5 ms·

1/12th of a year's revenue is a bit of pain, but it won't cause any fundamental changes at Facebook I think. This just sends the message that you don't have to

by vzidex 7y ago

1/12th of a year's revenue is a bit of pain, but it won't cause any fundamental changes at Facebook I think. This just sends the message that you don't have to care about things like ethics or user data being private as long as you have a big enough war chest to pay off the government. Either the fine should've been bigger, or coupled with new regulation.

scarface74 7y ago
Nothing can change Facebook that Zuckerberg doesn’t want to change. He has a controlling interest.
- Balgair 7y ago
  Yup, FB is Zuck essentially. He owns ~53% of the voting stock shares.
- mulmen 7y ago
  That's not true. Regulation can change it.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Government regulation of tech written by people who don’t know anything about it. What could possibly go wrong?
    - mulmen 7y ago
      I'm not commenting on the merit of government regulation of tech companies. I'm simply pointing out that even Mark Zuckerberg does not have absolute power.
- adventured 7y ago
  Tell that to the talent that no longer wants to work for Facebook and the executives fleeing the company. It's an extremely fast way to change a company, no matter how much voting power Zuckerberg has. It'll kick Facebook into old age stagnation and rot mode faster than just about anything else. To say nothing of what happens when an organization no longer trusts and believes in its CEO. Which is to say, Zuckerberg's voting power doesn't make him or Facebook immune to suffering numerous consequences of poor leadership. That can rather dramatically change Facebook. Depending on the extent and duration of that poor decision making obviously.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Tell that to the talent that no longer wants to work for Facebook and the executives fleeing the company. And there are thousands of college graduates who will spend months learning LeetCode and be glad to take their places and get a total comp of $250K+ a year. You severely overestimate how few people care more about the “greater good” than collecting a nice check.
    - Balgair 7y ago
      Maaaaybe. I'd like to think that there is an evaporative effect occuring there. Assuming that more ethical people are better to work with and vice versa, then as more ethical people leave, the work enviroment gets worse and worse. Like, payroll issues take longer to deal with, your co-workers aren't as up for beers on Fridays, your boss isn't as on your side as you'd like. So, the elves leave middle earth. Eventually, the company can end up in a situation where payroll issues are impossible to deal with, where your co-workers are far too free to hit up a bar on a Tuesday night, where your boss could care less about you. So then even some of the skuzz-bucket people say they have had enough. So, yeah, FB is good right now and can use their funds to pay people to deal with those issues. But fines like the one they got today are going to hamper that process. As has been said for decades: Culture is everything.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        I’ve worked for 20+ years and I’ve learned that the boss “never cares about me”. Anyone who thinks that your company “cares about you” is in for a rude awaking.
        Balgair 7y ago
        I mean, there is a lot of space between the type of boss that could care less and the type of boss that actively tries to harm. Also, it really does depend on the firm. I've worked a lot of jobs that couldn't be arsed to know my name. I've worked a lot fewer jobs that really did care about me, but I have been there and seen them.
colechristensen 7y ago
Regulation like this works when there are increasing consequences. This fine is $5B, if they keep doing the same sort of thing, what is the next fine going to be?
- adventured 7y ago
  Even if they don't increase the fines, $5 billion fines on a routine basis start to severely piss off shareholders. No shareholder likes to watch a quarter of a company's profit regularly getting vaporized. That is especially true when your sales and earnings growth rates have plunged as in the case of Facebook (increasingly a mature business). Now why does any of that matter when Zuckerberg is nearly impossible to remove? Because it risks suppressing the share value, which will (further) harm Facebook's ability to attract the best talent. SV companies like Facebook universally believe they sink or swim by the talent they retain and can recruit. If Facebook becomes enough of a mess, everyone turns on Zuckerberg, and he's done. The trust entirely goes, the belief in his leadership goes, the board relationships sour, talent doesn't want to work for him, executives don't want to work for him. It means in real terms he can no longer actually lead the company (morally, functionally), regardless of his voting position.
- mrkurt 7y ago
  $5B is already the increased consequence, they've been violating a consent decree for 8 years. Presumably in another 8 years the FTC will fine them $10B ... I'm sure that'll fix it right up.
MarkMc 7y ago
It's not really the size of the fine compared to total annual revenue or size of the war chest that matters. The correct comparison is to the boost in revenue over multiple years: Did the shady privacy practices increase Facebook's revenue by at least $5 billion over the past several years? If yes, the fine should have been bigger.

by vzidex 7y ago

scarface74 7y ago

Nothing can change Facebook that Zuckerberg doesn’t want to change. He has a controlling interest.

