Watch “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix, see how far off the rails the industry has gone, then come back and tell me that Apple is the bad guy here. Someone needs to start standing up for what’s right, and Apple is probably the only one with the size and cash reserves to be able to do it.
For all the free market cheerleaders, remember this: we already have laws in place preventing or regulating businesses from engaging in certain activities, like exploitation, gambling, addictive drugs, etc. And these companies fighting Apple want to do exactly that: Epic wants to sell digital gambling (loot) boxes to children. Facebook and Instagram want to track everything you do every second of the day, for the dubious goal of making advertising “more relevant to you” (and just happens to have the small side effect of being a tool currently in use to topple democracies around the world). Social networks are hooking into addiction centers of the brain to keep people hooked on misinformation that is actually killing people.
Is Apple perfect? No. Is this one thing going to stop all that I mentioned? No. But you have to start somewhere.
You can support a company for some of its actions while also condemning it for others. It's totally legitimate to be on Epic's side in the Apple vs Epic lawsuit while also supporting Apple's privacy measures.
Apple is a giant corporation with varied interests. In some areas they align with consumers (they’re not heavily in advertising... yet) while in others their anti-competitive behavior is harmful.
Writing these impassioned posts like you’re defending the decisions of your favorite sports team that can do no wrong... oof.
You've clearly never played Fortnite. Epic doesn't sell loot boxes, they sell skins. You get exactly what you pay for, there is nothing sketchy about it.
I'm sorry, but that show was really, really dumb and unrealistic and I couldn't sit through it.
3 engineers (notably: cringey white dudes) are never following one single user and controlling his interactions like that and it did more harm than good by pretending it works that way.
This implies someone is directly accountable, showing up to work every day and fucking with people's attention regularly, when in reality, it's soulless machines programmed to do this while the engineers are several degrees away from inflicting harm like this.
That's what makes it so dangerous -- not that tech companies have unlimited money to build situation rooms dedicated to following single users around.
Having just finished watching The Social Dilemma about fifteen minutes ago -- then hopping onto HN to satisfy the itch before bedtime (the irony is not lost) to read some commentary about Apple, Instagram, and Facebook.
"There are millions of [small businesses] out there that rely on us to target customers and to reach those customers." (quote from Instagram CEO)
I'm not an Instagram user / customer / product -- but it seems disingenuous for the CEO of Instagram to claim the company's primary concern is these myriad tiny companies, other than in the context of them indirectly buoying up Instagram's business.
Personally, I find basically everything about Instagram bad. The only reason I use it is because a lot of my friends share their pictures there.
Their app is full of bugs, at least on my regular Android phone, dark mode always messes up, ghost notifications, random crashes, etc.
The platform is full of bots. My profile is set to private, so everybody who wants to follow me needs to request first. On some days, I get requests from 10+ profiles trying to sell porn. And that's without following any big influencers, just friends.
The bots also invade basically every public comment section, trying to sell porn or NSFW snapchat. I don't get why they are successful, but I assume they are, given the scale they operate.
Their TikTok clone feature that basically completely spams my discover/search tab is full of content taken from TikTok or barely dressed girls trying to push their OnlyFans. Maybe that was the plan, I find it just annoying.
And now to their ads, easily one of the most annoying parts. Given how much data Facebook/Instagram is collecting, you'd assume they'd somehow manage to show interesting and relevant advertisings. At least for me and some friends I talked to, that is absolutely not the case. While it feels like every third post is an ad, there is nothing relevant at all. Basically all ads I get on instagram are trying to sell me 100k passive income online courses, cheap Chinese drop shipping products, knockoff products or trading apps (something I was never remotely interested in either).
I was an early adopter of both Instagram and the iPad. (As an iOS developer, even at the time; I have to keep up with the ecosystem as it evolves.)
I waited for years for them to create an iPad-compatible version. It is literally one of the only apps I use that still uses iPhone mode on an iPad.
'According to Mosseri (Instagram CEO), the reason for Instagram’s iPhone-only app is that the company doesn’t have the resources to develop for both platforms.'[1]
Eye. Roll. If little indie shops can have this out of the gate, I'm sure you could figure out a way to allocate some of your resources to a tablet version.
