
Zuckerberg didn’t make any friends in Europe today - laktak
https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/22/zuckerberg-didnt-make-any-friends-in-europe-today/
======
Roritharr
What struck me as quite interesting was Guy Verhofstadts sideremarks.

>"You have to ask yourself how you will be remembered," he said. "As one of
the three big internet giants together with Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, who
have enriched our world and our societies, or on the other hand, the genius
that created a digital monster that is destroying our democracies and
societies."

I imagine you have to talk like this to a guy like Zuckerberg to actually have
a chance to get through to him.

~~~
patio11
Presumably Zuckerberg has learned the lesson of Bill Gates: Europe
periodically discovers a reason to fine American tech companies large-but-
relatively-immaterial amounts of money. Then you eventually graduate to being
Old Money, and Europe reminisces fondly about you.

~~~
plopilop
By large-but-immaterial, do you mean the money escaped via tax fraud and
illegal tax cuts?

~~~
mikejb
'fraud' and 'illegal' might be problematic words here. The tax evasion schemes
used by large corporations are often considered exploits of loopholes - i.e.
technically legal. Countries try to offer companies a system to provide
ridiculously low tax rates for larger regions, because if they get 1% of the
revenue of the entire region it's more beneficial to them than getting 20% of
their local revenue (numbers are fictional here). That's partly also a reason
why e.g. Ireland is fighting on Apple's side on the $13bn ruling, despite them
loosing out on $13bn. They'd loose the ability to guarantee companies a low
tax rate, which is worth far more.

~~~
askmike
> 'fraud' and 'illegal' might be problematic words here. The tax evasion
> schemes used by large corporations are often considered exploits of
> loopholes - i.e. technically legal.

In your example on Apple this is not clear at all: there are two legal systems
at play (the Irish one and the EU one). Apple is only playing by the rules of
the Irish one. The problem comes from the EU saying that the Irish laws are
not within the EU framework and thus not allowed.

Apple is very much doing not legal things from a perspective of EU law, hence
the fine.

~~~
rusk
Wrong. Ireland's competition rules are harmonised with EU rules. Not by dictat
either, it's a condition of signing the various European treaties that you
will implement particular laws that conform to certain principles. In this
particular case Ireland had broken _her own laws_ on competition. Like with so
much of the skullduggery that goes on in Ireland, it took an outside agency to
blow the whistle.

~~~
rusk
_it 's a condition of signing the various European treaties_

These treaties by the way, are passed with popular consent. As a
constitutional democracy Ireland requires a Referendum for any constitutional
change, which is always necessary when signing up to anything that says we'll
conform to some outside agency.

------
zaarn
From what I gathered on news sources, most of the (german) MEPs are extremely
pissed at Zuckerberg in regards to the question answered, the format of the
Q&A and the refusal to livestream a real Q&A. He brought up the question about
FB's monopoly on the market, stating that there are plenty of competitor
products ("we might have a monopoly on cars but there are still planes, bikes
and walking!").

Zuck didn't make friends, I'm fairly certain he made enemies in Europe.

~~~
Y_Y
At least the format and the fact that a lot of the time was taken up asking
long-winded questions was the fault of the European Parliament and not Zuck
personally. Of course the idea that you can just drag the CEO up to account
for whatever grievances you have against the company and hope to get anything
out of it seems a bit misguided to me. Looks like more of a PR exercise.

~~~
stfwn
And a bad one at that. The first question I heard when I put on the livestream
was something along the lines of: "answer yes or no to the following
questions! (...) Will Facebook delete all fake accounts before $date and
prevent all new ones from being created?", with the MEP putting on a stern
look.

Zuckerberg is smart enough to show up and pretend to get a verbal beating, but
I wish he would just point out to the governing bodies that if they want
something they should pass laws. The GDPR is a start, but Facebook is not in
the business of selling data under the table. They will get the consent they
need and I'd be surprised if the percentage of users that make use of their
right of access and to be forgotten is relevant to them.

~~~
adventured
One idiot in the bunch asked Zuckerberg about having founded Facebook as a hot
or not site. They had no idea what they were talking about.

Another politician just used the Q&A platform as an excuse to threaten
Facebook with being broken up, while adding very little substance to the
discussion.

Another was seemingly out of control emotionally, waving his hands angrily and
belting hysterics, while pretending Facebook was going to bring on the end of
Democracy and that Zuckerberg might be an evil villain.

Another tried to pretend that somehow Facebook needed regulation to stop
bullying: as though bullying doesn't occur every day in every school in the
world. It's like saying: we must regulate human behavior to end all crime!
Good luck with that. They all seemed to not understand that Facebook =
everything that you see everywhere else in life, from the public square to
school to home. You can't actually regulate an end to bullying, no matter how
sad that is.

After how much I've seen others talk up the wise politicians of Europe, I
expected a lot more. They were no better than the US Congress. Which makes
sense, given the condition of most of the EU and its politics.

------
icebraining
There's some irony in getting the Oath panel forcing me to consent to their
tracking (in apparent violation of the GDPR) before showing me an article
about Facebook's data handling problems.

By the way, if you want to read the article without agreeing to their stuff,
stop the page load after the article shows up.

[https://guce.oath.com/collectConsent?brandType=nonEu&.done=h...](https://guce.oath.com/collectConsent?brandType=nonEu&.done=https%3A%2F%2Ftechcrunch.com%2F2018%2F05%2F22%2Fzuckerberg-
didnt-make-any-friends-in-europe-today%2F%3Fguccounter%3D1&sessionId=3_cc-
session_7f55c603-579b-47ea-b95e-ba039809db14&lang=&inline=false)

