Live data from Hacker News

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

481–490 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#481
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they rewrote Whatsapp from ground up, the two platforms are not mixed. Whatsapp is written in Erlang where Facebook has transitioned from PHP to Hack to the best of my knowledge.

I don't know how much they did with Whatsapp, but I do know they integrated the Facebook ad serving platform into Whatsapp. Breaking up Facebook and Whatsapp would cost Whatsapp that ad serving platform, which is probably nontrivial.

The nice thing about splitting a software company (unlike a company with physical assets) is that you can fork the assets.

Give both companies the ad platform source code.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bought all the platforms people were going to jump to. The "Onvao Protect" traffic snooping VPN to identify what up and coming products people were using was one particularly shady part of this strategy.

Funnily enough, the co-founder of Onavo (Guy Rosen) is now Facebook's "VP of Integrity," which probably speaks to FB's (lack of) commitment to integrity.

Wow, thank you for the hearty laugh!

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#484

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…

The way facebook is different is that it isn't just a social network, it IS your online identity. The fact that they make you use your real name rather than just some username is what made it work. And what continues to make it a more permanent part of who you are digitally. Facebook login makes it even more intertwined and hard to remove.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly makes it 'great? No password access, login through SMS which can be intercepted, no 2FA, no access from another device while you phone is dead, compresses video to 2 pixels, no real crypto auth to speak of. It does not seem to have any features that are better than Signal, telegram, messenger, or a dozen other apps. Why is it worth any awards or special consideration, besides being popular?

> besides being popular You're not wrong about any of this, but that final phrase weighs far more for most people than anything else. It is a communications app after all, and is only useful if there are people to communicate with.

But its not a valid criteria - If tomortow it somehow dissapeared, another app would take its place immediately

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might be true if Safeway is going to buy the same number of cereal boxes from you every quarter, but that's not what happens. Stores adjust their purchases based on what sells, so if Safeway starts promoting their own cereal then they will start buying less of yours. You do know that the companies that make the name brand cereals...also make the store brand cereals... It's about market fit. Price sensitive custo…

And you frankly have no clue. Let me clue you in on a few facts. Retail stores are not paying upfront. Name a single major retailer that does this. I've yet to hear of a single one doing this. Amazon is a bookstore. Go to any other bookstore or even distributor, and ask how quickly folks get paid who sell into their market. These folks drag the absolute HELL out of payment. And yes, the local bookstore can return the…

Retail stores are not paying upfront. Name a single major retailer that does this. I've yet to hear of a single one doing this.

I don't claim that the companies "pay upfront" because that's not how B2B invoicing works. Companies pay invoices on a net-terms basis (ranging between 30 and 180 days after the underlying good or service is provided or received). But they have signed the legal contract agreeing to pay before they received the inventory (and indeed before the inventory was even queued for delivery), and so legally, they are required to pay.

For financial and tax purposes, they are treated as having paid (because the expense has accrued) even if, economically, they have not actually forked over the money.

And yes, the local bookstore can return the books. They are generally not taking inventory risk

This is not true. The local bookstore has taken on inventory risk. B&N takes on inventory risk. They can, however, ask the publisher for discounts or credits for unsold books, and publishers generally give those out like candy.

Same thing with a grocery store. Want to get on shelf? Pay a fee? Want to sell in store? Until you prove sales volume so risk is gone, you will need to be willing to accept product returns and pay fee to cover whatever you replaced.

Yes, and I've never claimed otherwise. If you want to replace items on the shelf that are selling, you need to pay the store for the risk of your replacement product not selling. But once you have established that record of sales, they buy future inventory. Note that for most retail stores we are talking about here (grocery, gas stations, Target, Walmart, etc.), these trials last a day or two; maybe even a week for slower-selling product types; trials may last longer for specialty stores.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#488
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) FB is not negative for society. It's just a social network. Most people use it because they like it. 2) It's not good when governments swoop in and shut down / mess around with private business in general. Of all the things the Feds could be doing, putting in privacy protections, Net Neutrality, protecting from scams would be much higher on this list.

Both of these statements are highly contentious, and I strongly disagree with both of them in this case. Everything that follows is my opinion, as these are clearly questions without objective answers. Facebook has become a massive force for division and the propagation of hate rhetoric. A lot of that comes from their own algorithms which basically create a catered stream of content to reinforce user's already held b…

[deleted]

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might be true if Safeway is going to buy the same number of cereal boxes from you every quarter, but that's not what happens. Stores adjust their purchases based on what sells, so if Safeway starts promoting their own cereal then they will start buying less of yours. You do know that the companies that make the name brand cereals...also make the store brand cereals... It's about market fit. Price sensitive custo…

You can safely leave off the leading paragraph about how other people in the thread are not smart and you're in the right—that's the default motivational assumption that surrounds making comments online

Yeah, I removed that. It was too snarky and detracting from my main point.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#490

I feel like instead of pushing for the companies to separate, congress should pass laws mandating [adversarial interoperability]( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera... ). Then the data (including the social graph) really would belong to the users, and facebook would have to compete with multiple other “social network clients” that would rapidly emerge. Facebook would lose some monopoly profi…

I agree and find the attempt at a breakup a bit frustrating. This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect and it's not really clear what the positives or negatives would be. For instance, FB has invested massively in trust and safety people operations and AI. What happens to that investment when IG is spun off? Laying out laws and regulations so the market works as intended (no doubt with adjustment…

And yet, Facebook is untrustworthy, unsafe, and had developed AI that amplifies controversy...

The Facebook purchases of WhatsApp and Instagram were not innovative and should have triggered antitrust at the time. There is no healthy competition when you buy Any worthy competitors.

Post reply on HN