9 ms·

I can't believe how weak these cases have been - are these more of a posturing thing? * These were all approved at the time. This is going to make for a crazy

I can't believe how weak these cases have been - are these more of a posturing thing? * These were all approved at the time. This is going to make for a crazy world if folks act on an approval and then they are reversed. * The focus of a lot of these seems to be on harm to other (sometimes very scammy) businesses. The Apple case has this issue as well. Match group can't do non-cancelable auto-renewing billing in their own app store. Rando app can't get your email and other details but you can route via apple. Etc. Why not focus on consumer harm more - that was traditional focus. The complaint is Facebook doesn't make an easy api for others to scrape their platform - uh, hello cambridge analytic? * These social network things seem somewhat fragile. Myspace came and went, Friendster was hot. Now I see a lot more folks on tiktok. Are kids still even active on facebook? * Instagram wasn't that big when purchased, and many folks (including same people writing the articles now about monopolies) said that facebook wildly overpaid. https://twitter.com/rockspindeln/status/189416024058245121 https://twitter.com/rockspindeln/status/189416024058245121 What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. I mean, stuff that is obvious consumer harm. In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). It turns out you have to cancel 90 days in advance but not more than 120 days in advance?? So now I'm on the hook for another 1K. That is just total trash behavior online. And instead of the click to sign up, I had to go through endless hoops. Talked to someone, then they wanted me to submit a case, I did that, then back and forth to "verify" me etc etc. The FTC is crickets on just endless false advertising, misleading internet offers etc (stuff that's not even close to OK).

