• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Taking Back the Internet

Gord_in_Toronto

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
26,452
Once upon a time the Internet was a free and open place inhabited by individuals who liked and trusted each other. Then along came its commercialism and it was taken over by entities who only want to make money.

Is it possible we may get control back?

The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed a lawsuit Wednesday against Meta Platforms on behalf of an Amherst professor who wants to release a tool that enables users to unfollow all the content fed to them by Facebook's algorithm.

Lawsuit against Meta asks if Facebook users have right to control their feeds using external tools

Do social media users have the right to control what they see — or don't see — on their feeds?

A lawsuit filed against Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc. is arguing that a federal law often used to shield internet companies from liability also allows people to use external tools to take control of their feed — even if that means shutting it off entirely.
 
To be honest, I am dubious about how successful this lawsuit will be. Don't get me wrong, I agree with every single thing in it; I think it's a great tool, I think it ought to be legal - in fact I think the idea that such a thing would ever exist in some kind of legal grey-area is absurd. I think massive monolithic businesses have far, far too much control over the internet on every scale and level from basic infrastructure all the way to the user agent, and as a rule I support any attempt by users to claw back any of that control even in small ways. I hope the lawsuit succeeds.

But the US court system has become increasingly business-friendly and consumer-hostile in recent years, and I fear that a bad result in this case may help legally solidify the commercial stranglehold on the internet even more.

Ideally, people should delete their accounts and stop using Facebook altogether.
 
It’s not just Meta. It’s how devices work with advertising. They send your data to be sold to companies wanting to sell you things. Looking up information shouldn't be a capitalist transaction, but here we are.
 
Very true.

I would personally consider Google and Meta, in that order, to be the absolute worst of the worst. On an individual level, if people want to reclaim any privacy at all, to begin with they need to stop using any and all Google products and services to the fullest extent practical, followed by Meta products like Facebook and Instagram. If work requires using Google or Meta services then consider using separate devices for work and everything else. Use tools, addons, extensions, and the services' own user settings to defeat the data-mining features of whatever's left. Use ad-blockers and tracker-blockers and don't feel guilty about it. If you want to support creators, send them a couple of dollars a month on Patreon - they definitely have one and that's exactly what it's for. Use a reputable VPN, all the time.

After this, move on to excising second-tier offenders like Apple and Microsoft. Use alternative programs to do all the things they do. Consider paying for an email service rather than using free email services which are all data-harvesting scams. Stop using dedicated apps when the web page works just fine. Curate and use RSS feeds for news and updates rather than letting social media and other algorithmic services decide what to show you.

Yes, it will cost some money, and the applications may not look quite as sexy, and setting things up may seem like a lot of time and effort commitment especially in the aggregate. But these are the kinds of things people have to do now in order to grant themselves a mote of privacy and freedom online. You don't have to be some anonymous masked hacker and move your activities to the dark web; you just have to stop being apathetic and be willing to live without a minor convenience or two in favor of standing by your principles.
 
It’s not just Meta. It’s how devices work with advertising. They send your data to be sold to companies wanting to sell you things. Looking up information shouldn't be a capitalist transaction, but here we are.

So you don't think you should have to pay anything at all for information? Nothing?
 
Our taxes pay for the infrastructure these companies use to make their businesses. Also, for the subsidies.

It seems liek a lot of the "disruptors" and various tech companies aren't innovating anythign anymore except for ways to get between us and the things we want and charging us for access. They are producing anything. Not even making the transactiosn easier. Just standing in the way with a hand out.
 
I''m dubious about the law suit as well. Look at FB Purity, the browser extension removes crap from your FB feed. The guy is always struggling to handle new obfuscation etc in FB code to mess with him. They can claim they're always making improvements and how can they expect their new code to be made available to 3rd parties.
Until a better solution, maintain your HOSTS file link , use alternate search engines (even though many use google in the backend) etc.

eta: The above now includes a link to an hosts file auto-update tool.
 
Last edited:
While we're at it, why not take back our roads? They didn't used to have advertising on them. And if I go into someone's private place of public accommodation (you know, like FB/Insta), why should I have to see advertising there? I think these people should provide exactly what I want at no cost to me or benefit to them.
 
While we're at it, why not take back our roads? They didn't used to have advertising on them. And if I go into someone's private place of public accommodation (you know, like FB/Insta), why should I have to see advertising there? I think these people should provide exactly what I want at no cost to me or benefit to them.
I get 3:
Excluded middle. Slippery slope. False equivalence.
 
I get 3:
Excluded middle. Slippery slope. False equivalence.

Maybe I'm missing the point of the OP? I don't FB so it's possible.

It's a free platform. So they advertise and push stuff to keep you hooked on it. That makes sense to me, because they kind of couldn't function if they didn't. So by "controlling your feed", you are not subjected to the advertising that... allows the platform to exist? I mean, advertising to pay for free services is kind of a well-established thing.

