8 ms·

Honestly, great move by Meta. 1. Regulators: We're going to require you do X on your product Y. 2. Facebook: That literally makes no sense. If you pass this l

Honestly, great move by Meta. 1. Regulators: We're going to require you do X on your product Y. 2. Facebook: That literally makes no sense. If you pass this law we will simply stop offering Y in your country. 3. Regulators: We're going to pass the law anyway. 4. Facebook: Does exactly as they warned. 5. Ultimately, the regulators and the citizens lose. Hopefully the citizens are vocal enough about it to make regulators understand just how braindead they are behaving.

yieldcrv 3y ago
It wasn’t a braindead move, it wasnt about providing that service it was a punitive measure to prevent exposure to that service, with the icing on the cake of paying publishers if Facebook complied with it. Facebook News is toxic, the market chose something else partially because of their representatives’ attention showing what it is, Facebook exited the market. Deprecated, specifically, until their existing agreements expire.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
zeroonetwothree 3y ago
Perfect use of the shocked pikachu meme
blitzar 3y ago
5. Ultimately, the citizens win Nothing of value for humanity was lost. Based on past form, not having a facebook dopamine targeting news feed is considered a huge gain for the entire human race (even for the facebook execs who have (a little bit) less money and less problems).
- trog 3y ago
  One thing of value that was lost was that the ABC (Australian national broadcaster) had hired 60 reporters, mostly in regional areas (typically more undeserved by journalists) from the revenue they got from this deal. Those jobs are now at risk. (This is all according to the ABC coverage on this topic.)
- Moldoteck 3y ago
  it's one perspective. Another perspective is that smaller news sites will be annihilated by bigger ones with this law, because traffic from social media will drop significantly and as result, revenue too, contributing to monopolization of the news category by a bunch of big players :)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

yieldcrv 3y ago

It wasn’t a braindead move, it wasnt about providing that service it was a punitive measure to prevent exposure to that service, with the icing on the cake of paying publishers if Facebook complied with it. Facebook News is toxic, the market chose something else partially because of their representatives’ attention showing what it is, Facebook exited the market. Deprecated, specifically, until their existing agreements expire.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

zeroonetwothree 3y ago

Perfect use of the shocked pikachu meme

blitzar 3y ago

5. Ultimately, the citizens win Nothing of value for humanity was lost. Based on past form, not having a facebook dopamine targeting news feed is considered a huge gain for the entire human race (even for the facebook execs who have (a little bit) less money and less problems).

trog 3y ago
One thing of value that was lost was that the ABC (Australian national broadcaster) had hired 60 reporters, mostly in regional areas (typically more undeserved by journalists) from the revenue they got from this deal. Those jobs are now at risk. (This is all according to the ABC coverage on this topic.)
Moldoteck 3y ago
it's one perspective. Another perspective is that smaller news sites will be annihilated by bigger ones with this law, because traffic from social media will drop significantly and as result, revenue too, contributing to monopolization of the news category by a bunch of big players :)

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]