
Facebook is helping to set up a new pro-tech advocacy group - annadane
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/12/facebook-lobbying-american-edge/
======
hn_throwaway_99
> The American Edge Project is dedicated to the bipartisan proposition that
> American innovators are an essential part of U.S. economic health, national
> security and individual freedoms

This will be interesting. On one hand, I definitely agree with that quote in
the article. On the other hand, you often see highly tech-invested commenters
on this website argue that it no longer makes sense to work for a startup
because the FAANGs have amassed so much wealth and power that they can always
be a better deal, _even when the startup succeeds_. So at the very least in
seems the tech giants are stifling innovation in some way. It's also important
to note that all of the tech giants amassed their power through acquisitions,
not just organic growth (e.g. Facebook and Instagram/WhatsApp, Google and
Android/YouTube).

~~~
Nasrudith
What about Amazon? Wholefoods is the main notable purchase and they were were
essentially a peripheral expansion/afterthought. NetFlix I can't even think of
a single merger.

~~~
yardie
Amazon: Audible, IMDB, Goodreads, Comixology, the Book Depository, Woot, Ring,
Eero.

They've been gobbling up other online media stores for decades. It's to the
point you just assume a new store is an Amazon subsidiary or will be soon.

~~~
apocalyptic0n3
Don't forget Twitch as well. That was a massive acquisition. And Alexa, Box
Office Mojo, Zappos, LoveFilm (an early Netflix competitor), and Curse. If I
recall correctly, they also own a stake in Wikia/Fandom too. And that doesn't
even go into the dozens of book stores and book data companies they've
acquired over the last 20+ years.

Amazon has gobbled up tons of smaller companies in order to make themselves
stronger and more diverse. I'm not sure why Nasrudith singled them out as
someone who hasn't really.

~~~
drewmate
Zappos was a huge infusion of business DNA into Amazon, and from what I
understand had a big influence on Amazon's customer service practices (Zappos
was/is known for being maniacally customer focused.)

Another acquisition from around the same time was 'diapers.com'. That site is
now defunct, and was never huge, but I believe they pioneered the concept of
'subscribing' to consumables like baby formula and, of course, diapers. After
that acquisition, Amazon started doing the same with baby products, then their
own brands, and now you can subscribe to just about any recurring purchase on
the site.

In these cases, I think the acquisitions provided much more than the economic
value of the business. They infused Amazon with new strategies and ideas to
make them, as you said, stronger _and more diverse._

------
SpicyLemonZest
I feel like the group has a point. We should regulate Facebook to some degree,
and I'm glad to know about their involvement here, but some people think the
company should be destroyed and I don't see what they're hoping to accomplish.
The realistic present alternative to a world dominated by Facebook proper and
Instagram is a world dominated by WeChat and Weibo.

~~~
Nasrudith
Regulate how exactly? While better than the indistinguishable from bots
"destroy/break up Facebook" ad nausuem repetition I have seen plenty of calls
for regulation with zero thought as to what regulations they would add. The
few examples I have seen proposed are either blatantly unconstitutional,
ineffectual, and/or obviously doomed to backfire. Politician's syllogism (we
need to do something and this is something) gets us nowhere.

~~~
dublinben
One possible regulation that should resonate with the HN crowd would be a real
form of due process or arbitration for users who have been censored. If
platforms like Facebook are going to be the universal arbiters of acceptable
public speech, then we ought to have formal recourse when they silence us. As
it stands, we are completely at the mercy of the algorithm or outsourced
contractors.

------
Hokusai
> Facebook is helping to set up a new pro-tech advocacy group to battle
> Washington

My guess is that Facebook is going to look for its own specific interest not
so much "pro-tech". That makes sense and it is the normal PR naming to make it
more palatable.

I can see that Facebook lobbing sometimes is going to align with "tech" needs
and other it would play opposite to it.

I cannot read the article, so, anyone knows if organizations like EFF would be
included in this advocacy group, it includes just Facebook or which companies
it includes?

~~~
Cthulhu_
Yup, that's pretty much what I'm getting. It'll be an exercise in doublespeak;
on the one hand they will push for internet access for all, but on the other
to do away with net neutrality so that they can offer free internet access to
Facebook and co but paid for non-facebook, like they tried (and failed) in
iirc India. They want to push the Libra cryptocurrency so they can literally
print digital e-monies and get a chunk of that dank payment processing
revenue. They want to not be held accountable for swaying public interest,
because they already are - consciously or not. They are pushing to get more
and more power, less and less government oversight. Pesky consumer protection
laws, pfft, not for us.

------
dmos62
This looks like the start of a new misinformation campaign. Unregulation is
anti-tech, not pro-tech: tech of today is in a strangle hold of corporate
anti-competition tricks. Calling Facebook's lobbying efforts pro-tech is a
cruel joke, but most people aren't well informed enough to tell.

