At the risk of being redundant:
#Meta doesn't care about your posts. Because there is nothing of interest that you could possibly post. You are not interesting for Meta.
#Meta doesn't care about enabling their users to be part of an open network. All they want is hype, marketing and to skim the fallout from Twitter. All they want is their users personal data.
#Meta can never inject ads into your instance or timeline - ergo they are not interested in you.
#Meta cannot even correlate your account to anything in their database.
Meta's release of #Thread is as much of relevance for the Fediverse as a Biden farting in his chair.
> Propagandist
I wouldn't say that per se.
> Meta doesn't care about your posts. Because there is nothing of interest that could possibly post. You are not interesting for Meta.
This is accurate.
> Meta doesn't care about enabling their users to be part of an open network. All they want is hype, marketing and to skim the fallout from Twitter. All they want is their users personal data.
Also accurate.
> Meta can never inject ads into your instance or timeline - ergo they are not interested in you.
They could spin up adbot accounts, but they are whitelist-only so they probably won't be delivering posts to any other instances. That is not the only reason they care about random people on the internet.
> Meta cannot even correlate your account to anything in their database.
Probably not accurate. Facebook *invented* the "shadow profile".
The short version is that they pushed all these little embeds (same thing Twitter does), like you see those "Like us on Facebook" buttons on random websites? Facebook uses those for data collection. So even if you didn't use Facebook, they'd follow you around the web and collect data on you.
Thank God Facebook doesn't have my future email for college. Anyways, why is Facebook wanting to invade people's privacy when they already have enough money to buy themselves an island? It just doesn't make sense to me.
@Jojothegoodperson @louis @p @thatguyoverthere This is going into conspiracy territory but Facebook is most likely *NOT* a private company that started from someone's dorm, but rather actually a government project with the sole intention of collecting user data. It was never really about the profit motive, it was about government control.
Back in the early 2000s there was a DARPA project known as LifeLog. It's intent was to log people's day to day lives, including their relationships, jobs, purchases, places visit, etc. They planned to do this by various means like using CCTV, GPS data, tracking sites visited, etc. The plan was to use all the data to determine someone's interests, goals, etc.
The project ended THE SAME DAY that Facebook launched. It shouldn't be a coincidence, especially given that Facebook uses the same methods to track both users and non-users. It seems like the US government saw the rise of blogging and early social networking sites like Friendster and MySpace, and saw those as the perfect way to implement their project.
If that's the case, then answer this. Why doesn't Facebook manipulate the terms of service. Why doesn't Facebook steal other features from tiktok and YouTube to make their website more appealing? Why doesn't Facebook make end to end encryption that are fake to target more users that are politically incorrect. Why did Facebook banned Trump. Hypothetically, if Facebook wanted more users, then they are banning more conservative users, therefore it makes political freedom on the platform unappealing. My guess is that Facebook just wanted to look sexy and hot to advertiser. And to be honest, sorry for rambling on and on, but I think the main reason on why Facebook created the app "Threads" wasnt because of Twitter, it was actually because the younger demographic wasn't using the app Facebook as much as tiktok or Twitter. And I think the second reason on why they created a Twitter clone was to further get into personal political ideologies and personal lives disturbingly.
@Jojothegoodperson @louis @p @thatguyoverthere Who isn't to say that other services aren't in on it too? Google has a similar story (I need to find the article again), and it should be common knowledge these alt-tech sites that a lot of right-wingers are flocking to are just honeypots. They literally exist to serve the same purpose. They are still spying on the people that are banned. And this Big Tech censorship on conservatives is just a distraction because both parties are controlled by the same shadow government.
You mean truth social and those websites. I agree with you, because they're only promoting conservative ideology and not developers or coder needed to improve the infrastructure of making your "social network" more privacy or encrypted. I personally think that Google is worse than Facebook in terms of privacy, but let's be for real, Google has huge soft power in the market. How are you tell people about privacy when even the younger demographic is less interested in those things. The government is not telling us all of this because they want to take our freedom away. Like, for example, have you ever heard about the website "Freedom of the world"? The United States has a score of 83, while the united kingdom has 93, which proves that american is slowly disappearing.