There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

If you live in the EU - you may also be faced with this Meta prompt. Info in text.

If you, like me, live in the EU, Facebook is now entirely clamping down and forcing free users to make their personal data available for monetization.

Attempting to access any Facebook domain and perhaps also other meta products will redirect you to the following prompt with a choice between either accepting the monetization of your user data, or coughing up a region-dependent monthly subscription fee: base (for me ~10€) + an additional fee (~7€) for each additional facebook or instagram account you have.

Now, the hidden third option. At an initial glance, it seems like there is no other option but to click one of the buttons - however, certain links still work, and grant access to important pieces of functionality through your web browser.

If anyone has information to add regarding Facebook or Instagram, please do share it. I’ve only (begrudgingly) used the former up until now, but I know many others use Instagram and don’t feel like giving a single cent (nor their personal info) to Meta.

  1. www.facebook.com/dyi - perhaps most important of all, now is a good time to make a request to download your Facebook data. Don’t forget to switch to data for “all time” and “high quality” if you intend to permanently delete your account.
  2. www.facebook.com/your_information - here you can find and manage your information, but crucially also access Facebook messenger.
  3. The messenger app: Still hasn’t prompted me with anything, though I expect that will change in the not too far future.

Currently my plan is to use messenger to inform any important friends that I intend to leave FB, and where they’ll be able to reach me in the future.

PepeLivesMatter ,
@PepeLivesMatter@lemmy.today avatar

They were already monetizing your data, just like websites were already using cookies to track you before the EU made it mandatory to inform visitors about this.

Honytawk ,

This forced me to look into hosting an own social media as a replacement for me, my friends and acquaintances. Where we can chat, upload files, organise events, and make posts about all sorts of things.

Anyone got a recommendation for software, preferably open source?

Humhub looked promising, but the “free” version only allows 5 people, which is just dumb.

lud ,

How did this specifically make it worse? They didn’t follow the GDPR before so choosing free is the exact same as before.

This is just their latest attempt at avoiding the GDPR and last I checked taking payment for not tracking someone is a grey zone in the GDPR. After looking at the law it shouldn’t be allowed but it might be. Who knows. Other sites do it as well.

If anything this has bought them time.

Honytawk ,

Because I was willing to pay, but not for the exuberant amount they ask.

It also made it worse in the sense that now friends were discussing it on their own, which did not happen before.

clot27 ,
@clot27@lemm.ee avatar

Mastodon?

Honytawk ,

Sadly no groupchat features.

Otherwise, solid choice!

clot27 ,
@clot27@lemm.ee avatar

github.com/mastodon/mastodon/pull/19059 they are adding one

ginerel ,
@ginerel@kbin.social avatar

Friendica should fit the bill right there for you. Or if you don't want ActivityPub, check out diaspora*. There's also Hubzilla which uses AP as well, but internally it uses its own Zot protocol.

Honytawk ,

I was looking into Friendica, and it also looks promising. But the lack of an ios app may be a dealbreaker for some of my friends.

Diaspora has the same issue, although the integration with other social media is interesting.

Huzilla is a bit more for filesharing, isn’t it?

All in all, I think Friendica is indeed one of the better bets.

syfershock ,
@syfershock@syfershock.com avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    Honytawk ,

    Akkoma dropped support for chats, which sucks tennis balls.

    The others are too technical for many of the people I know. They just want something like Facebook, but that I host myself. Not the “every device is its own node” type of deal.

    And connection to the fediverse definitely isn’t a necessity.

    All by all Friendica looks the most promising.

    lemmesay ,
    @lemmesay@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

    you can use create a matrix server for e2e conversations.

    BaardFigur ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Iron_Lynx ,

    Same. Although I have a few services where I use it to log in, sooo…

    victorz ,

    Recently uninstalled:

    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • Twitter/X
    • Reddit

    I feel free. My phone feels lighter, almost. My brain feels lighter.

