3 ms·
You are correct that your data isn't particularly impactful for these platforms - but you're also overestimating the value that many of these services have. A
by munk-a 4mo ago
You are correct that your data isn't particularly impactful for these platforms - but you're also overestimating the value that many of these services have. A fair few of them have competitors with better features and privacy offerings so the only reason you need them is purely for the network effect of everyone else using them.
- harel 4mo agoIf there is a substitute and I am not time constrained 100% i'm switching. But I've been in a situation already where a platform I'm using required me to face-up. I can't even remember which to be honest but I had no alternative or recourse to refuse. In addition, in the UK company directors are legaly required to face-up to Companies House and confirm their identity, so they have my face too. Ah, and so is every single CCTV camera around London. I don't know how to fight this particular battle.
- wwweston 4mo agoAnd increasingly, everyone isn’t using them, even if they’re on them. I’m on Insta and WhatsApp and I use them a few times per year. I’m on Messenger and have seen a dramatic dropoff in messages. I’m on FB frequently and notice only a small fraction of my friends bother anymore and it’s become an interest platform to make up the lack, so I’m trending toward less time there. I’m on Twitter/X but check in maybe once a month. I may not be a typical user, but I’m probably not unique either.
- baq 4mo agoI visit my facebook once a year and always regret it
- munk-a 4mo agoAt this point I purely use it to log in on my birthday to pass pleasantries with relatives that don't use any other platform and then turn it off again for a year.
- stephenhuey 4mo agoI was one of the earliest on FB. It's mostly an address book for me now. I'm sad sooooo many acquaintances and relatives are there, and yes, it would be a lot of effort to get their contact info or get them to use other messaging platform (but I've started doing that). For 15+ years, I've thought long and hard countless times about what could sustainably replace social media platforms that do not serve us well. I know a paid app is not super likely to succeed, although WhatsApp did use to cost a dollar! It seems like a nonprofit wouldn't be that great, and so I wonder about a mission-driven public benefit corporation (not to be confused with a B corp, though it could be one of those too). Of course it has to be cool or no one would use it. Not a fuddy duddy wannabe social network. Anyway, to sustain itself, would ads or paid offerings (that don't harvest personal data) be successful? Happy to discuss with anyone interested!
- ghaff 4mo agoI'm very much like you. There are several apps that I use to communicate with a handful (or less) of people in the world. I see people on travel sites saying "Just use WhatsApp" and I'm more or less, yes it's installed on my phone and I use it with a couple people but it's certainly not something that most people I know use. Probably something of a demographic (geography/age) thing.
- svachalek 4mo agoWhatsApp is very much a geography thing; it's pretty ubiquitous in many countries but relatively unknown in the US.
- throw1234567891 4mo agoThe competitors will be also regulated. It’s a slippery slope.
- cortesoft 4mo agoJust because the network effect is why you need them doesn’t make that need go away.
- rockskon 4mo agoIt represents an increase in cost to use the service. Most such services have a wealth of competitors for your time and attention. "Need" is an extremely strong word that is not appropriate for many Internet services where facial recognition is being pushed for.
- munk-a 4mo agoI don't disagree. I still use facebook once a year for contact with relatives but if the only thing keeping you is the network effect then hopefully people will migrate off - maybe you can help them do so!