[–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

To unlock higher limits, users must subscribe to the newly expanded Meta One service, with tiers ranging from $49/month for eight monthly links to a staggering $499/month for unlimited sharing.

God I can't wait for Meta to crash and burn

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 2 weeks ago

    I've been trying to get people to stop using Facebook for business for years and years. My efforts pale in comparison to FB themselves. Bravo! It's brave of you to push businesses off your platform.

  • source
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 month ago

    It's not just the switching costs, it's the network effects that are forcing people to use Meta platforms. Once I was moving and needed to sell or give away some furniture, appliances and other items (the alternative would be to pay someone to have them disposed of). The problem is, other than the Facebook marketplace, there is barely a place where this can be done. Likewise, where I live, everyone has WhatsApp and everyone assumes that you have it as well.

    Another problem is lack of good alternatives. Meta is making products that work for billions of people. I am not aware of any alternative to Facebook marketplace that works globally. All WhatsApp alternatives are worse in some respect: Telegram doesn't fully support non-Google Androids as it requires Play Integrity, iMessage only works on Apple devices, RCS must be supported by the carrier and until very recently didn't work on Apple devices, Signal and others have too few users and also lack important features such as web client. It is difficult to make people migrate off Meta if that means they lose things that they are used to.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    While I want everyone to freely choose to end their Meta accounts, and while I agree that one should never be in a position where a unilateral decision can block access to one's personal data and contacts, we must not be smug about what's happened here.

    Meta is like any monopoly platform: They actively and aggressively get as many people as possible to put as much of their life as possible onto the platform, and deliberately make it difficult to leave. Not to mention that they also effectively dominate so much of the “share with your friends and colleagues and customers” capacity, that any competitor would have an enormous disadvantage and therefore these people cannot leave Meta easily.

    The solution here is not to shame people for still using the dominant platform, when that platform's switching costs make it immensely difficult to leave with one's data and connections intact. We must instead agitate for change so that there can never be any profit-motivated dominant platform. This will carve out the room for a rabble of competitors that are each small enough they cannot dominate, and must treat their users with respect in order to keep them.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago*

    lmao they are so intent on giving us free slop and we won't budge, meanwhile they're doing business plans on us subscribing to slop feeds

    The bubble is gonna burst and it's going to be fucking crazy how many linkedin heads pop out like "WHAT HAPPENED, HOW"

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago*

    He will just be replaced by some other money hungry twat. No, we need Mark Zuckerberg to stay and drive Meta into the ground.

    the board should request the resignation of Mark Zuckerberg and restructure to put safety above profit

    What planet is the writer on? It's a publicly traded company! They care about anything but profit!

  • source
  • view more: next ›