Comment by MichaelZuo

> How is this relevant?

How is it relevant to what? We were discussing "net positives" as in net positives for society, but it sounds like you're referring to net positives for Facebook alone, at the expense of all others.

> The user isn’t the one making the decision to implement it or not

This is true. Here is another difference between them: Facebook isn't the one being harmed by cutting off approved API access to 3rd parties.

It seems like we both agree that Facebook and users are different groups, in different circumstances, with different things to gain and lose from different decisions made here.

With that shared foundation of understanding: Why should we care about what Facebook wants, more than we care what users want? Why should we care about Facebook wanting to stifle startups and other competitors, more than we care what users want? Why should we care about Facebook's profit margin, more than we care what users want?

Of course Facebook is free to do what is good for them and bad for users, and they indeed chose (and continue to choose) to do so. Here we see the predictable result: Users criticizing them for it.

We are all smart and can comprehend Facebook's purely-economic "fuck the users, we wanna make money" decision criteria just fine, but we don't have to respect it.

In general there are more users than implementers, so their experience is more relevant to whether it's an overall net positive.