5 ms·

I'm glad that Bibliogram exists, but it really shouldn't have to exist. Instagram/Meta should be legally required to provide an open API.

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
> Instagram/Meta should be legally required to provide an open API. Why?
- atoav 4y ago
  One argument would be: Because beyond a certain size your service becomes a public platfrom and you are no longer competing with other platforms through your features, but through the fact that you have an existing userbase. So there is A) public interest in accessing, archiving, displaying, etc. the things users do on your platform and B) forcing your service to become more open the bigger it becomes keeps the competition of services going. Edit: also see the relevant discourse in this other thread (especially that comment here): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32686866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32686866
  - noitpmeder 4y ago
    So have other services, i.e. PornHub and the like, crossed your threshold of public service? I've always viewed this argument as a very poor one. This essentially mandates that all very successful online enterprises become government arms. When does Instragram/Twitter/Facebook, once made a "public platform", become free of these new responsibilities? Is Twitter free to shut down tomorrow once they have public fiduciary responsibilities? I'm all in favor of additional regulation to encourage/reward/enforce "openness", especially with respect to data originating from users (photos, ...). But saying these companies have any responsibility to the social good is pure foolishness.
    - rhn_mk1 4y ago
      > This essentially mandates that all very successful online enterprises become government arms. It doesn't. You can always split up before you grow too large, and remain private. There's precedent: once you're a monopoly, you have extra responsibilities to the social good, like splitting up or getting regulated.
      - ssizn 4y ago
        Instagram has a monopoly on what exactly
        aerzen 4y ago
        It has dominant market share of photo-centric social platforms. In some smaller communities, it is also has a monopoly on social media in general and instant messaging. This is even more problematic, because such platforms have a positive feedback loop of user acquisition. Many users have no option but to use them, because all their contacts are using them.
        ekianjo 4y ago
        The definition of a tiny specific monopoly within a niche is meaningless. If you had 30 different factors to describe exactly what each platform does then each of them would be a monopoly in themselves. In any case Instagram is certainly not in a monopolistic position at the moment unless you try to twist the sense of words to fit a narrative.
        rhn_mk1 4y ago
        Instagram has a monopoly said who exactly?
    - atoav 4y ago
      If you read my comment again you will find that I did not communicate this as my argument on purpose. So please don't frame it as such. Discussing something without necessarily having to share that opinion is hopefully still possible. Also: we are talking about Instagram, not about Pornhub — I guess the nature of the service would certainly play a role in that argument (e.g. think about messengers). What I do think myself is that beyond a certain size platforms should have it harder, should be held to higher standards, should fulfill more requirements etc. Because naturally bigger platforms will have it easier than their smaller competitors and it is in our interest to balance this out. Whether APIs are part of this, I don't know. Haven't given it much thought.
    - ad404b8a372f2b9 4y ago
      All companies have a responsibility to the social good, it's not foolishness it's been the way things work since forever. Companies are responsible for their employees' well being, for their impact on the environment, and they have many responsibilities to the government, this is all enshrined in many many laws. See also all the companies that came together to produce Covid equipment at cost at the beginning of the pandemic.
- grumbel 4y ago
  It's just taking "Right to data portability"[1] a step further. We already have the ability to get data out of a service, but it's generally a slow and cumbersome process (e.g. giant .zip file that takes a day to create). So the next logical step would to require this process to be as seamless as possible, meaning real time import/export of selected bits of information, which could be accomplished by providing an API. Basically, if we ever want to get the Internet back into the users hand, we need to decouple the "service" and the "storage" parts. Companies shouldn't be allowed to hold user data hostage. [1] https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/
- baq 4y ago
  Why not?
caiob 4y ago
Bukhmanizer 4y ago
I don’t mind requiring open APIs but can we all agree that this is pretty much in direct opposition to a lot of the privacy concerns that people here talk about? The more able I am to interact with an interface programmatically, the more easily I can exploit it and turn it into a giant database.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  The privacy problem with Instagram isn't what people post on it (they want it to be seen publicly), it's what the disgusting company behind it collects in the background as you interact with it (who may be a non-Instagram user and just need to visit an Instagram link you've been sent). People don't use Bibliogram (or other alternatives) to access unauthorized data (all it displays is the same data visible on the web or via the app), it's to be able to browse without being stalked by Facebook and avoid their dark patterns.
  - Bukhmanizer 4y ago
    People might not want to be seen publicly by everyone, which is why they allow users to choose who to show their posts to. But it’s not all that hard to exploit this by creating a popular page that lots of people end up sharing some data with. With permissive enough APIs, you instantly have a dataset. This is more or less how the Cambridge Analytica fiasco started. And yes, this was seen as a privacy problem.
    - 411111111111111 4y ago
      Do keep in mind that the people that are calling for a default API here aren't the same people that would've complained about the privacy implications of said API. This is a diverse Forum and people have various opinions.
      - Bukhmanizer 4y ago
        > Do keep in mind that the people that are calling for a default API here aren't the same people that would've complained about the privacy implications of said API. To be honest I think they would have. I just don’t think they’ve fully thought through the consequences. Worse, maybe they have thought about the consequences, but are ok with being outraged at both ends of things. Lots of people get mad and try and skirt any security/password protection measure, but also get just as mad when they inevitably get hacked because they’ve skirted all the security measures. But even after that still won’t use the security measures because of the “inconvenience”.
jacooper 4y ago
If the digital markets act expands to social media, it will happen.
annadane 4y ago
Or legally required to provide a chronological feed, which even logged-in users don't get
- tech234a 4y ago
  Have you tried clicking the Instagram logo at the top left lately? It should open a drop-down menu where you can pick “following”, though I’m not sure if this has rolled out to everyone yet.