    BonesOfTheMoon ,

    Same! I am enjoying the fediverse as a largely nontoxic replacement.

    victorz ,

    Agreed. It’s not too mainstream (yet) so not too much drivel has started seeping through lol. Here’s hoping it’ll stay this way. Feels very wholesome so far! Feeling at home already.

    lemmesay ,
    @lemmesay@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

    don’t forget to delete the accounts too! I’ve seen people just deleting the app and thinking their account is gone too.

    victorz ,

    Very good tip! To be honest, I’m not ready to delete the accounts yet. I’ll just run the services on my computer in containers (Firefox) and with μBlock Origin, so there’s minimal impact of this change for me.

    But it does feel very nice not to be able to do much when I pull out my phone as a reflex. I feel limited in a positive way. Much rather be talking to you fine folk than the drivel I was often interacting with on Reddit. 😁

    AWittyUsername ,

    “Your info won’t be used for ads” - but it will be used in other ways

    avater , (edited )
    @avater@lemmy.world avatar

    Easy fix. Stop using crap like meta, or Reddit, or TikTok, or Twitter or another degenerated social media platform…

    gtaman ,

    Great. Now tell that to my uni please.

    avater ,
    @avater@lemmy.world avatar

    your uni is using facebook?

    NostraDavid ,
    @NostraDavid@programming.dev avatar

    That includes lemmy, right?

    Right?

    avater ,
    @avater@lemmy.world avatar

    Nah, Lemmy can somtimes be a little cringe and insulting but has no narcisitic sociopaths in charge like the others have 😅

    Gestrid ,

    How much you wanna bet your info will still be used for ads even if you subscribe?

    zAkk ,

    “It’s free and always will be”

    Nobsi ,
    @Nobsi@feddit.de avatar

    It is free. You are not paying. You couldnt even get money for your information so its not like youre selling it

    the_of_and_a_to ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi ,
    @Nobsi@feddit.de avatar

    Where can i sell my data? I want money.

    isVeryLoud ,

    Go fill some surveys for Google Play Store credits or something.

    There are services out there that will pay you (either real cash or with points) to fill out surveys all day. They’ll pay you less than they’d pay someone like Facebook though, since people are more truthful on these platforms than when filling out these surveys.

    Nobsi ,
    @Nobsi@feddit.de avatar

    They dont want my data, they want to ask me dumb questions. And they dont pay

    ILikeBoobies ,

    surveys.gobranded.com

    There are tons of sites for this, it was a lot more popular a decade ago before sites realize they could just steal it

    Int_not_found ,

    You couldnt even get money for your information

    Well, you could. Taking part in surveys in exchange of monetary compensation is a side hustle for many.

    And on the other side is sourcing data a huge expense for many research endeavours.

    That’s why everybody is buying from Google & Facebook. Because they offer it for relative low cost.

    Aceticon ,

    Only if you think your time and personal information are free.

    You might want to work on your self-worth and business sense if you think that.

    soulfirethewolf ,

    Lol the wording and design of it all. Subscribe to use without ads, picture of a credit card. Versus Use for free with ads, picture of a shooting star:

    Discover products and brands through personalized ads, while using your Facebook account for free.

    Plus the little “your current experience” highlighted in green. And finally “use for free” highlighted in blue.

    They really want you to go with the second option so they can try to prove to the court that people want free stuff. When most of them were likely unconsciously coerced into it.

    Toribor ,
    @Toribor@corndog.social avatar

    The big mean regulator is trying to make us charge you money. Click here to pay up or click here to stay free.

    Infinity13 ,

    My relatives are using FB as crazy. Like too much. I was telling them how Facebook is tracking and selling users data, thats why i dont use FB and all i have seen in their eyes was wanting me to shut the f*ck up

    danque ,
    @danque@lemmy.world avatar

    Same. That look that says:"I don’t care, I dont want to know, I just want to use (insert any social media). They have no idea what’s collected and used without their knowledge.

