20 ms·
Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier
- dymk 7y agoSnap can blame Facebook all they want, but what they had was a feature, not a product, and then they alienated their users with the redesign. Nobody else is to blame for their own stagnation then failing to reimagine their product. I mean, Snap Spectacles, really?
- H8crilA 7y agoNot really relevant for the antitrust investigation.
- dymk 7y agoThe article is about Facebook copying features and draws a connection to Snaps subsequent downfall. I’m claiming the downfall was inevitable (no product, bad redesign, those useless spectacles), and once again Facebook is the scapegoat in all this.
- hellomyguys 7y agoYou do realize both of these things can be true? Snap playing a role in their issues and Facebook also participating in behaviors that are relevant to an anti-trust investigation?
- sweezyjeezy 7y agoI think you should reread the article, it has very little to do with copying features. If Snap are correct then Facebook - actively discouraged IG users from discussing Snap - prevented Snap from trending on FB - used data from an acquisition Onavo to track what users did on other apps (such as Snap) Furthermore - whether or not these shady practices were the downfall of Snap does not absolve FB from doing them.
- privateSFacct 7y agoI'm curious - why is facebook required to promote a competing social network? Did snap promote facebook properly on its network?
- airstrike 7y ago> I'm curious - why is facebook required to promote a competing social network? They aren't required to promote, but arguably also can't actively find ways to prevent it from trending "organically" as that could ostensibly constitute an anti-competitive practice
- hizanberg 7y agoSnap’s not a bankrupt Startup without product, they’re still a 23.5B company with growing market share and features Facebook has been copying hand over fist, that would be arguably be worth a lot more if FB had to come up with their own features instead of Xeroxing Snaps ideas.
- throwaway38638 7y agoCopying features of your competitors and innovating on them is part of competition.
- meowface 7y agoBoth things seem to be true. Snap created an unsustainable business model that could be easily copied, and Facebook did a lot of highly unethical and possibly illegal things to accelerate their domination of Snap's market. If you read the article in full, there's really no defending Facebook's alleged behavior. The article doesn't even mention feature-copying, other than Zuckerberg saying "accept our buyout price or we'll copy you", but it's a single sentence in an article with a laundry list of unrelated allegations. I feel like a lot of people who dislike Snap are commenting without actually reading the article.
- umvi 7y agoActually, I'm super, super grateful they redesigned the Android app from the ground up. Before the redesign it was a disaster that would occasionally soft-brick my camera, mandating a reboot.
- srbby 7y agoSeems like a problem with your camera hardware and/or software. An unprivileged, user-space app should not be able to soft-brick a hardware part.
- umvi 7y agoMy phone is a Nexus 5X. All I know is that the old Snapchat app would occasionally soft-brick my camera such that no other application (including the camera app) could use it until I rebooted my phone. I confirmed with multiple experiments that Snapchat was the culprit. After the redesign, the problem went away.
- srbby 7y agoI 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.
- 7y ago
- menacingly 7y agothe feature/product dichotomy is a subtle gradient that ultimately means nothing. It's only ever seems poignant with the benefit of hindsight. It's sort of like saying "well, the way the market shook out is the way the market shook out"
- yashap 7y agoIndeed, you could say the same thing about IG vs FB, it’s an empty criticism. Also, curious why we always see these “Snap must regret not selling to FB for $7 billion” comments parroted so often? Snap currently has a market cap of almost $24 billion, and it’s stock price has nearly doubled since the start of 2019. Still not quite at their IPO price, but close. Seems like they should be very happy they went the IPO route?
- nova22033 7y ago>the belief that Facebook was preventing Snap’s most popular content from trending on Instagram >Snap executives noted their belief that Instagram was blocking searches of these Snap-related terms Real solid data driven analysis here.. >Facebook’s tactics have long engendered concern across Silicon Valley, said Paul Keable, chief strategy officer at Ashley Madison. The dating site, which caters to married people seeking affairs, is blocked from advertising on Facebook, which now operates its own dating feature. Yes, Ashley Madison, the "dating" site.
