/g/ - Technology

>>11830

I'd think that exposing their violation of people's privacy and/or abusing them to livestream people getting murdered would be a good idea, but obviously that didn't work.

>>11830

All social media sites work off of the lowest common denominator; what ever people will accept wins by default. I don't like face book. I more don't like goo g le (in case bots).

Both companies work off averting. First thought: break advertising. Most operations that use face book for out reach are not going to be using it's paid features, so if you want to hit these companies you want to limit their access to money. You could try to out compete them with an avert system that gets better conversion (customer from advert) than the companies in question. But sabotage can be done more cheaply: install add block on all the users of face book's computers. There are levels to blocking adds, network, LAN, domain filtering, but you can't get very far messing with how traffic works on the internet. In a scene the home computer is still the final frontier for software freedom; the CFBIA can't do much to compel you to load a render a web page a certain way unlike how they can instigate network traffic. Cell phones are also a good target for this kind of strategy, but I'd need to do some research into android and i os and others for the scheme.

To strike on multiple frontiers you can try to capture advertising companies that work with face book and goo g le, that way you are cutting off there client base too. I'd just bank rupt the companies. You can just get an incompetent manager installed and then just let the companies implode.

Capturing is when you buy-out or coerce the leadership in other ways of a company to do your will.

>>11834

Well it did somewhat, nowadays mostly boomers are still actively using the site.

>>12554

I think refocusing on their more popular subsidiary Instagram would be more beneficial.

>we

There is no "we". There is only anon, you dumbass newcunt.

We don't have to. Right-wing people who use Facebook are almost only boomers (which are going to die soon anyway). Left-wing people are starting to hate Facebook too due to ads related to Trump (and that's especially visible on Twitter) and that group is the most hesitant to abandon it. Normies (AKA NPCs with little to none political opinions) will probably abandon it as soon as more politically engaged people - that is the most popular people will switch to something else.

The point is though that they will most likely switch to something even worse. There's no way that they'll switch back to traditional decentralized forum system or literally anything that isn't a centralized and *tard friendly solution.

There's a more important enemy here - Discord. They're centralizing many communities which would otherwise use more privacy friendly and decentralized services, even though most of them are comprised of actually tech-savvy people. Why? The network effect. Of course you can use IRC or XMPP, but then you'd be in contact with a quite small group of people concentrated about a certain subject (which can be sometimes quite comfy tbh) or even you may not be able to find anyone to discuss that topic with you (especially some niche stuff like archivization, piracy, video game series (especially dead/niche ones, such as Half-Life, where larger communities = access to recent leaks)

TL;DR: NETWORK EFFECT IS A FUCK

>>12698

>The point is though that they will most likely switch to something even worse. There's no way that they'll switch back to traditional decentralized forum system or literally anything that isn't a centralized and *tard friendly solution.

Bullshit, they switched to WhatsApp long ago which is owned by zuckerkike too. Different colour, same scheme. So no actual switch. People don't like switching because then they have to learn. Learn! Can you believe it????? That is so not cool and hip!!!!111111111111111111111111😂😂😂😂😂😂

>>12554

Or just but an woman in power there fort few years it works with IBM

We need to mass promote adblocking&tracking-blocking thats how they make their money if that happens they are fucked beyond recovery

1. Install uBlock Origin on everyone's computers you know to block facebook, google and other adverstising companies.

2. Add EFF's recommended open source ad companies to the whitelist.

3. ???

4. Profit

Making alternatives usable and getting actually good content there.

The most popular fediverse groups are:

1) (SJW-coded) far right containment internethatemachine echochamber

2-) mid-far left containment internethatemachine echochambers

... then after a while we start to find more neutral, less hateful options.

So long as the most advertized alternatives are vitriolic politics-based shitholes somehow managing to be more toxic than twitter and facebook, we're fucked.

Users are dependent. It's not illogical but its disgusting. Four years ago, we found that 97% of my uni cohort (USA) were facebook/messenger users. It's the opposite of herd immunity.

If you get enough people to use the alternative, it gets users (see whatsapp/signal/telegram). The initial launch is the hard part. Facebook committed reputational suicide over the past few years AND NEARLY NO-ONE LEFT. That's very important to understand.

>>13044

>reputational suicide over the past few years AND NEARLY NO-ONE LEFT

Facebook has the same problem windows does: much of the normalfags "essential" things are covered by facebook the same way windows tries to make PC hardware and games "windows exclusive.". It's also the same reason amazon has money poured into it while memos are being leaked and dirty laundry is being aired by the truckload.

Normalfags know exactly how insidious this shit is, but treat both as a "necessary" evil rather than something to be discarded. That is solely the reason either of these companies and their platforms exist, because if a more useful thing came out that has the functionality that the old, evil thing has, they would jump ship in droves.

Why the fuck is every single technology board filled with more autistic niggerpills than /b/?

>>13052

Well, not like Lincux is any better. Specially if you use it to emulate the desktop metaphor, one of worst computing metaphors to ever come out of the industry. You know those pesky and inefficient things that annoyed you on Windows? Well, they are replicated on Unix-like "desktop" but even worse than Windows because they are over-glorified by RedHat/freedesktop goons. It is basically an open sores implementation of everything that is wrong with Windows and Mac OS. You might as well call Lincux Windows Lite at this point. Not like the BSDs are any better. It is just that all the "innovation" wrought by freedesktoy orgynization arrives on Linux earlier. If you do use a Unix-like operating system, however, I recommend avoiding freedesktoy crap and anything that might be encumbered by it. If you happen to need such program, you can probably just utilize a few use flags to fix the program that pulls freedesktoy dependencies