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

Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#71

Post by reaperducer »

bredren wrote: post #23

It’s interesting to see this accusation about Zuck trying to cover up his “failing” to recognize the transition to smartphones. I was working at perhaps the biggest iOS shop in the country at this time in Seattle. And I was regularly invited and attended the developer poker / presentation night events at FB’s Seattle office. At the time facebook had an open position for a mobile czar that continued to go unfilled for…

IIRC, the whole transition of Facebook from web app to iOS app was a complete fiasco, from a user perspective.

It was at least a year, perhaps more before the app was usable. It would take minutes for a single page to load in the app. People hated it with the intensity of a thousand suns.

I think you dodged a bullet not getting on board that train wreck.

My guess is that Facebook only decided to go mobile-first when it realized that a phone is a much better personal data slurping device than a stationary desktop computer.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#72

Post by Eridrus »

dragonwriter wrote: post #45
Eridrus wrote: post #36

Am I the only one, or does it sound like someone tipped them off? How would one know that this guy had these documents, and be keeping a close enough eye on his travel?

> How would one know that this guy had these documents They'd know he had access to them from public information about his job and the relevant court proceeding. Given the threat to use similar process on Zuck should he travel to the UK, I would assume that the Parliamentary committee involved has a way to get that kind of travel info about people of interest from the government, who, after all, works for and is answ…

Oh, do you have a link to this threat to Zuck? Had not heard about that.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#73

Post by reaperducer »

meddlepal wrote: post #15
lixtra wrote: post #3

> ... process during its court case against the Zuckerborg , in which it is alleging Facebook defrauded ... Seriously? What happened to journalism?

> Zuckerborg It's the new M$ / Micro$oft. Childish and appealing to a small minority.

Childish

Maybe. It depends on your taste. If it's not your taste, don't read it.

and appealing to a small minority.

My guess is that The Register knows its audience better than you do. If that audience is a minority of the population, it's their decision to target it, not yours.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#74

Post by reaperducer »

londons_explore wrote: post #6

No government should have to resort to 'sneaky' measures like this. If you have a suspicion that a company is breaking the law, you ask a judge for permission to inspect them. If permission is granted, you show up at the main office and do your investigation. If a judge won't grant you permission do do that inspection, you drop the case entirely. None of this 'we used sneaky laws from centuries ago to take documents…

No government should have to resort to 'sneaky' measures like this.

That's tourist thinking.

If you want to play in their country, you abide by their rules.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#75

Post by reaperducer »

wtfstatists wrote: post #44
kitd wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK, Parliament is sovereign. FB had repeatedly refused to appear before a parliamentary committee to give evidence in the Cambridge Analytica case. Now, I'm not totally certain of the precise legal position, but because of its sovereignty, Parliament can act in a quasi-judicial way, so in effect, FB's actions can be seen as roughly equivalent to refusing a subpoena. FB's refusal authorised Parliament to seize…

You are basically normalizing violent response to a non-violent action. US can do that because FB is US company. UK cannot just because you happen to visit. Please realize that other states are taking notes at this situation. They are waiting for US/UK/etc exec to visit and make the same excuse.

US can do that because FB is US company. UK cannot just because you happen to visit.

Didn't the U.S. arrest a Volkswagen exec wanted in connection with the emissions scandal, when he visited?

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#76

Post by meddlepal »

reaperducer wrote: post #73
meddlepal wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Zuckerborg It's the new M$ / Micro$oft. Childish and appealing to a small minority.

Childish Maybe. It depends on your taste. If it's not your taste, don't read it. and appealing to a small minority. My guess is that The Register knows its audience better than you do. If that audience is a minority of the population, it's their decision to target it, not yours.

Not my decision, but totally within my rights to criticize.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#77

Post by bredren »

reaperducer wrote: post #71
bredren wrote: post #23

It’s interesting to see this accusation about Zuck trying to cover up his “failing” to recognize the transition to smartphones. I was working at perhaps the biggest iOS shop in the country at this time in Seattle. And I was regularly invited and attended the developer poker / presentation night events at FB’s Seattle office. At the time facebook had an open position for a mobile czar that continued to go unfilled for…

IIRC, the whole transition of Facebook from web app to iOS app was a complete fiasco, from a user perspective. It was at least a year, perhaps more before the app was usable. It would take minutes for a single page to load in the app. People hated it with the intensity of a thousand suns. I think you dodged a bullet not getting on board that train wreck. My guess is that Facebook only decided to go mobile-first when…

I also remember how bad the mobile app was, it was very poorly rated in the app store. It would lose auth even i think. The people at the firm I worked on couldn't believe how poorly it was built when big companies including Apple were making major progress on apps with very small teams.

>I think you dodged a bullet not getting on board that train wreck.

Maybe you're right. I did end up heading to the valley and applying to YC and eventually getting a couple companies funded, but hard to know. I am not fond of Facebook the product or its business these days but back then I thought it was cool and built apps on it very early.

> My guess is that Facebook only decided to go mobile-first when it realized that a phone is a much better personal data slurping device than a stationary desktop computer.

You may be right, but I think they also realized that mobile ads converted. I can't remember but someone could probably write a book about Facebook's move to Mobile on its own.

Speaking of mobile privacy, I also remember that we were all aware of how messed up permissions on iOS were--in that you could read full contact list data silently. Not long after we had Path-Gate: http://technologyfront.com/journalism/2012/02/17.html

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#78

Post by dlor »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #26
DannyBee wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK can still compel them, by compelling Facebook's relevant country director. The method used here (physically detaining a non Facebook actor who is not a UK citizen who had access to the docs under a protective order and threatening them until they caved) is so far beyond unacceptable it's hard to fathom. As I said in the other thread, the only reason this could ever be acceptable of because of hate of Facebook,…

Don't travel to the UK or offer your business to UK citizens if you don't like UK laws. It's not that hard.

I think you might be missing the point. DannyBee says that requesting documents from Facebook in the UK would have been a fine option.

But that's not what happened here! The documents were obtained from someone who was essentially a third party, that just happened to have access to them. Facebook was not willingly doing business with this person.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#79

Post by dragonwriter »

Eridrus wrote: post #72
dragonwriter wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would one know that this guy had these documents They'd know he had access to them from public information about his job and the relevant court proceeding. Given the threat to use similar process on Zuck should he travel to the UK, I would assume that the Parliamentary committee involved has a way to get that kind of travel info about people of interest from the government, who, after all, works for and is answ…

Oh, do you have a link to this threat to Zuck? Had not heard about that.

It's in the call-out box in the source article for this thread.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#80

Post by acct1771 »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #21
stewartm wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You either need to read a lot more of The Reg, or none at all. The Reg is written with a certain brand of humour that is appreciated by a fair chunk of its tech readership. If you want a humour free version of the article, checkout the link to The Guardian article cited. Brace yourself for lots of speling mistakes however.

I stopped regularly reading "El Reg" years ago for this very reason. Perhaps I just grew up. It's a real shame they put up this barrier to entry as they've been behind some truly excellent investigative journalism over the years.

NY Post, same issue, different fashion..

They actually just did a great piece on Congresspeople sleeping in their offices because they can't afford two houses.

Still get a "tabloids are bad" rap. A shame.

Post reply on HN