4 ms·

I fail to see why that consideration should make a difference. Facebook provides a service, if you want to use the service, you see ads. If you don't want to se

by blahi 10y ago

I fail to see why that consideration should make a difference. Facebook provides a service, if you want to use the service, you see ads. If you don't want to see ads, don't use the service. Your livelihood is not threatened if you don't see some information hidden through a facebook login. If some friend of yours handles invitation through FB, that is because facebook provides a very good infrastructure to handle those things. In order for them to do that, they have to hire all sorts of people which kind of need salaries. Those salaries are paid by their business model. You are blocking their business model, consuming their resources and denying their employees and shareholders. Because...? I can see enabling adblock for the internet at large and sites you don't care about, but you KNOW that facebook relies on ads and you repeatedly use them. I also want to hear if you use google and adblock them too. Do you rarely go there too?

elmigranto 10y ago
No. Facebook does not provide a service, you said it yourself, it is "ad supported". What they provide is a platform that companies pay to show ads on. Kind of like billboards and ad agencies. Snickers bar drawn on the street is not a service, even if you happened to glance over it.
- blahi 10y ago
  Chatting with your friends and looking at their pictures are not services? The lengths to which you guys will go to for justification of your sense of entitlement is staggering.
  - elmigranto 10y ago
    They are but not in a sense in which, for example, Netflix is, where terms are clear — pay and enjoy content. FB is also a service as an ad platform — pay and we will show your ads to people. Anyone with FB profile is not "getting serviced", they are a commodity same as peanuts at the store, but it instead of storing boxes in a warehouse, FB hosts your photos. There is expectation that most of users won't block ads, just like most of peanuts get sold.
    - blahi 10y ago
      The terms are not clear only in the heads of people who think they can have their cake and eat it too.
      - elmigranto 10y ago
        Let's not look into our heads for clear terms, but rather operate on actual FB's Terms and Conditions document, which does not include anything about me watching their ads or not blocking them: http://facebook.com/terms http://facebook.com/terms Also, index page of Facebook says in huge letters that "It's free and always will be.", so not sure why you are so eager to prove I am to pay for it somehow.
  - elmigranto 10y ago
    No one ever asked me to pay for it. I never agreed to look at ads. If anything, I might argue that I am providing FB with a service of sharing my personal info and typing messages to people, so others will be motivated to stay/join the website. But expecting to get compensation for that is as much nonsensical, as expecting me to "pay" for free website (which is exactly what is promoted and offered — free place to stay in touch with friends/etc, not picture hosting in exchange for looking at ads).
    - blahi 10y ago
      Then don't. You don't think the tradeoff is worth it, just don't go to the site.
FoeNyx 10y ago
> Your livelihood is not threatened if you don't see some information hidden through a facebook login. I would have missed an exam, because the place and date were only communicated through that medium. > I can see enabling adblock for the internet at large and sites you don't care about, but you KNOW that facebook relies on ads and you repeatedly use them. As I said, I rarely go there (maybe two or three times per year?). I'm more a statistical noise at that level. I doubt it threatens their business model, they seem to be doing pretty well recently. In fact I'm probably making them and their partners save some money by not loading ads for products I would not buy anyway, it seems way more ethical to me. And in fact all of this is dwarfed by the fact that ads in general are a big security risk.

by blahi 10y ago

elmigranto 10y ago

No. Facebook does not provide a service, you said it yourself, it is "ad supported". What they provide is a platform that companies pay to show ads on. Kind of like billboards and ad agencies. Snickers bar drawn on the street is not a service, even if you happened to glance over it.

blahi 10y ago
Chatting with your friends and looking at their pictures are not services? The lengths to which you guys will go to for justification of your sense of entitlement is staggering.
- elmigranto 10y ago
  They are but not in a sense in which, for example, Netflix is, where terms are clear — pay and enjoy content. FB is also a service as an ad platform — pay and we will show your ads to people. Anyone with FB profile is not "getting serviced", they are a commodity same as peanuts at the store, but it instead of storing boxes in a warehouse, FB hosts your photos. There is expectation that most of users won't block ads, just like most of peanuts get sold.
  - blahi 10y ago
    The terms are not clear only in the heads of people who think they can have their cake and eat it too.
    - elmigranto 10y ago
      Let's not look into our heads for clear terms, but rather operate on actual FB's Terms and Conditions document, which does not include anything about me watching their ads or not blocking them: http://facebook.com/terms http://facebook.com/terms Also, index page of Facebook says in huge letters that "It's free and always will be.", so not sure why you are so eager to prove I am to pay for it somehow.
- elmigranto 10y ago
  No one ever asked me to pay for it. I never agreed to look at ads. If anything, I might argue that I am providing FB with a service of sharing my personal info and typing messages to people, so others will be motivated to stay/join the website. But expecting to get compensation for that is as much nonsensical, as expecting me to "pay" for free website (which is exactly what is promoted and offered — free place to stay in touch with friends/etc, not picture hosting in exchange for looking at ads).
  - blahi 10y ago
    Then don't. You don't think the tradeoff is worth it, just don't go to the site.

FoeNyx 10y ago

> Your livelihood is not threatened if you don't see some information hidden through a facebook login. I would have missed an exam, because the place and date were only communicated through that medium. > I can see enabling adblock for the internet at large and sites you don't care about, but you KNOW that facebook relies on ads and you repeatedly use them. As I said, I rarely go there (maybe two or three times per year?). I'm more a statistical noise at that level. I doubt it threatens their business model, they seem to be doing pretty well recently. In fact I'm probably making them and their partners save some money by not loading ads for products I would not buy anyway, it seems way more ethical to me. And in fact all of this is dwarfed by the fact that ads in general are a big security risk.