mig39 5y ago
Kids haven't been on Facebook for more than a decade. It's all TikTok and Discord for my 3 kids.
- dleslie 5y ago
  Facebook Kids Messenger is popular with my kids and their friends; AFAICT, it's the only messenging app that allows preschool and primary school kids to communicate with each other under the watchful eye of their parents. It's got solid parental controls, fun little mini games, loads of photo editing and video tools that are appealing to kids. Pretty much kept my kids' cohort of friends connected during the lockdown.
  - bhb916 5y ago
    Facebook Kids Messenger is decent (for all the reasons you mentioned), however, I am pessimistic about it being genuinely appealing to kids. It's staying alive because middle-aged parents are forcing it on their children - they are the consume and decision-maker. My experience is once kids are allowed to make their own decisions they quickly move away from it.
    - robbrown451 5y ago
      Of course once kids are allowed to make their own decisions, the main value of FKM is gone. (parental controls and such) So it isn't the best example, and it isn't really facebook per se but more of a separate product, but still.... it is squarely aimed at kids that aren't old enough to make decisions for themselves, by design.
  - r00fus 5y ago
    It's a pity I distrust Facebook so much that I'd never give this a try (my kids simply don't social except sorta on Nintendo). My kids connected with their friends through outside activities properly masked up.
    - dleslie 5y ago
      Outside gatherings were banned for a while here, so even masked groups in public parks were not feasible.
      - bhb916 5y ago
        Ugh. Sorry to hear that. IMHO the damage done to the kids here is worse than the risks they would face from the virus. Kudos to you for doing what you can to keep your kids connected socially.
        whoaisme 5y ago
        Yes, the damage to kids to worse than death.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
djeidpdd 5y ago
>These social network things seem somewhat fragile. Myspace came and went, Friendster was hot. Now I see a lot more folks on tiktok. Are kids still even active on facebook?< Not until they need it for a job or coordination need. Laying all the platforms out as competitors is sort of misguided imo though. Most social media platforms aren't competing for the same space they're competing to be the first to establish that space. Insta and Snapchat compete as did Myspace and Facebook. But Facebook, Insta, Discord, Whatsapp, Tiktok, Twitch, and Clubhouse are wildly different beasts as far as the experiences they offer and encourage even if the millenials and older generations just lump everything under 'social media business' because they see feeds and instant messaging. Most of these platforms might share demographics but they're wildly different products.
nsizx 5y ago
It's incredible how this purchase was approved at the time and a few years later they want to reverse it without anything having changed at all.
Calvin02 5y ago
Sadly this is what happens when an office, like the FTC, is politicized. FTC caters to the current party and pursues an aligned agenda over other things that can bring a tangible benefit to the population.
SteveGerencser 5y ago
We used to refer to these things as press release politics. There is no goal to enforce any rule or punish anyone, they are designed for those on the political side to say, see, look how hard we are working for you, then the business consents to some minor thing with zero punishment and gets to say, see, we worked with the people in politics and we have all made things better. You can see this see this at all levels of politics and business.
- slownews45 5y ago
  Sure - but there are folks getting straight scammed endlessly online - can't they do these press releases AND do some enforcement of just stuff with direct consumer harm?
Nicksil 5y ago
>What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. >In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). It turns out you have to cancel 90 days in advance but not more than 120 days in advance?? So now I'm on the hook for another 1K. >And instead of the click to sign up, I had to go through endless hoops. Talked to someone, then they wanted me to submit a case, I did that, then back and forth to "verify" me etc etc. >The FTC is crickets on just endless false advertising, misleading internet offers etc (stuff that's not even close to OK). I share your frustration, however I suspect this is more an indictment of our industry than FTC's apathy. Of course the FTC and other regulatory bodies are pursing enterprises for behavior other than that described in the link, but it may understandably be perceived that nothing is being done about those other egregious behaviors due simply to the sheer volume of occurrence. This industry is rife with user-hostile behavior. It's become so commonplace you'll find these purveyors openly discussing it as if there isn't anything wrong with what they are doing; industry "best practices." It's insane.
- mountainb 5y ago
  They do bring suits against scammers pretty regularly, but they only really go after very successful scammers who have stolen 7-8 figures+ from their victims. The FTC does not have the resources to go after smaller claims. They leave that up to civil plaintiff to at least somewhat rectify. They're not as inactive as you think it's just that there's a LOT of federal crime that goes unpunished. The federal government in general is only capable of effectively pursuing a small sample of federal crimes that occur. This has a lot to do with the way that we finance our regulators -- a lot of these crimes could be handled on a bounty system, which would fix the manpower problems.
  - slownews45 5y ago
    But even going against big players like Amazon, why can't they say - hey, you are selling products with totally false descriptions, refund everyone who but the fake "apple certified" device, or the "UL listed" device. Just do mass refunds across 10's of thousands of customers. Instead they are going after Apple. In my experience at least least scammy company out there. My refunds go through, the warranty / applecare stuff works, subscription renewals are fair and easy to cancel, no * fine print on trials.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
unmole 5y ago
The current FTC chair was appointed for her well publicised hipster antitrust stance.
5faulker 5y ago
Sadly Facebook is really a faceless corporation after all.
micromacrofoot 5y ago
Don't forget that Facebook has nearly 3bn active users. They eclipse every social media company that has ever existed... combined. Facebook is synonymous with internet access in some corners of the world. They're not going to disappear with a trend (as much as I'd enjoy that). They've already weathered a few. They've expanded far beyond kids and their average user is above 35. This limits their growth, but they could probably continue to exist in a massive way for a few decades if they stopped trying anything new.
arrosenberg 5y ago
Reversing mergers is completely appropriate when the merger is found to have caused harm to competition after the fact. It would be a crazy world if the FTC didn't pursue that.
cwkoss 5y ago
>Are kids still even active on facebook? 10 years ago in college, about 90% of my friends were using Facebook every day. Today, we're ~30 y/o. I'd estimate about 10% of my friends use facebook every day, and more than 50% of them use it less than once week. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that many people younger than me are barely using facebook at all. Most of the people I interact with on facebook these days are older relatives.
- slownews45 5y ago
  Right - similar boat. I haven't posted in a year or two plus? I used to work with kids when it was basically the be all end all of everything. For me the endless politics just was a turn off - keep friends updated other ways (icloud shared albums are fun!).
narag 5y ago
