5 ms·
Am I forbidden from wearing tinted glasses while looking at Facebook as well? After all, they "alter the experience".
by tlrobinson 13y ago
Am I forbidden from wearing tinted glasses while looking at Facebook as well? After all, they "alter the experience".
- reflectiv 13y agoI understand your point, however that isn't quite a valid analogy in this case. The correct analogy would be: Q) Am I forbidden from writing an application using the facebook API that tints/alters the color of the website? A) Yes, you are forbidden from doing that.
- scottcanoni 13y agoThis did not use the Facebook API. It completely circumvents it.
- mattkruse 13y agoYes. What they said. Social Fixer is not bound by any API TOS, because I do not use their API or any official mechanism they offer. I am not a Facebook Developer, and this isn't a Facebook App. This is, of course, intentional, because I don't want to be bound by the Developer TOS.
- reflectiv 13y agoMy apologies, I did not know it was completely separate. I had assumed it wasn't separate because that is what is listed as the reason for removing it. This is quite unfair to you IMO...downright shameful of facebook to do this.
- res0nat0r 13y agoUnfortunately altering the FB experience, api or not is against their TOS.
- Gormo 13y agoHe's explaining that he never accepted their TOS in the first place, because he never did anything that required him to.
- Karunamon 13y agoIt's pretty hard to develop an app that modifies the way a site is displayed to logged in users without being logged in to the site yourself...
- palakchokshi 13y agoNot true. I've created a browser extension that inserted a menu item to Facebook's menu for each facebook story. I didn't have to be signed in as a facebook developer to do that.
- moocowduckquack 13y agohttp://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html
- Karunamon 13y agoNow, develop and debug it without being able to use HTTP or test it with live data in any way.
- mattkruse 13y agoIf you're referring to point 3.11, then I don't agree. This is not the intent of this provision. This is clearly targeted at malware or other software that prevents the proper working of Facebook against the user's wishes. Otherwise, it would be a violation of their TOS to disable Javascript, change your font, or use custom CSS in your browser.
- res0nat0r 13y ago> This is clearly targeted at malware or other software that prevents the proper working of Facebook against the user's wishes. Facebook could be defining anything that blocks or interferes with their advertising and revenue stream as malware.
- yid 13y agoIf they put that clause in their ToS, and then decided to kick you off Facebook for wearing tinted glasses, they'd be well within their rights.
- alextingle 13y agoThe ToS is irrelevant. They can kick you off FB for no reason at all, if they want.
- troels 13y agoThey would be in their rights - legally speaking - but would it be reasonable? And would you expect it to happen?
- yid 13y agoWhether or not it is reasonable is besides the point here -- I was responding to a bad analogy.
- tlrobinson 13y agoOf course they can kick any Facebook user/group off for any reason, but I suspect they would have a hard time taking any sort of legal action against a plugin (or tinted glasses) that merely changes the way a user's browser interprets the resources loaded from Facebook. Anyway, I think it's silly for Facebook to be going after tools that make users like Facebook more, as long as they don't somehow degrade the experience for others (spamming, etc)
- yid 13y ago> going after tools that make users like Facebook more I suspect it has more to do with the fact that many of these tools strip ads.
- tlrobinson 13y agoI installed Social Fixer, and it doesn't strip ads, at least not by default.