    Same for TikTok. I tried to warn them about the Chinese government watching with TikTok over their preferences and I still get that same “I don’t care” look. But then they receive a promotional mail and complain they get spammed.

    Infinity13 ,

    They say “I have nothing to hide” but talks sh*t about China and comunism 😁

    AutistoMephisto ,
    @AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world avatar

    They figure looking at funny cat videos is worth the spam. Of course, I like the idea of paying users for their data. If data is the new oil, and we are the oil wells, it’s time they paid for it.

    kumatomic ,

    I took a five year break for this reason. As I embraced being an artist it seemed the only way to know what is going on locally in my stupid medium-sized Texas town is Facebook. Even local government news was only on Facebook. So if I wanted to find calls for art locally to submit for galleries then I had to join. Luckily with two fences and uBlock Origin the only information they get is by logging any text I put in. It’s a lot of work to try to maintain my privacy though and no official app ever. I use a couple container apps from F-Droid, but they barely work most of the time so it mostly has to be on Desktop. I’ve tried to get a few friends to switch to federated apps and they look at me the same way. Even my partner’s casino job requires a Facebook account because if you want someone to take a shift for you it’s the only way. Also any company news. It should be regulated as a utility.

    Infinity13 ,

    Exactly. I was looking for renting an appartment. I was looking on specific real estate websites how it should be but my girlfriend found the best one to rent on Facebook. Shouldn’t be like that

    Ilgaz ,

    The real dark, unexplainable and one of the most complex software after Google services is Facebook.apk. No baseless privacy claim that Google promises is valid if one installs and runs Facebook as it isn’t in its nature. Anyone, organisation pushes or even requires an application in today’s age is spyware. The Guardian even says “less ads” and they are supposed to be a bit better guys. How does it show less ads? Because it accesses these play.google.com/store/apps/datasafety?id=com.guar…It isn’t just an Android thing, Apple tried their best to stop Facebook from leeching but there isn’t anything to do when you “check in” at home.

    KuroiKaze ,

    It’s actually much much worse to use the preload version that came with your phone versus the Play store version. The play store has many rules they force devs to comply with that aren’t true for preloads.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    this has to be illegal.

    like, no, seriously. i’m not a lawyer but i was working on a (since failed) startup in 2018 and distinctly remember how much headache the gdpr caused. literally one of the main things was that you cannot coerce users into consenting to data processing, or make features conditional to them. the gdpr makes a distinction between processing you do to perform a contract (that’s why no one asks for your consent for processing your email address to log you in, that’s implied) and processing you do for other reasons, which require user consent (that’s why everyone asks if they can spam you on the same email – it doesn’t matter that your email address is already on their server, processing it for marketing reasons requires consent of the data subject). opting into these kinds of processing needs to be granular, if it’s not they lose the validity of your consent.

    i seriously hope facebook gets slapped so hard over this that no one ever thinks about doing this again. “paying with your data” should never be a thing in any society that calls itself civilized.

    nothingness ,

    like, no, seriously.

    What does “like” mean here? What’s it for?

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    flair, mostly. lol

    joel ,

    It’s how people have been talking for, like, 20 years now at least

    nothingness ,

    Rather, fucked american english. Like, fucked american english. Like, fucked. Like, like! Like!

    JonEFive ,

    Assuming you’re not a native English speaker. It’s a filler word. It doesn’t really mean anything, it’s used more to communicate tone.

    nothingness ,

    Being native doesn’t make one being able to speak properly.

    buddascrayon ,

    I don’t think you understand how this works. I’m not the biggest fan of Facebook but even I know they’re not a charity they’re not a governmental entity. They’re out there to make a profit and if they can’t make a profit on their ad revenue then they have to make a profit in another way via a subscription service. So they’re literally giving you the option to either continue using them with ads or continue using them as a subscription service. Your other option is to completely delete your Facebook. I don’t see the problem here. You aren’t entitled to a Facebook page, no matter how useful it is to your personal life.