- GhettoMaestro 7y agoLol, the same Ashley Madison who screwed over their entire user-base by failing to secure their database. Please Ashley Madison, lecture us more about unethical behavior.
- nyolfen 7y agoit was not only that, it was revealed they ran bots to chat with users to convince them they had a shot with beautiful women that made up the bulk of user activity iirc. no sympathy obviously but it was a total scam
- dogma1138 7y agoBeing incompetent isn’t the same as being unethical however given their target audience they were more negligent than incompetent. I think the biggest take away from that site was just how few women were there compared to men, like we were talking in the single digits for verifiable active accounts. Which is also where the unethical part comes in as AM was running chat bots or ignoring their existence to keep men on the site.
- lhball 7y agoI don't understand what editor allowed the A.M. section to remain in the article. Felt like an afterthought. They built up the 'Voldemort' file but then barely referred back to it. Would have preferred they wait to publish when the had the report in hand or could at least quote directly from it.
- 7y ago
- NN88 7y agoI still don't see the problem here. None of these sites actually make or sell anything besides maybe an ad-platform. Any cachet they have is based on social viability or popularity... i.e. waning psychological value, not intrinsic hard tangibility
- duxup 7y ago>None of these sites actually make or sell anything besides maybe an ad-platform. Why does that matter?
- MiroF 7y agoWhy 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?
- epmaybe 7y agoThat's a lot of HN though, you'll see people talk about tangentially related things to the main topic, and never address the linked topic. I've learned to accept it as is, and not to worry about it too much.
- awakeasleep 7y agoSome news.ycombinator readers may actually work for Facebook, and have a direct financial stake in the outcome of this matter. It sounds like a conspiracy, but it's possible. You know the old saying about "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
- zaroth 7y agoSpeculating about sock puppets is not only not interesting, it’s against the guidelines. If there’s a post you want to make a substantive argument against, please reply to it directly.
- faceplanted 7y agoI don't think he's suggesting sock puppets as much as employees using their personal accounts, which I don't think is the same.
- ulucs 7y agoNot just employees, there's basically financial incentives for anyone who holds facebook stock.
- 7y ago
- xwdv 7y agoClassic. Not a day goes by that Evan Spiegel doesn’t regret selling Snap for a cool 7 billion to Facebook and just moving on with his life, so they throw out crap like this as some kind of revenge by social mob justice. He drank too much of his own koolaid.
- debt 7y agoSNAP has $23 billion market cap you dolt.
- mtmail 7y agoYou can correct somebody without name calling.
- xwdv 7y agoFor now, but that could easily change if they have some bad quarters coming up. I’m bearish.
- negrit 7y agoSo because you're bearish you think that SNAP's CEO regrets his decision?
- xwdv 7y agoIf I didn’t then I wouldn’t be bearish. I think the headache and anxiety over running Snap and the pressure to grow users quarter after quarter with a simple app that is easily duplicated will eventually get to Evan.
- paggle 7y agoThe thing is that if Evan Spiegel, or any tech billionaire, just wanted to party on boats, they would have left long ago. You or I see "running Snap" as a negative, so of course if you could find a way to not do it, we would. He probably sees it as something he enjoys even when it is difficult.
- ineedasername 7y agoThe headline doesn't really match the story. I don't doubt the likelihood that Facebook engaged in these sorts of things, but from the headline I expected a laundry list of complaints and at least anecdotes to support them. Instead there's only two vague accusation without support that Facebook discouraged influencers from Snap, and suppressed Snap content from trending.