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago

> Instagram/Meta should be legally required to provide an open API. Why?

atoav 4y ago
One argument would be: Because beyond a certain size your service becomes a public platfrom and you are no longer competing with other platforms through your features, but through the fact that you have an existing userbase. So there is A) public interest in accessing, archiving, displaying, etc. the things users do on your platform and B) forcing your service to become more open the bigger it becomes keeps the competition of services going. Edit: also see the relevant discourse in this other thread (especially that comment here): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32686866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32686866
- noitpmeder 4y ago
  So have other services, i.e. PornHub and the like, crossed your threshold of public service? I've always viewed this argument as a very poor one. This essentially mandates that all very successful online enterprises become government arms. When does Instragram/Twitter/Facebook, once made a "public platform", become free of these new responsibilities? Is Twitter free to shut down tomorrow once they have public fiduciary responsibilities? I'm all in favor of additional regulation to encourage/reward/enforce "openness", especially with respect to data originating from users (photos, ...). But saying these companies have any responsibility to the social good is pure foolishness.
  - rhn_mk1 4y ago
    > This essentially mandates that all very successful online enterprises become government arms. It doesn't. You can always split up before you grow too large, and remain private. There's precedent: once you're a monopoly, you have extra responsibilities to the social good, like splitting up or getting regulated.
    - ssizn 4y ago
      Instagram has a monopoly on what exactly
      - aerzen 4y ago
        It has dominant market share of photo-centric social platforms. In some smaller communities, it is also has a monopoly on social media in general and instant messaging. This is even more problematic, because such platforms have a positive feedback loop of user acquisition. Many users have no option but to use them, because all their contacts are using them.
        ekianjo 4y ago
        The definition of a tiny specific monopoly within a niche is meaningless. If you had 30 different factors to describe exactly what each platform does then each of them would be a monopoly in themselves. In any case Instagram is certainly not in a monopolistic position at the moment unless you try to twist the sense of words to fit a narrative.
      - rhn_mk1 4y ago
        Instagram has a monopoly said who exactly?
  - atoav 4y ago
    If you read my comment again you will find that I did not communicate this as my argument on purpose. So please don't frame it as such. Discussing something without necessarily having to share that opinion is hopefully still possible. Also: we are talking about Instagram, not about Pornhub — I guess the nature of the service would certainly play a role in that argument (e.g. think about messengers). What I do think myself is that beyond a certain size platforms should have it harder, should be held to higher standards, should fulfill more requirements etc. Because naturally bigger platforms will have it easier than their smaller competitors and it is in our interest to balance this out. Whether APIs are part of this, I don't know. Haven't given it much thought.
  - ad404b8a372f2b9 4y ago
    All companies have a responsibility to the social good, it's not foolishness it's been the way things work since forever. Companies are responsible for their employees' well being, for their impact on the environment, and they have many responsibilities to the government, this is all enshrined in many many laws. See also all the companies that came together to produce Covid equipment at cost at the beginning of the pandemic.
grumbel 4y ago
It's just taking "Right to data portability"[1] a step further. We already have the ability to get data out of a service, but it's generally a slow and cumbersome process (e.g. giant .zip file that takes a day to create). So the next logical step would to require this process to be as seamless as possible, meaning real time import/export of selected bits of information, which could be accomplished by providing an API. Basically, if we ever want to get the Internet back into the users hand, we need to decouple the "service" and the "storage" parts. Companies shouldn't be allowed to hold user data hostage. [1] https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/
baq 4y ago
Why not?

caiob 4y ago

Bukhmanizer 4y ago

I don’t mind requiring open APIs but can we all agree that this is pretty much in direct opposition to a lot of the privacy concerns that people here talk about? The more able I am to interact with an interface programmatically, the more easily I can exploit it and turn it into a giant database.

Nextgrid 4y ago
The privacy problem with Instagram isn't what people post on it (they want it to be seen publicly), it's what the disgusting company behind it collects in the background as you interact with it (who may be a non-Instagram user and just need to visit an Instagram link you've been sent). People don't use Bibliogram (or other alternatives) to access unauthorized data (all it displays is the same data visible on the web or via the app), it's to be able to browse without being stalked by Facebook and avoid their dark patterns.
- Bukhmanizer 4y ago
  People might not want to be seen publicly by everyone, which is why they allow users to choose who to show their posts to. But it’s not all that hard to exploit this by creating a popular page that lots of people end up sharing some data with. With permissive enough APIs, you instantly have a dataset. This is more or less how the Cambridge Analytica fiasco started. And yes, this was seen as a privacy problem.
  - 411111111111111 4y ago
    Do keep in mind that the people that are calling for a default API here aren't the same people that would've complained about the privacy implications of said API. This is a diverse Forum and people have various opinions.
    - Bukhmanizer 4y ago
      > Do keep in mind that the people that are calling for a default API here aren't the same people that would've complained about the privacy implications of said API. To be honest I think they would have. I just don’t think they’ve fully thought through the consequences. Worse, maybe they have thought about the consequences, but are ok with being outraged at both ends of things. Lots of people get mad and try and skirt any security/password protection measure, but also get just as mad when they inevitably get hacked because they’ve skirted all the security measures. But even after that still won’t use the security measures because of the “inconvenience”.

jacooper 4y ago

If the digital markets act expands to social media, it will happen.

annadane 4y ago

Or legally required to provide a chronological feed, which even logged-in users don't get

tech234a 4y ago
Have you tried clicking the Instagram logo at the top left lately? It should open a drop-down menu where you can pick “following”, though I’m not sure if this has rolled out to everyone yet.