Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 204 posts

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#171

Post by nneonneo »

brhn wrote: post #127
DiabloD3 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its the same way "embrace, extend, and extinguish" was coined. "Embrace and extend", without extinguish/exterminate, was used in Microsoft corp docs that were handed to the DOJ during the famous antitrust case, but it was the DOJ that turned it into EEE after realizing what "embrace and extend" actually meant in the broader context of Microsoft's machinations. The DOJ's clever hook won them the case.

This is false. They explicitly used extinguish in their internal doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

Did they actually use this phrase in their internal comms? The one reference I can find - https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2006/... - says that Steven McGeady (then VP of Intel) testified that Paul Maritz (then an exec at Microsoft) told Intel that Microsoft's strategy was to "embrace, extend, extinguish". However, I can't see that corroborated by any actual internal communications.

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#172

Post by pstuart »

smsm42 wrote: post #166
andai wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, it's not like we could just demand to see the code that's governing our lives. What right do we have to poke around in Facebook's private affairs like that? -xkcd 1390

I think if facebook code governs your life, the major part of the fault does not lie with facebook. It is possible to live not being chained to the feed 24x7.

Absolutely. But many others are, and they can have an impact on your life even if you never logged in.

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#173

Post by PeterHolzwarth »

scotty79 wrote: post #54
PeterHolzwarth wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In China, "harmed society or the economy" is very very often the excuse used to put political enemies into prison.

So? It works. Their economy is starting to lap the West one. Maybe cutting a little bit off the top works regardless of who exactly is being cut?

Just want to be clear here: you appear to be saying that you support a regime putting people in prison that a regime doesn't like, on made-up charges, with the excuse of "harmed society or the economy" - have I got that right?

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#174

Post by deaux »

Aurornis wrote: post #144
deaux wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inability to personally jail megacorp CEOs who cause untold amounts of societal damage is not common "everywhere" ("many places", maybe). And that is the actual thing the person you're responding to cares about, and rightly so.

The countries who jail CEOs who due “societal damage” as a fuzzy cultural concept, as opposed to jailing CEOs according to the law, are not legal systems you want to imitate. The US does jail CEOs who commit crimes. Social media just has a short memory for topics like Worldcom, Enron, Tyco, or even recent topics like Theranos and FTX. You may also have your personal list of “societal damages” that you believe should…

> The countries who jail CEOs who due “societal damage” as a fuzzy cultural concept, as opposed to jailing CEOs according to the law, are not legal systems you want to imitate.

The US doesn't jail people according to the law and does not have a legal system you want to imitate.

> The US does jail CEOs who commit crimes. Social media just has a short memory for topics like Worldcom, Enron, Tyco, or even recent topics like Theranos and FTX.

Yes, the US jails CEOs that defraud investors, i.e. the powerful. This is a direct application of the fuzzy concepts that the US uses when deciding whether to jail someone.

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#175

Post by blooalien »

duped wrote: post #102
digitaltrees wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America has a profound problem. It defines companies as legal persons with all the same rights. But it also applies the same restrictions and punishments as people without factoring in the underlying advantages a company has when breaking the law for profit. 1. Perpetual existence means breaking the law is a short term problem that is well worth the long term benefit — companies essentially live for ever and out live…

> it defines companies as legal persons with all the same rights It absolutely does not but people keep repeating this on social media

> it defines companies as legal persons with all the same rights

> > It absolutely does not but people keep repeating this on social media

Funny how some folks can comment here on the world's biggest library and communications system but they can't take a minute to search out and read some actual details on the thing they're commenting about first. For example, Wikipedia's Corporate Personhood article [1] took me less than 5 seconds to find (including the time it took to open a web browser to my favorite search engine), and another two seconds to read enough to find that the very first sentence says some (not all) legal rights... The rest of the article has all the details anyone needs to understand what that first sentence actually means.

> Notion that corporations can have some legal rights, responsibilities and accountability (emphasis mine)

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#176

Post by koolala »

nneonneo wrote: post #171
brhn wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. They explicitly used extinguish in their internal doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

Did they actually use this phrase in their internal comms? The one reference I can find - https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2006/... - says that Steven McGeady (then VP of Intel) testified that Paul Maritz (then an exec at Microsoft) told Intel that Microsoft's strategy was to "embrace, extend, extinguish". However, I can't see that corroborated by any actual internal communications.

That statement was itself internal communication.

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#177

Post by blagie »

ajcp wrote: post #74
blagie wrote: post #9

I think what's missing here is elderly. Arguably, that's even more harmful.

How are the elderly, who have full rights as citizens/members of society, and are (as far as the law is concerned) free and accountable for their own actions, more harmed than minors, who are none of that?

> are (as far as the law is concerned) free and accountable for their own actions

I don't think you've ever had a relative with e.g. Alzheimer's or dementia.

There's a fine line where the above stops being the case. "Vulnerable to predatory behaviour" happens a long time before "can't find the bathroom without a nurse."

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#178

Post by scotty79 »

PeterHolzwarth wrote: post #173
scotty79 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? It works. Their economy is starting to lap the West one. Maybe cutting a little bit off the top works regardless of who exactly is being cut?

Just want to be clear here: you appear to be saying that you support a regime putting people in prison that a regime doesn't like, on made-up charges, with the excuse of "harmed society or the economy" - have I got that right?

Reality is the same behind the polite facades both in the East and the West. The problem with the West is that being rich mostly excludes you from being put in prison for being not liked by the powerful. Excuses are also irrelevant.

You can put people behind bars on made-up charges in USA as well, if they interfere with powerful enough interests. Just not the rich enough people. China doesn't make that exception. Is that worse or better?

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#179

Post by blagie »

SoftTalker wrote: post #115
blagie wrote: post #9

I think what's missing here is elderly. Arguably, that's even more harmful.

The elderly are grown adults who have a lifetime of experience and can be expected to see through the charade and spot what's really going on. Young people are more naive. I'm almost legally a senior citizen and I saw Facebook for what it was a long time ago, and most of the people I know who are my age don't use it, they don't even like social media in general. They use email or text messages, mostly. The people who…

> Yes, some elderly are disabled by mental decline or dementia, that's no different from a mental disability at any age.

If there were a clean way to define it, I'd probably be better to change:

- "elderly" to "individuals impacted by mental decline, dementia, or other disability;" and

- "children" to "people who haven't reached an adequate level of maturity to [long definition]."

The point is MOST elderly are impacted by mental decline or dementia by some age. That's often not the same as age-of-retirement. I know people where it happened at 60, and where it happened in their nineties.

Serious questions: You'll be a senior citizen soon enough, and maybe a decade later this will hit you too. What mechanisms would you like in place to be protected?

If and when it this hits you, there may be a long period where you'll be:

a) Functional (e.g. able to feed yourself, keep yourself clean, manage the house) and not needing care (e.g. nursing home);

b) Emotionally important to your relatives; and yet

c) Already vulnerable to predatory behaviour

What protective measures would you like to see in place during this period?

Footnote: In my current location, most people 80 and beyond are glued to some source of polarizing disinformation, be that Facebook or cable TV. Coincidentally, of the few I know better personally, some have empty bank accounts, since they can't manage their money properly any more. But they can cook, clean, shop, but not more complex things like that. It's not just outright scammers. It's predatory advertising, and all sorts of other predatory behaviour.

Re: Hook, hold, harvest and hide: Meta's alleged strategy laid out in first week

#180

Post by ajcp »

blagie wrote: post #177
ajcp wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are the elderly, who have full rights as citizens/members of society, and are (as far as the law is concerned) free and accountable for their own actions, more harmed than minors, who are none of that?

> are (as far as the law is concerned) free and accountable for their own actions I don't think you've ever had a relative with e.g. Alzheimer's or dementia. There's a fine line where the above stops being the case. "Vulnerable to predatory behaviour" happens a long time before "can't find the bathroom without a nurse."

I do...
Post reply on HN