Facebook's seized files published by MPs • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#201

Post by mcguire » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:54 PM UTC

breischl wrote: post #29

paganel wrote: post #7

> Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat > there was evidence that Facebook's refusal to share data with some apps caused them to fail Stuff like this should trigger the EU Commissioner for Competition to withdraw the aut…

I have no particular love for FB or what they've done with data, but these I don't understand why either of those points is particularly controversial or even unusual. > Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat Checking out…

Unless they're a monopoly...

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#202

Post by iaml » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:55 PM UTC

josefx wrote: post #126

fantunes wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you work at Facebook? Shame on you. Does it apply to the people using its products, softwares, services? What's the ethical threshold for using reactjs for example in this scenario?

Didn't they try to push some rather questionable licensing terms on react or do I confuse it with a different open source library? If it was then its users almost became another victim of facebook trying out where it can get away with abusing its position.

They did have a license with a clause allowing them to sue or restrict access to it legally, but they changed it to a more permissive one. Also, even if they did try to do anything, no one was stopping you from replacing react with inferno or preact, they have compatible APIs.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#203

Post by 5trokerac3 » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:56 PM UTC

_salmon wrote: post #175

> "But the facts are clear: we've never sold people's data." What

It's 100% true. They never sold people's data. They sold access to people's data.

Slimy, corporate lawyerese 101.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#204

Post by tynpeddler » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:57 PM UTC

breischl wrote: post #29

paganel wrote: post #7

> Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat > there was evidence that Facebook's refusal to share data with some apps caused them to fail Stuff like this should trigger the EU Commissioner for Competition to withdraw the aut…

I have no particular love for FB or what they've done with data, but these I don't understand why either of those points is particularly controversial or even unusual. > Facebook used data provided by the Israeli analytics firm Onavo to determine which other mobile apps were being downloaded and used by the public. It then used this knowledge to decide which apps to acquire or otherwise treat as a threat Checking out…

I agree that the first point seems pretty routine, but the second one is a problem. Look at Microsoft in the late 90's. They changed their system API's and refused to publish the changes for the express purpose of killing netscape. That was later deemed to be illegal. Facebook using their market dominance to kill other apps seems to be very similar.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#205

Post by dreamdu5t » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:58 PM UTC

evilzuku wrote: post #33

tpush wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really interesting stuff in there. > Facebook email 24 January 2013 > Justin Osofsky – ‘Twitter launched Vine today which lets you shoot multiple short video segments to make one single, 6-second video. As part of their NUX, you can find friends via FB. Unless anyone raises objections, we will shut down their friends API access today. We’ve prepared reactive PR, and I will let Jana know our decision. > MZ – ‘Yup, go…

Nothing says evil more than preparing reactive PR to bury your competitors. And the nonchalant way his response sends chills down my spine. These people will suffocate innovation just to win.

Hyperbole. Facebook is a free website... A website.

Burying competitors is a good thing. That’s the whole point. That’s literally the objective of every business in the entire economy.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#206

Post by dreamdu5t » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

Just a reminder to all the children here: You don’t have to use Facebook. Really.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#207

Post by JeremyBanks » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 5:00 PM UTC

emiliobumachar wrote: post #197

fosco wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this seems like a hole in their design, additional access is being granted without the user really knowing what is going on and they are deliberately keeping the user out of the loop. at least, that is how I am interpreting it, it seems that the functionality of their software is not functioning in the 'spirit' of what it is suppose to be doing.

In essence, Android permissions system have (had?) a vulnerability that Facebook exploited, and Google is responsible to a small extent as the maintainer of the vulnerable software.

Google is very culpable because the various problems with Android's permission system were raised hundreds of times by security experts, both internal and external, and they didn't consider it a high priority to fix.

Even when they added a sane permission model in Android $VERSION, developers were allowed to bypass it for years by just building apps targeting Android $VERSION - 1 instead.

Google's web security may be the best in the world, but Android security is a disgrace and they should be called on it. (Fuschia may put them on top of the world if they ever switch Android to that, but we'll have to see whether that happens.)

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#208

Post by rdruxn » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 5:00 PM UTC

dreamdu5t wrote: post #199

It’s terrifying that people want to use the government to regulate a free website that nobody even has to use and which has not actually caused anyone harm. GDPR tyrants: get a life and stop using Facebook. Seriously.

Perhaps it has not directly caused harm, but Facebook has certainly facilitated it.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#209

Post by nindalf » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 5:01 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #159

nakedrobot2 wrote: post #3

Good for them, thank you! The sooner facebook is controlled and broken up into pieces, the better. They are a massive net negative on civilization. Do you work at Facebook? Shame on you.

Yes, I do work at Facebook. I'm not going to get into some protracted argument about whether that makes me a bad person, or already was, but I'd like to give you something to think about. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we can neatly divide tech workers into good and bad. Likewise for companies. All categories are non-empty, and certain to remain so. What's the optimal assignment of workers to companies? Is…

Considering how downvoted this comment was within 10 minutes of posting, I wonder if people actually read it or just did a knee jerk downvote based on the first sentence.

Re: Facebook's seized files published by MPs

#210

Post by natch » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 5:01 PM UTC

Just to underline the obvious point the lawmaker is making, perhaps if Zuckerberg would show up to hearings that lawmakers invite him to, then he would be able to provide the context that Facebook says is missing.