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

Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 177 posts

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#41

Post by meowface »

ineedasername wrote: post #28

The headline doesn't really match the story. I don't doubt the likelihood that Facebook engaged in these sorts of things, but from the headline I expected a laundry list of complaints and at least anecdotes to support them. Instead there's only two vague accusation without support that Facebook discouraged influencers from Snap, and suppressed Snap content from trending.

The Onavo thing alone sounds utterly insane to me. I often think criticisms of Facebook and similar companies are overblown, personally, but Facebook really should have, at the least, faced as many repercussions as Volkswagen did for their deceit, if the facts are correct.

>One area of focus for the FTC is Onavo, an Israeli mobile-analytics startup that Facebook purchased in 2013. Onavo offered a free mobile app that described itself as a way to “keep you and your data safe” by creating a virtual private network. To do this, the company redirected internet traffic on Onavo to Facebook’s servers, which allowed it to log every action in a central database.

>That enabled Facebook to quietly track what users did on their phones, including which apps they used and for how long, the Journal reported in 2017. Onavo data was frequently cited in internal research and strategy decks

>At one point, Facebook—through Onavo—was able to see Snap data as specific as the number of messages a user sent or how much time those users spent in specific Snapchat features, the former employees said. Facebook couldn’t see the content of the messages or images. The visibility into Snap usage lessened considerably after Snap encrypted its app traffic.

>A Facebook spokeswoman said the app was similar to other industry market research tools.

Facebook literally published MitM (technically "MitMo") malware disguised as a VPN security app so it could intercept all unencrypted network traffic and record user actions, in part so they could spy on competing apps (and also, presumably, to spy on everything you do to serve you more ads and sell your behavioral data). This is exactly what spyware-distributing criminal organizations with front companies do, as documented by threat intelligence firms.

If this actually is similar to any other industry "market research tools", as they claim, the entire industry is fucked. If you bought a home security camera and later found out it was secretly sending back everything it saw and heard so they could sell the video and audio to advertising firms, causing the banner ads you come across to be tailored to your observed food, TV, and sexual preferences, the uproar would undoubtedly put them out of business. But Facebook can just quietly shut things down once there's negative press, and move on like it never happened. Snap is 100% in the right for compiling all of this info on "Voldemort".

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#42

Post by meowface »

dymk wrote: post #4
H8crilA wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really relevant for the antitrust investigation.

The article is about Facebook copying features and draws a connection to Snaps subsequent downfall. I’m claiming the downfall was inevitable (no product, bad redesign, those useless spectacles), and once again Facebook is the scapegoat in all this.

Both things seem to be true. Snap created an unsustainable business model that could be easily copied, and Facebook did a lot of highly unethical and possibly illegal things to accelerate their domination of Snap's market.

If you read the article in full, there's really no defending Facebook's alleged behavior. The article doesn't even mention feature-copying, other than Zuckerberg saying "accept our buyout price or we'll copy you", but it's a single sentence in an article with a laundry list of unrelated allegations. I feel like a lot of people who dislike Snap are commenting without actually reading the article.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#43

Post by privateSFacct »

sweezyjeezy wrote: post #10
dymk wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is about Facebook copying features and draws a connection to Snaps subsequent downfall. I’m claiming the downfall was inevitable (no product, bad redesign, those useless spectacles), and once again Facebook is the scapegoat in all this.

I think you should reread the article, it has very little to do with copying features. If Snap are correct then Facebook - actively discouraged IG users from discussing Snap - prevented Snap from trending on FB - used data from an acquisition Onavo to track what users did on other apps (such as Snap) Furthermore - whether or not these shady practices were the downfall of Snap does not absolve FB from doing them.

I'm curious - why is facebook required to promote a competing social network?

Did snap promote facebook properly on its network?

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#44

Post by yashap »

menacingly wrote: post #33
dymk wrote: post #2

Snap can blame Facebook all they want, but what they had was a feature , not a product, and then they alienated their users with the redesign. Nobody else is to blame for their own stagnation then failing to reimagine their product. I mean, Snap Spectacles, really?

the feature/product dichotomy is a subtle gradient that ultimately means nothing. It's only ever seems poignant with the benefit of hindsight. It's sort of like saying "well, the way the market shook out is the way the market shook out"

Indeed, you could say the same thing about IG vs FB, it’s an empty criticism.

Also, curious why we always see these “Snap must regret not selling to FB for $7 billion” comments parroted so often? Snap currently has a market cap of almost $24 billion, and it’s stock price has nearly doubled since the start of 2019. Still not quite at their IPO price, but close. Seems like they should be very happy they went the IPO route?

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#45

Post by throwaway_quote »

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both cases, after the companies rejected the overtures, Facebook soon after released features that mimicked the products from Snap and Foursquare.

This seems to be a critical bit

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#46

Post by _v7gu »

awakeasleep wrote: post #36
epmaybe wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a lot of HN though, you'll see people talk about tangentially related things to the main topic, and never address the linked topic. I've learned to accept it as is, and not to worry about it too much.

Some news.ycombinator readers may actually work for Facebook, and have a direct financial stake in the outcome of this matter. It sounds like a conspiracy, but it's possible. You know the old saying about "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"

Not just employees, there's basically financial incentives for anyone who holds facebook stock.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#47

Post by xwdv »

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #32
xwdv wrote: post #22

Classic. Not a day goes by that Evan Spiegel doesn’t regret selling Snap for a cool 7 billion to Facebook and just moving on with his life, so they throw out crap like this as some kind of revenge by social mob justice. He drank too much of his own koolaid.

not selling, you mean

Yes

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#48

Post by airstrike »

privateSFacct wrote: post #43
sweezyjeezy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should reread the article, it has very little to do with copying features. If Snap are correct then Facebook - actively discouraged IG users from discussing Snap - prevented Snap from trending on FB - used data from an acquisition Onavo to track what users did on other apps (such as Snap) Furthermore - whether or not these shady practices were the downfall of Snap does not absolve FB from doing them.

I'm curious - why is facebook required to promote a competing social network? Did snap promote facebook properly on its network?

> I'm curious - why is facebook required to promote a competing social network?

They aren't required to promote, but arguably also can't actively find ways to prevent it from trending "organically" as that could ostensibly constitute an anti-competitive practice

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#49

Post by goodluckchuck »

throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

Yep, there's the antitrust angle, but then these threats were allegedly made by Mr. Zuckerberg personally which would make it attempted extortion.

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-exto...

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#50

Post by toxik »

throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.
Post reply on HN