4 ms·
No, those are private web properties, they are free to provide or not provide you services as they wish (with the only exception that they cannot target protect
by deepsun 4y ago
No, those are private web properties, they are free to provide or not provide you services as they wish (with the only exception that they cannot target protected categories).
I might not like it, but they are in their right. I can always create my own web property.
By that unjust actions they actually show the value in de-centralizing WWW back to good old days.
- dessant 4y agoYou do realize that people's lives are being impacted, right? Running services of this size comes with responsibilities, and not just to your shareholders, but to society. You can't drive competitors out of business, then restrict access to services that have become essential. You shouldn't argue that a farmer who was kicked out from Facebook for absolutely no reason should no longer have the right to access a wider variety of local offers for farm equipment on Facebook Marketplace, or have a better chance to sell their produce. And you shouldn't argue that people are destined for this fate for the rest of their lives because of a primitive algorithm put in place by people who have no morals. They are not in their right. They are abusing their position, and they are harming people.
- gcanyon 4y agoOver 5 million people can’t vote in the US because of a felony conviction. How many of them are innocent, or should have been convicted of a lesser crime, or just have done their time and should be equal again under the law? But they don’t get to vote. We shouldn’t apply a higher standard to Facebook regarding shopping than we do to our government when it comes to the vote.