The FTC's antitrust lawsuit against Meta kicked off in federal court. The FTC argues that Meta illegally monopolized the virtual reality market by acquiring Within, maker of the popular fitness app Supernatural, and is seeking to force Meta to divest the company. Meta contends that the acquisition was pro-competitive, benefiting consumers and developers alike. The trial's outcome holds significant weight for the future of VR and the FTC's ability to challenge Big Tech acquisitions in nascent markets.
A federal court ruled the NSA's warrantless searches of Americans' data under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act unconstitutional. The court found that the "backdoor searches," querying a database of collected communications for information about Americans, violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches. This landmark decision significantly limits the government's ability to search this data without a warrant, marking a major victory for digital privacy. The ruling specifically focuses on querying data already collected, not the collection itself, and the government may appeal.
HN commenters largely celebrate the ruling against warrantless searches of 702 data, viewing it as a significant victory for privacy. Several highlight the problematic nature of the "backdoor search" loophole and its potential for abuse. Some express skepticism about the government's likely appeals and the long road ahead to truly protect privacy. A few discuss the technical aspects of 702 collection and the challenges in balancing national security with individual rights. One commenter points out the irony of the US government criticizing other countries' surveillance practices while engaging in similar activities domestically. Others offer cautious optimism, hoping this ruling sets a precedent for future privacy protections.
Summary of Comments ( 298 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43680957
HN commenters discuss the difficulty of defining the relevant market in the Meta antitrust case, with some arguing that virtual reality fitness is a distinct market from broader social media or even general VR, while others believe the focus should be on Meta's overall social media dominance. Several commenters express skepticism about the FTC's case, believing it's weak and politically motivated, and unlikely to succeed given the high bar for antitrust action. The acquisition of Within is seen by some as a relatively small deal unlikely to warrant such scrutiny. Some discussion also revolves around the potential chilling effect of such lawsuits on acquisitions by large companies, potentially stifling innovation. A few commenters also mention the unusual courtroom setup with VR headsets provided, highlighting the novelty of the technology involved in the case.
The Hacker News post titled "Meta antitrust trial kicks off in federal court" has generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters offering their perspectives on the case and its potential implications.
A recurring theme in the comments is skepticism towards the FTC's case, with some users questioning the FTC's focus on acquisitions of Within and Instagram, arguing that these acquisitions did not stifle competition but instead brought VR fitness and photo sharing to a wider audience. One commenter points out the difficulty of proving consumer harm, especially given the free nature of Meta's services, and suggests that the FTC might be overreaching. Another comment echoes this sentiment, highlighting the lack of clear alternatives for users even if Meta hadn't made these acquisitions. A particularly compelling comment draws a parallel to Microsoft's antitrust case, arguing that focusing on acquisitions rather than the core product's behavior misses the mark and sets a bad precedent for future innovation. This commenter suggests that if the FTC wins, it could discourage large companies from acquiring smaller startups, hindering technological advancement.
Another thread of discussion revolves around the definition of the relevant market. Some users debate whether Meta holds a monopoly in "social media" as a broad category or if the market should be more narrowly defined, perhaps by specific functionalities like photo sharing or virtual reality fitness. This distinction is crucial for determining whether Meta's acquisitions were anti-competitive.
A few commenters also touch upon the political aspects of the case, with some suggesting that the FTC's pursuit of Meta is motivated by political pressure rather than genuine concern for consumer welfare. Others argue that large tech companies have accumulated too much power and need to be regulated regardless of the specifics of this particular case.
While there isn't overwhelming agreement on any single point, the comments collectively paint a picture of a complex case with significant implications for the future of antitrust law and the tech industry. Many commenters express doubts about the FTC's chances of success and raise concerns about the potential chilling effect on innovation if the FTC prevails.