4 ms·
> I guess they can’t afford to cover costs given current prices so they sell customer metadata to Facebook This sentence, your thesis, is absurd. Where does it
by mvzvm 6y ago
> I guess they can’t afford to cover costs given current prices so they sell customer metadata to Facebook
This sentence, your thesis, is absurd. Where does it say they make money from selling data?
Furthermore, "I guess they can’t afford to cover costs given current prices" is a really strange foundation to leap from. Do you have any facts? Or are you just speculating on BackBlaze and making wild assumptions?
> now that other like-minded crazies can find each other faster than ever
You are right, there is nowhere else online where "crazies" gather - not 4chan, not reddit, not voat, not twitter, just Facebook?
- gigatexal 6y agoThe last point I’ll admit exposes my bias against Facebook. But the previous two points make no difference on why tracking is baked into an internal portal so I speculated as to the reasoning as anyone would do — it’s not a stretch to think that data owners could sell customer data to an aggregator like Facebook for an additional line item of revenue.
- manigandham 6y agoFacebook does not, and never will, pay for data like this.
- mnw21cam 6y agoWhich raises the question - why would anyone ever include a Facebook tracking pixel in their web page, if it provides no benefits, and has a cost?
- manigandham 6y ago> "if it provides no benefits" Because it does? There are valid reasons for using the pixel in advertising.
- goatinaboat 6y agoWhere does it say they make money from selling data? What would be their motivation for just giving their customers data to Facebook for free?
- suprfsat 6y agoApparently it's incompetence, if they're unaware that they could have been making money on the deal.