It's been ten years since both the iPad and Instagram. I get that Instagram is a photo-taking app; and typically you'd use a phone for that. Many of my friends are iPad-only on the Apple ecosystem; and they enjoy taking and editing photos, especially with the Apple Pencil, on the device.
The new iPad Pros have excellent cameras for the hardware - not nearly as great as; say, the iPhone 11, but worthy of taking pictures and it happens all the time.
The recommendation engine is bizarre too. I have had minimal interaction with the app, and follow a handful of people. Once I've read their updates, I get 'recommended' posts that are mostly pro-Trump stuff with the occasional random same-looking model from wherever the fuck.
Considering that my Instagram account is linked to my Facebook account, they should be able to figure out that I'm a left-leaning European nerd with very little interest in puffy-lipped models...
Meanwhile TikTok has been eerily good at recommending stuff that amuses or interests me, with very little input from my end of things.
I might be one of the few, but I like the ads I see on Instagram and have purchased lots of things via IG ads. I can’t think of any other app/site where the ads have sucked me in.
I realize this is besides the point, but I thought it was worth sharing in terms of how they might be doing personalization. For me, it’s so good that it actually works.
Would you have bought these items otherwise?
If the answer is no, then you were "sucked in".
Google AdWords was great, you search for product X you definitely wanted to buy X, that's reasonable personalization.
Now they want to know who you are, so they can
optimize manipulatating you to want X even if you didn't before you saw their ad.
There's a big difference between the two type of advertising, although they're both personalized. One is aligning stake holders interest, the other forms an adversarial dynamics.
Of course, in reality, these are the two ends of a spectrum, I dichotomized it to make my point clearer.
From my experience, I don't enjoy relentless targeted pressure to give up my money for goods I don't really need. I don't like wasting precious time consuming adverts, each braying for my attention in one way or another. I don't think it's ethical treatment of impulsive types and folks who are less aware of what's really happening them. Interestingly, I have felt less pressure to buy anything since installing advert blockers and ignoring TV. I remember feeling strong sensations that I needed to buy a new phone, that I needed to upgrade my PC. Now I've had the same phone for four years and a PC for even longer. Those pressures and sensations are gone and my wallet thanks me.
A strong case could be made that little would be lost to the world if we banned advertising outright. Also consider, it would be better if we could be recommended goods and services by those who don't have a financial incentive from the providers of goods and services.
I agree - I (and at least one friend) feel the same way. There’s some great stuff being made for nerds like us and IG/FB ads have been a fun way to discover.
That being said - why doesn’t someone just cut out all the BS and just design a system that lets me give you my preferences - “show my interesting new products and services related to tech, cooking, coffee, and bicycling” - and then just show me the ads! I’d actually browse that if the ads were as good as IG/FB.
Would save everyone a ton of effort and hand-wringing.
Sure, but the ideal framing here is that Apple is not going to assume that on your behalf. It is very welcome to have someone in the space who is willing to say that my phone isn't necessarily a platform built for advertisers.
I hate being in a position to defend Facebook or Instagram, but independent of the size of any of the platforms, Apple is a gatekeeper for them, not the other way around.
>Apple is a gatekeeper for them, not the other way around.
Given that Android has a 75% share[0] of the mobile OS market, that isn't really true. Apple is a gatekeeper for the 23% or so of mobile devices.
I think that giving end users control over what data about them is exfiltrated from their devices is a good thing. And assuming that applies to Apple apps as well, it sounds like a win for IOS users.
N.B.: I do not currently, nor have I ever owned an Apple device. Even the Apple ][ I built from a kit in high school was a clone and not Apple hardware.
However, hasn't this happened just because they themselves wanted to be mobile first - mostly due to the fact that it was (and partially still is) a "virgin territory" in which abusing users privacy is easer? Sounds like they should only blame themselves...
I CAN'T WAIT for decentralized infrastructure to finally become robust enough that clones of instagram and facebook can all share a network -- they'll all become portals to the same social graph data. When that happens, there will no longer be any reason to put up with this abuse of privacy garbage.
Never going to happen. Ever. Decentralized means it's inevitably more cumbersome to use. If you make it easier you're taking shortcuts somewhere, especially if you want a platform that's resistant to censorship and is supposed to provide anonymity. And if you actually do succeed in this you'll inevitably end up with a platform where highly immoral content is just a wrong click away.
