Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by threeseed » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

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…

This is implicit in almost every acquisition though.

It's one of the first things any investor will ask you which is how you can you defend your product from duplication by a larger company. If you are a company that overly relies on a single feature e.g. Snap stories then of course you will be more sensitive to threats like Facebook presented.

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

#62

Post by xwdv » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

negrit wrote: post #59

xwdv wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now, but that could easily change if they have some bad quarters coming up. I’m bearish.

So because you're bearish you think that SNAP's CEO regrets his decision?

If I didn’t then I wouldn’t be bearish.

I think the headache and anxiety over running Snap and the pressure to grow users quarter after quarter with a simple app that is easily duplicated will eventually get to Evan.

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

#63

Post by werber » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:24 PM UTC

srbby wrote: post #23

umvi wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My phone is a Nexus 5X. All I know is that the old Snapchat app would occasionally soft-brick my camera such that no other application (including the camera app) could use it until I rebooted my phone. I confirmed with multiple experiments that Snapchat was the culprit. After the redesign, the problem went away.

I remember the same problem in a Nexus 4. And Google said they couldn't fix it because it was a bug in a Qualcomm driver and they had no access to the source code. I think the redesign fixed that because Snapchat no longer takes pictures with the camera. Instead, they take screenshots of the camera preview.

Is that true across the board or just on Android?

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

#64

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

[deleted]

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

#65

Post by habosa » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

This is definitely not-nice behavior but is common. On an iOS App Store listing you can't even say the word Android, etc.

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

#66

Post by habosa » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:28 PM UTC

fasicle wrote: post #58

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.

SNAP have had a great last 12 months, market cap up to 23.65B

7B and 24B are both effectively infinite money. If I could have the former just for signing my name or the latter but I need to go through an IPO and get slammed in the press every day, I go with the former.

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

#67

Post by sp332 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:33 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

They probably anticipated it to the penny.

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

#68

Post by sp332 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:36 PM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #24

moron4hire wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you are aware of the specific details of what Ashley Madison did, but basically they were using bots to convince men that there were actual women interested in meeting (if only the use paid the membership fee to enable messaging), when by-and-large there were none. It was a scam. I mean, most dating websites use a series of tricks of messaging and "matches" to trick people into thinking there are more…

Do you have that study - sounds an interesting read.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10125704

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

#69

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

Kuinox wrote: post #54

aswanson wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rather easy. Delete your fb and use bing + ddg. Done.

Then you go on your news outlet and meet your friendly facebook "like" button that keep stalking you.

uBlock w/ social filter

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

#70

Post by paggle » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #34

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

> could they really not anticipate future antitrust action? I we go by the pattern of behavior at Facebook, it really doesn't seem like the decision makers consider much in the way of anti-trust or much of anything. The pattern is well established and their version of move fast and break things is almost entirely off the rails.

And if we look at the pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice, the pattern of behavior at Facebook seems (at least at this moment) to be perfectly rational.