~~~
blowski
Why would that violate GDPR?

~~~
robin_reala
Requiring consent as a pre-condition of a service is frowned upon under GDPR.
If you have a legitimate requirement (which is fairly rigidly defined under
GDPR) or legal obligations for that data then you don’t need user consent, but
if you don’t then you need to offer the service regardless of the user consent
or not.

~~~
yread
I think that's where the wiggle room (or court battleground?) of GDPR will be.
Lots of companies do that: Quora, Pinterest,...

~~~
woolvalley
I think quora and co is more about having an account and not about any sort of
data consent per say.

~~~
ColonelPhantom
Making an account is generally seen as a form of giving consent, especially as
you need to agree to the terms and conditions when doing so.

~~~
zerostar07
you can make an account and still not consent, e.g. to be tracked because they
can't prove that 'being tracked is necessary for reading quora'. the two are
orthogonal

------
munchhausen
It amazes me how both the hearing at the US senate, and the one at the
European Parliament, were marred by an absurdly ineffectual format of the Q&A
session.

You'd think that having achieved the seemingly hardest part, which was to get
Zuck to talk to these bodies at all, care will be taken to make the most of
the opportunity. Rather, the complete opposite has taken place.

I found it laughable how many times I've heard, during the US Senate session,
an injunction addressed to the speaker to wrap it up, as their allotted time
was up. The entire thing was rushed as if they were in a hurry to catch a
train.

Is the Cambridge Analytica fiasco alone not reason enough to keep Zuckerberg
in the hot chair for 12 hours over 2 days, if need be, if that is what is
ultimately required to get him to actually divulge meaningful information,
rather than the sound bites that he happily served up?

It seems that these hearings were mostly carried out for show, and rather than
actually protect the interests of their constituents, these legislative bodies
are content to operate on a purely formalistic level, devoid of any actual
meaning. This is global politicians v.2018 for you - fumbling, toothless,
woefully out of their depth on crucial issues of our time.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
Of course it was for show, that's why it was public. If the politicians wanted
real answers to real questions they'd have done the whole thing behind closed
doors, they have these little hearings as a group PR exercise. This is hardly
unique to 2018, it's pretty much always been like this.

------
thebradbain
If worst comes to worst and EU tries to break up Facebook — and it seems
likely they might — what would be Facebook’s best path forward?

Theoretically, would it send a stronger signal to US regulators if Facebook
simply shut down all operation in the EU? A pop up message to all EU citizens
along the lines of “You may no longer access Facebook from within the EU due
to X Y and Z from your government. As such, all of your data is unavailable
for download and no longer subject to GDPR privacy regulations.” Would that be
safer for Facebook in protecting its child companies (which presumably make up
a large part of its value) in the US as an effective way to grandstand?
Eventually the EU would have to come up with a compromise solution then, too,
right? I can’t imagine everyday citizens being happy with the EU if they
perceive they’ve blocked them from Facebook.

I’m not saying I would be on Facebook’s side (I definitely wouldn’t), but the
sheer scale of Facebook as a global company makes me question the
effectiveness of current antitrust law.

I’ve never seen a trade war between a company and a government. And I don’t
want to.

~~~
phicoh
Just my impression: if this was Google, then yes. It is very hard to replace
Google at this point in time.

Facebook is on its way out. Due to the network effect, Facebook will stay
relevant for a long time. But if Facebook would leave the EU then it wouldn't
take long for other social networks to take its place.

Facebook is relevant because everybody is on Facebook. Not because it is such
a great service.

Personally, I am way more worried about Google.

~~~
adam-_-
That network effect can't be underestimated.

In the olden days of a new social network every other week the percentage of
my friends and family on each social network (including Myspace, the most
dominant) was relatively low, so the pain of switching was low.

Now the percentage on Facebook is extremely high and I don't even know what an
alternative would be.

Lots of friends and family are on Whatsapp, quite a lot of people use
Instagram but beyond that... there's very little uptake in any other heavily
used social network. And of course, they're both owned by Facebook anyway.

So, for me at least, to say Facebook is on the way out, is something I cannot
agree with.

