annadane

13 ms·

91.
by annadane 5y ago
That's more than fair.
92.
by annadane 5y ago
In this thread: Facebook employees desperately trying to shape the narrative Look, I'd be as happy as anyone if this all did turn out to be 'nothing'. It would be a much more pleasant world. But it's kind of obvious th
93.
by annadane 5y ago
Correct.
94.
by annadane 5y ago
No. Stop it with the false equivalence. Facebook is absolutely one of the worst and they need to go after them first Edit: downvotes from shills.
95.
by annadane 5y ago
Oh so it's just like when they had internet.org with their dishonest Free Basics program; a URL that would imply something not belonging to a company so naturally the company buys it to raise importance/awareness of itself
96.
by annadane 5y ago
> "Despite multiple efforts to report the post, it remains up and live as of this moment," he said. This to me, is the real issue. Say what you want about "it's the users, not the platform, stop blaming the platform&q
97.
by annadane 5y ago
> A social network is a natural monopoly due to the network effect. It wouldn't make any sense to split it up. Regulating it like any other natural monopoly could make sense. They definitely need to take Whatsapp away from Facebook,
98.
by annadane 5y ago
The thing that's insane to me is you can't even access any profiles without being logged in. This is public information; they've locked things down to an incredible degree and I bet every last dollar I have it's for cyni
99.
by annadane 5y ago
I don't like this line of reasoning and you see it all the time on Reddit: "Oh, you dislike Facebook but I bet you still use Instagram lol!" The existence of a company being scummy shouldn't lead to consumers being blame
100.
by annadane 5y ago
One of the worst things that could have happened to Facebook is the whole Cambridge Analytica thing; now they can always just hide behind the veneer of "we disable scripting/API access to x degree because something something hand
101.
Talking about Cancer on Facebook(alexschroeder.ch)
2 points by annadane 5y ago|1 comments
102.
Progressives Respond to Facebook Outage with Simple Call: 'Break Them Up'(commondreams.org)
1 points by annadane 5y ago|0 comments
103.
by annadane 5y ago
> people rely on Messenger and especially WhatApp for communication, artists rely on Instagram for inspiration and social outreach Great. Zuckerberg also bullied the Instagram co-founders out of the company, ditto Whatsapp, and they&#x27
104.
by annadane 5y ago
It's a good statement, I just wish he'd spend more time on 'yes, I stole the original Facebook, and I tricked the Whatsapp founders into giving up their company to me, and I've routinely lied in the past, but moving forw
105.
by annadane 5y ago
Are we surprised? It's a company run by Zuckerberg, you know going into it it's going to be slimy and corrupt
106.
by annadane 5y ago
This. The entire reason the acquisition was allowed was that it would remain independent. They lied about it so there's no need to honor that purchase. Divest immediately.
107.
by annadane 5y ago
Don't say that on here, you'll get the droves coming in with their talking points of "But open APIs are how cambridge analytica happened"
108.
by annadane 5y ago
https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive...
109.
by annadane 5y ago
Sure they do. And it's why Whatsapp needs to be broken off from Facebook, because they blatantly lied about it and only bought it to kill off their competition
110.
by annadane 5y ago
The fact you made an account just to post this. lol.
111.
by annadane 5y ago
I can't believe you've done this.
112.
Facebook: I Want Out (2015)(medium.com)
2 points by annadane 5y ago|0 comments
113.
by annadane 5y ago
All the money gained from scraping Whatsapp users' metadata, I'm sure. Or is it the lying about video metrics for 2 years? Hard to tell.
114.
by annadane 5y ago
Current controversy aside can Instagram please be less like Facebook in its quest to dominate everything under the sun and give people back their chronological timeline (I can maybe understand this with Facebook, because they have to put ad
115.
by annadane 5y ago
Whatsapp is owned by Facebook. That automatically disqualifies it.
116.
by annadane 5y ago
That actually does make sense in a newsfeed way. I had this mental image of a person physically reading the group (being in the group specifically) and just not seeing any posts by x because x didn't pay to play
117.
by annadane 5y ago
> For example, Facebook offers you to pay to "increase the reach" of your posts. This happens for example when you try to post a message to a Facebook group. If you want to make sure all members see the message, you have to pay
118.
by annadane 5y ago
This. That's the problem. It's not just one company unfairly being screwed by Apple. They've lied about everything else.
119.
by annadane 5y ago
I like archive.org being linked, though. It's an inoculation against pages eventually going down
120.
by annadane 5y ago
Considering every single person tends to have conflicts with Zuckerberg (see: bullying the Instagram people out of their company) I'm not convinced this is just "natural, turnover within companies that happens all the time"

More ›