It'll be this cycle of a new platform being fresh and trendy, then they become bigger, care about being taken seriously by traditional media, for getting ad deals with the big players, then a new platform pops up, cycle repeats.
Just a general response to some of the skeptics here (I hear your points, I just think we're still early in the game). I do believe this will happen. I believe it's inevitable, it will just take time. The main advantage over current networks+apps is that it breaks the barrier to entry for new competitors. Mastodon etc are still early newcomers who still have to break that barrier. But once there are many of them playing in the same water, they can gradually build a competing network - slowly at first, then they'll win over the entire new generation. Whatever the next "tik-tok" is could be decentralized, and then the flood gates open. Advertising and privacy issues will still exist, but it will be competitive. There will no longer be a monopoly gate keeper who that sets the rules. Lots of details to be worked out for sure. We need user interfaces to improve and get simplified. I agree that right now federated platforms like mastodon are still too cumbersome for users. But I believe all of this will improve and this will work eventually. I think it's coming this decade.
Mastodon and Pixelfed already exist and are very functional, the issue is that all instances of the above are run with a hobby-grade SLA and mixed moderation policies and users that do not understand federated services. Even domains on emails get defaulted to gmail.com when in doubt now.
I deleted my FB account years ago, never used Instagram.
Unfortunately I am forced to use WhatsUp because of my family :( .
I think it is time to put a stop at this selling user data business.
Selling user data and ads is not an Apple business, so I trust Apple vs Google, where the majority of their revenue comes from ads.
> And give me a fucking break with bringing the pandemic into this. It’s especially infuriating coming from Facebook, of all companies. Maybe if they weren’t the main vector for the disinformation and anti-science nonsense that has prolonged the pandemic by turning it into a needless culture war, their “concern” would ring more true.
If companies are responsible for the content posted on their platforms, wouldn't that make iPhone the main vector? Especially since they take the most active filtering stance for any app onto their device.
There's a pretty simple solution to both sides of the problem people are complaining about in here. Make a personal choice to stop using Apple, Facebook, Instagram, and Epic products. It's pretty easy and there's no cloudiness ethically to this solution. Take personal responsibility and vote with your $currency and attention.
I hope this will be much easier for people to do when there are decentralized options. (other thread here discussing that.) And then the big players can't just buy the competitors and keep locking us into the same problem.
> But Facebook has 2.5 billion users and Instagram 1 billion — and they’re the sole gatekeepers of their own massive platforms.
What's good for the goose, not the gander type of mentality at play here.
However, using these numbers 2.5 BILLION users for FB and 1 BILLION users for Insta. Even if these platforms have to go with non-targeted ads, that's still a huge pool of potential eyeballs for an advertiser. If you we placed in front of 1% of that pool, that's 10 MILLION viewers. You'd be hard pressed to get those numbers for a national TV ad. So even 0.5% brings it down to 5 MILLION people. These are very large numbers.
> Mosseri said Instagram’s advertising business requires certain data to show users relevant ads and to provide value for its advertisers, the majority of which are small and medium-sized businesses.
And they're always showing me utterly irrelevant ads and content ^_^
Not that I complain, I like that they haven't managed to track me well so far. But then again, I do wonder if they'd ever share that info (or if it was leaked), which companies/people would believe about me: whatever I say, or the flawed model that they've built.
The reason Instagram's founders are no longer there is because they could not stomach being forced by facebook to publicly make these kinds of statements.
> but if their ads are less effective without privacy invasive user-tracking, then so be it, they’re less effective
For end advertisers IDFA is not about effectiveness, it's about measuring: we've spent $N on ads at platform X and got Y installs/purchases. Then they can tag those customers with source X and track lifetime value per source.
Without analytics like that we are back to times of TV and newspaper and billboard ads, and small business just may not afford that.
I think that's the point of original quote. I am not a big fan of Facebook and Instagram, but their ad targeting is indeed best on the market. I understand Apple just want to redirect that cash stream into it's own pocket (see "Apple own search engine" leak couple of weeks ago).
