https://groups.google.com/g/linux.debian.bugs.dist/c/ItL6xJm...

Instead, its strategy has become to advocate for increasing the net levels of tracking and regulatory burden, so long as it is positioned to burden other parts of the technology stack (namely, app stores and operating systems) rather than their social networks.

From the link from a sibling commenter: https://web.archive.org/web/20260429210901/https://tboteproj...

> Meta spent a record $26.3 million on federal lobbying in 2025, deployed 86+ lobbyists across 45 states, and covertly funded a group called the Digital Childhood Alliance (DCA) to advocate for the App Store Accountability Act (ASAA).

The irony that their namesake Metaverse was meant to be, itself, an operating system and app distribution platform is palpable. When ambitions shift to regulatory capture, a shark has arguably been jumped.

There's a wonderful line from a different context which I find applies quite broadly:

"The Art of ship handling involves the effective use of forces under control to overcome the effect of forces not under control."

-- Charles H. Cotter

Meta, one of the wealthiest corporations and indeed institutions on the Planet, is exploiting a long-extant tendency and proclivity in technological policy. It's doing so against long-standing traditions within the tech community, largely to serve its own interests. Meta aren't the only actor seeking greater surveillance and forced identification, but the are among the very most powerful. Culpability devolves from that, and violation of tech-community norms, alone.

The assumption is you have to control people to enforce laws. They keep pushing this notion that is a requirement to keep people safe. That somehow if we have big brother AI surveillance everyone will be on their best behavior.

Oracle, Palantir, Meta, and other mega billionaires push this agenda because who is going to stop them from controlling society and getting absurdly powerful and wealthy from it?