What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. I mean, stuff that is obvious consumer harm. In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). These situations are solved with regulation. But not the regular kind of regulation, but one that forces business of a certain type to have simpler procedures for actions like canceling, procedures that also keep a public record that some authorities can readily inspect and do instant arbitration. It's possible to make it work. Once there is no incentive for the companies to stall your cancelation or complaints, they suddenly lose interest and use their resources to do productive work. How do I know it works? I've seen it in action for the last decade or two: if you want to change mobile providers (in Spain, not sure about the USA) you just start a suscription with the new one. The former receives the notification and you don't even need to deal with them, except for one call offering you a counter-proposal. A similar system could be implemented for many other suscriptions services.
wintermutestwin 5y ago
It is a hard requirement that my two non-profit organizations have a FaceCrook presence. It is the same for a majority of businesses. This is clearly a monopoly position. The level of service that they are providing to the user pales in comparison to the value of the data they extract in exchange. There is clear harm to the users. That this is not a simple case against them is a clear failing of the regulators and/or their laws.
- abduhl 5y ago
  Why is it a hard requirement?
  - wintermutestwin 5y ago
    In the US at least, not having a social presence is indicative of an outdated enterprise. FB is the primary expectation. (along with a Google and Apple Maps link for your address)
jessaustin 5y ago
Could you instruct the payment vendor not to pay this charge? I've found that to be quite effective for "free first period" offers that refused to turn off.
- AlbertCory 5y ago
  See my comment above about privacy.com
annadane 5y ago
>These were all approved at the time With specific conditions, which Facebook violated
- slownews45 5y ago
  Ugh - I hate this HN type of misinformation. It just seems reactionary. Please post to the conditions facebook violated around their instagram acquisition. Remember, instagram had 13 staff or something - it was pretty tiny! Even folks who are arguing for breakups admit this fact: " Yet the Federal Trade Commission approved the merger without conditions. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/28/case-breaking-up-facebook-instagram/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/28/case-break...
kube-system 5y ago
> Instagram wasn't that big when purchased That's... the point. Instagram was a very rapidly growing threat to Facebook's market position. Facebook took drastic action to ensure that they didn't become big.
- disgruntledphd2 5y ago
  Yeah, by growing them to 1bn users! That'll show them. Personally, I think there's a much stronger case for the cloning of Snapchat rather than the acquisition of IG. The Whatsapp acquisition should probably be unwound though.
  - kube-system 5y ago
    I'm talking about Instagram the company, which is what the FTC cares about -- competition. FB eliminated Instagram as a competing company when they purchased them. Buying up competitors to keep dominant control of a market is absolutely an antitrust violation.
FridayoLeary 5y ago
The last case against FB, that was thrown out of court was also very weak. Now, the new head of the FTC had spoken out against monopolies. It isn't surprising that a hardliner who is emotionally invested in bringing down Big Tech won't accomplish much. I think we can expect similar cases brought against Google, Amazon etc.
- slownews45 5y ago
  I think there are probably good cases to be made in areas. Maybe something around consumer harm - ie, people bought oculus devices being told no facebook login, now required to use a login - do something like a 70% refund for those who want one and return their device?
  - bickeringyokel 5y ago
    Or 100% refund in cases like this https://www.tomshardware.com/news/oculus-quest-2-users-banned-from-facebook https://www.tomshardware.com/news/oculus-quest-2-users-banne...
  - FridayoLeary 5y ago
    But "getting" Big Tech shouldn't become their focus. Protecting consumers should come first.
handrous 5y ago
> * These social network things seem somewhat fragile. Myspace came and went, Friendster was hot. Now I see a lot more folks on tiktok. Are kids still even active on facebook? Facebook's only role in my life is as the main web presence for lots and lots of small organizations. They may have other things—even a website—but FB will be the first, and sometimes only, place content is posted. HOA, kids' schools, small area businesses, almost all treat FB is their main outlet for information, even if they do communicate some on other channels.
AlbertCory 5y ago
I will just deal with the cancellation issue: Use privacy.com for this. For every online subscription, you create a new credit card number, which can have preset limits. I like to give it enough money for ONE payment, and then it expires. You can also make it a one-time-use card. These temp cards are all backed by your "real" card. There's no fee. You don't get real privacy (i.e. the payments still show up on your bank statement) unless you pay $10/month, but if all you want is the ability to cancel immediately, this is for you. Take back the control. Some web service makes it difficult for you to cancel? Screw 'em -- just cancel the credit card you gave them.
- slownews45 5y ago
  One issue - I like actually that Apple is big enough to negotiate (ie, screw over) third party developers. You have to notify of renewal terms of trial in same font (ie, $1 for 1 week, $100 per month after). You have to allow people to use your app anonymously (ie, with an apple sign in). I KNOW I could never negotiate terms like these - but Apple can. Yes, it probably is a sign they have too much power, but they seem to direct a lot of their headaches to third parties, which makes my consumer experience better not worse. Good tips on the privacy.com thing.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bjt 5y ago
What's the basis for saying they're "crickets" on such scams? Those shady operators tend to be much smaller and less newsworthy than Facebook, so you don't read about them, but that doesn't mean it's not happening. I interned with the FTC's consumer protection division in Los Angeles during law school. My job was calling up people who had filed Better Business Bureau complaints and helping them to provide affidavits against the companies that scammed them. At the time we were focused on prepaid debit card scams. Have you complained to the FTC about the company with the 1k/yr subscription? Made a BBB complaint? Filed a small claims court suit?
- bagels 5y ago
  The fact that robocall scams still exist is all the evidence I need. It has a pretty easy regulatory solution too: fine everyone up the chain for every one of these calls delivered. Service providers will figure it out pretty quickly.
tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
> not more than 120 days in advance Are such clauses binding, or can you send your cancellation by registered mail now and do a chargeback if they try to bill you beyond that?
heavyset_go 5y ago
> * What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. I mean, stuff that is obvious consumer harm. In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). It turns out you have to cancel 90 days in advance but not more than 120 days in advance?? So now I'm on the hook for another 1K. That is just total trash behavior online. And instead of the click to sign up, I had to go through endless hoops. Talked to someone, then they wanted me to submit a case, I did that, then back and forth to "verify" me etc etc.* Do a chargeback and let the company deal with the fallout from their payment processors.
brarsanmol 5y ago
> Are kids still even active on facebook? Most people my age don't use Facebook or only use it to keep in contact with family. My friends and I have recently re-created accounts on the platform because our respective universities require them for orientation or clubs and whatnot.

