3 ms·
FWIW, she was fired in 2017 and only now is trying to become a "whistleblower." If the conduct needed whistle-blowing, surely it would have been more timely to
by loeg 2y ago
FWIW, she was fired in 2017 and only now is trying to become a "whistleblower." If the conduct needed whistle-blowing, surely it would have been more timely to come out almost a decade ago.
- trhway 2y agoShe published a book with these FB "revelations" recently, like a month ago, so kind of PR tour.
- MeetingsBrowser 2y agoPlaying devil's advocate: If the allegations about Meta violating laws in the book are true, what would be an appropriate waiting period before the author testifies to the Senate, so that it doesn't appear to be a PR tour?
- trhway 2y agoA negative value, about -7 years in this case.
- loeg 2y agoShe could have raised her concerns in 2017 or earlier, rather than 2025, when her knowledge is eight years out of date.
- cookiengineer 2y agoNot sure why you are writing this bad faith argument. Not a single legal system on the planet is that fast. All class action law suits take years of preparation time in their discovery phase.
- loeg 2y agoWhat about this do you think is constrained to the legal system? Her book and the senate hearing are not moving through or constrained by the ordinary courts. (And while they're slow, they do generally move faster than eight years.)
- mrguyorama 2y agoGod forbid we hold a corporation to account for what they did several years ago. Nope, if you can't convince CNN to carry your story the moment it happens, it's clearly not worth doing any law stuff about.
- loeg 2y agoIf it wasn't an interesting story in 2017, I don't think it's an interesting story now. You can disagree; that's fine.
- jdgoesmarching 2y agoGiven how forcefully Meta has cracked down on this, this doesn’t feel like that big of a gotcha. Hell, she’s not even allowed to speak about it outside of congressional hearings because of Zuck’s lawyers. If not for her book, we wouldn’t be talking about this at all.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> she was fired in 2017 and only now is trying to become a "whistleblower" It's a lot easier to be a whistleblower once you're materially comfortable. More than the threat of legal action is the insidiousness of being blacklisted for employment. I wouldn't take the delay from the actions as evidence of her having ulterior motives. Just that we need contemporaneous notes and/or evidence to ensure she isn't misremembering.
- loeg 2y agoFair enough.