[jsnell]

Yes, it's incredibly unlikely. So unlikely that it's basically impossible.

They explicitly and unambiguously deny doing it; if that was incorrect, there would be a huge regulatory and public backlash. (Think of what happened with the Cambridge Analytica case, despite Facebook's hands being pretty clean on that). No disgruntled ex-employees blew the whistle on this but did on other issue), which suggests it probably didn't happen.

Selling ads is very profitable. Selling data directly risks that business for little gain. In addition to the backlash when that data selling were revealed, it risks somebody else using the data sold by Meta to outcompete them on ad targeting.

[SantalBlush]

>They explicitly and unambiguously deny doing it; if that was incorrect, there would be a huge regulatory and public backlash.

Companies typically don't admit to the public when they're engaged in unethical practices. Purdue Pharma is a good example.

[jsnell]

Then you say nothing on the subject, or say something that's technically true but ambiguous and easy to misunderstand.

[JumpCrisscross]

> it risks somebody else using the data sold by Meta to outcompete them on ad targeting

Bingo. They're unlikely to be selling the data because those data are their secret sauce. They are as economically incentivized to build sociopathic models on you as they are to keep your data out of anyone else's hands.