I am very much on Apple's side on this and want Apple to go ahead with this. It is worth considering that there is an entire industry (including may be Apple Insider) which is dependent at least partly on revenue from targeted advertisements. But, most sites already had to diversify their revenue models as Facebook's and Google's and all the other players in the ecosystem eat away every growing percentage of the pie. That probably is what made this change inevitable. Most industry estimates are predicting that this will completely cripple the targeted advertising industry with drastic drop in the amount of data available.
It begs the question on, why/how the industry was allowed to be built on backs of privacy of the rest of us. Apple actions here though belated are an extremely important steps in reining back this industry. But expect drastic changes once this change is fully implemented. Oddly enough Facebook's and Google's and other big players will survive this. It is the smaller players who wear bear the brunt of it at least in the short run.
Disclaimer: I am not a wealthy man by any reasonable measure.
I am more than willing to pay for content that I consume. There are a lot of misconceptions about the “free internet”.
It should be free, as in freedom of speech. But it’s not, because ad money distorts what is available in it, like every other media.
It never was free, as in free beer. Most of us pay quite a bit of money for fiber/DSL in our homes/business, and then some more for mobile data plans.
I’ve all but abandoned free content in TV and YouTube, because my time is valuable to me, and I don’t like to throw it away seeing (invariably) irrelevant ads. Satellite/Cable TV has as much ads as what I get from free with a simple aerial, so I canceled my subscription.
I had the misfortune to find a single streaming service that was egregious enough to put “unskippable” minute length ads before 5 minute long content! It lost my business even before the free trial week expired!
Paying for content is better to both consumers and producers in the long run.
A few years ago I realized that every time I bought something on Amazon I started seeing ads for that very thing on Web sites, Facebook, Instagram, etc. I went into the settings on Amazon and FB and turned on every privacy setting that I could locate to try to stop this cross-site tracking, but nevertheless it continues. I don’t know if this is Amazon selling my purchase information to others, or if it is sites like FB tracking my activity across other sites, but either way I applaud Apple’s efforts to restore a user’s control over their digital identity.
AppleInsider said: “Facebook is reportedly planning a second attack ad for Thursday, this time claiming Apple is angling to destroy the free internet“
So according to Zuckerburg, the definition for free internet is: “Facebook is free to collect the data of the users without asking them, and the users don’t have the freedom to be able to refuse this robbery” It seems to me a dictatuur.....
A few years ago I realized that every time I bought something on Amazon I started seeing ads for that very thing on Web sites, Facebook, Instagram, etc. I went into the settings on Amazon and FB and turned on every privacy setting that I could locate to try to stop this cross-site tracking, but nevertheless it continues. I don’t know if this is Amazon selling my purchase information to others, or if it is sites like FB tracking my activity across other sites, but either way I applaud Apple’s efforts to restore a user’s control over their digital identity.
I’ll tell you what’s annoying about this:
I buy something, and for next four weeks I’m bombarded with ads for the thing I just bought.
Facebook’s success derives from the fact that it is free. A paid service cannot function for broad family-and-friends social networking.
The only solution is to build a robust social networking platform into iOS/Android etc. and macOS/Windows etc., run by an industry consortium that can respond to the ebb and flow of government regulations around the world.
I love how FaceBook tries to spin this as Apple being the bad party here. "We stand with you" for small businesses, etc. LOL.
With companies like Facebook and Google, etc. this is just another reminder that if you are not paying to use their product, that's because you ARE the product. FaceBook does not care for the welfare of their own user base. They only care about their advertising revenue that will now be worth less money. Advertising is an inherently sleazy business. If your business model depends on advertising revenue, you are incentivized to conduct your business in a sleazy manner. That's unfortunate.
The pervasive tracking for ads is a cancer on the internet and Facebook tracks even people who have never signed up for Facebook.
Just piling on to your points....
If all Facebook was doing is harvesting personal data for “ads” in a traditional advertising sense I would classify their actions as merely a “bad rash” rather than cancerous. However, this is not what they are doing. I could tolerate or try to block a deluge of “ads” for antivirus software and personal grooming products if they are too annoying.
