Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#211

Post by dx034 » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:02 PM UTC

sveme wrote: post #160

pavlov wrote: post #44

Facebook is a weird mass-market product because the average American tech industry pundit has very little visibility into how it’s actually used around the world. Take Facebook Watch. Ask a journalist or HN commenter, and they’ll tell you that it’s a content wasteland, a flop, a waste of investment. Here’s what Zuckerberg said about Watch on the earnings call: "There are now 400 million people who use it every month,…

Have the 2.3 billion MAU been independently verified and checked for duplicates/triplicates etc? Considering the number of people in the world, the number of people older than 13 and younger than 75, the number of active internet users and the penetration in richer countries, I seriously doubt these numbers. Turns out, others are doubting it as well: https://mashable.com/article/report-claims-half-facebook-mau... So…

How would you verify and check 2.3bn entries for duplicates? I don't think there's a reliable way to get to the real number of users. Names can be similar, IP addresses used by many accounts, etc. Not sure how you'd identify duplicates without a lot of false positives.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#212

Post by cityzen » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

The only thing that bothers me about Facebook anymore is the realization that I live on a planet with, literally, billions of people that do not care about their privacy.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#213

Post by tanilama » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:42 PM UTC

I am happy that Facebook endure this organized media smearing attacks. It is very obvious to me someone wants to shape a narrative against Facebook, and it is distasteful to dress such intention under an altruistic disguise, like destroying Facebook could save the mankind. Utter nonsense.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#214

Post by chillee » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

trophycase wrote: post #108

m0zg wrote: post #60

I hope this will pierce the HN anti-FB bubble somewhat. It's dangerous to believe one's own BS. FB is here to stay, although I do believe it will wither in the long term (5+ years).

It's really not a HN bubble. Facebook the site/app has peaked for the most part, both people I know who are currently in high school do not use it and have never made a "Facebook" page. Now Instagram is a completely different story of course.

The way it works is that although high schoolers using FB has leveled off, they tend to start making FB accounts after high school, when many of their friends are no longer reachable by simply meeting up with them in class.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#215

Post by icebraining » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 7:35 PM UTC

rock_hard wrote: post #66

giancarlostoro wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not that they dont care about privacy a number of people do as others have said their bedroom windows likely have curtains. They likely close their bathroom / bedroom doors for privacy. The issue is they either dont truly understand the technical implications or they have already been so invested into Facebook personally and with no alternative to migrate to in sight (they bought Intagram which could of been one)…

Starting from a point of view that people are dumb never lead to great results! But it’s of course a easy way to defend ones point of view :)

[flagged]

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#216

Post by randomsearch » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 8:23 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #105

randomsearch wrote: post #55

Or... Zuckerberg is lying. You certainly can’t treat anything he says as ground truth - you need independent figures.

Please don't take HN threads on flamewar tangents. There's plenty of opportunity to make substantive critiques on HN. This is not that.

Ack sorry, my bad. It wasn't meant to be, but I see I have misintentionally done just that.

What I meant to communnicate was "we shouldn't take these stats at face value and therefore assume the scandals have had no impact" but I made the mistake of phrasing it as if it were an assertion (not an interpretation I'm used to), being too pithy, and also using Zuckerberg's name rather than "social media"/"facebook".

I didn't mean it to be a tangent, just a genuine point that such statistics should be treated with healthy scepticism and therefore caution against concluding too much from them. Hopefully the last bit in the post at least indicates I was sincere. But totally my bad. Need to take more care.

I'm certainly often a contrarian, but never intentionally a troll.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#217

Post by randomsearch » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 8:26 PM UTC

mastazi wrote: post #115

yesenadam wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but saying (or sarcastically hinting) that you believe B (that you 'consider B to be true') is still a different thing from saying ('claiming') that actually B.

Oh OK I see what you mean, yes I agree with you then.

Thanks Mastazi, for pointing that out. I did make the mistake of intending what I wrote to be literal rather than implying something. My bad. But I see what you mean.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#218

Post by randomsearch » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 8:27 PM UTC

johnfn wrote: post #85

randomsearch wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t claim he was lying. I said it was an alternative conclusion. Perhaps to be more generous I should say “exaggerating” or “being selective.” Clearly his interests are aligned with higher stats. Therefore, it makes sense to corroborate those stats with independent data.

Your first sentence was “Or... Zuckerberg is lying.” That is a claim.

Wasn't intended as one, but I see from discussion above that's a common way to imply that the alternative is true. My mistake.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#219

Post by tj-teej » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 8:56 PM UTC

adpirz wrote: post #12

It’s hard not to look at this performance and take away from it that most people really don’t care about privacy. As upsetting as the thought may be to some, Mark’s hypothesis that privacy is no longer a social norm we value seems to be proven more and more right. Despite all the scandals and hearings, their DAU are more than the population of the largest countries on Earth. Short of serious legislation, what slows t…

I don't think the conclusion that "most people really don't care about privacy" is proved by people still using Facebook.

Just because my friend buys a pack of cigarettes a day doesn't mean he doesn't care about cancer.

My view: Loss of privacy is a negative externality of using Facebook. And we know companies can use shiny stuff (compelling-engaging products, PR, advertising, etc.) to overcome these kinds of negative externalities and keep customers coming back.

I do think that your point about serious legislation is correct. Cigarette smoking in countries with serious legislation IS down, the question is if the political will is there and if Facebook's power can or can't outweigh that political will.

Re: Facebook shares shoot up after strong Q4 earnings despite data breach

#220

Post by dang » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 9:25 PM UTC

randomsearch wrote: post #216

dang wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads on flamewar tangents. There's plenty of opportunity to make substantive critiques on HN. This is not that.

Ack sorry, my bad. It wasn't meant to be, but I see I have misintentionally done just that. What I meant to communnicate was "we shouldn't take these stats at face value and therefore assume the scandals have had no impact" but I made the mistake of phrasing it as if it were an assertion (not an interpretation I'm used to), being too pithy, and also using Zuckerberg's name rather than "social media"/"facebook". I did…

Thanks. Moderating HN has taught me that most of what looks like trolling is unintentional.

Most of us consider our comments to be individual statements; we don't think of them as roots of the next possible subthread. But that's actually what matters for discussion quality.