zlacker

The app is not a tool to serve you, instead the app turns you into the tool to serve itself.

>>Nextgr+(OP)
You hit the nail on the head. This is the actual, real, definition of "free" (as in "free to use"). Every instance of that term should be surrounded by red blinking scare quotes.

>>classi+Y2
Or regulation that curbs our outlaws this cancerous business model. If you can't profit without wasting people's time and/or stalking them then you shouldn't be in business.

We have regulation that somewhat works (there are exceptions of course and corruption is a thing, but at least there's an attempt) for other negative impacts on society (environmental damage, etc) but absolutely nothing for tech despite these new apps & services turning people into addicted zombies.

>>Nextgr+(OP)
It is both. The app takes your attention and divides it up into (A) things you want to give your attention to (people you follow) and (B) things you don't (ads).

It's not just about (B). There is a tricky balancing act involved. A company that does too much (B) ends up with an app that users don't like and stop using. A company that does too much (A) produces a beloved app right up until the point that the company runs out of money and folds.

>>munifi+bB
> A company that does too much (A) produces a beloved app right up until the point that the company runs out of money and folds.

Because they have to compete with people doing lots of (B), and giving the app away for free. I'm increasingly feeling that "free + ads/surveillance" is the problem.