    Edit: a word

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    then offer the subscription service as the only option. if they want to do that, it’s on them. but you can tell by the dark pattern on this ui element that that’s not their main goal, they just want to use the threat of having to pay to coerce people into consenting to data processing.

    it’s not about entitlement, it’s about playing fair. removing the option to “pay with your data”, and leaving only the subscription or cancellation as options would be fair play. it would also destroy facebook but that’s on them, it’s their decision to make. but if they decide to provide a free service of any kind, they cannot discriminate against those who wish to choose privacy.

    and if we’re being realistic, they’re not expecting even 1% of their user base to pay. they are, however, expecting to keep nearly 100% of their user base. that’s what makes this about coercion – if they didn’t have the option to coerce people (and i’m fairly sure they don’t have it legally, but again, i am not a lawyer) the options presented would be very different, because facebook itself wouldn’t be able to afford to only give its service to paid users. you’d probably have a free tier with optional privacy included, which is missing some features, or a paid tier with extra features and privacy included (hopefully non-optionally, but it’s facebook so they’d probably still try to track you).

    buddascrayon ,

    Every argument you make here is completely silly.

    This is a for-profit company and it has always been a for-profit company. They have no obligation to host you on their site and they can stipulate any conditions they like. If they want to make it a choice between paying a subscription fee or you consciously acquiescing to their collecting your data and advertising to you using that data, then that is 100% their right. Equally you have the right to opt out by closing your Facebook page and deleting all of your data on their site. I will reiterate, you are not entitled to a Facebook page!! This is not right, it’s a privilege granted to you by this greedy-ass corporation in exchange for monetary compensation, either through targeted ad revenue or a subscription fee. Deal with it.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    then don’t host the site if they don’t want to. or charge people for shit if they want to. i’m not asking for them to not do that, i’m asking for one thing and one thing only: don’t make service, free or not, conditional to consenting for data processing not related to providing that service. that shit, to my best knowledge, is illegal in the eu, and it’s for a damn good reason.

    facebook is not entitled to a profit either just because they’re for-profit. they need to earn it. and no, they don’t have a right to take a “whatever means necessary” approach on it – just like a company cannot legally rob people, or cannot legally entice minors into gambling addictions to make that money, in the eu it also cannot coerce people into giving up their personal data just so it can then profit off of that either. consent for that needs to be given willingly, without pressure, and without deception. why is this principle so hard to understand?

    you paint some ridiculous strawman arguments here in your efforts to lick the zuck’s boots, but i never once asked for facebook to continue giving their service for free if they don’t want to. the only thing i said is “paying with your data” is not a valid idea under the gdpr (and honestly, it shouldn’t be a thing in any civilized country.) if facebook relies on it, tough shit, their options are to figure out an alternate revenue stream or go out of business. that’s how it works for every other business as well.

    buddascrayon ,

    Where exactly is the coercion here? The choices in order to maintain a Facebook account you either pay a fee or let them use your data to advertise to you. The other option is to completely close your Facebook account and delete all of your data on their servers. An argument can be made that they should make it easier to remove all of your data and several people that I know have made that argument. But other than that I don’t see anything they are doing as being illegal, in the EU or otherwise. Sure the way they presented is a pretty scummy but what do you want? It’s Facebook and it’s run by greedy corporate dick heads. If you don’t like it delete your Facebook profile.

    I also find it hilarious that you don’t think they have lawyers who specialize in European Union law that don’t know exactly what the fuck they’re doing. This is a multi-billion dollar company, they can afford the best goddamn lawyers.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    Where exactly is the coercion here? The choices in order to maintain a Facebook account you either pay a fee or let them use your data to advertise to you.

    right there. you’re a parody of yourself lmao.

    a facebook account cannot simultaneously hold enough value that it’s worth compromising your privacy for and not hold value so that the threat of taking it away is not coercion. the enemy cannot be both strong and weak at once. the only way to resolve this dichotomy is to posit your privacy itself holds no value and is therefore a fair price to pay for something that also holds no value, but that’s just absolutely ridiculous to begin with.

    you also had your answers to your questions about which part should be illegal, multiple times. to then ask the same questions again because you “don’t see it”, playing dumb like that, is just manipulative. why are you so dead set on corporate bootlicking?

    buddascrayon ,

    Read carefully:

    You 👏 do 👏 not 👏 require 👏 a 👏 Facebook 👏 page 👏 to 👏 live.

