281
Welcome to the Age of Paid Social Media (gizmodo.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
124 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

There's this tendency in more leftist and anti-authoritarian circles to imagine that the big corporations and the billionaires have a literally infinite pie of money and therefore they can fund all things for free.

And while they do have a lot of money, when you're scaling things to a general population, things get very very expensive. Facebook has to pay for a ton of infrastructure and bandwidth and hire a lot of very expensive employees. That has to be paid for somehow, and even Zuck himself wouldn't be able to cover it all for very long. In music, Spotify has never turned a profit. Movies cost massive amounts of money to produce and very often fail to make the budget back.

While it is true that one individual person blocking ads or pirating doesn't make a material difference, if everyone did that, we simply wouldn't have any of this stuff at all.

Tl;dr people need to read more Kant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Except you can't just pretend like every single business' expenses are legit, nor can you ignore the fact that the thing they're selling is our content.

    Meta wants $17 bucks. For what? They're not making shit. My friends posts the content, for free.

    So what's the $17 bucks for? How much of that is going toward executive bloat and other garbage? How much is going towards their PR team, their marketing, their fucking lobbyists??

    When I donate a few bucks a month to the open source apps I use, I know that money is going to the people that created and maintain the thing.

    This shit is about keeping these companies and their investors rich. It has fuck all to do with keeping the lights on, it's soley about keeping the line going up.

    And again, all of this, and they're not even making the damn content.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    If you think that the only thing required to run services like Facebook and Instagram is a supply of content, by all means, make your own platform. But you'll pretty quickly discover that developing the infrastructure required to handle hundreds of millions of people uploading hundreds of gigabytes of data every minute isn't actually a trivial problem, and that there's a reason Facebook pays hundreds of engineers a lot of money. Meta's labor costs, excluding sales, marketing, and admin, were 15 billion dollars in 2022. Just keeping the lights on for service as that scale is not a simple task at all, let alone actually building anything new.

    If you want to get content from your friends, the postal service is perfectly well-equipped to deliver that, or you can of course simply meet up with them in person. But if you want a platform with essentially everyone you'll ever meet on it that's capable of hosting and sending almost any content you can imagine instantly for free, that does actually take money to build. Undoubtedly, there is some money that's siphoned back towards investors as well, but their products also wouldn't exist at the scale they do now without the 26 billion dollars of debt that they also have right now, which obviously needs to be re-paid.

    I get that you're probably not actually looking for answers to those questions, but my point is that they do have answers if you actually cared. Again, if you don't think they're actually providing any value, then do the obvious thing and don't use them. After all, by your own position, they're not actually providing anything, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent