5 ms·
The article confusingly states first that China's stake would not be influential, and then states that the apparent reason for China's interest is to have "cont
by mef 15y ago
The article confusingly states first that China's stake would not be influential, and then states that the apparent reason for China's interest is to have "control in the long run".
Even if China's stake was influential, why would they need it in order to censor Facebook? They censor plenty of sites in which they have no stake whatsoever.
- esrauch 15y agoThey are currently only able to completely block the website from China. If they can get an influential stake then they can have it open in China with back doors to block certain traffic/words and give law enforcement access to information on dissidents.
- mef 15y agoSure, but what motivation would they have to open it in China instead of just blocking it and propping up a Facebook-style Chinese site that they can surveil for free?
- prostoalex 15y agoIt's a dual-class stock structure, "an influential stake" is purely theoretical.
- joe_the_user 15y ago"Even if China's stake was influential, why would they need it in order to censor Facebook? They censor plenty of sites in which they have no stake whatsoever." Uh, to censor it in other countries?
- andymurd 15y agoI suspect that China does not want to censor or influence Facebook, but rather to co-opt its IP, as it has done with other US corporations (sometimes legally, sometimes not) - see Cisco, Google, GM, Microsoft. Holding a good-sized stake in FB is a great way to plant an inside man and gain access to that IP.