Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

arstechnica.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 76 posts

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#21

Post by jessriedel »

Fnoord wrote: post #8
matthewcford wrote: post #3

This looks equally bad on the EU, that they lacked the foresight to see that phone numbers in the WhatsApp database could be matched with phone numbers in the Facebook database.

Oh, the EU knew it could happen; they were told it wouldn't happen. We need to operate on some basic level of common trust. If you wanna do business in the EU, you need to play by the rules. As it turns out, not only did it happen, the software/tech to make it happen was already ready ! That makes a pretty strong case against Facebook's intentions. I actually would agree that it was in hindsight stupid because of Fac…

> Oh, the EU knew it could happen; they were told it wouldn't happen.

This is not what's stated in the article.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#22

Post by Solinoid »

alaaf wrote: post #5

> the free content ad network failed to disclose Interesting they don’t call it a ‘social network’. ‘content ad network’ is more accurate in my opinion.

I believe that was coined by theregister.co.uk ^1, a fine source for quality wordplay and tech news/opinion. Unfortunately fondleslab never took off for tablet.

^1 I may be wrong

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#23

Post by TeMPOraL »

kuzmin wrote: post #7
matthewcford wrote: post #3

This looks equally bad on the EU, that they lacked the foresight to see that phone numbers in the WhatsApp database could be matched with phone numbers in the Facebook database.

If you read the case decision, specifically paragraphs 137 - 140 it becomes even more ridiculous: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m721... This quote sticks out as a bit of an exaggeration regarding the difficulty of this operation: "Notably, integration of WhatsApp's and Facebook's networks would require matching WhatsApp users' profiles with their profiles on Facebook (or vice versa). This wo…

The quote basically says that this task is complicated because it requires an equivalent of a SQL one-liner that any CS undergrad should be able to write. Where would Facebook/WhatsApp find experts that good?

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#24

Post by dpark »

drkwatr wrote: post #16
Fnoord wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, the EU knew it could happen; they were told it wouldn't happen. We need to operate on some basic level of common trust. If you wanna do business in the EU, you need to play by the rules. As it turns out, not only did it happen, the software/tech to make it happen was already ready ! That makes a pretty strong case against Facebook's intentions. I actually would agree that it was in hindsight stupid because of Fac…

My belief in why they wanted to purchase WhatsApp was it presented a threat to fakebook [sic]. This is why they also purchased Instagram, and attempted the same for Snapchat. If true, then WhatsApp wasn't valued at $19 billion, but rather fakebook [sic] saw that removing the perceived threat was worth the price. What astounds me the most, is the FTC doesn't seem to investigate tech acquisitions like other industries.…

> fakebook [sic]

That name is meaningless and generally just juvenile. It makes it hard to take you seriously when you do this.

This is also not an appropriate use of "sic".

> Although, I've seen a few deals structured in a way to make it seem like a smaller company is buying a larger one to avoid a review [at&t SBC, Sears Holdings K-Mart].

Smaller companies buying larger companies don't skip regulatory scrutiny. It's a fairly common practice to structure mergers this way, but not because it changes the level of regulator involvement.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#25

Post by solotronics »

gooseus wrote: post #13
robert_foss wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we should adopt the term? "Content ad network" does have a certain ring to it.

I concur, even before there was widespread corporate advertising my impression of "social networking" was that it was more about advertising your personal activities and beliefs to your network than actually socializing within it.

social advertising

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#26

Post by yorwba »

witty_username wrote: post #14
holydude wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anything currently doing not shady ? That's becoming a really big problem.

Is anything currently doing not shady?

Sleeping, for example. Now if we are talking about organized groups of people ... some shady power play within the ranks is probably unavoidable.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#27

Post by droopyEyelids »

mkaziz wrote: post #20
alivelore wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the US had the same taxation and regulatory environment as Europe you wouldn't have Facebook in the first place lol

Funnily, I'd be okay with that. I guess I'm just an old fogey though.

Or just educated in history.

Really, what is the longest period of time a country has existed without a repressive regime coming to power and abusing the institutions and populace?

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#28

Post by ewood »

alivelore wrote: post #18
mkaziz wrote: post #17

I wish the US had laws like the EU that protected the consumer.

If the US had the same taxation and regulatory environment as Europe you wouldn't have Facebook in the first place lol

The US has higher absolute and effective corporate tax rates than EU countries and almost every country in the OECD.

Tax treatment of equity compensation varies among European nations though.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#29

Post by evgen »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #23
kuzmin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the case decision, specifically paragraphs 137 - 140 it becomes even more ridiculous: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m721... This quote sticks out as a bit of an exaggeration regarding the difficulty of this operation: "Notably, integration of WhatsApp's and Facebook's networks would require matching WhatsApp users' profiles with their profiles on Facebook (or vice versa). This wo…

The quote basically says that this task is complicated because it requires an equivalent of a SQL one-liner that any CS undergrad should be able to write. Where would Facebook/WhatsApp find experts that good?

Facebook uids based on email address, WhatsApp on phone number. Please show me the SQL one-liner to join those tables...

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#30

Post by hood_syntax »

Solinoid wrote: post #22
alaaf wrote: post #5

> the free content ad network failed to disclose Interesting they don’t call it a ‘social network’. ‘content ad network’ is more accurate in my opinion.

I believe that was coined by theregister.co.uk ^1, a fine source for quality wordplay and tech news/opinion. Unfortunately fondleslab never took off for tablet. ^1 I may be wrong

Ooh, fondleslab is a good one.
Post reply on HN