I might be wrong about this, but it’s my impression that Facebook tries really hard to track everything possible, not just what you’re doing on FB/IG/WA, using those silly like/share buttons people embed everywhere, and other technologies. Considering their vehement arguments against this change in iOS, I’d guess they think those off-platform streams of information are quite important. And I can see why - a user might not use Facebook for hobbies or interests, and tracking them around the web would give a much better view of someone. It’s quite sleazy.
For Facebook at least, it's not about 'ads'. Personalised ads are a distraction. Not being able to track outside of their platform takes away the ability to extend the profile they are building around the user. Their customers are interested in this profile because they can use that information to manipulate the user. And we're not talking about choosing Bosch over Whirlpool for a new dishwasher...
Developers working on building adtech are just as unscrupulous and complicit in undermining our privacy as Zuckerberg and Mosseri are in defending their money-printing social media spyware platforms.
Also Instagram has lots of other ways to get info on you. eg if you follow or like photos in CityX then they can assume you are interested in that city and show you ads about it. And so on, about any subject.
Does Apple track user information? Yes, they just don't sell those data to adverisers but keep those information for themeselves and use it as advantage to sell their services and devices.
The number of Facebook users doesn't mean anything because Facebook and Instagram are free services, there are a lot of inactive accounts and bot accounts. In order to publish their apps to app store they have to get approval from Apple and Google. So Apple is still the ultimate gatekeeper.
Apple seems to be on a PR offensive after a few weeks of bad press and it seems they are employing their usual bloggers to entertain the developer audience. I dunno why devs participate in this PR circus.
And btw the author is wrong about comparing to facebook’s platform, which is still the most open, free to use large platform out there.
I find this article stupid for the primary reason that everyone has been absolutely bending over backwards to justify Apple's stance vs Epic, where everyone's argument in favor of Apple comes down to a pro-capitalist, dog-eat-dog, "if you don't like it, don't buy it" type of thing. But for other apps actually powering the iPhone's popularity, this argument is completely absent, and by behaving the same way, these companies are "dickheads." The hypocrisy is unbelievable.
[+] [-] orev|5 years ago|reply
For all the free market cheerleaders, remember this: we already have laws in place preventing or regulating businesses from engaging in certain activities, like exploitation, gambling, addictive drugs, etc. And these companies fighting Apple want to do exactly that: Epic wants to sell digital gambling (loot) boxes to children. Facebook and Instagram want to track everything you do every second of the day, for the dubious goal of making advertising “more relevant to you” (and just happens to have the small side effect of being a tool currently in use to topple democracies around the world). Social networks are hooking into addiction centers of the brain to keep people hooked on misinformation that is actually killing people.
Is Apple perfect? No. Is this one thing going to stop all that I mentioned? No. But you have to start somewhere.
[+] [-] frosted-flakes|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stonith|5 years ago|reply
Fortnite hasn't had loot boxes like this for about 18 months. The contents of the box are visible and change each day.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/01/fortnite-puts-an-end-...
[+] [-] ctvo|5 years ago|reply
Writing these impassioned posts like you’re defending the decisions of your favorite sports team that can do no wrong... oof.
[+] [-] beaner|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vsareto|5 years ago|reply
I'm sorry, but that show was really, really dumb and unrealistic and I couldn't sit through it.
3 engineers (notably: cringey white dudes) are never following one single user and controlling his interactions like that and it did more harm than good by pretending it works that way.
This implies someone is directly accountable, showing up to work every day and fucking with people's attention regularly, when in reality, it's soulless machines programmed to do this while the engineers are several degrees away from inflicting harm like this.
That's what makes it so dangerous -- not that tech companies have unlimited money to build situation rooms dedicated to following single users around.
[+] [-] Jedd|5 years ago|reply
"There are millions of [small businesses] out there that rely on us to target customers and to reach those customers." (quote from Instagram CEO)
I'm not an Instagram user / customer / product -- but it seems disingenuous for the CEO of Instagram to claim the company's primary concern is these myriad tiny companies, other than in the context of them indirectly buoying up Instagram's business.
[+] [-] moooo99|5 years ago|reply
Their app is full of bugs, at least on my regular Android phone, dark mode always messes up, ghost notifications, random crashes, etc.
The platform is full of bots. My profile is set to private, so everybody who wants to follow me needs to request first. On some days, I get requests from 10+ profiles trying to sell porn. And that's without following any big influencers, just friends.
