Meta’s paid tier will let people avoid ads in their feeds.

Now you can pay for the privilege of being tracked.

  • AndromedusGalacticus@lemm.eeEnglish
    60·
    10 months ago

    If it wasn’t Meta, I would almost be okay with this. If I genuinely believed that my privacy was being preserved, I think it’d be a fair trade.

    • YⓄ乙 @aussie.zoneEnglish
      194·
      10 months ago

      Lol really? I would just spread the word to use lemmy or mastodon for free and donate to the Devs and Admins when needed.

      • AndromedusGalacticus@lemm.eeEnglish
        172·
        10 months ago

        I love open source in an ethical sense, and I use it to meet all of my media and storage needs. Even my operating system is open source. However, as a consumer, I also value having the best possible experience. Companies can provide better and more refined experiences in many ways, often by leveraging their deep pockets.

        I don’t mind paying for services that offer great value or save me time. The problem that most companies face, though, is that I expect them to respect both me and my privacy.

        If we were to eliminate privacy infringements from proprietary software and make it open source, it would often become best-in-class within the open source community (e.g., Photoshop, Microsoft Office, etc.). Admittedly, this isn’t always the case, but all of this is to say that there can be arguments in favor of providing a service that respects the end user and their privacy, which warrants further discussion.

      • rbits@lemm.eeEnglish
        64·
        10 months ago

        Cause everyone is just about to switch to the fediverse…

    • Aopen@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      121·
      10 months ago

      Not just Meta. Every closed software from any developer can potentialy spy on its users

  • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    261·
    10 months ago

    Good. As it should be. This isn’t fixing any issue per se but atleast it’s a step into right direction. A paid service where the users are the customer, not the product, is the way to go. Obviously in Facebook’s case it doesn’t really matter because it’s not like you’re also paying to stop them tracking you.

    • NPC@lemmy.worldEnglish
      31·
      10 months ago

      No, I think at this point going to Facebook for the ads would actually be more valuable

  • restingboredface@wayfarershaven.euEnglish
    10·
    10 months ago

    So how does this work in reality though? Most of the feed is sponsored content. Does that mean that for paid users they would only see posts from their own friends? As in, they get the intended experience of fb?

    Imagine paying to get the product a company pretends it is delivering for free. And they still mine your data to sell to the highest any bidder.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    91·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    Meta could let users pay for Facebook and Instagram to avoid ads in their feeds, at least in Europe.

    The company has been fighting with the EU and other European regulators around alleged privacy violations from its ad-tracking services and data transfers.

    The US and the EU signed a data transfer agreement in July, easing restrictions on social media platforms.

    Meta has already started offering the ability to opt out from targeted advertising in the EU, and it reportedly proposed going further and shifting it to an opt-in option for everyone in the region.

    Meta also delayed releasing its new social platform, Threads, in Europe due to regulatory concerns.

    Meta seems to be worried about the upcoming Digital Markets Act that prevents companies from reusing personal user data, including their name and location.

    The original article contains 214 words, the summary contains 131 words. Saved 39%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!