mig39 5y ago

Kids haven't been on Facebook for more than a decade. It's all TikTok and Discord for my 3 kids.

dleslie 5y ago
Facebook Kids Messenger is popular with my kids and their friends; AFAICT, it's the only messenging app that allows preschool and primary school kids to communicate with each other under the watchful eye of their parents. It's got solid parental controls, fun little mini games, loads of photo editing and video tools that are appealing to kids. Pretty much kept my kids' cohort of friends connected during the lockdown.
- bhb916 5y ago
  Facebook Kids Messenger is decent (for all the reasons you mentioned), however, I am pessimistic about it being genuinely appealing to kids. It's staying alive because middle-aged parents are forcing it on their children - they are the consume and decision-maker. My experience is once kids are allowed to make their own decisions they quickly move away from it.
  - robbrown451 5y ago
    Of course once kids are allowed to make their own decisions, the main value of FKM is gone. (parental controls and such) So it isn't the best example, and it isn't really facebook per se but more of a separate product, but still.... it is squarely aimed at kids that aren't old enough to make decisions for themselves, by design.
- r00fus 5y ago
  It's a pity I distrust Facebook so much that I'd never give this a try (my kids simply don't social except sorta on Nintendo). My kids connected with their friends through outside activities properly masked up.
  - dleslie 5y ago
    Outside gatherings were banned for a while here, so even masked groups in public parks were not feasible.
    - bhb916 5y ago
      Ugh. Sorry to hear that. IMHO the damage done to the kids here is worse than the risks they would face from the virus. Kudos to you for doing what you can to keep your kids connected socially.
      - whoaisme 5y ago
        Yes, the damage to kids to worse than death.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

