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

691–700 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#691

Post by baq »

hmall wrote: post #629
aerosmile wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get it that HN is all about minimal design, but the need for the parent post (in this and other threads) is a sign that the UI could be improved in this aspect.

It is a courtesy, there is no real need for the post; the "More" link is quite discoverable. I don't think this extremely minor issue warrants cluttering the UI with additional "page 1 2 3 ..." links at the top.

the more link is so easy to miss that dang thinks every front page post with multiple pages of comments needs a pinned comment with links to next pages.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#692

Post by s3r3nity »

dr_zoidberg wrote: post #620
mrkurt wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The situation reminds me of when Google bought Motorola[0], and then the Android phone manufacturers pushed for them to sell it again. Which eventually happened. Main difference here would be that it's the government pushing now, instead of (indirect?) competitors (which also happen to be customers). [0] Good old times, I still have a Moto G3 from back then that works like a charm, except it can't "speak" to the 4G t…

Maybe, but I wonder if the difference in hardware vs. software makes the FB situation a tad more complicated.

Leadership made the push a few years back when Chris Cox left to merge the code bases as much as possible. Do you trust the government to know enough to dictate how that should be undone? You can't, like, just run a "git rebase" to undo years of merging by 10000's of engineers.

Then again, maybe that is just crazy enough to work???

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#693

Post by thomastjeffery »

mrkramer wrote: post #101

This doesn't make sense who authorized Instagram and Whatsapp acquisitions at the first place? FTC [1] It isn't Zuck's fault nobody else is as competitive as Facebook is.... I look at you MySpace and Twitter. [1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/08/ftc-c... "The Federal Trade Commission has closed its nonpublic investigation of Facebook's proposed acquisition of Instagram, Inc., without taking any…

Does one mistake demand another?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#694

Post by lovecg »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #83
dsr_ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FTC could, potentially, require: 1. That FB split into N independent companies, whereupon each share of FB would become 1 share in each of N companies. 2. That the supermajor shareholders (say, more than 10% of any company) each pick at most one company to retain that interest in, and sell off shares in the other companies until they had less than 10% of each of those). 3. That the new companies avoid overlapping…

And then it would eventually come back together. See ATT. https://money.cnn.com/infographic/technology/att-merger-hist...

Reminds me of Terminator 2.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#695

Post by actuator »

gamblor956 wrote: post #446
actuator wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many inaccuracies in this. > it uses its access to their sales data to come up with its own competing products. Every retail chain has data on what gets sold inside and where it was kept, how it was promoted etc. They can very well use this data and most probably are using it. > Thus, it is irrelevant to the manufacturer whether the supermarket promotes their store-brand product or the name brand product; Only til…

Every retail chain has data on what gets sold inside and where it was kept, how it was promoted etc. They can very well use this data and most probably are using it. Yes, they are. They use this data to determine what products (specifically, what SKUs) to re-order from their suppliers. Only till the time when their store brand starts selling much better and consumers develop a relationship with that. I don't know why…

> No, because Shopify doesn't compete against its own sellers. The antitrust concern arises solely because Amazon is both the platform and a competitor and it uses its access as the platform provider to acquire data to compete.

One can always make the argument then, that just use Shopify and don't come to Amazon. Amazon can even make the case for Google and FB having sufficiently big audience size for customer acquisition.

Unlike an app which needs to go through AppStore to end up on an iPhone, a product being sold on Amazon doesn't need to go through them for customers to purchase it.

> Yes, they are. They use this data to determine what products (specifically, what SKUs) to re-order from their suppliers.

So does Amazon, but both don't limit themselves to just this use case.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#696

Post by actuator »

shrewduser wrote: post #471
actuator wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many inaccuracies in this. > it uses its access to their sales data to come up with its own competing products. Every retail chain has data on what gets sold inside and where it was kept, how it was promoted etc. They can very well use this data and most probably are using it. > Thus, it is irrelevant to the manufacturer whether the supermarket promotes their store-brand product or the name brand product; Only til…

i don't see what's hard to understand, get access to your competitors data, use that data to cherry pick and create competing products on your own platform with an inherent home field advantage. boom competition dead.

I get that completely and it is scary, what I don't get is the argument that somehow physical retailers are above this. There is nothing new in what Amazon is doing, retailers have been playing by this book for long. Whatever regulation is being asked for Amazon, should have been asked for other retail behemoths as well way before.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#698

Post by patorjk »

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…

My mom asked me the same thing back in 2014 and I essentially felt the same way as you so I said the same thing. She bought some anyway though, and later sold when it hit $200. Glad she didn't listen to me.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#699

Post by 8note »

vladmk wrote: post #273
munk-a wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

People willingly give permission for Facebook to share their data, too.

What difference does that make? Facebook almost certainly knows my banking information, without me giving it directly to them

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#700

Post by [deleted] »

aerosmile wrote: post #568
dang wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a stub comment to hold all the replies to the parent. I did not mean to explode an offtopicness charge, and usually turn off replies for these because the same issue comes up every time and the answer is always the same. (When it comes to explaining something, the internet is stateless [1].) Forgot to do so in this case! I'll move them now. [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I get it that HN is all about minimal design, but the need for the parent post (in this and other threads) is a sign that the UI could be improved in this aspect.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN