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

511–520 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#511

Post by khazhoux »

I fail to see what the public benefit would be of breaking out Instagram and WhatsApp, or exposing the APIs more widely.

* Are customers lives improved by browsing lifestyle photos on Instagram^notFB ?

* WhatsApp makes voice and video calls. How does it affect me that it's part of FB? How is my life improved if its not? Another voice/video app will somehow thrive?

* Opening their APIs so that a couple of startups can build custom FB and Instagram apps? One of them will succeed and the rest will fail. This is the public benefit?

There's such a huge difference between this and Microsoft's anti-competitive case: Microsoft controlled your entire computer. When they restricted apps, they restricted your entire ability to operate your computer, connect to the internet, etc. Here, FB is constraining... your access to social data on FB??

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#512

Post by Tijdreiziger »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #406
lbsnake7 wrote: post #30

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…

Don't forget FB Dating!

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#513

Post by jrmg »

aerovistae wrote: post #463
gamblor956 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon promoting its own brands isn't much different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. Amazon promoting its own brands is completely different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. You're confusing a bazaar with a retail store; the two are nothing alike legally or economically. The supermarket pays for everything on its store shelves (except, rarely, for certain new products on a consignment…

> Moreover, in essentially all cases, the name brand also made the store brand. Whoa, what? Total news to me. Source? Or do you work in this sector? This is really interesting.

They might make it, but it’s generally a different, cheaper, product. You can easily see this with food - the ingredients and nutrition information will usually be different.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#514

Post by vlovich123 »

bigbubba wrote: post #506
meekmind wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is. It's possible to have two completely valid, objective, and opposed positions in an argument where multiple different groups have a vested interest in one position being more popular than the other. Which one is propaganda? The one you disagree with? The one that doesn't fit with your preconceived notions? The one that doesn't fit with your personality profile? Both positions? Neither position? Do we just shut…

Small nitpick, whether or not something is propaganda has nothing to do with whether or not it's correct. These are completely orthogonal. "Loose lips sink ships" is basically true, and is also a textbook example of propaganda. Propaganda is media that intents to influence an audience to further an agenda.

By definition that is almost every communication that a human makes, whether through art, technical books, education, news, opinion pieces etc. They are all attempts to influence an audience and there’s always some kind of agenda behind it.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#515

Post by SulfurHexaFluri »

andromeduck wrote: post #470
SulfurHexaFluri wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is if you try to monetize it, facebook or google will overnight release a 10x better version for free.

if you water down restrictions like noncompetes it won't matter, the people at fb or goog would just as likely start their own

The people at google or facebook don't poses some secret talent that the rest of us do not. Most senior developers could have built what facebook and google release given enough time and money.

The problem is that you simply can not keep up with 100 developers working full time building the same product as you but giving it out for free.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#516

Post by sorenjan »

grishka wrote: post #404
Catsandkites wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there an app that lets you take/provide a photo of somebody's face and get their VK profile?

FindFace? It shut down its user-facing service several years ago and focused on selling its technology. There are rumors it has some government contracts.

Now there's FindClone instead. And I would consider finding somebody's identity by matching a photo of them with a database of VK profile pictures a privacy nightmare. I don't know If they got the pictures via an API or scraping, but it shows what can be done with easy access to this kind of data. People used FindFace to deanonymize porn actresses and out them to family for instance.

https://towardsdatascience.com/steeling-faces-for-investigat...

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2016/05/02/facial-recogniti...

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#517

Post by pmoriarty »

saddlerustle wrote: post #222
ghufran_syed wrote: post #155

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…

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.

"It's not okay to allow a third party to access the data your friends have shared with you without your friends consenting."

Facebook itself is a third party.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#518

Post by pmoriarty »

vladmk wrote: post #348
arilotter wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People give Facebook their access willingly and they know what information they input into Facebook. I don't think this is true. Facebook tracks your activity all over the web on thousands of third-party sites and builds a unique profile to identify you, without regard for you having an account. You can't opt out of this if you don't have a Facebook account. Some of these "social graph" features will do things like…

I guess that’s what separates me and you I have more faith in humanity. I think all this false outrage about data being sold on systems that are free to use will die down and people overtime understand that the Internet doesn’t run on pixie dust and fairy magic. PS by fighting this point you’re merely pointing out that giving more businesses this data isn’t a good idea

"I think all this false outrage about data being sold on systems that are free to use will die down and people overtime understand that the Internet doesn’t run on pixie dust and fairy magic"

It doesn't have to run on companies spying on their users either.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#519

Post by cbnotfromthere »

grishka wrote: post #320
baby wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? WhatsApp today is a great messaging app platform with end-to-end encryption.

WhatsApp is one of the most uncomfortable and confusing messaging apps, UX-wise, I've ever used. It's as if they wanted to replace SMS, but were passionate enough about it that they copied all the shortcomings and annoyances, too. End-to-end encryption in a proprietary app is a joke. "Please trust us we encrypt your messages".

Care to provide 2 examples of a comfortable and not confusing messaging apps?

Not trolling, I just have no idea what do you actually mean (as, for instance, most of my friends believe WhatsApp is some sort of nec plus ultra of easy of use and clarity).

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#520

Post by freen »

readams wrote: post #418
arthurcolle wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social graphs are really useful for detecting idea contagion though. Facebook obviously has the tools to fight propaganda, they have one of the most granular datasets of people data ever assembled in human history. They are just addicted to the ad dollars. It is a shame they killed their delightful API. Good riddance to them.

Seeing sharing in a social graph is easy. Defining what is "propaganda" is all but impossible.

It’s advertising Facebook isn’t getting paid for.

I’m surprised they don’t go after it as a violation of their terms of service.

Post reply on HN