Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel so much better that China’s state sponsored social media platform is what constitutes “competition”. Clearly no regulation needed here.
Weird they aren't getting regulated....
[deleted]
Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
131–140 of 183 posts
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#132This story is just bizarre. First and foremost, the time for objecting to an acquisition should be before it closes, not after. Second, forcing a company to "unbundle" like this is really an antritrust action and the bar for that should be pretty high. Objections to acquisitions can be done on potential issues. De-merging a company should pretty much be based on actual not potential violations (IMHO). Third, all of t…
The CMA did object [0]; in fact it made an order preventing Meta/Facebook from continuing but the order was ignored. Meta/Facebook was fined as a result [1].
[0] https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/facebook-inc-giphy-inc-merger-i...
[1] https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/facebook-inc-giphy-inc-merger-i...
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#133Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#134Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
> far poorer security and privacy practices Poorer than Meta? Is that even possible?
I’ve worked at Meta and I can imagine that other companies have worse security in general yeah. I think people here have a glamorous idea of how companies run security. Most companies don’t even have security teams.
Most companies don't have Meta's dragon's hoard of personal data.
Meta is essentially a surveillance company, with the incredible caveat that they no longer know what data they're collecting.
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> far poorer security and privacy practices Poorer than Meta? Is that even possible?
> poorer security. likely so, Meta does have thousands of competent engineers, ensuring their data remains exactly where they want it to be
> Meta does have thousands of competent engineers, ensuring their data remains exactly where they want it to be
Meta's own employees testified that it would be impossible to enumerate and locate all the data they're either collecting or synthesizing about their users.
So you'll forgive me if I don't really believe you.
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you think about it for more than 2 moments you will see that owning Giphy allows Facebook to see which chat apps you're using (via the api key for the app's Giphy integration) and who you're talking to on them (by attaching an id to each gif similar to how tracking pixels work in email.) Most chat clients automatically load images, triggering the tracker. This gives Facebook unprecedented visibility into the user…
Could you provide an example of a competitor app that integrates Giphy? It feels like a lot of people _think_ this is the explanation, but the chat apps I use defer gifs to the keyboard.
Signal, for one.
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
And my response to the article is that there are way bigger fish to fry than splitting up a dying social media conglomerate. Google and Amazon are far more powerful and dominant than Meta and you know it. Sent from my Android phone through Chrome. BRB, I just got a package and I need to check my AWS config.
You sound kinda crazy, friend. It is possible for several things to matter at the same time. This article is about Facebook, so we're discussing Facebook.
It's possible for several things to happen, but there's a limited amount of resources that can be applied at a time. I don't think Facebook is the bigger picture.
>This article is about Facebook, so we're discussing Facebook
My subject, which was formed in my thread, is a response to the original post.
>You sound kinda crazy, friend
Now you're just being emotionally immature.
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#139At first I thought Giphy might have been a UK company, but no. It's an American company founded in New York. Ignoring the merits of the judgement—ridiculous as they are—does no one sense terrible outreach in issuing a ruling on a merger about two companies which are in no way related to the country issuing it? This has terrible repercussions for the American tech economy. Every big tech company would think twice befo…
If Meta wants to not be subject to UK or EU rules, they could certainly stop doing business there… Personally, I'm really tired of seeing good products get subsumed into these faceless conglomerates, watered down, then finally borg'd into some tiny feature in the corner of the main app. Plenty of good ideas get tossed in the bin by these companies because they don't make 7-figure revenues out of the gate instead of b…
> If businesses are looking for a buyout, I'd appreciate some up-front notice that I'll have to look for another solution once their dream is attained instead of being slapped in the face with a "hey, we got bought, but we're sticking around!" to "uh, we lied, it's going away; you have a week to save any data, hope you're not on vacation" a few months later.
Your upfront notice is not paying for the service.
If you use it for free, the chances of buyout are high and you'll get this issue. Companies that don't need the buyout don't ever have this issue.
Re: Meta to sell Giphy after UK watchdog confirms ruling
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
then they are free not to operate in the UK. You seem surprised that UK law holds in the UK.
> You seem surprised that UK law holds in the UK. Then you've misunderstood.
I think the only one misunderstanding here is you.
Meta is operating in the UK. Just because it is an American company, they have a presence in the UK. The UK government is demanding they sell Giphy, they don't _HAVE_ to follow that demand, but they'll most likely be banned from operating in the UK, which to them is more valuable than keeping Giphy.
This is no different than a UK based company operating in the US and having the US tell them to sell a product they acquired similarly.
As a matter of fact, the US does this stuff all the time.