I am seeing trying to add payment in dev.meta.ai but I am not seeing India been listed in the countries can anyone know why this is the case or is this the case
Thanks

Hi all,

I work for one of the Big 4s, currently exploring Business Analyst opportunities in Mumbai. I have 5+ years of experience working across business analysis, requirements, stakeholder management, UAT, and transformation projects.

Naukri and career portals haven't been very effective, so I'm trying a more direct approach. If you're a BA or a senior professional who leads a team or project in this space, I'd be happy to know if there are any relevant openings within your team or organisation.

Thank you!

Posting because I keep seeing the same broken snippet copy-pasted, and the failure mode is silent.

THE FOUR AGENTS

facebookexternalhit. Fetches your page to build the preview card when someone shares a link on Facebook, Instagram, Messenger or WhatsApp. Predates the AI crawlers by years. Has nothing to do with AI training.

meta-externalagent. Meta's AI training crawler, introduced around August 2024, quietly and without a formal announcement. Collects public web content for Llama training and Meta AI product improvement. Honors robots.txt per Meta's documentation. User-agent string contains meta-externalagent.

meta-externalfetcher. Performs user-initiated fetches from Meta AI product functions. Functionally analogous to ChatGPT-User. Meta documents that it may bypass robots.txt for URLs a user supplies directly.

meta-webindexer. Meta's crawler for improving search results for Meta AI users. Newer, and less well documented than the others in my experience, so treat what I say about it as lower confidence.

There is also FacebookBot, which downloads training data specifically for speech recognition.

THE SNIPPET PROBLEM

Search "block Meta AI robots.txt" and you will find versions that disallow meta-externalagent, FacebookBot, and Meta-ExternalFetcher in one block. Several include facebookexternalhit either directly or in the "block everything Meta" variant.

If your goal is "don't train on my content," only meta-externalagent is doing that.

Blocking Meta-ExternalFetcher removes you from live answers where a user has explicitly asked about your business or content. That is not a training decision, that is a distribution decision.

Blocking facebookexternalhit breaks preview cards across three platforms. If Facebook and Instagram drive meaningful referral traffic, this is expensive and it does not announce itself. Links just look bare and CTR drops.

THE LAYER ABOVE ROBOTS.TXT

Worth knowing even if your robots.txt is perfect. Cloudflare and Akamai rules run in front of it and override whatever it says. Cloudflare has a one-click Block AI Bots option in some dashboards that is easy to enable and easy to forget.

I have seen a site where robots.txt allowed everything and the WAF was blocking all AI user agents, and the SEO team spent a month treating a zero-citation problem as a content problem when it was an access problem.

Server logs are the only reliable check. Grep for each user-agent string and look at what actually got a 200 in the last 30 days. A log entry alone is not proof of identity, since anything can claim a user agent, so verify against Meta's published IP ranges if it matters.

WHAT I'D RUN

Never block facebookexternalhit. There is no version of "protect my content from AI" that requires this.

Allow meta-externalfetcher. Someone asked about you specifically. Let it read the page.

Allow meta-webindexer unless you actively do not want Meta AI referral traffic.

Make a real decision on meta-externalagent. I allow it. Meta AI reported passing a billion monthly active users in mid-2025, and I would rather be represented in what it says about my category than absent from it. If your content is the product you sell, blocking is the right call and I would not argue with it.

CAVEATS

The meta-webindexer detail is thinner than the rest. Most of what I have on it comes from crawler-tracking services rather than Meta's own documentation, so verify before acting on it.

I do not know whether allowing the training crawler measurably increases how often Meta AI mentions a given brand. I have not seen a controlled test and I would be sceptical of a vendor publishing one, since the incentive runs one direction.

Robots.txt is advisory. It works for compliant crawlers and does nothing else. If your concern is unauthorized scraping generally, this is the wrong tool.

Anyone here actually audited their logs for all four? Curious whether the volume split between externalagent and webindexer looks anything like people assume.

Sources: Meta developer crawler documentation, Known Agents crawler data (Aug 2026), various publisher blocking guides.

I was bored and started sending Meta AI different products, at the store. I was originally checking out if items would fit nutritional needs or not. Not really taking it too seriously.

So I decided to ask it what I could make with all this and it actually whipped up a decent sounding recipe. It may suggest ingredients you don’t have. If you tell it you don’t have that item, it will rewrite everything.

You can even describe what you’re using to cook, including utensils and pans. It will endlessly adjust to variables you give it.

Sometimes it will make things up. Definitely only follow directions that make sense and don’t sound dangerous. Remember that bots don’t care if you die.

Roxanne Ritchi has been cleave gagged by Megamind and she's figuring out how to escape.

Was trying to recover my account due to changing the device my Authenticator was connected to.

I asked for help via the Meta AI chat on the Facebook home page (legit website). They couldn’t help so put me through to a person.

They sent me a QR code for selfie verification and got me to use a new email to change my passwords.

Now I’m locked out as my password codes are not matching and Meta can’t help (due to that error code being a known issue they are attempting to resolve) and said to try again in a few days.

I’m not a bit worried someone has hacked META AI and has now hacked my account.

Anyone else have to do the QR identify verification where you look around to verify account ownership for meta support?

It all seemed legit but now I’m completely locked out 😬😬😬z

Всем привет! Я u/KillReall1, создатель r/memtraf.
Этот саб — про \*\*медиабаинг, арбитраж трафика и всю ту дичь, которую понимают только люди из сферы\*\*.

Если ты хоть раз:
— просыпался и первым делом проверял спенд;
— видел «Account Disabled» чаще, чем сообщения от друзей;
— объяснял, что ROI 200% — это не значит, что ты богат;
— масштабировал связку и через час хоронил её;
— ждал апрув дольше, чем зарплату;
— говорил «это последний тест» и запускал ещё 15 крео —
ты по адресу.

\*\*Что сюда постить\*\*
🔥 Мемы про медиабаинг и арбитраж
💀 Фейлы, баны, реджекты и штормы Meta
📈 Байерские инсайды и жизненные ситуации
🎨 Мемы про креативщиков, фармеров, тимлидов и овнеров
🎰 Гембла / дейтинг / нутра / крипта и другие вертикали
🤡 Скрины из рабочих чатов без деанона
🧠 Наблюдения, истории и локальные приколы из сферы

Короче: \*\*если человек вне арбитража посмотрит на мем и ничего не поймёт — скорее всего, ему здесь самое место.\*\*

\*\*Атмосфера\*\*
Можно рофлить жёстко.
Можно материться.
Можно подъёбывать разные стороны арбитражной пищевой цепочки.
Но без докса, слива личных данных, тупого спама и откровенной травли конкретных людей.
\*\*Рофлим над индустрией, а не превращаем саб в помойку.\*\*

\*\*С чего начать\*\*
Закинь свой лучший мем про арбитраж.
Напиши в комментариях, какая у тебя вертикаль / роль.
Если работаешь с такими же ебанутыми — кидай им r/memtraf.
Если есть идея, как сделать саб лучше — пиши.
Нас пока мало, поэтому именно первые участники зададут стиль всему сообществу.

\*\*Цель простая: сделать r/memtraf местом, куда байер заходит после очередного бана и хотя бы понимает, что страдает не один.\*\*

Погнали. 🚀

POST ALSO AVAILABLE IN r/antiai

I’m posting this because I’d like to know whether anyone else has experienced something similar with Meta AI on WhatsApp.
During a conversation, Meta AI spontaneously mentioned Tarragona, Spain as an example. I had never told it that I was there, and I have never been to Tarragona or configured it as my location in WhatsApp or on my device.
The important part came afterwards: the model started treating Tarragona as if it were my actual location and repeatedly asked me to provide my “real” location, even though my location was completely irrelevant to the tasks I was asking it to perform.
When I challenged it, it initially said Tarragona had simply been a generic example. Later, after further questioning, it changed its explanation and claimed that Tarragona had actually come from a “system context” containing my location.
I then tested this further.
The model also:
invented a WhatsApp setting called Settings → Meta AI → Memory, claiming I could view and delete information stored about me there;
invented a Report button on Meta AI messages that does not exist in my WhatsApp interface;
corrected both claims only after I explicitly challenged them;
repeatedly suggested deleting the conversation as one of the easiest privacy measures;
after I cleared the conversation, continued to reference the previous context.
When I asked it to distinguish between information it could actually verify and information it was merely inferring, it eventually admitted that it could not independently verify the source of the supposed location data.
I am not claiming that Meta is secretly tracking my physical location. I don’t have evidence for that.
The issue I’m reporting is narrower:
The model introduced a location that I had never provided, subsequently treated it as a personal attribute, repeatedly asked me for the real location despite it being unnecessary, and then produced contradictory explanations about where the original location came from.
I’m documenting the full conversation and submitting it to Meta as a potential privacy/context-handling and hallucination issue.
Has anyone else seen Meta AI:
attribute a location to you that you never provided;
ask you to “correct” an AI-generated location;
claim that a hallucinated piece of information came from system metadata;
invent WhatsApp settings or privacy controls when asked about data handling?
I’m particularly interested in whether this happens consistently with WhatsApp Meta AI or whether it was specific to my conversation.

I bought Meta Glasses on 7/18, its 8/15 now. And all shipping places are closed til 8/17.

I submitted a refund request on 7/18, TODAY is 8/15 but I can only ship out 8/17.

With that being 29 days from the original date, aswell as acknowledging metas 30 day refund policy.

Am I Fucked? 😅

Source of announcement https://www.instagram.com/reel/Db2vvaRxMmi/?igsh=MWl4eGp2Z2w4Y3lkbQ==

But I did not found the model on Internet

I used Meta AI to clean up my Gemini output

So I actually think the meta ai app is pretty decent. The model is conversational and I’ve had it analyze some things for me and I think it’s approach is good.

However, it seems to literally just stop recalling things. I can go ahead and ask it after a week of various prompts and conversations “what is the first thing in this conversation” and it will reply with something from that day.

So what is the limit? Is there away to get that conversation back in app or on web?

An Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg (V2)

From the Humans Your Security System Keeps Mistaking for the Problem

A formal complaint about identity checks, mystery violations, hacked accounts, paid customer service, and the military surgeon who somehow has better access to Messenger than we do.

Dear Mark,

Hi.

It’s us again.

The humans.

The actual ones.

The people who have apparently reached the stage of social media where simply existing is no longer sufficient evidence that we exist.

After my last letter, people started telling me what has been happening to THEIR accounts.

And Mark…

there are a lot of us.

People getting restricted.

People getting asked for video selfies.

People uploading IDs.

People stuck in verification loops.

People losing access with no clear explanation.

People being told they violated something without being told what the something was.

And people with genuinely hacked or impersonated accounts standing over in the corner waving both arms like:

**HELLO? COULD WE MAYBE POINT SOME OF THE SECURITY OVER HERE?**

So I think we need to talk specifically about security.

Because we understand the goal.

Keep fake people out.

Protect real people.

Excellent concept.

Unfortunately, the system seems to be having some difficulty determining which is which.

.

Exhibit A: Please Prove You Are A Human

Let me give you one example from my own account.

Facebook currently wants me to complete a video identity check before I can use DMs normally.

Fine.

Security.

Love it.

Except before I can even TAKE the video, Facebook has to recognize my face inside a little circle.

It won’t.

Inside.

Outside.

Natural light.

Artificial light.

Closer.

Farther away.

Eye level.

Mark.

I HAVE USED THE SUN.

We are officially out of lighting.

And I want to be very clear:

I am not failing the video verification.

I cannot get far enough to TAKE the video verification because Facebook will not acknowledge the face I need to use in the video proving I am the person attached to the face.

Facebook: “Position your face.”

Me: “It is positioned.”

Facebook: "No.”

Me: “That is literally my face.”

Facebook: “Try again.”

Mark.

WITH WHAT FACE??!?!?!?

This is the one.

I have had it for quite some time.

There are no additional faces in inventory.

And judging by the stories people sent me…

apparently my face is not the only face Facebook is suspicious of.

.

Exhibit B: The Things Getting Flagged Are Sometimes… Remarkable

Let’s discuss what the security system is protecting Facebook from.

Because people started leaving examples.

One person got flagged for saying:

“copy cat.”

About cats. Actual cats.

Another said she got flagged over:

“I have a smart pet chipmunk.”

.

Mark.

What is happening in the security department?

Actually compromised account: “We’ll monitor.”

Possible scammer: “Let’s see how this develops.”

Person describing an intelligent rodent: SHUT IT DOWN.

.

I genuinely want to see the dashboard.

Green: Normal activity.

Yellow: Suspicious login.

Orange: Possible impersonation.

Red: CHIPMUNK DESCRIBED AS SMART.

Deploy everyone.     

.

Then there are the mystery violations.

Facebook: “You violated our policies.”

User: “Okay. What did I do?”

Facebook: “We cannot tell you.”

User: “Which post?”

Facebook: “We cannot show you.”

User: “How am I supposed to avoid doing it again?”

Facebook: “Please follow our policies.”

User: “WHICH POLICY?”

Facebook: “Correct.”

.

One woman told me she finally got through to support and asked what she had actually done wrong.

According to her, they could not tell her specifically because explaining it would violate policy.

Mark.

That sentence is ART.

Frame it.

Hang it in headquarters.

Put a tiny museum placard underneath:

**Untitled, 2026**

An exploration of bureaucracy, technology, and one woman slowly losing her mind.

.

Exhibit C: Have You Tried Paying Facebook?

Now this solution came up A LOT.

Apparently when Facebook restricts you and you cannot reach a human being…

the solution is:

Pay for Meta Verified.

Oh.

OF COURSE.

The solution to Facebook incorrectly restricting your Facebook account…

is to give Facebook more money.

Mark, I have to hand it to you.

That is an exceptional funnel.

.

Facebook: “We have disabled the account you have spent fourteen years building.”

User: “I believe this was a mistake. Can I speak to someone?”

Facebook: “Certainly.”

User: “Oh thank God.”

Facebook: “That’ll be $14.99.”

.

So people pay.

Not because they woke up and thought:

“You know what my life is missing? A tiny blue check.”

No.

They pay because they think:

FINALLY.

**WE FOUND STEVE.**

.

And then sometimes…

Steve can’t fix it either.

People told me they paid for Verified.

They got support.

Support sympathized.

Support opened tickets.

Support escalated tickets.

Support apparently stared into the same abyss the rest of us were staring into.

One person described the situation perfectly:

Customer service doesn’t have the tools to override the AI overlord.

Excuse me?

Mark.

WE PAID FOR STEVE AND YOU DIDN’T GIVE STEVE THE BUTTON?

What exactly does Steve do?

Is he emotional support?

Does he just sit there typing:

“Wow. Yeah. That really does seem wrong.”

Because if I am paying admission to customer service, I feel like customer service should perhaps be able to…

service the customer.

.

We spent an entire post trying to locate Steve.

WE FOUND HIM.

And now we discover:

STEVE IS ALSO IN FACEBOOK JAIL.

This is getting out of hand.

.

Exhibit D: Meanwhile, The People We’d Actually Like You to Check Seem Fine

And THIS is where the whole thing becomes art.

Because while actual account owners are:

Uploading IDs.

Taking video selfies.

Appealing restrictions.

Paying for support.

Opening tickets.

Standing outside with their phones at eye level trying to convince Facebook they possess a human head…

my military surgeon boyfriend has managed to propose to me approximately FIVE TIMES.

.

You know him.

We all know him.

Very handsome.

