[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

It doesn't have to be, but that's not really an argument for claiming it isn't. Considering how deeply embedded privacy violation is in Meta's corporate DNA, is there any reason other than hilariously naïve and inexplicably charitable, hypothetical speculation to believe this is not motivated by more privacy violation for profit, just like literally every single thing Meta has done in the entire history of the company? No? Didn't think so.

[yalok]

were you in that room where Adam was making that call? No? didn't think so...

Just give people some benefit of doubt. There're much simpler ways to explain certain things that suspecting some universal evil in every move...

[mfru]

not if it is one of the companies famous for going the extra mile of being "evil" / a corporate shit hole stealing every thought you ever have to better sell you stuff you don't need