~~~
aabeshou
freedom in America usually means freedom of the elite to do whatever they
want, and freedom of the workers from being protected

------
unnamedprophet
It's about damn time. One of the clearest things on display during
Zuckerberg's Senate grilling is that tech as an industry has proportionally
smaller influence when compared to other industries (automotive, airline,
finance) despite having a larger share of the economic pie. Tech is also a
newer player than other companies in those industries, so it's natural that
the balance of power has not yet swayed in favor of tech terms of Washington
politics. Infiltrating politics through lobbying, advocacy or people in seat
doesn't outright necessarily jive with our ideal notions of a democracy but
it's the way that the game is played.

~~~
Barrin92
I'm not really sure what the purpose is of openly celebrating regulatory
capture and the decline of our public institutions as they are being
undermined in their independence by yet another interest group

------
zelias
Luckily the top Google search result for "American Edge Project" is this handy
website about knives:
[https://www.americanedgesharpening.com/](https://www.americanedgesharpening.com/)

------
sigzero
You will have to forgive me if I don't trust Facebook to do anything but that
which is good for Facebook.

------
nogabebop23
>> political advocacy group

Nice way to position your lobbyist.

~~~
thephyber
To be fair, lobbyists and advocates are both just mouthpieces for special
interests. "political advocacy group" just takes some of the stink off of the
connotations of "lobbyist".

------
KoftaBob
I've always wondered why big tech and its seemingly unlimited cash hasn't been
able to out-lobby NIMBY groups in the bay area, and spur more housing
construction.

Hopefully this is one of the things they'd be able to accomplish with an
advocacy/lobbying group.

------
neonate
[https://archive.md/CytY7](https://archive.md/CytY7)

------
na85
Disgusting. Everything about this is simply disgusting.

~~~
hakka-nyu-su
Particularly the fact that Zuckerberg and other companies are using China as a
bogeyman to extract favorable tax and other policy concessions while
exploiting Chinese immigrant labor.

~~~
nogabebop23
It's not the labour that is their end game, unless you're talking about their
users.

------
meddlepal
Surprised it's taken this long. Tech has for too long pretended Washington and
politics don't matter.

~~~
lgleason
Not true. Google is one of the largest spenders of lobbying money in
Washington.

------
minikites
I'm sure Facebook will prioritize the interests of the common man in their
advocacy.

------
coldpie
Every company in that article needs to be broken up, and also investigated for
their roles in enabling and encouraging extremism. The ad-driven frenzy for
clicks at all costs needs to be reigned in.

~~~
Nasrudith
Investigated for things that aren't even remotely a crime isn't a very good
idea and is also a form of extremism ironically.

The central asseration of driving it while a convenient scapegoat also assumes
facts not in evidence and outright contradicted. Alex Jones has been driving
extremism in concrete and proven ways by hawking his own crap for funding.

~~~
projektfu
There are congressional investigations as well which are meant to inform
legislation, not indict criminals.

------
swalsh
Sometimes I feel like "The People" need the equivalent of the NRA. An advocacy
group that will advocate for their tech civil rights.

The real power of the NRA is not the money donated to it, but the huge group
of single issue voters they can whirl up at a moments notice.

~~~
vorpalhex
That's sort of the problem: The People (at least, a subset of them) are the
ones who created and support the NRA. The People (at least, a subset of them)
are also the ones who run and support Brady.

"The People" includes a large amount of people who disagree with you -
regardless of what your belief system is. Arguing that your enemies are some
privately sponsored or corporate backed shill is a tactic going back to
ancient Rome.

~~~
Nasrudith
Yeah "the People" in the Populist sense is a rhetorical trap. Implicitly it is
"People who agree with me" which is myopia if ignorant or astoturfing if not.
Even the Ironmanned best "the majority unrestricted from coercing others".
That is why rights especially for the unpopular are important along with
anonymous voting. With those precautions it would be truly Steelmanned but
also not aa susceptible to the trap.

Without safeguarding rights populism is a ladder to powers which may become
"people who agree with Great Leader".