- meowface 7y agoThe Onavo thing alone sounds utterly insane to me. I often think criticisms of Facebook and similar companies are overblown, personally, but Facebook really should have, at the least, faced as many repercussions as Volkswagen did for their deceit, if the facts are correct. >One area of focus for the FTC is Onavo, an Israeli mobile-analytics startup that Facebook purchased in 2013. Onavo offered a free mobile app that described itself as a way to “keep you and your data safe” by creating a virtual private network. To do this, the company redirected internet traffic on Onavo to Facebook’s servers, which allowed it to log every action in a central database. >That enabled Facebook to quietly track what users did on their phones, including which apps they used and for how long, the Journal reported in 2017. Onavo data was frequently cited in internal research and strategy decks >At one point, Facebook—through Onavo—was able to see Snap data as specific as the number of messages a user sent or how much time those users spent in specific Snapchat features, the former employees said. Facebook couldn’t see the content of the messages or images. The visibility into Snap usage lessened considerably after Snap encrypted its app traffic. >A Facebook spokeswoman said the app was similar to other industry market research tools. Facebook literally published MitM (technically "MitMo") malware disguised as a VPN security app so it could intercept all unencrypted network traffic and record user actions, in part so they could spy on competing apps (and also, presumably, to spy on everything you do to serve you more ads and sell your behavioral data). This is exactly what spyware-distributing criminal organizations with front companies do, as documented by threat intelligence firms. If this actually is similar to any other industry "market research tools", as they claim, the entire industry is fucked. If you bought a home security camera and later found out it was secretly sending back everything it saw and heard so they could sell the video and audio to advertising firms, causing the banner ads you come across to be tailored to your observed food, TV, and sexual preferences, the uproar would undoubtedly put them out of business. But Facebook can just quietly shut things down once there's negative press, and move on like it never happened. Snap is 100% in the right for compiling all of this info on "Voldemort".
- throwaway_quote 7y ago> 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 cases, after the companies rejected the overtures, Facebook soon after released features that mimicked the products from Snap and Foursquare. This seems to be a critical bit
- goodluckchuck 7y agoYep, there's the antitrust angle, but then these threats were allegedly made by Mr. Zuckerberg personally which would make it attempted extortion. https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-extortion-laws.html https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-exto...
- toxik 7y agoI 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.
- aswanson 7y agoIt's rather easy. Delete your fb and use bing + ddg. Done.
- Kuinox 7y agoThen you go on your news outlet and meet your friendly facebook "like" button that keep stalking you.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 7y agouBlock w/ social filter
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lammalamma25 7y agoDoes anyone else have trouble getting upset about these kind of stories? I can believe anti-competitive behavior is happening, but we're talking about snapchat stories and Instagram trends. It's not like they are a phone company raising prices on their customers or a railroad squeezing shippers. I get why this could be bad for a competitive marketplace, but does this hurt the consumer? What are the net downsides of this sort of behavior (not being sarcastic. I really have trouble thinking of any serious ones)
- darawk 7y agoThe downside is that if you know Facebook can and will do this to any competitive threat, you just won't bother to start your company in the first place.
- threeseed 7y agoAs I mentioned before if your product is so weak at differentiation and defensibility then it doesn't deserve to be launched in the first place. Facebook can only compete with you if you let them.
- jonas21 7y agoI can think of many reasons why I wouldn't want to start a company, but a fear that one day Facebook will show up and threaten to copy me unless I accept a multi-billion dollar acquisition offer is not one of them.
- darawk 7y agoFirstly, those offers will shrink over time as Facebook refines its playbook, and it becomes more and more clear that they can win by copying. Secondly, it doesn't just impact you the founder, it also impacts VCs thinking about funding you. $1-2 billion may be a lot of money for you and me, but if you're a venture capitalist investing $10 million in lots of low probability bets, you need them to have the potential for very high returns.
- pigeon888 7y ago
- Seb-C 7y agohttps://web.archive.org/web/20190923121641/https://www.wsj.com/articles/snap-detailed-facebooks-aggressive-tactics-in-project-voldemort-dossier-11569236404?mod=rsswn https://web.archive.org/web/20190923121641/https://www.wsj.c...
- panpanna 7y agoHow about a dossier detailing how Spiegel managed to piss on 85% of world-wide mobile users? You cannot recover from something like that no matter how many times you rewrite your app.