    It is the very definition of superfluous luxury service. Just delete your page and be done with it.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    Read carefully:

    You 👏 cannot 👏 make 👏 personal 👏 data 👏 the 👏 price 👏 of 👏 a 👏 service.

    It’s literally that simple. This is not about whether the product is essential or not, it never was. It’s whether this business practice is legitimate or not. The GDPR clearly believes it’s not and it’s for a reason.

    If you do not need a facebook page to live, why provide it for free at all? Just make people either pay or delete their page. Do not bribe them with free shit to manipulate them into giving up their data. That’s all there is to it.

    buddascrayon ,

    Informed consent. It’s right there in the text of the law.

    gdpr.eu/article-5-how-to-process-personal-data/

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    And you have a right to object to that.

    gdpr.eu/article-21-right-to-object/
    gdpr.eu/Recital-42-Burden-of-proof-and-requiremen…

    Threatening to disable a user’s means of communication as retaliation for an objection is antithetical to Article 21 of the GDPR, and goes directly against Recital 42. Removing your facebook page is a detriment. If there is a detriment to not consenting, consent is considered invalid, therefore facebook has no legal basis to process the data of anyone who clicked “use for free” on the prompt in the original post.

    buddascrayon ,

    If your only means of communication is Facebook, then that is an absolute failure of your government and society and you have much bigger fish to fry than Facebook’s shitty ad policy.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    you’re just hell-bent on missing the point, aren’t you?

    just stop. your idea that the loss of a facebook account is not a detriment will never stand up in court, nor should it.

    buddascrayon ,

    LoL, it’s never going to make it to court. 🤣

    You people are hilarious.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    at this point i genuinely believe that you’re just trolling. some companies like sony and apple absolutely do have this level of bootlickers who constantly move goalposts and try to convince people how they are ackshually right to do their extremely anti-consumer moves. but facebook? give me a break lmao. but even for a troll it’s such a stupid hill to die on

    i believe we adequately explored why your idea that corporations have the right to coerce people into giving up their data is idiotic. so idk, keep trolling and insert your next goalpost below this line:

    buddascrayon ,

    I’m not trolling but you can think what the hell you want, I don’t really give a shit.

    I don’t see it as coercion because Facebook is not a necessary service. And I think everyone here who is tearing their hair out and screaming about how “illegal” this new policy is are being overly dramatic.

    It’s just as simple as that. Oh, and my personal hope is that the new policy will encourage people to delete their Facebook. I would love to see the site go up in flames like Twitter is currently doing. So you thinking I’m some kind of sycophantic fanboy of Zuckerberg and his “metaverse” is quite hilarious to me. 🤣

    Aceticon ,

    Your thinking is so pinned-down by business-centric presumptions it’s ridiculous.

    The Law doesn’t give a shit about any one company’s chosen business model, otherwise Murder would be legal as long as it was done by employees of an incorporated “Murdering Services” company.

    Further, Facebook is an American company which avoids tax like crazy, so in Europe even politicians don’t give a shit about their business model, which means these Laws were not even adjusted to account for Facebook’s business model when they were created.

    Facebook’s business model and even survival as a company are wholly irrelevant: the Law is the Law, and Facebook either obbey it or they stop operating in the Jurisdictions whose laws they don’t want to obbey - ultimatelly, all legal recourses exhausted, “comply” or “leave” are their only two options.

