Live data from Hacker News

Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

thehill.com

111–120 of 135 posts

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism wasn't an authoritarian movement back then, it was anti authoritarian. What is being opposed is authoritarianism. China isn't really communist, and neither was the ussr. It's just a regressive authoritarian regime with different propaganda. Authoritarianism is fundamentally right wing. Freedom for the right wing is fundamentally doublespeak for freedom for the oligarchs to gain power and oppress. Secondaril…

> …Communism wasn't an authoritarian movement back then… When and where was that?

Answer: Never

Marx aimed to theorize on a worker based authority. Anti dictator or anti oligarchy, sure.

Unfortunatley he outlined inadequate protections against an oligarchy, because he believed a society could self regulate equality (between workers).

Google: Marx on Authority

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism wasn't an authoritarian movement back then, it was anti authoritarian. What is being opposed is authoritarianism. China isn't really communist, and neither was the ussr. It's just a regressive authoritarian regime with different propaganda. Authoritarianism is fundamentally right wing. Freedom for the right wing is fundamentally doublespeak for freedom for the oligarchs to gain power and oppress. Secondaril…

> …Communism wasn't an authoritarian movement back then… When and where was that?

Communist philosophy is somewhat anti-authoritarian. It's literally about putting the everyday people in power. It's often anti-democratic though. You have to turn to Nordic socialism if you want to bring democracy in, which was developed basically as a direct result of Stalin insisting that Soviet communism was the only communism, and you could either join their (violent, awful) communism or die.

Except, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, all wrote about how important it was to be self critical, how important it was to stay grounded in reality, to make reality drive your decision making and goals.

And then they all purposely and aggressively built themselves cults of personality with the express purpose of being just garden variety dictators. They surrounded themselves with boring "Yes men" by murdering anyone who pointed out the clear contradiction between their writing/philosophy/"theory" and reality.

There's a grand canyon between what they all wrote about, and what they clearly did. The closest they ever came was Mao being like "Whoops, a lot of people died, maybe it's partially my fault" but that sure didn't dissuade him, or make him change direction.

Meanwhile their hundreds of millions of insane, murderous followers had no qualms about such a contradiction, such a destruction of reality, because they had been so poorly treated for so long in the old system that all they really cared about was tearing it down (gee, sound familiar?).

A Cult of personality is toxic to functionality. It's toxic to any progress. It's toxic to productivity and success. It's toxic to competence. It's toxic to reality.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#113
post #7

>In remarks to a hearing convened by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Wynn-Williams alleged that Meta executives worked vigorously to “win favor” with leaders in Beijing to build an $18 billion business in China. Has Hawley demonstrated similar interest about Elon's business dealings in China? Elon owes much of his net worth to the CCP's Shanghai factory.

Hawley was one of the first congresscritters to plan to overturn the 2020 election.

Nothing he does or says is legitimate. It's all about power.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#114
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing devil's advocate: If the allegations about Meta violating laws in the book are true, what would be an appropriate waiting period before the author testifies to the Senate, so that it doesn't appear to be a PR tour?

She could have raised her concerns in 2017 or earlier, rather than 2025, when her knowledge is eight years out of date.

God forbid we hold a corporation to account for what they did several years ago.

Nope, if you can't convince CNN to carry your story the moment it happens, it's clearly not worth doing any law stuff about.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#115
post #7

>In remarks to a hearing convened by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Wynn-Williams alleged that Meta executives worked vigorously to “win favor” with leaders in Beijing to build an $18 billion business in China. Has Hawley demonstrated similar interest about Elon's business dealings in China? Elon owes much of his net worth to the CCP's Shanghai factory.

What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nearly every CEO at a company making physical products from 1990 onward owes much of their net worth to Chinese factories.

He's not just a CEO. He's someone who nearly managed to invite himself to a top-secret briefing about military strategy against China.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#117
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She could have raised her concerns in 2017 or earlier, rather than 2025, when her knowledge is eight years out of date.

Not sure why you are writing this bad faith argument. Not a single legal system on the planet is that fast. All class action law suits take years of preparation time in their discovery phase.

What about this do you think is constrained to the legal system? Her book and the senate hearing are not moving through or constrained by the ordinary courts. (And while they're slow, they do generally move faster than eight years.)

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#118
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She could have raised her concerns in 2017 or earlier, rather than 2025, when her knowledge is eight years out of date.

God forbid we hold a corporation to account for what they did several years ago. Nope, if you can't convince CNN to carry your story the moment it happens, it's clearly not worth doing any law stuff about.

If it wasn't an interesting story in 2017, I don't think it's an interesting story now. You can disagree; that's fine.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#119
post #46

FWIW, she was fired in 2017 and only now is trying to become a "whistleblower." If the conduct needed whistle-blowing, surely it would have been more timely to come out almost a decade ago.

> she was fired in 2017 and only now is trying to become a "whistleblower" It's a lot easier to be a whistleblower once you're materially comfortable. More than the threat of legal action is the insidiousness of being blacklisted for employment. I wouldn't take the delay from the actions as evidence of her having ulterior motives. Just that we need contemporaneous notes and/or evidence to ensure she isn't misremember…

Fair enough.

Re: Whistleblower tells senators that Meta undermined U.S. security, interests

#120
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is even harder to take the accusations seriously, given that she made factually provably wrong statements that contradict the reality (and the original article in the OP actually contrasted those very plainly and directly, gotta commend good journalism there). > Wynn-Willias told senators that Meta built a “physical pipeline connecting the United States and China” and executives “ignored warnings that this would p…

This is mentioned in her book. In the book she says Meta wanted to build the pipeline, despite the warnings. But yes, ultimately the construction fell through. She is not claiming the pipeline exists today.

>ultimately the construction fell through

It was part of the ongoing subsea cable wars, US wanted to squeeze PRC from subsea infra game a few years ago and sanctioned a bunch of PRC companies which disrupted projects.

Post reply on HN