• traveler@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get it why and how they get away. I mean I do get it, but it’s astonishing the amount of the shit these big corporations get away with. They’re pretty much profiting from crime and nobody does anything against them.

      • traveler@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you use the app there’s no blocking it sadly. What people should start doing it’s stop using that platform all together

        • Mr_Vortex@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          I use an alternative side-loaded Instagram app called Instander which blocks ads and comes with other nice features. I don’t use the platform much anyhow, but when I do it makes the experience actually tolerable.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, what people should start doing is demanding that governments actually enforce the law against Facebook for acting as an accomplice to the myriad crimes the article discusses. Facebook should be dissolved and executives should go to prison.

          • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            eh, I’m a photographer/videographer. sadly I more or less need to use it if I want anyone to find me…

        • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          As opposed to when?

          At what point in internet history do you think website advertising was tolerable? Because in my eyes, it’s always been an aggressive obstacle to usability, since the dial-up era.

          • traveler@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, you either pay the service so you don’t have to watch ads (like YouTube Premium) or you see ads that aren’t criminal behaviour or spam.

            Either way, I fail to understand how people got into the mindset that every service in the internet should be both free and ad free.

            • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Movie piracy can be both, and it’s straight-up illegal. Hosting text is nothing in comparison. Images and video snippets are barely more than that. If all a website provides is bandwidth and storage, we all have that in spades, and if a website can’t let us share it, then a website is the wrong model.

              Running a glorified chat server and image board in the year two thousand and fifty gigabits should not be remarkable. You are currently on a service patched together by randos hosting servers for fun. It replaces a website which, despite strenuous effort, made fuck-all revenue from a highly constructive and ordered community of millions.

              I fail to understand how people got into the mindset that every website needs to make money. Some worthwhile and widely-desired things simply lose money, and that’s fine. Expecting to monetize your family would be gross. Expecting to monetize community is not much better, and equally fruitless. Squeezing any blood from that stone requires some fundamental betrayals of what those relationships mean and why people seek them.

              Social media sites only turned a profit when they undermined democracy. Advertising is propaganda for sale. If you think capitalism prevents us from even talking to one another without being gouged for the privilege or subjected to destabilizing abuse, then torches and pitchforks are on your left.

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            But conceivably they could be enforcing the law by putting pressure on these companies to stop facilitating advertising of illegal services and thereby the flow of business. If they instead just don’t bother with that so that they can use these ads to pick out and track down the juiciest, lowest effort prosecution targets, representing a small proportion of the total market, that’s pure corruption with little to no social benefit.

            To be clear I don’t actually know if this is what is going on, but if it was it would be reprehensible.

      • traveler@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are law enforcement actually doing it? Because if they were people were not always making those ads.