djeidpdd 5y ago

>These social network things seem somewhat fragile. Myspace came and went, Friendster was hot. Now I see a lot more folks on tiktok. Are kids still even active on facebook?< Not until they need it for a job or coordination need. Laying all the platforms out as competitors is sort of misguided imo though. Most social media platforms aren't competing for the same space they're competing to be the first to establish that space. Insta and Snapchat compete as did Myspace and Facebook. But Facebook, Insta, Discord, Whatsapp, Tiktok, Twitch, and Clubhouse are wildly different beasts as far as the experiences they offer and encourage even if the millenials and older generations just lump everything under 'social media business' because they see feeds and instant messaging. Most of these platforms might share demographics but they're wildly different products.

nsizx 5y ago

It's incredible how this purchase was approved at the time and a few years later they want to reverse it without anything having changed at all.

Calvin02 5y ago

Sadly this is what happens when an office, like the FTC, is politicized. FTC caters to the current party and pursues an aligned agenda over other things that can bring a tangible benefit to the population.

SteveGerencser 5y ago

We used to refer to these things as press release politics. There is no goal to enforce any rule or punish anyone, they are designed for those on the political side to say, see, look how hard we are working for you, then the business consents to some minor thing with zero punishment and gets to say, see, we worked with the people in politics and we have all made things better. You can see this see this at all levels of politics and business.

slownews45 5y ago
Sure - but there are folks getting straight scammed endlessly online - can't they do these press releases AND do some enforcement of just stuff with direct consumer harm?

Nicksil 5y ago

>What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. >In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). It turns out you have to cancel 90 days in advance but not more than 120 days in advance?? So now I'm on the hook for another 1K. >And instead of the click to sign up, I had to go through endless hoops. Talked to someone, then they wanted me to submit a case, I did that, then back and forth to "verify" me etc etc. >The FTC is crickets on just endless false advertising, misleading internet offers etc (stuff that's not even close to OK). I share your frustration, however I suspect this is more an indictment of our industry than FTC's apathy. Of course the FTC and other regulatory bodies are pursing enterprises for behavior other than that described in the link, but it may understandably be perceived that nothing is being done about those other egregious behaviors due simply to the sheer volume of occurrence. This industry is rife with user-hostile behavior. It's become so commonplace you'll find these purveyors openly discussing it as if there isn't anything wrong with what they are doing; industry "best practices." It's insane.

mountainb 5y ago
They do bring suits against scammers pretty regularly, but they only really go after very successful scammers who have stolen 7-8 figures+ from their victims. The FTC does not have the resources to go after smaller claims. They leave that up to civil plaintiff to at least somewhat rectify. They're not as inactive as you think it's just that there's a LOT of federal crime that goes unpunished. The federal government in general is only capable of effectively pursuing a small sample of federal crimes that occur. This has a lot to do with the way that we finance our regulators -- a lot of these crimes could be handled on a bounty system, which would fix the manpower problems.
- slownews45 5y ago
  But even going against big players like Amazon, why can't they say - hey, you are selling products with totally false descriptions, refund everyone who but the fake "apple certified" device, or the "UL listed" device. Just do mass refunds across 10's of thousands of customers. Instead they are going after Apple. In my experience at least least scammy company out there. My refunds go through, the warranty / applecare stuff works, subscription renewals are fair and easy to cancel, no * fine print on trials.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

unmole 5y ago

The current FTC chair was appointed for her well publicised hipster antitrust stance.

