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

Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 164 posts

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#41

Post by whatshisface »

FFRefresh wrote: post #39
whatshisface wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

Nice analysis. I'm certainly not suggesting that this is a coordinated campaign by FB without evidence to suggest it, but the net result of these viral news events could be FB getting the regulation that they want. If one did want to coordinate such a campaign, there's a certain society-wide informational/narrative vulnerability that makes such a campaign potentially attractive: -You have a public who loves latching…

There's no need for coordination when every participant independently desires a similar outcome.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#42

Post by whatshisface »

busterarm wrote: post #33
whatshisface wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Focusing too much on the personality of the whistleblower is in a sense getting sucked into the celebrity drama hole that will always take us away from consideration of the real issue. In fact, I think being taken away from consideration of the real issue is a major consequence of the way this is being approached: nobody can debate with the obvious truth that teenagers are getting a little too sucked in to the fake w…

Again, I agree with you on this point as well and it's got my spidey-senses tingling like crazy that the whole thing is a work. I've long been in the ban social media completely camp. It's a tool too dangerous for use by regular people.

Well, let's not fall prey to thinking that we, in doing what we are doing right now (talking on the internet), are too much smarter or less corruptible than most of our fellow man, including those of our fellows who spend too much time doom scrolling.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#43

Post by busterarm »

dntrkv wrote: post #21
leahbarton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your source on her wealth? I'm only finding second hand sources stating up to 5 million...

There is no source because nobody under the C-level is worth anywhere close to that much.

She's one of the cofounders of Hinge, which was acquired by Match Group.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#44

Post by josephg »

adolph wrote: post #36
whatshisface wrote: post #10

Has anyone got the documents themselves, or only reporter's descriptions of the documents?

Yes. At this point in the world we need not take anyone's word for what a corpus says or does not say. Either the data, query, and processing exist and are documented or they may as well be making things up. Public forkable repo or gtfo.

Facebook would fight tooth and nail to get those documents removed if they show up on GitHub. They’d win, too - since they own copyright.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#45

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

whatshisface wrote: post #15
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

> because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them

Is this always true? I always thought that these companies do want to fix themselves but fixing yourself when your competition won't means that you lose. Regulation helps force everyone to fix themselves.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#46

Post by kwertyoowiyop »

whatshisface wrote: post #15
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

It’s laughable for Facebook to point at Congress now and say it’s their fault for not acting, when they know darn well that if there’s one thing Congress is incapable of doing, it’s “acting.”

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#48

Post by ceejayoz »

josephg wrote: post #44
adolph wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. At this point in the world we need not take anyone's word for what a corpus says or does not say. Either the data, query, and processing exist and are documented or they may as well be making things up. Public forkable repo or gtfo.

Facebook would fight tooth and nail to get those documents removed if they show up on GitHub. They’d win, too - since they own copyright.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107

> Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

(Emphasis mine.)

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#49

Post by keewee7 »

leahbarton wrote: post #14
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

What's your source on her wealth? I'm only finding second hand sources stating up to 5 million...

She founded Hinge that was bought by Match Group for $2 billion.

Update: There is no verifiable information about her stake in the company.

Post reply on HN