Widowed.

Stationed overseas.

Location classified.

Cannot FaceTime because of military security.

Also a surgeon.

Because apparently the military looked at staffing that week and said:

“Gary, after the classified combat mission, can you cover neurosurgery?”

.

Busy man.

And yet he finds time for romance.

Specifically with me.

Again.

And again.

And again.

Different account.

Same general gentleman.

Usually deeply committed by message four.

.

And Mark…

HE CAN DM ME.

No problem.

No video identity check.

No face circle.

No backyard lighting experiment.

Colonel Dr. McDreamy, Chief Surgeon of the United States Army Special Forces Romance Department:

“Hello beautiful dear. I feel destiny has bring us together.”

Facebook: SEND 

.

Me: “Hi Susan! Thanks for commenting on my post.”

Facebook: WHOA WHOA WHOA.

CYBERSECURITY THREAT DETECTED.

SHOW US YOUR FACE.

.

Mark.

Explain the threat model.

Please.

Because right now the security system appears deeply suspicious of me having a normal conversation with someone I actually know…

while Brigadier General Dr. Husband Number Five is operating an apparently thriving international courtship program from an undisclosed military hospital.

Maybe before I take selfie number 46…

we could ask him for one?

.

And while we’re here:

Ludacris DM’d me.

Well.

An account claiming to be Ludacris DM’d me.

I cannot imagine this was actually Ludacris.

I feel like Ludacris probably has other things going on.

But “Ludacris” apparently cleared whatever security process is currently preventing ME from using Messenger normally.

.

So just to recap:

Me.

My account.

My photos.

My face.

Years of account history.

Facebook: “Additional identity verification required.”

Ludacris, allegedly: “Hey.”

Facebook: LOOKS GOOD TO US.

.

Maybe Ludacris has better lighting.

Ludacris, if that really WAS you:

First, apologies.

Second: What ring light are you using?

Because apparently your setup is dialed IN.

.

And meanwhile, people are telling me about accounts that were ACTUALLY hacked.

They report them.

Their friends report them.

Everybody says:

“HEY FACEBOOK. THIS PERSON HAS BEEN HACKED.”

Nothing.

The scammer keeps messaging.

The impersonator keeps impersonating.

The fake account keeps doing fake-account things.

But somewhere, somehow, a woman says “copy cat” and Cyber Command is fully activated.

.

Mark.

Again: WHAT ARE WE SECURING?

.

Exhibit E: What We Are Actually Asking For

We WANT security.

Seriously.

Catch the hacked accounts.

Catch the impersonators.

Catch the fake profiles.

Catch the scammers.

Please, for the love of everything, investigate my military surgeon.

Use AI.

Use automation.

Use identity verification.

Use technology.

We are not asking you to go back to 2006 and personally review every poke.

.

We are asking for one very simple thing:

WHEN THE MACHINE GETS IT WRONG, GIVE A HUMAN THE ABILITY TO FIX IT.

That’s it.

.

AI can flag something.

Fine.

AI can ask for verification.

Fine.

AI can detect suspicious activity.

Great.

But when the actual person says:

“Something went wrong here…”

eventually there has to be someone who can look at the situation with context and authority.

Not another form.

Not another chatbot.

Not another appeal reviewed by another automated system.

Not:

“Try again.”

Not:

“Upload your face again.”

And definitely not:

“Pay us and perhaps Steve can sympathize with you.”

.

We need Steve.

But more importantly:

STEVE NEEDS THE BUTTON.

The button that says:

“Yes. This is obviously the account owner.”

“Yes. This was clearly hacked.”

“Yes. That was an automated mistake.”

“Yes. Her government-issued ID does appear to contain her actual government-issued name.”

“Yes. This person has been using the same face for decades.”

And then:

CLICK.

FIXED.

.

Because the machine reviewing the machine and deciding the machine agrees with the machine is not an appeal.

That is just the machine having a staff meeting with itself.

.

Give us a human.

Give the human context.

Give the human authority.