5faulker 5y ago

Sadly Facebook is really a faceless corporation after all.

micromacrofoot 5y ago

Don't forget that Facebook has nearly 3bn active users. They eclipse every social media company that has ever existed... combined. Facebook is synonymous with internet access in some corners of the world. They're not going to disappear with a trend (as much as I'd enjoy that). They've already weathered a few. They've expanded far beyond kids and their average user is above 35. This limits their growth, but they could probably continue to exist in a massive way for a few decades if they stopped trying anything new.

arrosenberg 5y ago

Reversing mergers is completely appropriate when the merger is found to have caused harm to competition after the fact. It would be a crazy world if the FTC didn't pursue that.

cwkoss 5y ago

>Are kids still even active on facebook? 10 years ago in college, about 90% of my friends were using Facebook every day. Today, we're ~30 y/o. I'd estimate about 10% of my friends use facebook every day, and more than 50% of them use it less than once week. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that many people younger than me are barely using facebook at all. Most of the people I interact with on facebook these days are older relatives.

slownews45 5y ago
Right - similar boat. I haven't posted in a year or two plus? I used to work with kids when it was basically the be all end all of everything. For me the endless politics just was a turn off - keep friends updated other ways (icloud shared albums are fun!).

narag 5y ago

What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. I mean, stuff that is obvious consumer harm. In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). These situations are solved with regulation. But not the regular kind of regulation, but one that forces business of a certain type to have simpler procedures for actions like canceling, procedures that also keep a public record that some authorities can readily inspect and do instant arbitration. It's possible to make it work. Once there is no incentive for the companies to stall your cancelation or complaints, they suddenly lose interest and use their resources to do productive work. How do I know it works? I've seen it in action for the last decade or two: if you want to change mobile providers (in Spain, not sure about the USA) you just start a suscription with the new one. The former receives the notification and you don't even need to deal with them, except for one call offering you a counter-proposal. A similar system could be implemented for many other suscriptions services.

wintermutestwin 5y ago

It is a hard requirement that my two non-profit organizations have a FaceCrook presence. It is the same for a majority of businesses. This is clearly a monopoly position. The level of service that they are providing to the user pales in comparison to the value of the data they extract in exchange. There is clear harm to the users. That this is not a simple case against them is a clear failing of the regulators and/or their laws.

abduhl 5y ago
Why is it a hard requirement?
- wintermutestwin 5y ago
  In the US at least, not having a social presence is indicative of an outdated enterprise. FB is the primary expectation. (along with a Google and Apple Maps link for your address)

jessaustin 5y ago

Could you instruct the payment vendor not to pay this charge? I've found that to be quite effective for "free first period" offers that refused to turn off.

AlbertCory 5y ago
See my comment above about privacy.com

annadane 5y ago

>These were all approved at the time With specific conditions, which Facebook violated

slownews45 5y ago
Ugh - I hate this HN type of misinformation. It just seems reactionary. Please post to the conditions facebook violated around their instagram acquisition. Remember, instagram had 13 staff or something - it was pretty tiny! Even folks who are arguing for breakups admit this fact: " Yet the Federal Trade Commission approved the merger without conditions. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/28/case-breaking-up-facebook-instagram/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/28/case-break...

kube-system 5y ago

> Instagram wasn't that big when purchased That's... the point. Instagram was a very rapidly growing threat to Facebook's market position. Facebook took drastic action to ensure that they didn't become big.

disgruntledphd2 5y ago
Yeah, by growing them to 1bn users! That'll show them. Personally, I think there's a much stronger case for the cloning of Snapchat rather than the acquisition of IG. The Whatsapp acquisition should probably be unwound though.
- kube-system 5y ago
  I'm talking about Instagram the company, which is what the FTC cares about -- competition. FB eliminated Instagram as a competing company when they purchased them. Buying up competitors to keep dominant control of a market is absolutely an antitrust violation.

