That is an interesting question, at what point is it more profitable to care about your user's privacy rather than selling their data?
Logically, you could just take the income from the data you are selling, divide it among all users, add the smallest domination of currency you can, and set that as the cost of using your service.
However, then you need to handle payments, deal with added costs and administration, most people not wanting to pay and so forth.
Not always. Only for-profit driven companies that offer no tangible product.
Many of the forums that I hosted were free to the orgs that used them. I'm already paying for the server and network for my own use, so why not give back to the communities that I am a part of with my other skills as a sysadmin?
Website owners can configure the pixel to track user website interactions such as searches or filling out a form, sending each action to Meta, even if the user doesn’t have an account on Facebook.
Haven't had a facebook account in over a decade, but I have no doubts that they still have loads of data about me.
I think "metal pixel" has just become what they call their trackers, not that its an actual pixel any longer. I could be wrong but I've heard references to the "meta pixel" for enough years after most companies switch to JS or other methods that I jumped to conclusions.
You can find routers and what not with various PiHole like software. If you're comfortable with network engineering then you can certainly write NACLs and the like to blacklist tracking networks.
Stopping them at the browser level is also reasonably effective. EFF's Privacy Badger is a must have extension for me.
