7 ms·

The hearing was a big joke. Zuckerberg simply avoided answering difficult questions by talking about something else entirely...

serg_chernata 8y ago
There's a glimmer of hope in my heart, but I stopped caring about these hearings because nothing seems to ever come from them.
GreeniFi 8y ago
What did I deduce from today’s hearing: 1. The weird question/answer format was probably a negotiated condition of Zuckerberg appearing. 2. This underlines the power of Zuckerberg: setting conditions for the EU Parliament is quite a show of force. 3. This condition was probably set because Zuckerberg is a very poor spokesperson. The end of the session was quite frankly bizarre when Zuckerberg refused to take questions. 4. There is quite clearly a mood for heavy regulation and anti-trust action to break-up the monopoly. Zuckerberg’s odd behavior will result in the sharpening of EU swords, not their scabbarding. 5. I have no idea what this type of activity will mean for EU/US relations. The US will be keen to protect homegrown global monopolies. The EU must break them before they break Europe. 5.
- joejerryronnie 8y ago
  The EU, by trying to impose their will on the rest of the world, will see their power slip through their hands. The EU as a political structure is tenuous at best, with too much control being wielded by a few members. All it will take to break up the EU is a better deal extended to a few weaker members. Trump may decide to do this just to watch Europe burn.
- zerostar07 8y ago
  How can the EU break up foreign monopolies?
  - GreeniFi 8y ago
    That’s a really good question. I guess one of the options would be to require social media companies to obtain a licence, subject to their non-monopolistic activities. My guess is that there will be a FB sell-off today. Other countries will see the opportunity to raise a high tax rate on a natural monopoly, and FB returns will be tax-adjusted.
  - ianai 8y ago
    There are no sovereign companies. For instance, the NY financial regulations matter so much across the world because a large portion of the financial world’s business is headquartered there. But more so, governments set legal standards. If those standards are not met then products/services are outlawed. I’m pretty sure the EU could simply ban browsing to IPs associated with FB, as an example. I think the largest companies of the world want to believe they operate in some atmosphere above any individual government. But that’s not the case. They operate under the jurisdiction of at least all of the worlds largest governments, contemporaneously.
    - zerostar07 8y ago
      yeah but that's not a break-up
      - ianai 8y ago
        So they declare ownership over all FB assets in their nation and the data of their citizens. Really though, I think maybe the act of combining data to form contiguous blocks of PII tied to online personas may need to be made illegal outside of some official, state database. Ie the government gives you a citizen entry and only they may produce such information. So you simply may not have access to certain PII.
        zerostar07 8y ago
        > Ie the government gives you a citizen entry and only they may produce such information thats a tad dystopian don't you think?
- bogomipz 8y ago
  >"The US will be keen to protect homegrown global monopolies." I don't believe the US will be "keen" to protect FB if that's in fact what you are stating here. There is just as much concern about FB in the US as there is in the EU, even if the political will to act might be blunted in the US by lobbyists and money. I would argue that FB isn't a "US monopoly" per se but a global monopoly.
  - cpeterso 8y ago
    I doubt many US politicians or citizens are concerned enough about Facebook to take any meaningful action. A bill like the EU's GDPR would not even get a vote in the US congress.
    - bogomipz 8y ago
      >"I doubt many US politicians or citizens are concerned enough about Facebook to take any meaningful action." You might want to re-read my comment where I say there is no political will on account of lobbying and money. US Citizens are just as concerned as EU citizens about FB. Especially given FB's role in the last US Presidential elections. What is your justification for asserting that US citizens are not as concerned as EU citizens?
      - zerostar07 8y ago
        > What is your justification for asserting that US citizens are not as concerned as EU citizens? If a significant amount of them cared it would be reflected in the user numbers.
        bogomipz 8y ago
        And if you had actually looked at those user numbers you would have seen that Europe has far more FB users than the US. Europe has 370 million FB users compared to 239 million in the US: https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/31/facebook-q4-2017-earnings/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/31/facebook-q4-2017-earnings/
cJ0th 8y ago
It was frustrating to not get any answers. But actually that tells us everything we need to know.
- bogomipz 8y ago
  I think you make a good point. I think many people came to the same conclusion after he testified before the Senate in the US. I think it's it quite damaging to dissemble the way he does by moving his mouth without ever answering the question that was asked. And to do this for hour after hour an even in response to simple "yes" or "no" questions is nothing short of a farce. I have to wonder what his employees back in Menlo Park think when they watch their CEO shoveling such obvious bullshit.
  - rjsw 8y ago
    People do keep wondering whether he will run for an elected office, he is just getting in some practice first.
    - cJ0th 8y ago
      He would have to make a quantum leap in his development. If he keeps running scripts to address real people he'll fare at best as good as Hillary Clinton.
zerostar07 8y ago
Yeah he made no effort to appease the audience or answer any pointed question. He rushed to leave, while during his US hearings he offered to stay longer a number of times. I think he was agitated by the questions in the end, even though he knows he ll probably face more regulation in europe. It might be the case that he has already discounted that possibility and simply doesn't care if EU wants to ban facebook anymore.

serg_chernata 8y ago

There's a glimmer of hope in my heart, but I stopped caring about these hearings because nothing seems to ever come from them.

