[afavour]

Man, I absolutely cannot disagree more. If a service wants to use my face in an ad they need to ask me for permission first. The gradual erosion of user autonomy we’ve seen online over the past few decades never ceases to amaze me.

> People have knee-jerk reactions to anything to do with ads because of the privacy concerns of yesterday, understandably.

Can you elaborate on this? What were the privacy concerns of yesterday that we don’t need to worry about today?

[mysterydip]

> If a service wants to use my face in an ad they need to ask me for permission first.

But you granted us full unrestricted access when you agreed to page 58 section J of our latest terms of service. - meta lawyer somewhere

[carlosdp]

It's an ad only you can see, I don't see the harm.

> What were the privacy concerns of yesterday that we don’t need to worry about today?

The web/internet is a hell of a lot more private today than 10 years ago. Third party cookies are basically gone, mobile tracking is going out the door with Apple leading that charge, there are tons of relatively popular browsers and extensions that reduce tracking even more, there's enough privacy legislation that big companies have had to re-architect to preserve privacy as much as possible by default.

Hell, if we're just talking about Meta, they literally nuked a thriving third-party developer API ecosystem to appease people's privacy concerns, out right.

[raxxor]

There were times when users warned about the consequences of putting your images on the net. If you upload them on Facebook services, you gave away the rights on them I believe.