3 ms·
Why don't you just stop using Facebook, if you don't like it?
by eru 1y ago
Why don't you just stop using Facebook, if you don't like it?
- astonex 1y agoIt's about making the right choices for society as a whole
- eru 1y agoNot using Facebook might be the right choice.
- hiccuphippo 1y agoBecause the alternatives are not going to try exploit us when they grow big enough?
- snoman 1y agoNot if there’s enough of them.
- nathan_compton 1y agoIt probably is the right choice. But that hardly means that we can't also regulate Facebook.
- rosseitsa 1y agoThere is a level of investment we put in the platforms we use. This comment is akin to asking farmers cut off from repairing their equipment "why don't you buy tractors from a different company instead of fighting to fix your existing ones?" The investment in the case of social media is the network you've built. In my country most local events are announced primarily on facebook for example.
- eru 1y ago[flagged]
- Klonoar 1y agoYou have completely missed the point of what they are saying to you, or are being willfully obtuse.
- vintagedave 1y agoHindsight is easy, and perhaps had no-one taken up Facebook in 2004 we'd all be okay. It's also not always obvious what trade-offs you're making, because you cannot see the future. Ultimately, it was not obvious in 2004 where we'd be today. Reality exists regardless of retrospective blame. The problem we have _today_ is the one we need to deal with.
- hiccuphippo 1y agoSorry the factory you bought from changed their T&C last month. You agreed to it when you turned your tractor on that morning.
- eru 1y agoGet a longer lasting contract next time.
- snaking0776 1y agoThis article about the AT protocol (which Bluesky uses) provides a good argument for why alternative social media sites like will help prevent this feeling of lock-in in the future and is worth a read: https://overreacted.io/open-social/ https://overreacted.io/open-social/
- supermatt 1y agoIs it possible to use bluesky without a did:plc? Id rather be in control of my own identity than leave it irreversibly in the hands of yet another overlord.
- snoman 1y agoUnless you depend on Facebook for your livelihood, then this is a false equivalence.
- sigzero 1y agoThat isn't a good comparison at all. "Don't use it" is a valid choice. I use it. None of my kids do. It's also "free" for you to use. So maybe stop trying to force them to do things while providing you a "free" service.
- kartoffelsaft 1y agoI don't think you understood their point at all. "Don't use it" isn't necessarily a valid choice when it's where all of your friends and/or family are. The "investment" is not monetary; instead, it takes the form of having connections on the platform. You are invested in the platform if your primary connection to someone is hosted there, and it costs a ton of time and effort to transfer that somewhere else.
- saubeidl 1y agoThe network effect is real.
- pixl97 1y agoWhy dont we make all laws voluntary and let people do whatever they want?
- eru 1y agoUsing Facebook is voluntary.
- nathan_compton 1y agoLiving in a society that gets fucked up by Facebook is not voluntary.
- pixl97 1y agoIn the same sense that having a job that requires you to use facebook is voluntary. Unless of course eating is also voluntary.
- jlouis 1y agoFacebook is one major bait and switch strategy. In the first step, you get everyone to invest into your platform. You provide some valuable services to people, and they sign an implicit contract as a result. In the second step, you reap what you sow. You switch the platform entirely and change its core nature and functionality. It's hard to stop using Facebook when everyone else is using Facebook, and this fact means you can do things which would normally have people leave your platform in droves. This ruling limits the extent to which you can run such a bait and switch campaign. It's somewhat remarkable, because it extends some basic consumer rights to tech companies, even if there's no direct product nor a subscription in place. Personally, I think it's long overdue.
- eru 1y agoHow has Facebook changed its core nature?
- jlouis 1y agoI'd say the major switch happened at the point where you lost control over your feed. It's not populated because you opted in to updates from a specific person or organization. It's populated by algorithm. Furthermore, at no point in time were any of these new features opt-in. Instead, they were enabled without your consent. Facebook has a long history of enabling features for people which is not in their interest in the slightest. I should also say that it's more general than Meta. Google are also notorious for doing stuff like this. About time we start legislating against it.
- N70Phone 1y agoAn important matter in this particular case: It's about elections as well. You can opt to not use facebook yourself to protect your own data, that is more or less fine. (Though we can talk about Facebook's collection of non-user data another time) You can't individually opt out of the election influence.
- eru 1y agoFacebook's election influence is pretty minor.