The real problem is that Facebook is using data harvesting and analytics to drive engagement around these “ads” and not all of these are for antivirus software and personal grooming products. Facebook’s financial success is borne out of these analytics and algorithms and the algorithms don’t care whether the “ads” are for nose hair trimmers, political priming, or social anarchy.
Facebook has positioned itself in a role where it succeeds whether its customers (those paying for ads) or its captive herd of livestock (Facebook users) are overcome with a wave of joy or immeasurable suffering. Facebook doesn’t care, and Facebook doesn’t want to care. They simply want their cut of the action either way.
Is this entirely Facebook’s problem? No, but they are both an accelerant and and amplifier and have not applied sufficient control (via informed negative feedback) to keep their machine from running open loop and out of control. Facebook has unleashed something on society that requires careful, thoughtful, and informed control but they have failed to control it and are solely focused on exploiting it for profit and power. The destructive potential of Facebook is unmatched with anything that’s been presented to human society in the past 50 years and Facebook is not managing it sufficiently or in the best interest of society in general, even when they have all of the controls at their fingertips.
I applaud Apple for giving its customers a way to turn off some of the destructive potential of Facebook by severing the links to its data harvesting and algorithms. People also have the option to not become an active herd member in Facebook's data farming operation, thus reducing Facebook's reach even further, but probably not completely.
These types of moves from Facebook are a prelude to a larger campaign ultimately aimed at the inevitable moment they are designated a “platform utility” and subject to regulation as a result. For when it’s governments, not Apple, that mandate data harvesting be opt-in and not opt-out.
Apple, on the other hand, is a step or two ahead — basically when the government steps in, and they will, all they’ll need to do is say to the industry: “Do what Apple is already doing, and then we can talk.”
Zuckerberg wants it both ways, and that’s the essence of the lie. He wants the wealth and power of being a utility, without the accountability and responsibility that comes with it.
Apple usually responds to attacks and criticisms with class, but this time I’d really love to see them get a little dirty. It’s time for someone to put Zuck in his place.
Since Facebook seem to like these changes so much Apple should implement them right away. Honeymoon's over!
Facebook’s success derives from the fact that it is free. A paid service cannot function for broad family-and-friends social networking.
The only solution is to build a robust social networking platform into iOS/Android etc. and macOS/Windows etc., run by an industry consortium that can respond to the ebb and flow of government regulations around the world.
I've suggested awhile ago that Apple should start their own social networking platform with no ads, no tracking, no cost, and no frills (i.e., don't allow news, selling items, etc.). Keep it simple.
I'm so glad I no longer have a Facebook account. This latest whine by them convinced me to get rid of Instagram too.
Whether you no longer have one, or even have never had one doesn't matter to Facebook... all those Facebook share wdigets you see splashed everywhere are tracking you regardless...
"Facebook tracks internet users even if they are logged off or don't have an account on the social network, the company confirmed on Monday (April 16) as it attempted to shake off the unprecedented controversy that arose following allegations that it facilitated a breach of user data linked to an estimated 87 million accounts.
The platform has admitted that applications and websites that use Facebook services—such as embedded "like" or "share" buttons, login pages, analytics or advertising—are not able to distingish if the user actually has a Facebook account. The U.S. social network receives the information anyway."
Does uBlock or Adblocker stop these widgets/buttons?
Exactly. This is one of the examples I use when mocking those hysterical ‘AI will rule us!’ know nothings.
Just saw the new FB ad - ridiculous. Makes up some ridiculous % of business small businesses will lose. Also say ‘many small business owners...’ - but doesn’t name 1. Sure sign they’re making stuff up.
Word of Mouth is still the most effective advertising.
A few years ago I realized that every time I bought something on Amazon I started seeing ads for that very thing on Web sites, Facebook, Instagram, etc. I went into the settings on Amazon and FB and turned on every privacy setting that I could locate to try to stop this cross-site tracking, but nevertheless it continues. I don’t know if this is Amazon selling my purchase information to others, or if it is sites like FB tracking my activity across other sites, but either way I applaud Apple’s efforts to restore a user’s control over their digital identity.
