I installed it earlier this year on android. But it wouldn't let me sign in or browse without syncing my contacts from my phone.

So I uninstalled it.

Consider pixelfed, the fediverse alternative to Instagram

Instagram no longer allowed to be installed on my phone, how is that for a deal, Meta?

all meta's apps are suck ngl. i hate the way i can't paste image from clipboard in whatsapp chat without giving whatsapp permission to manage my storage.

Gonna play Devil's Advocate for a moment here.

I assume that this isn't actually for nefarious purposes, and is actually just a low-effort way of curbing spambots on their platform. It's likely that the bots are using emulated devices to post from the official app, and this permission might lock up a lot of those bots. Obviously this wouldn't be the best way to combat spambots, but I'm gonna go with Hanlon's Razor on this one.

I know the immediate first thought most people will have is that this is just so Meta can open up another avenue to spy on you. But let's consider for a moment the logistics involved in that. Audio/video data is huge; capturing and parsing it it requires a non-insignificant amount of CPU/battery usage, and transmitting it will use a good bit of bandwidth, both of which would be noticeable by even novice users (since most modern devices these days will show an on-screen indicator whenever certain sensors are being activated, and will tell you what app is using it, so seeing Instagram trigger your mic/camera when you're not using it would be immediately noticed by just about everybody). That would also make this one data stream exponentially more costly to gather and process for Meta than most of their other data streams combined.

Also consider the fact that Meta already has over a million data points on just about every single person on the planet, anyway; what could they stand to gain by monitoring your IRL presence that they haven't already inferred from the other, less-invasive data they've gathered on you? Half of the recordings they'd get would be farts and "oh my god, stop barking, nobody's even at the door", and Meta probably already knows that you have a dog and lactose intolerance.

It's more expensive to produce, it's more likely to be detected, and there's less of a guarantee that you even get any usable data from it at all since they already know just about everything about you already. I really don't see spying as the end goal for this particular action, only because it doesn't seem like a profitable venture.

None of this is to suggest that Meta isn't spying on you. They are. They 100% are spying on each and every one of you. I just don't think the mic/camera are how they're doing it.

It's a new frontier in sourcing material for AI training...

If they don’t already have rules about this, Google and Apple should update their store rules to prevent this crap.

They keep filtering the stupid people, but there's always more.

I keep wondering what zuck has to do to be more obvious, but it seems like an infinite horizon to someone whe never signed up for any meta product.

Also, soft switches don't really turn things off. Physical covers over cameras, mics, and speakers can't be overridden.

Not surprised. It’s just Meta being Meta and garbling up all yo data so that it can make money from it. Maybe don’t use the app. Try accessing from your mobile browser.

iOS plus Facebook

The "dream" combo

gee, guess i'll just have to continue never using it, then...

I've wondered for quite a while if there was ever any truth to the rumors that Meta apps "listen" to people. It doesn't make logical sense, as the OS should expose they are doing it. Unless they had API access to allow microphone access without triggering the microphone icon. These companies have had API access in the past, like when Uber had full screen display capture access, and Meta definitely has some agreements with the fruit company to access some kinds of data. Or, when iOS first introduced the location tracking symbol in the status bar, I was able to write a program that allowed gathering of location access without actually triggering the icon.

Most of the time, the events can be explained away by knowing how adtech works, like, I was drinking a beverage, a friend asked what it was, the next day I started getting ads for it.

In that case:

• They were on my wifi network
• They picked up their phone when they were asking about it and did an Internet search
• So once the GeoIP was cross-referenced across ad providers, the IP started being targeted for those ads, makes sense

Some stories I've heard are more strange.

It does make me wonder if it was true the whole time, but they now have to ask for permission.

Don't use the platforms myself or I'd try and set up a test experiment.

I wonder if saving the website as an app would work around this restriction?