think they code named it beacon) so I stopped using their services & eventually deleted my account.

I did the same for #LinkedIn as well. If #YouTube ever gets to the place where I do not find value in the platform, I will leave.

These services are option, not critical for my life.

madargon, 13 days ago

@darnell Yes, I absolutely don't trust them and don't use. I cut from my life few of them and never touched the rest. And I block connections to their services if I find them. Never thought they are critical.
But there are people who don't use it voluntarily but because of external factors (employers, stubborn families, various service providers refusing to use other communication channels) forcing them. And they don't deserve to be "punished".

captainepoch, 15 days ago

@darnell Meta already does this in Europe. It costs 13€/month or you opt-in to tracking and see ads.

john, 15 days ago

@darnell You can do ads without tracking. That's what they would do if tracking were just flat illegal.

darnell, 15 days ago

@john Yeah, but then the ads would suck & no one would click on them, resulting in advertisers leaving & the company losing money.

Basically Twitter ads & Instagram ads when Apple blocks their tracking behavior. 😂

john, 15 days ago

@darnell Ads can be fitted to content, so it's not like they will be completely irrelevant. TV, radio, and until recently podcasting got by without ad tracking. Meta and Google are massively profitable. Non-tracked ads can be considerably less effective and the'd still profit.

darnell, 14 days ago

@john It looks like the European Union 🇪🇺 is agreeing with you here. Here is an article from @TechCrunch about this: https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/17/consent-or-pay-decision-report/

john, 14 days ago

@darnell @TechCrunch tech brought us to the place where tracking is so out of control that I agree with the intent, if I’m reading the tea leaves right, that the EU basically wants to outlaw it.

Forget consent, no one really consents to companies tracking their every move and thought. Crafting laws is tricky, of course, because many companies have legitimate reasons to collect and share data, which we naturally expect in some circumstances. The EU’s clunky solution is better than no solution.