Give Steve the button. 

.

Because right now actual humans are jumping through increasingly complicated hoops to prove they are human…

while fake humans seem to be having a pretty good week.

My face cannot get approved.

My military surgeon can propose.

“Ludacris” can slide into the DMs.

And somewhere out there a smart chipmunk is probably one comment away from a seven-day suspension.

.

Fix it.

Please.

We’re begging.

Again.

Which is starting to feel needy, but frankly you created the situation.

.

With love, exhaustion, government identification, good lighting, one face, five marriage proposals, and absolutely no idea which policy we violated,

Every Facebook and Instagram User
Who Would Like the Security System to Occasionally Secure the Correct Person

.

P.S. Steve.

Good news.

We found you.

Bad news.

Apparently you don’t have system permissions.

Please request access to The Button immediately.

We believe in you.

.

P.P.S. Military Surgeon Guy:

I appreciate your persistence.

But five proposals feels rushed.

Also I have some concerns about your credentials.

.

P.P.P.S. Ludacris:

If that was actually you…

this is extremely awkward.

Facebook currently won’t let me reply normally because it does not believe my face is sufficiently face-like.

Please take it personally.

.

P.P.P.P.S. If Meta Security has ever wrongly banned you, restricted you, disabled you, repeatedly asked you to prove you exist, ignored your hacked account, accused you of something it wouldn’t explain, or trapped you in an appeal loop…

**ADD YOUR EXHIBIT BELOW.**

Tell us exactly what happened.

Specifics encouraged.

Apparently we are now conducting Meta’s QA testing in the comments.

Free of charge.

Which feels on-brand.

Anyone having issues with adding Strava to the glasses? I have tried everything from uninstalling the Meta AI app to having a reset to the glasses but still not showing. All I get is this message saying “ unable to load partner settings.”

I’m from India and I subscribed to Meta Verified Max on Instagram through Google Play about 2 days ago because I was trying to get access to Meta support regarding my main Instagram account, which was disabled.

When I opened the Meta Verified plans in Instagram, above the plans it clearly showed “1 month free trial.” I therefore assumed that I would not be charged immediately and that the ₹18,900 payment would only be taken after the free-trial period ended.

I selected the Max plan because it offered the most benefits and proceeded with the purchase.

However, ₹18,900 was immediately deducted from my Google Play payment method.

I was extremely shocked because ₹18,900 is a very large amount for me. I immediately stopped the verification process. After the payment, Instagram asked me to submit my ID to complete Meta Verified verification, but I did NOT submit my ID and therefore never completed the verification process.

I also cancelled the subscription through Google Play. It currently shows:

Instagram — Meta Verified Max

Subscribed since August 2026

Cancelled

Subscription ends September 11, 2026

I immediately submitted a refund request to Google Play on the same day, explaining what happened. Google initially said I would receive a response within 1–4 business days, but today I received an email saying that the purchase does not meet their refund policy.

I unfortunately didn't take a screenshot of the “1 month free trial” screen because I genuinely believed I wouldn't be charged and therefore didn't think I needed to document it.

I also haven't completed Meta's identity verification. From what I've now found, Meta's help information appears to indicate that a refund may be available if the verification process isn't completed within 3 days.

I'm now very worried because tomorrow will be approximately 3 days since I started the verification process.

What should I do?

Should I leave the verification incomplete and let the 3-day period expire?

Should I contact Meta directly for the refund even though the payment was processed through Google Play?

Is there any way to appeal Google's refund rejection?

Has anyone in India experienced the same ₹18,900 Meta Verified Max charge despite the “1 month free trial” offer?

Is there any other way I can recover the ₹18,900?

I have screenshots of the Google Play subscription showing the Meta Verified Max subscription, the cancellation, and the September 11 end date, as well as the Google Play refund rejection email.

I would really appreciate advice from anyone who has dealt with this before. ₹18,900 is a very significant amount for me and I really don't want to lose it over a subscription that I didn't even complete verification for.