Facebook's seized files published by MPs • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#71

Post by amerine » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:42 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #43

whatshisface wrote: post #5

The documents[0] contain market research done by Onavo[1]. This data may have been bought from them, and if so it was probably bought under a non-disclose agreement, as is typical for those arrangements (the reasoning being that Onavo can't sell the data more than once if it is released publicly). This could pose a problem for Facebook if Onavo decides that another release like this is likely to happen again. I'd be…

The bigger problem is that, as I understand it, all of these documents were obtained from someone suing Facebook who had access to them as part of a lawsuit against Facebook under a court order that required them to be kept confidential.

The law was followed to get access to these files. What are you talking about? Regardless of your agreement with the manner of procurement, nothing nefarious was done here. This is what happens when CEOs ignore governments.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#72

Post by Jyaif » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:42 PM UTC

nakedrobot2 wrote: post #3

Good for them, thank you! The sooner facebook is controlled and broken up into pieces, the better. They are a massive net negative on civilization. Do you work at Facebook? Shame on you.

I think this is not going far enough.

Do you work in the evil tech industry? You should die.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#73

Post by hkt » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:43 PM UTC

Sometimes, even amidst the Brexit madness, I love our Parliament. Publishing and seizing documents like this is a move that proves politicians have the spine to look after people's interests. Time to get serious, act on this, and break up Facebook forever.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#74

Post by criddell » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:44 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #26

mooneater wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally get this POV. But honestly, if you work at FB, you definitely have options. So no, this POV does not really apply to people at FB.

H1B visa holders for example. To change job you need an entire new visa application which is not guaranteed to win the lottery. Even Facebook employees can have limited options. And it’s not just engineers. Cleaners, cooks, maintenance people.

The cleaners, cooks, and maintenance people really aren't the problem at Facebook.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#75

Post by frgtpsswrdlame » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:44 PM UTC

breischl wrote: post #29

paganel wrote: post #7

> Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat > there was evidence that Facebook's refusal to share data with some apps caused them to fail Stuff like this should trigger the EU Commissioner for Competition to withdraw the aut…

I have no particular love for FB or what they've done with data, but these I don't understand why either of those points is particularly controversial or even unusual. > Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat Checking out…

>Checking out your competition is pretty standard among all businesses, as is buying out the ones you can't beat.

The fact that buying out competitors you can't beat is seen as 'standard' is the problem. When facing a competitor that you can't beat the standard should be: improve or die.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#76

Post by jerf » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:44 PM UTC

sbhn wrote: post #28

Thx for link. Everytime i read the word ‘whitelist’, i think, havn’t they caught up with the times, thats racist, whitelist. Why does white suggest good?

"White" as symbolizing purity or goodness and "black" for contamination or evil is used by a wide variety of cultures around the world, only a minority of which happens to consist primarily of people with un-melanined skin. If you think "whitelist" and "blacklist" is racist, just wait until you find out about Yin and Yang.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#77

Post by CPLX » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:45 PM UTC

btown wrote: post #22

paganel wrote: post #7

> Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat > there was evidence that Facebook's refusal to share data with some apps caused them to fail Stuff like this should trigger the EU Commissioner for Competition to withdraw the aut…

A world in which companies are not allowed to selectively withhold proprietary data from some competitors, and form partnerships with others, is a world that suboptimally promotes innovation and economic growth.

That's a statement that requires evidence and proof.

Market fundamentalists are so used to advancing arguments like this without being challenged that they have become almost completely divorced from the scientific method entirely.

Maybe being forced to share this kind of proprietary data, in this specific type of circumstance, will actually promote a more diverse marketplace with higher innovation. Maybe it won't.

Either way you don't just get to assert it.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#78

Post by dnadler » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:46 PM UTC

dyeje wrote: post #51

btown wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A world in which companies are not allowed to selectively withhold proprietary data from some competitors, and form partnerships with others, is a world that suboptimally promotes innovation and economic growth.

I'm not advocating for anything here, but isn't hurting innovation and economic growth exactly what FB is doing by snuffing out promising products based on analytics?

Would it be better if, instead of analytics, they flipped a coin?

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#79

Post by criddell » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:47 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #43

whatshisface wrote: post #5

The documents[0] contain market research done by Onavo[1]. This data may have been bought from them, and if so it was probably bought under a non-disclose agreement, as is typical for those arrangements (the reasoning being that Onavo can't sell the data more than once if it is released publicly). This could pose a problem for Facebook if Onavo decides that another release like this is likely to happen again. I'd be…

The bigger problem is that, as I understand it, all of these documents were obtained from someone suing Facebook who had access to them as part of a lawsuit against Facebook under a court order that required them to be kept confidential.

That makes me wonder if a confidentiality agreement should ever include sharing that information with the government? Maybe NDAs from publicly traded companies should always exempt sharing with elected officials?

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#80

Post by notahacker » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 3:47 PM UTC

btown wrote: post #22

paganel wrote: post #7

> Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat > there was evidence that Facebook's refusal to share data with some apps caused them to fail Stuff like this should trigger the EU Commissioner for Competition to withdraw the aut…

A world in which companies are not allowed to selectively withhold proprietary data from some competitors, and form partnerships with others, is a world that suboptimally promotes innovation and economic growth.

A world in which data monopolies and platform companies selectively withdraw much smaller companies' access to their services based on whether they wish those companies to fail or not probably isn't one which optimally promotes innovation and economic growth though.