• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    So much for the claims I read that it would be a more open platform.

    There’s no profit in an open platform. You only build these things to mine data.

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Exactly.

      It’s a for-profit company.

      They care about your privacy like McDonald’s cares about your health: if you have any left then they’re not squeezing cash from you hard enough.

      Talk to friends on Signal, invite your favorite The Atlantic reporter, use self-hosted or federated social networks.

      Expecting privacy on corporate owned social media is like expecting to become a royal because you went to Disney World.

      Don’t confuse the facade (social space for you and your friends/magical kingdom) with the reality (privacy stealing monetization factory/tourist juicer).

    • bishbosh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      This is further supported by the fact that story that they made more money selling their “fuck zuck” shirts or whatever, than they did in their actual money making strategies of selling unique domains.

      No VC investor is going to be okay with a merchandise company growth curve.