Hacker News Reader

Why shouldn't I be able to uae the software of my choosing? If i habe an account and have properly authenticated, the client I use is my choice.

You can't reasonably make the "go elsewhere" argument with the monopoly hold FB has on much social data. We need to choose yo regulate them and others to force interoperability, or at the very least allow comcom explicitly (competitive compatibility).

View on HN

Because your access to their API is conditioned on an agreement not to use unauthorized clients. You are free to use the software of your choosing in conjunction with your own computers, but not necessarily with everybody else's.

“You shouldn’t be able to do something because it’s not allowed” is a tautological argument. Parent comment is arguing that it should be made allowed.

What's an unauthorized device? If I fork chromium and make my own browser what makes it authorized or unauthorized? If I make a CURL request from my terminal is that authorized or unauthorized?

If FB blocked any requests from Firefox Focus they'd likely be in hot water from government agencies.

Do they have the right to block any other app?

So you want to consume their content, use their servers, but not display their ads?

Nothing prevents a third-party client from displaying ads.

They are free to cease offering unpaid accounts if they wish.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com