The bots also invade basically every public comment section, trying to sell porn or NSFW snapchat. I don't get why they are successful, but I assume they are, given the scale they operate.
Their TikTok clone feature that basically completely spams my discover/search tab is full of content taken from TikTok or barely dressed girls trying to push their OnlyFans. Maybe that was the plan, I find it just annoying.
And now to their ads, easily one of the most annoying parts. Given how much data Facebook/Instagram is collecting, you'd assume they'd somehow manage to show interesting and relevant advertisings. At least for me and some friends I talked to, that is absolutely not the case. While it feels like every third post is an ad, there is nothing relevant at all. Basically all ads I get on instagram are trying to sell me 100k passive income online courses, cheap Chinese drop shipping products, knockoff products or trading apps (something I was never remotely interested in either).
[+] [-] lostgame|5 years ago|reply
I waited for years for them to create an iPad-compatible version. It is literally one of the only apps I use that still uses iPhone mode on an iPad.
'According to Mosseri (Instagram CEO), the reason for Instagram’s iPhone-only app is that the company doesn’t have the resources to develop for both platforms.'[1]
Eye. Roll. If little indie shops can have this out of the gate, I'm sure you could figure out a way to allocate some of your resources to a tablet version.
It's been ten years since both the iPad and Instagram. I get that Instagram is a photo-taking app; and typically you'd use a phone for that. Many of my friends are iPad-only on the Apple ecosystem; and they enjoy taking and editing photos, especially with the Apple Pencil, on the device.
The new iPad Pros have excellent cameras for the hardware - not nearly as great as; say, the iPhone 11, but worthy of taking pictures and it happens all the time.
[1]https://9to5mac.com/2020/02/16/instagram-ipad-app-excuse/
[+] [-] mercer|5 years ago|reply
Considering that my Instagram account is linked to my Facebook account, they should be able to figure out that I'm a left-leaning European nerd with very little interest in puffy-lipped models...
Meanwhile TikTok has been eerily good at recommending stuff that amuses or interests me, with very little input from my end of things.
[+] [-] ptest1|5 years ago|reply
I realize this is besides the point, but I thought it was worth sharing in terms of how they might be doing personalization. For me, it’s so good that it actually works.
[+] [-] mola|5 years ago|reply
Google AdWords was great, you search for product X you definitely wanted to buy X, that's reasonable personalization.
Now they want to know who you are, so they can optimize manipulatating you to want X even if you didn't before you saw their ad.
There's a big difference between the two type of advertising, although they're both personalized. One is aligning stake holders interest, the other forms an adversarial dynamics.
Of course, in reality, these are the two ends of a spectrum, I dichotomized it to make my point clearer.
[+] [-] thrwn_frthr_awy|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HeckFeck|5 years ago|reply
From my experience, I don't enjoy relentless targeted pressure to give up my money for goods I don't really need. I don't like wasting precious time consuming adverts, each braying for my attention in one way or another. I don't think it's ethical treatment of impulsive types and folks who are less aware of what's really happening them. Interestingly, I have felt less pressure to buy anything since installing advert blockers and ignoring TV. I remember feeling strong sensations that I needed to buy a new phone, that I needed to upgrade my PC. Now I've had the same phone for four years and a PC for even longer. Those pressures and sensations are gone and my wallet thanks me.
A strong case could be made that little would be lost to the world if we banned advertising outright. Also consider, it would be better if we could be recommended goods and services by those who don't have a financial incentive from the providers of goods and services.
[+] [-] nlh|5 years ago|reply
That being said - why doesn’t someone just cut out all the BS and just design a system that lets me give you my preferences - “show my interesting new products and services related to tech, cooking, coffee, and bicycling” - and then just show me the ads! I’d actually browse that if the ads were as good as IG/FB.
Would save everyone a ton of effort and hand-wringing.
[+] [-] roenxi|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dannyr|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beervirus|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rospaya|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nobody9999|5 years ago|reply
Given that Android has a 75% share[0] of the mobile OS market, that isn't really true. Apple is a gatekeeper for the 23% or so of mobile devices.
I think that giving end users control over what data about them is exfiltrated from their devices is a good thing. And assuming that applies to Apple apps as well, it sounds like a win for IOS users.
