Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by zepto 1966 days ago
Erm, no - nothing I just said is about expressive a beef.

It’s just a description of Facebook’s core business.

If Apple does use ‘sweatshops’, which they clearly do to some extent, that is a marginal part of their business, and not part of their business model at all.

Selling Ads is what Facebook gets paid for. Targetting ads is why they can charge a premium for those ads. Keeping users engaged to content is how they reliably deliver a large volume of ads.

This is their business.

1 comments

You said:

> by tracking user behavior without consent so that they. can sell targeted ads, and by keeping users engaged with the ad delivery platform by presenting content algorithmically selected to provoke emotional reactions.

Some things in here are the core business model, others are implementation choices that don’t have to be true (like the sweatshops). I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that the lawsuit should fail because they didn’t lead it with a list of complaints people have about the company (not would I expect Apple to include the same in their response).

“others are implementation choices that don’t have to be true”

Are you able to identify one of these implementation choices that don’t have to be true?

Sure, “tracking without consent” is an easy one.
It seems like Zuckerberg disagrees with you on that. He seems to think it is a very important part of their business.

I’d like to believe you are right and it’s just an implementation choice, but Facebook seems very determined to be able to continue the practice.

I expect the lawsuit will be about how Apple is requiring users to opt-in for companies to be able to track ad conversions in some places but not others.

Will require opt-in to track:

Facebook ad conversion to buy an item in Wish’s store

Facebook ad conversion to buy an app from App Store

Won’t require opt-in to track:

Amazon ad conversion to buy an item from a store on Amazon

Apple App Store ad conversion to buy an app from the App Store

Facebook’s proposed remedy might be removing the opt-in requirement, or adding the same requirement uniformly to create a level playing field.

Why would this be relevant if tracking without consent is just an implementation choice?

Why even bother with a lawsuit over it if it’s not an important part of their business?

Wouldn’t they just let users opt-out if the wanted to?

In any case, I think we have established that my characterization of facebook’s business was accurate. They wouldn’t be seeking remedies for something that wasn’t important to them.