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

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#271

Post by steve_taylor »

This smells political, possibly retribution for crimes such as fact checking. It’s without merit. The complaint states that Facebook should have competed with Instagram and WhatsApp instead of acquiring them. But if it did so successfully, it would be likely to run afoul of antitrust law anyway.

And since when is a company under any obligation to provide its customer list to up and coming competitors? That’s ludicrous.

It’s interesting watching all the ways America tears itself apart.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#272

Post by gfodor »

samatman wrote: post #153
gfodor wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems unlikely to me unless you think your children are going to be using computers with flat screens on walls like we do today.

I happen to think the problems with VR are rooted in the laws of physics, or at least human physiology, rather than the limitations of hardware. Can you trick my eyes into focusing on infinity when the actual focus point is three cm away? Maybe? Can you trick my inner ear into accepting the virtual reality? Ok, how? AR is a different story, but Oculus would be starting from zero on an AR play, the only company with a…

Uh not really, Oculus has been working on AR for years and has prototype glasses in the field. They're probably ahead of Apple if I had to guess. VR is the bootloader for AR.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#273

Post by vladmk »

munk-a wrote: post #258
saddlerustle wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no way to provide access to the social graph in a privacy preserving way. It's not okay to allow a third party to access the data your friends have shared with you without your friends consenting. Unencumbered API access to the social graph is exactly what led to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and promising to restrict API access was part of Facebook's settlement with the FTC.

> There's no way to provide access to the social graph in a privacy preserving way. If we're not okay with other companies having access then why is it okay for a single company to have that access? Do you know and trust every facebook employee including those that don't work there yet with your data? Do you trust that that data will be securely handled when the company is sold after declaring bankruptcy? I think you…

I think the accidental straw-man is actually your reply. People give Facebook their access willingly and they know what information they input into Facebook.

Should Facebook have all the info your bank has for instance? Or auto mechanic, your realtor? This is a slippery slope of logic of shared data for all leads to.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#274

Post by majani »

ergocoder wrote: post #216
Erik816 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there were some kind of federal agency, maybe a "trade commission" that could have blocked these mergers when they originally happened ....

When they originally happened, people thought Zuck was insane. Instagram for $1B? WhatsApp for $17B? Really? FTC definitely isn't competent enough to understand how visionary the acquisition was. To be fair, not many was that competent. Otherwise, Google and other cash-loaded companies would have acquired these companies with higher offer. It could have easily been Twitter + Vines + Periscope where the acquired produ…

To be fair, that Whatsapp deal still looks insane. Still no meaningful revenue coming from that end 8 years later

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#275

Post by mrkurt »

s3r3nity wrote: post #267
crazygringo wrote: post #199

Honestly, while I have my doubts about this succeeding, it nevertheless feels like the big tech suit most likely to succeed. Amazon promoting its own brands isn't much different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. Apple isn't a monopoly in phones because of Android. And Google's search is so inherently tied to selling ads as a business model that separating them is a difficult argument -- plus search com…

I have my doubts, simply because the markets would be significantly disrupted if the government can retroactively “unapprove” a merger over a decade (or longer) after the fact - AFTER the government previously approved it. You’re better off trying to right the wrongs through litigation that sets a better market environment.

It's not any different than splitting a company up into parts. Historically, that hasn't disrupted the markets as much as it's made sharedholders more money ... because the multiple, smaller entities are more valuable than the whole.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#276

Post by mrkurt »

majani wrote: post #257
crazygringo wrote: post #199

Honestly, while I have my doubts about this succeeding, it nevertheless feels like the big tech suit most likely to succeed. Amazon promoting its own brands isn't much different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. Apple isn't a monopoly in phones because of Android. And Google's search is so inherently tied to selling ads as a business model that separating them is a difficult argument -- plus search com…

Unfortunately there's literally thousands of social networking sites, chat apps and photo sharing apps out there, and many of them have millions of downloads which keeps Facebook on their toes. Facebook can easily win this based off of that technicality.

That's only a technicality in internet discussions. Actual antitrust law in the US does not have a binary definition of "monopoly" that lets large companies off the hook.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#277

Post by hawk_ »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #139
Grazester wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the same note, a relative asked me the same thing when they IPO.I thought if Google could make money selling ads why couldn't Facebook. I bought in at IPO price for them. I sold for them about 2 years ago when the price was dropping due to privacy scandals.

I've been giving the wrong answer to "Should I buy Bitcoin" since 2011 or so. I was bearish on Amazon when its stock was at 60 because its P/E ratio was ridiculous. I've learned to just be comfortable with the fact that I'm wrong a lot.

If you're consistently wrong there's alpha even in that, just doing the opposite would work wonders.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#278

Post by patothon »

jsinai wrote: post #124
jdminhbg wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they do compete with WhatsApp, on the basis of those points of differentiation.

Whatsapp has near universal market penetration globally, especially in countries where most people can’t afford iPhones and use iMessage. Even in countries where iPhones are ubiquitous the cross-platform nature of Whatsapp and the fact that everyone from your friend to your grandmother is on it, makes it dominant. Yes you could use Slack to message your friends like you would on Whatsapp. The experience won’t be the…

> Whatsapp has near universal market penetration globally, especially in countries where most people can’t afford iPhones and use iMessage.

do you have data to back up that claim?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#279

Post by nr2x »

uoaei wrote: post #218
nr2x wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prior administration was very cosy with Google and Facebook, which helped even more.

And the next one will be too. Harris is a darling of SV giants.

Yes, I'm curious as to why DOJ announced Google and FTC announced Facebook actions right before the same group of people who nurtured their rise to monopoly status retake power.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#280

Post by Forbo »

uoaei wrote: post #245
nvrspyx wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in case you weren't aware, uMatrix has been deprecated and will receive no further development, including fixes. It still runs fine now, but it may not in the future.

Thank you! I was not. The GitHub repo has indeed been archived.[1] Any ideas where to go for similar functionality that will be supported in the future? [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix

There seem to be several forks, although it doesn't look like there's much consolidation on merging PRs into any specific repo. Hopefully they don't just splinter off and end up fragmented and neglected. :-\

https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/network

Post reply on HN