Meta is about to roll out ad-free subscriptions on Instagram and Facebook. But critics say privacy should not be turned into a luxury.
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 84 users / day
- 537 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 6.58K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.48K Posts
- 57.4K Comments
- Modlog
Well, getting an extra 10$ each month sounds nice but it’s really not remotely enough to make me use Facebook.
Uninstalling that garbage is free
removed by mod
For $10/mo, you dont see ads while we track everything you do on the internet.
Whats privacy got to do with it?
They just need a non-sketchy way to ask you for a donation
“privacy”
There’s no fucking way. They’ll take your $10 and still sell all your shit.
deleted by creator
Is it just me or is this article written under the false assumption that Facebook not serving you ads is somehow the same as Facebook not collecting your data? Because just yesterday I read an article about Costco being in trouble for allowing Facebook’s tracking pixel to collect their customers’ HIPPA-protected medical information through their pharmacy’s web interface. I can’t imagine that serving ads or not serving ads is going to stop Facebook from collecting and exploiting all the personal data it possibly can. Paying to opt out of seeing ads seems like it would, at best, just make Facebook’s data mining less visible.
Not a FB user, yet my firewall and DNS filters at home and on my devices stop a LOT of FBs continual monitoring and profiling. $10/month to stop ads suggests a price to be paid to me and everyone else for using our data, OR they need to let us have an easy way to opt out
I don’t even use Facebook. In this case, I’m not even receiving any services from them, so they should so stop spying on me. If their answer is “pay us $10/month anyway,” which it seems to be then Facebook is more of a protection racket than a legitimate business.
And of course the “expert” quoted in favor of giving everything to Facebook is a Washington DC lobbyist.
I don’t understand why everything seems to always require “both sides” in reporting. Some things should be written with an obvious slant and not try to walk it back with a BS quote from the other side.
Here’s a tip that costs less than $10/month - if you want privacy, just don’t go on Facebook!
T’ain’t enough. Gotta block everything they do, everywhere on the internet.
As someone so eloquently put it: you might not have a facebook profile, but facebook has a you profile.
If you’ve ever seen a “share on facebook” button on another website, they’ve been watching you.
Aka a shadow profile.
This has to be illegal. And if it’s not, it should be. There was a good excuse for a while: the internet is too new for regulations to be in place yet. Well we are well past that, but too many people are making money off of them still not being in place. Fuck.
I know for a fact that I have at least 3 different shadow profiles about me being bought and sold on the Internet. They all have different inaccurate information about me. Because I don’t have a direct relationship with the brokers, any attempt by me to correct or remove one of the profiles would just result in yet another profile.
We need global legislation to make it illegal to hold PII on an individual without notifying them of the fact annually. Failure to do so would have GDPR level consequences.
While Europe may seem to care about privacy, good luck in the states. If you think US regulators care, well, bridges are a hot commodity in this thread and I’ve got em
You’ll have to outbid cuckerberg for enough corrupt politicians to do that, and he has a 15 year head start
Agreed, but how long have people been saying if you’re not paying, that you’re the product and they’d rather pay for privacy? Well, here they go!
Anybody with a brain wouldn’t actually trust Meta, but the idea is right at least.
Except they’re being tricked into believing they’re paying for privacy, when they’re actually paying for an ad not to be displayed. All the privacy-hostile tracking that went into selecting the ad will still take place but you’re $10 worse off.
But people pay thousands for cars and still end up the product. I don’t think paying guarantees privacy anymore and if anything is an outdated concept that gives people a false sense of security if they still buy into it. Data collection is the rage now.
And you’d better believe that they’ll have twice-a-year price hikes, Netflix-style.
They gotta pump up those numbers, those are rookie numbers
Privacy? What is this article talking about. Ads not displaying in no way implies privacy. They will harvest your data as much as it possibly can either way. All you are doing by paying to remove ads is directly funding the ad business model.
What annoys me most about that kind of logic is that the reverse could also be true - they could potentially run ads like on TV without directly profiling users or violating privacy. But by marrying the concept of ads and tracking, they can play the “but we need to pay for our services somehow” card.
And its not like their similar concepts at all. This journalist needs to actually read Facebook’s terms of service.
Exactly this!
The article confuses privacy and ads-free. As in, you pay $10 a month not to see what the data they collect on you would be used for if you didn’t pay. But they still collect data on you and monetize it in many other ways.
And if you think this is the final price, I’d like to buy a bridge from you…
This bridge is all over the place
If you believe Facebook will stop abusing your privacy if you pay them, I have a bridge to sell you…
Is it a private bridge?
Is it a nice bridge?
Why is that a phrase? People do occasionally sell bridges.
No. All bridges are gifted by the Bridge God. Attempts to create and then market a bridge results in mysterious death, 103% of the time.
The bridge god told me 60%, I want a refund
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/I+have+a+bridge+to+sell+you
Thanks