I’ll tell you what’s annoying about this:
I buy something, and for next four weeks I’m bombarded with ads for the thing I just bought.
Is there anyone so completely clueless and dim that they actually think FB is standing as the champion of small business? Even the folk who voted for fascism last month can't be that stupid.
Nobody's buying what you're selling, Zuck.
PS. The inherent arrogance and entitlement for FB (Twitter, Google, et al) to believe they are entitled to take my most personal data without my permission and without compensation is truly breathtaking, and I feel it will require a combination of very strong privacy laws and a Constitutional privacy amendment on the level of the GDPR before we can rid ourselves of this self-righteous digital stalking in the US.
Is there anyone so completely clueless and dim that they actually think FB is standing as the champion of small business? Even the folk who voted for fascism last month can't ...
Hmm. That presents a strange dichotomy because fascists, conspiracy theorists, and alternative truth purveyors are some of Facebook’s most loyal customers, or at least they were until Facebook put up a token wall of wet tissue paper to fend them off for a few days ... A few days, not weeks, not years, not permanently, just a little sideshow performance theater to show the herd that Facebook “really cares.” It must have been very touching to see the Zuck Man feebly waving the flag of freedom in our honor. I must have missed it but I’m sure it was a historic moment.
I am completely in favour of paying for content. In fact, if FB decided to stop collecting and selling data and instead decided to charge users1 USD per year, how much would they rake in. Plenty, I'm sure.
I am completely in favour of paying for content. In fact, if FB decided to stop collecting and selling data and instead decided to charge users1 USD per year, how much would they rake in. Plenty, I'm sure.
Average revenue per user is at Facebook $7.89 (up 9% year over year).
(All this is more or less public information due to the way corporations work, and need to present data to investors.)
Comments
I am more than willing to pay for content that I consume. There are a lot of misconceptions about the “free internet”.
It should be free, as in freedom of speech. But it’s not, because ad money distorts what is available in it, like every other media.
It never was free, as in free beer. Most of us pay quite a bit of money for fiber/DSL in our homes/business, and then some more for mobile data plans.
I’ve all but abandoned free content in TV and YouTube, because my time is valuable to me, and I don’t like to throw it away seeing (invariably) irrelevant ads. Satellite/Cable TV has as much ads as what I get from free with a simple aerial, so I canceled my subscription.
I had the misfortune to find a single streaming service that was egregious enough to put “unskippable” minute length ads before 5 minute long content! It lost my business even before the free trial week expired!
Paying for content is better to both consumers and producers in the long run.
So according to Zuckerburg, the definition for free internet is:
“Facebook is free to collect the data of the users without asking them,
and the users don’t have the freedom to be able to refuse this robbery”
It seems to me a dictatuur.....
I buy something, and for next four weeks I’m bombarded with ads for the thing I just bought.
I JUST BOUGHT IT! I DON’T NEED ANOTHER ONE!
With companies like Facebook and Google, etc. this is just another reminder that if you are not paying to use their product, that's because you ARE the product. FaceBook does not care for the welfare of their own user base. They only care about their advertising revenue that will now be worth less money. Advertising is an inherently sleazy business. If your business model depends on advertising revenue, you are incentivized to conduct your business in a sleazy manner. That's unfortunate.
If all Facebook was doing is harvesting personal data for “ads” in a traditional advertising sense I would classify their actions as merely a “bad rash” rather than cancerous. However, this is not what they are doing. I could tolerate or try to block a deluge of “ads” for antivirus software and personal grooming products if they are too annoying.
I applaud Apple for giving its customers a way to turn off some of the destructive potential of Facebook by severing the links to its data harvesting and algorithms. People also have the option to not become an active herd member in Facebook's data farming operation, thus reducing Facebook's reach even further, but probably not completely.
Zuckerberg wants it both ways, and that’s the essence of the lie. He wants the wealth and power of being a utility, without the accountability and responsibility that comes with it.
(All this is more or less public information due to the way corporations work, and need to present data to investors.)