    JonEFive ,

    And I don’t think you understand the problem. Nothing is preventing Facebook from displaying ads. Facebook’s issue is collecting user data and using it to directly target ads. They can make it so that a user can opt out of personalized ads and still show ads to that person. Companies would still pay to display their ads, perhaps not at the same rate but that doesn’t mean Facebook would be losing money by serving those users.

    Let’s not act like Facebook is going to go bankrupt if some of their users opt out of data collection and targeted ads.

    buddascrayon ,

    Facebook’s issue is collecting user data and using it to directly target ads.

    Literally nearly every website on the internet does this. Even the ones you pay a fee to subscribe to.

    You have the choice to close your account with Facebook if you don’t like their policy. Again, this is a completely for profit company, they have no obligation to host you on their site.

    JonEFive ,

    Literally nearly every website on the internet does this. Even the ones you pay a fee to subscribe to.

    Are you even a little familiar with GDPR?

    Nobody is acting like they have a right to Facebook in this thread. Likewise, nobody is saying that Facebook shouldn’t be trying to make money. The issue at hand isn’t the choice between a fee and ads. The issue is that you have to pay to opt out of targeted advertising and that they’re using dark patterns to encourage people to consent to targeted advertising.

    So the suggestion above that this may be illegal is accurate. You’re so focused on a person’s ability to not do business that you’re ignoring that there are laws regulating this type of behavior.

    SkepticalButOpenMinded ,

    I would love for FB to be smacked down hard by the EU, but isn’t this just the inclusion of a new option that didn’t exist before, I.e. the subscription? If you push the right button, isn’t that the status quo that you’ve been using all along without any other option? I don’t understand how giving more options is more coercive than before.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    no, ever since 2018 when the gdpr actually went into effect, they had to allow users to opt out of data processing individually for different purposes. like, if you want to allow facebook to process your data for improving their site but not for marketing purposes, you need to be able to set that, and facebook needs to respect that. as such, you had the option to use the site without “paying for it with your data” at all.

    and if that’s not a viable business model and they need to charge a subscription fee, that’s alright. there’s nothing in the gdpr that says you cannot charge for services. the problematic part here is that they do provide a free service but only if you consent to data processing. like i said, i’m not a lawyer, but i’m pretty sure that’s illegal, and it absolutely should be illegal. if they decide to provide a free tier (or a paid tier for that matter), it needs to be available even if you don’t consent for unrelated data processing. they’re not obligated to provide anything, but if they do provide something, they cannot discriminate against users who don’t want to share their data.

    that’s the problematic bit here. privacy cannot be a premium feature. facebook is trying to charge for something here that should be available to all users, whether or not the underlying product is freely available or not.

    Globeparasite ,

    Yeah I really hope the EU smack’em down. Asking users to pay a fee only because their countries law limit an illegal practice is astonishing

    AeonFelis ,

    I trust that Facebook’s lawyers are payed enough to make sure that this is technically legal. These laws always have loopholes.

    cosmicrookie ,
    @cosmicrookie@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s a reaction to Facebook methods being deemed illegal in Europe. Although this does not mean than the new model is illegal, it’s an interesting sample of Facebook not always being right even though they have good layers. Both Facebook, Google and many other big tech, operate on the edge of what is legal and often on the other side of it, because it can be profitable enough to just pay the fine if it turns out to be illegal.

    This last move, I believe, is more of a statement than it is an actual change.

    AeonFelis ,

    Oh, yea. I can believe that these lawyers checked it out and determined that it may be illegal, but more like a “pay a fine that’s the equivalent of a bubblegum wrap when scaled down to regular people money” illegal and not “shut down the company and place the CEO behind bars” illegal.

    Now, if it was Xwitter, I could totally see Must ignoring all his lawyers and just YOLOing it.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    i wish the eu could stop fucking around on this one. fines for gdpr violations can reach up to 20 million euros or 4% of global revenue, whichever is higher. if they actually prosecute over this, it will be far more than a slap on the wrist. (which is why everyone was so scared of the gdpr back in 2018, but apparently that didn’t really last)

    Hamartiogonic ,
    @Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz avatar

    Dark pattern of the week: button colors.