FridayoLeary 5y ago

The last case against FB, that was thrown out of court was also very weak. Now, the new head of the FTC had spoken out against monopolies. It isn't surprising that a hardliner who is emotionally invested in bringing down Big Tech won't accomplish much. I think we can expect similar cases brought against Google, Amazon etc.

slownews45 5y ago
I think there are probably good cases to be made in areas. Maybe something around consumer harm - ie, people bought oculus devices being told no facebook login, now required to use a login - do something like a 70% refund for those who want one and return their device?
- bickeringyokel 5y ago
  Or 100% refund in cases like this https://www.tomshardware.com/news/oculus-quest-2-users-banned-from-facebook https://www.tomshardware.com/news/oculus-quest-2-users-banne...
- FridayoLeary 5y ago
  But "getting" Big Tech shouldn't become their focus. Protecting consumers should come first.

handrous 5y ago

> * These social network things seem somewhat fragile. Myspace came and went, Friendster was hot. Now I see a lot more folks on tiktok. Are kids still even active on facebook? Facebook's only role in my life is as the main web presence for lots and lots of small organizations. They may have other things—even a website—but FB will be the first, and sometimes only, place content is posted. HOA, kids' schools, small area businesses, almost all treat FB is their main outlet for information, even if they do communicate some on other channels.

AlbertCory 5y ago

I will just deal with the cancellation issue: Use privacy.com for this. For every online subscription, you create a new credit card number, which can have preset limits. I like to give it enough money for ONE payment, and then it expires. You can also make it a one-time-use card. These temp cards are all backed by your "real" card. There's no fee. You don't get real privacy (i.e. the payments still show up on your bank statement) unless you pay $10/month, but if all you want is the ability to cancel immediately, this is for you. Take back the control. Some web service makes it difficult for you to cancel? Screw 'em -- just cancel the credit card you gave them.

slownews45 5y ago
One issue - I like actually that Apple is big enough to negotiate (ie, screw over) third party developers. You have to notify of renewal terms of trial in same font (ie, $1 for 1 week, $100 per month after). You have to allow people to use your app anonymously (ie, with an apple sign in). I KNOW I could never negotiate terms like these - but Apple can. Yes, it probably is a sign they have too much power, but they seem to direct a lot of their headaches to third parties, which makes my consumer experience better not worse. Good tips on the privacy.com thing.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

bjt 5y ago

What's the basis for saying they're "crickets" on such scams? Those shady operators tend to be much smaller and less newsworthy than Facebook, so you don't read about them, but that doesn't mean it's not happening. I interned with the FTC's consumer protection division in Los Angeles during law school. My job was calling up people who had filed Better Business Bureau complaints and helping them to provide affidavits against the companies that scammed them. At the time we were focused on prepaid debit card scams. Have you complained to the FTC about the company with the 1k/yr subscription? Made a BBB complaint? Filed a small claims court suit?

bagels 5y ago
The fact that robocall scams still exist is all the evidence I need. It has a pretty easy regulatory solution too: fine everyone up the chain for every one of these calls delivered. Service providers will figure it out pretty quickly.

tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago

> not more than 120 days in advance Are such clauses binding, or can you send your cancellation by registered mail now and do a chargeback if they try to bill you beyond that?

heavyset_go 5y ago

> * What's crazy is there is so much straight pure scam crap on the internet the FTC does nothing about. I mean, stuff that is obvious consumer harm. In my case I tried to cancel a subscription 30 days in advance recently (nearly 1K per year). It turns out you have to cancel 90 days in advance but not more than 120 days in advance?? So now I'm on the hook for another 1K. That is just total trash behavior online. And instead of the click to sign up, I had to go through endless hoops. Talked to someone, then they wanted me to submit a case, I did that, then back and forth to "verify" me etc etc.* Do a chargeback and let the company deal with the fallout from their payment processors.

brarsanmol 5y ago

> Are kids still even active on facebook? Most people my age don't use Facebook or only use it to keep in contact with family. My friends and I have recently re-created accounts on the platform because our respective universities require them for orientation or clubs and whatnot.