N.B.: I do not currently, nor have I ever owned an Apple device. Even the Apple ][ I built from a kit in high school was a clone and not Apple hardware.
[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-sha...
[+] [-] winterismute|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trollied|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] syllable_studio|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iforgotpassword|5 years ago|reply
It'll be this cycle of a new platform being fresh and trendy, then they become bigger, care about being taken seriously by traditional media, for getting ad deals with the big players, then a new platform pops up, cycle repeats.
[+] [-] nemothekid|5 years ago|reply
What? We HAVE this TODAY. It's called the INTERNET. How would another internet solve the problems that thrived in this version.
[+] [-] mola|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] syllable_studio|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sascha_sl|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryanmarsh|5 years ago|reply
How will we have privacy when the graph is open?
[+] [-] residentfoam|5 years ago|reply
I deleted my FB account years ago, never used Instagram. Unfortunately I am forced to use WhatsUp because of my family :( .
I think it is time to put a stop at this selling user data business. Selling user data and ads is not an Apple business, so I trust Apple vs Google, where the majority of their revenue comes from ads.
[+] [-] higerordermap|5 years ago|reply
Apple patents trivial programming language features and curved phone corners.
Apple deceptive marketing is well known.
Google has actually contributed lot more than Apple to open source.
There is a FOSS app store for android, because it is not a walled garden like iOS.
There is privacy, as in Linux culture, and there is "Privacy!!" as in apple marketing.
I am not affiliated to Google. But the hate they get here is undeserved.
[+] [-] beaner|5 years ago|reply
If companies are responsible for the content posted on their platforms, wouldn't that make iPhone the main vector? Especially since they take the most active filtering stance for any app onto their device.
[+] [-] superkuh|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] srtjstjsj|5 years ago|reply
As long as democracy exists, the crap poured into other people's brains is my responsibility.
[+] [-] syllable_studio|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dylan604|5 years ago|reply
What's good for the goose, not the gander type of mentality at play here.
However, using these numbers 2.5 BILLION users for FB and 1 BILLION users for Insta. Even if these platforms have to go with non-targeted ads, that's still a huge pool of potential eyeballs for an advertiser. If you we placed in front of 1% of that pool, that's 10 MILLION viewers. You'd be hard pressed to get those numbers for a national TV ad. So even 0.5% brings it down to 5 MILLION people. These are very large numbers.
[+] [-] srtjstjsj|5 years ago|reply
What it it's 0.1%? Or 0.00001%?
[+] [-] dr_zoidberg|5 years ago|reply
And they're always showing me utterly irrelevant ads and content ^_^
Not that I complain, I like that they haven't managed to track me well so far. But then again, I do wonder if they'd ever share that info (or if it was leaked), which companies/people would believe about me: whatever I say, or the flawed model that they've built.
[+] [-] spirographer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SergeAx|5 years ago|reply
For end advertisers IDFA is not about effectiveness, it's about measuring: we've spent $N on ads at platform X and got Y installs/purchases. Then they can tag those customers with source X and track lifetime value per source.
Without analytics like that we are back to times of TV and newspaper and billboard ads, and small business just may not afford that.
I think that's the point of original quote. I am not a big fan of Facebook and Instagram, but their ad targeting is indeed best on the market. I understand Apple just want to redirect that cash stream into it's own pocket (see "Apple own search engine" leak couple of weeks ago).
[+] [-] ComodoHacker|5 years ago|reply
Facebook loses data about user activity outside Facebook, but is it so important? Isn't in-platform data not enough to personalize ads?
[+] [-] atty|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sbuk|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sizzle|5 years ago|reply
Change my view if you disagree.
[+] [-] ape4|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidtranjs|5 years ago|reply
Does Apple track user information? Yes, they just don't sell those data to adverisers but keep those information for themeselves and use it as advantage to sell their services and devices.
The number of Facebook users doesn't mean anything because Facebook and Instagram are free services, there are a lot of inactive accounts and bot accounts. In order to publish their apps to app store they have to get approval from Apple and Google. So Apple is still the ultimate gatekeeper.
[+] [-] johnnyAghands|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] return1|5 years ago|reply
And btw the author is wrong about comparing to facebook’s platform, which is still the most open, free to use large platform out there.
[+] [-] BlueTemplar|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beaned|5 years ago|reply