    Can you guess which button Meta really wants you to press?

    Tau ,

    You can delete your account(s) clicking on “accounts in this Account Center” btw

    TimewornTraveler ,

    doesn’t that just hibernate your account?

    Tau ,

    It said “Delete” but Meta could very well be lying to me

    thanks_shakey_snake ,

    When the “Subscribe” button is gray and the “Use for free” button is blue, you know something’s up 🤔

    shasta ,

    It’s because they make more money from your user data, but it also doesn’t cost you money

    helenslunch ,
    @helenslunch@feddit.nl avatar

    Probably because the lost revenue from not showings ads exceeds the monthly subscription cost.

    WallEx ,

    You think they make 10€ per user in ads? I don’t believe that, the ad market is very competitive and banner ads don’t pay well.

    Syndic ,

    Maybe, maybe not. But the UX pattern they use clearly indicates that they rather have users continue to use the adds version instead of getting 10 euros per month. And that’s certainly not because of the goodness of their heart but because it is better for them as a company. And “better for the company” pretty much always means “making more money”.

    WallEx ,

    I don’t know, I don’t even believe, that they are going to stop using your data, even if you pay. So I don’t really know what to think. Also im very happy, that I’m done with meta as a whole.

    dwindling7373 ,

    That pricing (or any pricing) is unsustainable, all it is there for is to give illusion of choice to try and comply with the law. Your data are useless if too many people choose to pay and Facebook dies, on the contrary the more people allows for refined monetization, the stronger Facebook’s business becomes (or get back to before GDPR status).

    Syndic ,

    Oh of course they will still use the data of paying costumers. I’m sure that data is more important to them then any add revenue.

    JackFrostNCola ,

    Also that is just money for serving you ads, i think the real money is advertisers buying your data.
    How do they target you, are you the demographic they want to sell to, when are you active online, what do you look at, what are your interests, what values are important to you, etc.

    b3nsn0w ,
    @b3nsn0w@pricefield.org avatar

    youtube only makes around 2€ per user per month by the most optimistic estimates, and they serve full tv-like video ads which are also clickable and targeted, and a lot of them. that’s literally the final form of advertising and it still doesn’t reach a monthly 10€/user, the addressable market is just not that big.

    the dark pattern is real though. they’re going for your data and they’re not doing it for money. make of that what you will (i certainly have ideas and they’re not pleasant)

    WallEx ,

    Also those are video ads, that get you waaaay more money, opposed to the banner ads on Facebook (at least some)

    kumatomic ,

    They also make a great deal of money using people’s user data to match them to pages that pay to promote and have their page shown to more people. It’s 14 bucks to have a single post “boosted” for a page otherwise your posts will be held at the bottom of the algorithm.

    chiliedogg ,

    If you give them access to your info, they can keep using it after you’ve stopped paying.

    oce , (edited )
    @oce@jlai.lu avatar

    I’ve worked for a successful scaleup that was pouring millions into Google ads every month. I have no idea who clicks ads, but it worked for them.

    greybeard ,

    One thing nobody has mentioned here is that paying users devalue the ads for non-paying users. Paying users are more likely to have desposableincomee, and are more valuable to advertisers. If advertisers know that the only people being shown ads are those without the money to buy their products, they won’t be willing to buy the ad space.

    thanks_shakey_snake ,

    That’s a really interesting point-- I can see that being the case.

    InfiniteFlow ,
    @InfiniteFlow@lemmy.world avatar

    Yup. Got it last week. Found this shit so disingemuous it almost pissed me off more than the privacy violation itself. I dont use any of Meta’s stuff except for WhatsApp out of necessity (some groups from the kids’ school), but i keep getting dumped into FB by busineses that dont have a proper webpage…

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •