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

Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

arstechnica.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 76 posts

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#51

Post by oever »

mkaziz wrote: post #17

I wish the US had laws like the EU that protected the consumer.

It only works when the laws are upheld. Facebook is a non-EU company, so their actions are purely a problem for the people locked to Facebook, not for the European economy.

The emissions excesses of diesel cars first discovered on Volkswagen were fined in the USA. Volkswagen is a non-USA company. The EU is still not taking action on the emissions because it is feared that that would impact the bottom line of the European car industry which is apparently more important than the health of the constituency.

http://gerbrandy.eu/dieselgate-report-co-rapporteur-gerbrand...

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#52

Post by bovermyer »

kahnpro wrote: post #49
droopyEyelids wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just educated in history. Really, what is the longest period of time a country has existed without a repressive regime coming to power and abusing the institutions and populace?

And without a massive war? The USA has had 151 years of uninterrupted peace. Just as an example---because the old rivalry was USA vs USSR---Russia has endured two devastating and traumatic world wars, a revolution, a civil war, and Stalin. And they still rivaled US power throughout the cold war. I think Americans really overstate the effectiveness of their economic and political system, and understate the huge advant…

151 years of uninterrupted peace? I think you're forgetting about some conflicts.

Now, if you're talking just about wars that don't involve enemy attacks on American facilities, then technically World War II still counts. So no, not 151 years.

With that said, I do agree with your final sentence.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#53

Post by evv »

ffggvv wrote: post #38
tedmiston wrote: post #12

I don't see why this is different than any other acquisition involving combining two userbases. Unless it's about the scale.

Because they lied, they said they would never associate the whatsapp data with the facebook one (and funnily enough HN believed them).

Do you have a link to the HN thread you're referring to?

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#54

Post by majewsky »

holydude wrote: post #4
FussyZeus wrote: post #2

Is anything Facebook currently doing not shady? I'm not even trying to be snarky, it just seems like every single thing Facebook is doing lately is tainted with misinformation, corruption and spin. Just endless spin and lies.

Is anything currently doing not shady ? That's becoming a really big problem.

Well, is paying my salary in a particularly non-shady way.

There is more to any group of people than what hits the news. (This insight is not limited to businesses.)

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#55

Post by amelius »

alaaf wrote: post #5

> the free content ad network failed to disclose Interesting they don’t call it a ‘social network’. ‘content ad network’ is more accurate in my opinion.

No it is a telecommunications network.

As per the law, ads and content-snooping don't belong on it.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#56

Post by holydude »

majewsky wrote: post #54
holydude wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anything currently doing not shady ? That's becoming a really big problem.

Well, is paying my salary in a particularly non-shady way. There is more to any group of people than what hits the news. (This insight is not limited to businesses.)

Really ? Can you tell me the name of the mega corp you work for. All of them have some shady activities that never reach the media.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#57

Post by Jordrok »

What's interesting to me is that a lot of times these things are somewhat open for interpretation depending on your definition of a monopoly, where the line is drawn between good business decisions and anti-competitive behavior, etc. In this case though it seems pretty clear cut. Facebook said they couldn't link WhatsApp and FB user ids, but then two years later they did exactly that.

Does Facebook really have any plausible response other than "oops"?

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#59

Post by Matthias247 »

parthdesai wrote: post #33
evgen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook uids based on email address, WhatsApp on phone number. Please show me the SQL one-liner to join those tables...

Select * from fb_users join wp_users on wp_users.id = fb_users.phone_number A really basic query that will give you all the fb users who have listed their phone number. Also i just realized while typing this, i think fb started allowing logging in using your phone number around the time they bought whatsapp. So even the profiles that didn't give their phone number to fb, they could get it via this logging system. ( I…

I think more than half of the FB users also use the app or facebook messenger, which gives them access to their phone number through app permissons alone. Additionally they have access to the contact lists of both apps and can correlate names and phone numbers from there. Even if someone doesn't use the FB app and hasn't listed his phone number in FB - if any friend has him as contact in FB and Whatsapp it's quite trivial to match the IDs.

Re: Facebook charged with misleading EU on $22B WhatsApp merger

#60

Post by Fnoord »

alivelore wrote: post #18
mkaziz wrote: post #17

I wish the US had laws like the EU that protected the consumer.

If the US had the same taxation and regulatory environment as Europe you wouldn't have Facebook in the first place lol

How much tax did Apple pay to the US government based on their income, compared to the EU?

Apple managed to pay virtually nothing in EU, thanks to a deal with Ireland. Which, incidentally, also got axed by the very same Margrethe Vestager.

Post reply on HN