Balgair 7y ago
Yup, FB is Zuck essentially. He owns ~53% of the voting stock shares.
mulmen 7y ago
That's not true. Regulation can change it.
- scarface74 7y ago
  Government regulation of tech written by people who don’t know anything about it. What could possibly go wrong?
  - mulmen 7y ago
    I'm not commenting on the merit of government regulation of tech companies. I'm simply pointing out that even Mark Zuckerberg does not have absolute power.
adventured 7y ago
Tell that to the talent that no longer wants to work for Facebook and the executives fleeing the company. It's an extremely fast way to change a company, no matter how much voting power Zuckerberg has. It'll kick Facebook into old age stagnation and rot mode faster than just about anything else. To say nothing of what happens when an organization no longer trusts and believes in its CEO. Which is to say, Zuckerberg's voting power doesn't make him or Facebook immune to suffering numerous consequences of poor leadership. That can rather dramatically change Facebook. Depending on the extent and duration of that poor decision making obviously.
- scarface74 7y ago
  Tell that to the talent that no longer wants to work for Facebook and the executives fleeing the company. And there are thousands of college graduates who will spend months learning LeetCode and be glad to take their places and get a total comp of $250K+ a year. You severely overestimate how few people care more about the “greater good” than collecting a nice check.
  - Balgair 7y ago
    Maaaaybe. I'd like to think that there is an evaporative effect occuring there. Assuming that more ethical people are better to work with and vice versa, then as more ethical people leave, the work enviroment gets worse and worse. Like, payroll issues take longer to deal with, your co-workers aren't as up for beers on Fridays, your boss isn't as on your side as you'd like. So, the elves leave middle earth. Eventually, the company can end up in a situation where payroll issues are impossible to deal with, where your co-workers are far too free to hit up a bar on a Tuesday night, where your boss could care less about you. So then even some of the skuzz-bucket people say they have had enough. So, yeah, FB is good right now and can use their funds to pay people to deal with those issues. But fines like the one they got today are going to hamper that process. As has been said for decades: Culture is everything.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      I’ve worked for 20+ years and I’ve learned that the boss “never cares about me”. Anyone who thinks that your company “cares about you” is in for a rude awaking.
      - Balgair 7y ago
        I mean, there is a lot of space between the type of boss that could care less and the type of boss that actively tries to harm. Also, it really does depend on the firm. I've worked a lot of jobs that couldn't be arsed to know my name. I've worked a lot fewer jobs that really did care about me, but I have been there and seen them.

colechristensen 7y ago

Regulation like this works when there are increasing consequences. This fine is $5B, if they keep doing the same sort of thing, what is the next fine going to be?

adventured 7y ago
Even if they don't increase the fines, $5 billion fines on a routine basis start to severely piss off shareholders. No shareholder likes to watch a quarter of a company's profit regularly getting vaporized. That is especially true when your sales and earnings growth rates have plunged as in the case of Facebook (increasingly a mature business). Now why does any of that matter when Zuckerberg is nearly impossible to remove? Because it risks suppressing the share value, which will (further) harm Facebook's ability to attract the best talent. SV companies like Facebook universally believe they sink or swim by the talent they retain and can recruit. If Facebook becomes enough of a mess, everyone turns on Zuckerberg, and he's done. The trust entirely goes, the belief in his leadership goes, the board relationships sour, talent doesn't want to work for him, executives don't want to work for him. It means in real terms he can no longer actually lead the company (morally, functionally), regardless of his voting position.
mrkurt 7y ago
$5B is already the increased consequence, they've been violating a consent decree for 8 years. Presumably in another 8 years the FTC will fine them $10B ... I'm sure that'll fix it right up.

MarkMc 7y ago

It's not really the size of the fine compared to total annual revenue or size of the war chest that matters. The correct comparison is to the boost in revenue over multiple years: Did the shady privacy practices increase Facebook's revenue by at least $5 billion over the past several years? If yes, the fine should have been bigger.