3 ms·
The whistleblower is taking a huge legal risk here. I wonder if the Wall Street Journal has really explained the consequences to the leaker.
by travoc 5y ago
The whistleblower is taking a huge legal risk here. I wonder if the Wall Street Journal has really explained the consequences to the leaker.
- robbrown451 5y agoShe is taking a risk, and I salute her for it. But at the end of the day, it is likely her career will have a huge boost from this. And Facebook would probably be very foolish to go after her.
- AzzieElbab 5y agoumm if this hearing results in some kind of monetary settlement she will be entitled to some of it
- robbrown451 5y agoI can't see how a monetary settlement would be the result of this.
- AzzieElbab 5y agowhy not? this hearing is not about monopolization, and fb cannot be singled out when it comes to regulations either
- nostrademons 5y agoI worked with her briefly on Google+. She struck me as a trust-fund kid: idealistic, brash, (perhaps over)confident, intelligent but prone to tackling problems that can't be solved. Wikipedia says her parents were a doctor & academic-turned-priest, so she's likely got some family wealth backing her up. It's a different calculus than for most of the people here, who can't afford good lawyers and need that paycheck to survive.
- RubberMullet 5y agoNot like Snowden, Kiriakou, or Binney. This whole thing has been carefully orchestrated. She probably has a position at the Brookings Institute waiting for her but not before she completes her podcast/talk show book tour.