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

Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 177 posts

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#81

Post by r00fus »

paggle wrote: post #70
duxup wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> could they really not anticipate future antitrust action? I we go by the pattern of behavior at Facebook, it really doesn't seem like the decision makers consider much in the way of anti-trust or much of anything. The pattern is well established and their version of move fast and break things is almost entirely off the rails.

And if we look at the pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice, the pattern of behavior at Facebook seems (at least at this moment) to be perfectly rational.

Yes, rational + unethical = current status quo.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#82

Post by joe_the_user »

smacktoward wrote: post #73
toxik wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

It may be competition, but it certainly isn't fair competition. As you note, Facebook has much deeper pockets than even a well-funded startup. They can afford to build a clone of your product and give it away for free, without any expectation of even future revenue, specifically to drive you out of business. And they can bundle their clone with their already-popular apps, so people never even feel the need to check o…

Efficient markets have never been about absolute fairness. There's no industry that has been built without the attempted participation of deep pocketed enterprises from earlier, related industries - adding machine companies (like IBM) naturally wanted to jump into computers.

The system we live under is capitalism. It's aims are to provide profits to those who invest their existing wealth in innovations. If those with wealth can't use it to gain more wealth, they have no incentive to use it.

The government steps in when a given enterprise meets the definition of monopoly - IE, actually prevent new entries into a field (Microsoft met this definition). Google and Facebook are unpopular but I'd say it's pretty clear they don't meet the definition of monopolies preventing entry into their industry (at least on the net, Android is another matter).

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#83

Post by bksenior »

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

Its much simpler than that. Decision making at a big company is layered. Anti-trust considerations is about as C-suite a concern as I can possibly think about. Operational leadership even VP is singing for their supper on a project by project basis (to gain status and move up the company ladder). So you get these things.

It's almost certainly a reflection of a culture who's motto was/maybe still is "move fast and break stuff." I think the idea of existential consequences for actions is relatively new one for FB (and to a lesser extent Google) and your seeing a company not move fast enough and a CEO who is probably a little bit underarmed when it comes to really understanding the stakes of certain types of public perception.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#84

Post by superfrank »

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

IMO, it's because Evan Spiegel and Snap by extension is just as cutthroat and unlikable as Mark Zuckerburg and based on what I've read about it I feel like he would be doing the exact same things as FB is if the roles we reversed.

This doesn't feel like some altruistic, whistle-blowing gesture for the good of the consumer. This feels like Snap being pissy that there is a bigger bully on the playground.

I'm not saying what Facebook is doing is okay, because it's not, but Snap has a vested interest in FBs demise and Spiegel and Zuckerburg have their own pissing match. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for either company in this issue.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#85

Post by blotter_paper »

duxup wrote: post #72
paggle wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if we look at the pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice, the pattern of behavior at Facebook seems (at least at this moment) to be perfectly rational.

I don't understand what you mean by that.

I took GP to mean that the DoJ hasn't been enforcing antitrust laws the way they used to, so the rational action for selfish companies to take is to break those unenforced laws.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#86

Post by vonmoltke »

sp332 wrote: post #68
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have that study - sounds an interesting read.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10125704

I think lifeisstillgood was asking for the eHarmony study.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#87

Post by misiti3780 »

toxik wrote: post #50
throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

I dont use foursquare but I dont think they won there. There data is being used all over the place -no?

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#88

Post by Porthos9K »

MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

Assuming FB gave any thought to antitrust action -- which is unlikely the prevailing doctrine that businesses can do as they like as long as they don't charge customers too much -- I think they ran some risk analysis and reached the conclusion that in a worst-case scenario they might take a hit to revenue and have to throw a VP or two under the bus, but would otherwise be able to continue with business as usual.

The DOJ antitrust people and the FTC got a lot of their teeth knocked out when they went after Microsoft in the 1990s. However, you think conservatives would be more open to the possibility of using antitrust as a cudgel against social media companies that seem intolerant toward right-wing viewpoints. (Never mind that the end of the FCC's Fairness Doctrine helped enable the rise of right-wing media in the first place.)

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#89

Post by empath75 »

toxik wrote: post #50
throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

> Isn’t it fair market competition?

Exploiting a monopoly in one segment in order to capture another is text book unfair competition.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#90

Post by srbby »

werber wrote: post #63
srbby wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the same problem in a Nexus 4. And Google said they couldn't fix it because it was a bug in a Qualcomm driver and they had no access to the source code. I think the redesign fixed that because Snapchat no longer takes pictures with the camera. Instead, they take screenshots of the camera preview.

Is that true across the board or just on Android?

If such a problem arose on iOS, Apple would patch it. Android manufacturers don't usually have that option, as they sometimes don't even have the code to the drivers.
Post reply on HN