Live data from Hacker News

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

451–460 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slotting fees are real, but of course supermarkets pay for the product. How else would the manufacturer be paid? The fee is basically paying for the right to shelf space, but the supermarket still buys the product to fill the shelves. Also, not all supermarkets, including not all large chains, have such fees.

They're paid when the product clears. Many big chains like Walmart and Best Buy don't own a significant portion of inventory on shelves or in warehouses. The manufacturers own the inventory up until the products are paid for by the customer.

This is simply false. Chains like Walmart and Best Buy own their inventory (i.e., they hold legal title).

They simply might not have forked over the cash yet, which is very different--for a variety of reasons, the actual transfer of cash can take place weeks or even months later. (This is how invoicing works with most companies. If you are an independent contract, you know exactly how this works.)

Very few products in retail are sold on a consignment basis (meaning, when the product sells). Generally, only new products or slow-selling big-ticket items (like refrigerators) get sold on consignment (or similar) arrangements.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure Facebook buys all the data on you that it can, which in America is an amazing amount of information. Your auto mechanic is likely already selling what is being done to your car to CarFax, etc.

Can a consumer buy this data? I suspect I'm getting too many bushings and brake rotors but haven't kept track.

Usually they only sell to businesses. For "privacy".

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#453
post #358
post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People willingly gave Facebook their social graph thinking it let them share photos and messages with their friends. They had no real idea what else it would or is being used for.

Putting your data publicly online can be not only used by Facebook but all your friends too, hell sometimes profile images end up on google, so just because they had no real idea it shouldn’t be facebooks fault if your friends decide to print screen your photo and redistribute it. That data you put out publicly is public once it’s in public domain the public will use it

Disney seems to have a different idea of "public domain" from you. Why don't I have the copyright to my life, if Disney has the copyright to Iron Man?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#454
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…

> It's unfair to Zuck for being very visionary about this.

I personally disagree with the idea that Zuck was being a "visionary" here. I don't think buying Instagram for $1bn was a particularly visionary move but rather just... cautious. Facebook also bought Gowalla, Lightbox.com, Friendly, TBH and tried to buy Snapchat, Musically (since merged into TikTok), Houseparty, etc. All these are/were competitors and threats. Some were small, some were big. Some worked out and grew, others didn't.

The Instagram acquisition happened fairly early on, so it makes sense that it was worth a lot of money to Facebook. Now that Facebook is huge it can get turned down by a company like Snapchat, and it'll just go ahead and copy/improve its features with its much-larger team, capital, and user-base. Back then, buying the competitor was the best option since Facebook didn't have as many resources or reasons to believe they could compete as effectively.

Moreover, I'd argue the reason Instagram worked out so well is precisely because it got acquired by Facebook. Had Instagram had to figure out its own monetization strategy, find its own clients, compete with the established players, build its own infrastructure, etc. it probably wouldn't have been able to grow as much or as quickly.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#455
post #393

I can't help but step back and look at the trade wars between the US and China. China is gaining ground fast. US on the otherhand is turning to infighting by suing FB, Google and Amazon. Countries win through innovation. It's hard to innovate with such distractions. China must be happy cheering on its tech companies while the US is on the sidelines. Go figure...

Arguably by breaking up big tech companies, there will be more space for innovation, especially for startups.

or we could just make it much easier for people to break off and start their own business

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#456
post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somehow, this hasn't turned into a privacy nightmare in more than 10 years the API was available. How would you know?

Most of the data you can access through the API is public anyway. You could as well scrape it off the website, API just provides it in a more convenient format. For example, you're able to get profiles and friend lists and posts of arbitrary people, as long as they're publicly visible, without real authentication (but you do need a "service token" you get on the app settings page). The worst thing to ever happen with…

That's a pretty quick backpedal from your previous post.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want Facebook to stop tracking me, not enable more of it. Which does this enable?

Stop using their free service and block their Javascript. Don't use apps built with their login framework.

The problem is facebook is wiping out the alternatives. In Australia there is a decent buy/sell site called Gumtree but its ultimately doomed as facebook marketplace uses its massive pre exsting userbase to wipe it out.

Facebook either buys or crushes all competition which doesn't have billions of dollars to push back.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But are there not multiple phone companies now instead of just one?

They have all pretty much merged back into AT&T or Verizon. Those two companies together would be the original MA Bell.

Duopolies are bad, but I'd say still better than monopolies.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#459

When Facebook first went public, an older relative asked me if he should invest in Facebook. My only insight was being an internet user at the time and I said no, there was no reason that Facebook wouldn’t be another MySpace. Facebook's only value was their users and users were historically very finicky and moved around platforms at will. I argued that Facebook would make no money and wouldn’t be around in a couple o…

Facebook was smart, it wasn't just a social network, it also was an apps and games platform. Remember Farmville? And also many bands ended up putting their merch and tour dates up on FB because it was just so easy. Then recently it grew a marketplace to take on craigslist and ebay, and added videos (making it a mini youtube or tiktok). And let's not forget that FB groups are the go-to place for many hobbies. Into old…

Craigslist has had it coming for a long time.

There are other marketplaces that proved the value of identity and reputation like Mercari and offerup in p2p before fb marketplace launched its own.

I do think FB would stomp or buy other marketplaces, but that there is even a smidgen of opportunity in this space in the US is due to the neglect of buckmaster and newmark.

They went from benevolent dictators to doggedly avoiding any increase in value to users.

This has happened at great detriment to Craigslist users who have been scammed, dealt with well-known but terrible landlords and wasted countless lifetimes due to the shoddy communication features of the site.

I am no fan of Facebook, but have only crocodile tears for Craigslist.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I don't want you telling folks that you are my friend? Why do you get to divulge this information to a third party that I know nothing about?

Can you stop your real-world friends from divulging your friendship to 3rd parties? Would you even presume to have any standing to do so? I think a case could be made that knowledge that belongs to A and B equally and that neither has standing to preclude the other from sharing that fact. Of course they could both mutually agree to such an arrangement ahead of time, but outside of such an agreement, I have a hard tim…

Many states have two party consent for audio recording, for example. Not every interaction is or should be freely licensed to both parties.
Post reply on HN