GreeniFi 8y ago

What did I deduce from today’s hearing: 1. The weird question/answer format was probably a negotiated condition of Zuckerberg appearing. 2. This underlines the power of Zuckerberg: setting conditions for the EU Parliament is quite a show of force. 3. This condition was probably set because Zuckerberg is a very poor spokesperson. The end of the session was quite frankly bizarre when Zuckerberg refused to take questions. 4. There is quite clearly a mood for heavy regulation and anti-trust action to break-up the monopoly. Zuckerberg’s odd behavior will result in the sharpening of EU swords, not their scabbarding. 5. I have no idea what this type of activity will mean for EU/US relations. The US will be keen to protect homegrown global monopolies. The EU must break them before they break Europe. 5.

joejerryronnie 8y ago
The EU, by trying to impose their will on the rest of the world, will see their power slip through their hands. The EU as a political structure is tenuous at best, with too much control being wielded by a few members. All it will take to break up the EU is a better deal extended to a few weaker members. Trump may decide to do this just to watch Europe burn.
zerostar07 8y ago
How can the EU break up foreign monopolies?
- GreeniFi 8y ago
  That’s a really good question. I guess one of the options would be to require social media companies to obtain a licence, subject to their non-monopolistic activities. My guess is that there will be a FB sell-off today. Other countries will see the opportunity to raise a high tax rate on a natural monopoly, and FB returns will be tax-adjusted.
- ianai 8y ago
  There are no sovereign companies. For instance, the NY financial regulations matter so much across the world because a large portion of the financial world’s business is headquartered there. But more so, governments set legal standards. If those standards are not met then products/services are outlawed. I’m pretty sure the EU could simply ban browsing to IPs associated with FB, as an example. I think the largest companies of the world want to believe they operate in some atmosphere above any individual government. But that’s not the case. They operate under the jurisdiction of at least all of the worlds largest governments, contemporaneously.
  - zerostar07 8y ago
    yeah but that's not a break-up
    - ianai 8y ago
      So they declare ownership over all FB assets in their nation and the data of their citizens. Really though, I think maybe the act of combining data to form contiguous blocks of PII tied to online personas may need to be made illegal outside of some official, state database. Ie the government gives you a citizen entry and only they may produce such information. So you simply may not have access to certain PII.
      - zerostar07 8y ago
        > Ie the government gives you a citizen entry and only they may produce such information thats a tad dystopian don't you think?
bogomipz 8y ago
>"The US will be keen to protect homegrown global monopolies." I don't believe the US will be "keen" to protect FB if that's in fact what you are stating here. There is just as much concern about FB in the US as there is in the EU, even if the political will to act might be blunted in the US by lobbyists and money. I would argue that FB isn't a "US monopoly" per se but a global monopoly.
- cpeterso 8y ago
  I doubt many US politicians or citizens are concerned enough about Facebook to take any meaningful action. A bill like the EU's GDPR would not even get a vote in the US congress.
  - bogomipz 8y ago
    >"I doubt many US politicians or citizens are concerned enough about Facebook to take any meaningful action." You might want to re-read my comment where I say there is no political will on account of lobbying and money. US Citizens are just as concerned as EU citizens about FB. Especially given FB's role in the last US Presidential elections. What is your justification for asserting that US citizens are not as concerned as EU citizens?
    - zerostar07 8y ago
      > What is your justification for asserting that US citizens are not as concerned as EU citizens? If a significant amount of them cared it would be reflected in the user numbers.
      - bogomipz 8y ago
        And if you had actually looked at those user numbers you would have seen that Europe has far more FB users than the US. Europe has 370 million FB users compared to 239 million in the US: https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/31/facebook-q4-2017-earnings/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/31/facebook-q4-2017-earnings/

cJ0th 8y ago

It was frustrating to not get any answers. But actually that tells us everything we need to know.

bogomipz 8y ago
I think you make a good point. I think many people came to the same conclusion after he testified before the Senate in the US. I think it's it quite damaging to dissemble the way he does by moving his mouth without ever answering the question that was asked. And to do this for hour after hour an even in response to simple "yes" or "no" questions is nothing short of a farce. I have to wonder what his employees back in Menlo Park think when they watch their CEO shoveling such obvious bullshit.
- rjsw 8y ago
  People do keep wondering whether he will run for an elected office, he is just getting in some practice first.
  - cJ0th 8y ago
    He would have to make a quantum leap in his development. If he keeps running scripts to address real people he'll fare at best as good as Hillary Clinton.

zerostar07 8y ago

Yeah he made no effort to appease the audience or answer any pointed question. He rushed to leave, while during his US hearings he offered to stay longer a number of times. I think he was agitated by the questions in the end, even though he knows he ll probably face more regulation in europe. It might be the case that he has already discounted that possibility and simply doesn't care if EU wants to ban facebook anymore.