The other part is that the internet was some kind of intimate group of friends, and how about we go back to that? Well... it's not an intimate group of friends anymore. It's the flipping planet, and some of the inhabitants of the planet are not your personal friends. They might be very different in fact. They should not have access to the internet because... OP thinks it should be a group of people that like and trust each other?
 
I'm honestly way more cocnerned about controlling my personal data. And its not jsut through facebook or even from my phone. data about me is colelcted by the devices I come close to, from when other people put a picture with me in it on their feeds, when I walk into a store.

I didn't sign up for that and I sure as hell don't get anything for it.
 
Very true.

I would personally consider Google and Meta, in that order, to be the absolute worst of the worst. On an individual level, if people want to reclaim any privacy at all, to begin with they need to stop using any and all Google products and services to the fullest extent practical, followed by Meta products like Facebook and Instagram. If work requires using Google or Meta services then consider using separate devices for work and everything else. Use tools, addons, extensions, and the services' own user settings to defeat the data-mining features of whatever's left. Use ad-blockers and tracker-blockers and don't feel guilty about it. If you want to support creators, send them a couple of dollars a month on Patreon - they definitely have one and that's exactly what it's for. Use a reputable VPN, all the time.

After this, move on to excising second-tier offenders like Apple and Microsoft. Use alternative programs to do all the things they do. Consider paying for an email service rather than using free email services which are all data-harvesting scams. Stop using dedicated apps when the web page works just fine. Curate and use RSS feeds for news and updates rather than letting social media and other algorithmic services decide what to show you.

Yes, it will cost some money, and the applications may not look quite as sexy, and setting things up may seem like a lot of time and effort commitment especially in the aggregate. But these are the kinds of things people have to do now in order to grant themselves a mote of privacy and freedom online. You don't have to be some anonymous masked hacker and move your activities to the dark web; you just have to stop being apathetic and be willing to live without a minor convenience or two in favor of standing by your principles.

Good post, especially the bit about ad-blockers. I might add, log out of your accounts, I clear my cache/cookies a couple of times/day and, really, it's not a big problem logging back into the very few accounts I have.

I even bought a new computer (Windows 11) and when it demanded I log into my Microsoft account to continue setting it up, I used my old computer to look up how to bypass that.

This lawsuit is stupid. Make them stop showing me stuff that I can't stop looking at.

OK, off to Twitter (using nitter.poast.org, of course) to spend a couple of hours watching cat videos.
 
YT has ads , they are more and longer than half a year ago and the -skip ad- function isn't always available. I go in as a guest. I have no google acct and will resist getting one until it's impossible to get video without.

It changed again recently with now having to actively choose guest mode. And the promotion for yt premium without ads comes up blocking a video playing and has to be rejected to continue.

The ads are not overwhelming, can mostly be skipped so I see no need to pay for watching YT as long as I abide by not actively blocking ads any more than they allow.

Google stopped demanding I make an account with them a while back which is nice. I offer generic data to mine in exchange. They do an admirable job with just that.

If they go to pay to watch, sooner or later we'll get ads there too because they want more money eventually.
No need to help them get there faster.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm missing the point of the OP? I don't FB so it's possible.

It's a free platform. So they advertise and push stuff to keep you hooked on it. That makes sense to me, because they kind of couldn't function if they didn't. So by "controlling your feed", you are not subjected to the advertising that... allows the platform to exist? I mean, advertising to pay for free services is kind of a well-established thing.

What makes that argument hollow in the end is that Facebook is incredibly profitable, meaning that it makes far more money than it needs simply to "function".

Facebook also has no ad banners; the only ads that an account holder would ever see on Facebook come in the form of posts by businesses or organizations that they have paid Facebook a special fee to promote. That fact - that the companies paid a fee to turn these particular posts into ads - is important, because it means that Facebook already has the money in hand and whether or not you see one of these posts in your own feed does not change or add to that, so there is no harm in using a tool to avoid seeing them.
 
On second thoughts, I think I'll find out for myself, thanks.

Which is how it's supposed to work, dammit!

I have some encyclopedias to sell you, or maybe you can buy a book, or a newspaper? How else are you going to find out for yourself?

Information is never free, if for no other reason that someone has to gather it up and put in a format that can be read and then disseminate it by some means. The internet is just the latest and most efficient way.
 
Information is never free, if for no other reason that someone has to gather it up and put in a format that can be read and then disseminate it by some means. The internet is just the latest and most efficient way.

Elsevier profit margin is 36%. Doesn't seem efficient. https://www.theguardian.com/science...at-global-science-journal-over-unethical-fees

Or there's Leibniz Open Science - worth subscribing to their mastodon feed https://mastodon.social/@leibnizopenscience

MIT Open Courseware https://ocw.mit.edu/

OpenLearn https://www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses/full-catalogue

Elsevier is one example of a more general problem. Companies compete to monopolize the market then run riot. We wouldn't have the IT or internet we have today IMHO if IBM hadn't bowed to the 1956 consent decree.
 

Back
Top Bottom