Why do you start your reply … with a false presumption?
My first opening of my first response to you was: “First of all what do you mean with “metadata”?”
As for my opening to my second response, yes I suggested you had not read the referenced information (Meta’s privacy policies).
Maybe you did, but then why did you post the link as if it would provide a big gotcha?. Does it? They are quite open about what they do.
Metadata is visible to, and it is collected by, every messaging platform.
Metadata and the Message Contents are separate things.
That is exactly my point. No need to read it back to me.
Your replies could have given the impression that you believed much more was collected by Meta.
The type of metadata you are mentioning now, is collected by each and every messaging system, iMessage and Signal included.
I suppose one could easily argue that, because of all the other Meta platforms people are using, Meta is better placed to make big data connections than others.
Would Meta use this information? Of course they do. They say as much.
Would Meta abuse this information? I wouldn’t be shocked if they did, but I don’t have any evidence of this so I refrain from stating it as a certainty.
I never once stated that messages are sold.
I’ve never once suggested you did.
Send me an invoice.