~~~
bambataa
Do the people you know actually engage with Facebook a lot, though?

I'm still on it and log in a few times a week but I engage far less. I
recently used a Chrome extension to delete my old comments and I'm surprised
at how much more I posted on it (and publicly, too). Although changing the
newsfeed to be mostly memes and adverts was one cause of my disengagement, I
think it's also just changing use. I haven't really noticed the recent changes
Facebook touted because my friend network simply seems to engage with it less.
Maybe a few people still insist on posting dozens of photographs of every trip
they take, but I see so much less public discussion and so on.

What happens to a social network when the 'social' bit tails off?

~~~
damontal
anecdotal, but on my daily commute i see people "engaging" with facebook (and
instagram) all the time.

------
ericdykstra
If anything, this kind of regulation helps companies like Facebook keep their
"monopoly", because it raises the monetary cost of starting a competitor. A
number of smaller services and games have shut down due to increased cost of
compliance, even for companies that don't have any privacy issues.

~~~
adrianN
What alternative do you propose? The free market obviously fails to address
privacy issues, I don't see how anything besides stricter regulation can help
the affected people here.

~~~
ericdykstra
I'm not a policymaker, but GDPR seems overly-reactionary, over-reaching, and
not well thought-out. I think the negative unintended consequences are likely
much greater than however much it actually protects the privacy of individuals
(which I don't think will be much at all).

~~~
Drakim
I don't think GDPR is flawless, but at some point if we don't do anything,
privacy violations are going to become so common place and so entrenched in
the online economy that we can't fix it anymore.

At that point, the discussion would be all about all the "jobs we would
destroy" and "businesses opportunities we would shut down!", and heavy
lobbying would make sure it gets nowhere.

~~~
kennell
Do you think that the GDPR has really changed anything for either Facebook or
its users? Do you think that anything changed in the way data is being
handled? All i see is a bunch of highly paid law firms writing up 200
additional pages in terms and conditions to shield the company, but nothing
really changed as far as daily business is concerned.

~~~
robin_reala
Two hundred extra pages of new privacy info in the T&Cs would fail GDPR:

 _The information you provide to people must be concise, transparent,
intelligible, easily accessible, and it must use clear and plain language._

[https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-
da...](https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-
protection-regulation-gdpr/individual-rights/right-to-be-informed/)

~~~
vmateixeira
If a company has money to hire lawyers to make an extra 200 pages of T&Cs, I'm
sure they will have the money to argue that those pages are _" concise,
transparent, intelligible, easily accessible, and it must use clear and plain
language"_.

------
weinzierl
Most press I’ve read so far in Europe is largely neutral or positive about
Zuckerberg but very negative about the procedings, the parliament and conduct
of the representatives. This is unusual but in my option justified.

Here is one particularly devastating article (Google Translate):

[https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&...](https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=http://m.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/anhoerung-
von-mark-zuckerberg-im-europaparlament-wird-zum-
desaster-a-1209003.html&xid=17259,15700022,15700124,15700126,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700189,15700191,15700201,15700205&usg=ALkJrhj5TGVc6OHF7EGSjd6pI3U22GQNmg)

~~~
FranzFerdiNaN
Looking at the Dutch media it's the complete opposite of what you say. It's
mostly about Zuckerberg not saying much, to the frustration of the members of
parliament.

~~~
scaryclam
Same here in the UK. Nothing positive about Zuckerberg so far, so I'm not sure
what media the parent is reading.

~~~
skrebbel
> _I 'm not sure what media the parent is reading._

Um, Der Spiegel apparently.

~~~
zaarn
SPON would be the only outlet that framed the story that way tbh.

------
teekert
Well, he made one friend [0], poor lady.

[0]
[https://twitter.com/ceciliawikstrom/status/99898468946035916...](https://twitter.com/ceciliawikstrom/status/998984689460359169)

~~~
siberianbear
I feel much more sorry for the citizens of Sweden than I do for that "poor
lady" who made a point of looking like Zuckerburg's tool. If Cecilia Wikström
was my elected representative, I'd start investigating how to expatriate.

~~~
teekert
She is clearly pretty naive but that grilling is fairly harsh imho. At least
on twitter she seems to have become the symbol of how the entire group of EU
politicians messed up.

------
kodablah
ZuckBot? "attention-sapping, app gobbling elephant"? What kind of poor excuse
for journalism is this? Or is it an op-ed that's just not clearly labeled.

Normally I would be disappointed such a terrible article would be so regarded
by the community, but no longer. The pitchforks are out, and the more anti-FB
you can be in your reporting, the larger the audience. Critical thought had
ceased and it's one sided now. What a sham these politicians are in their
grandstanding and IMO along with mass media outlets have grossly over
exaggerated the harms.

------
teekert
We should be pissed at Antonio Tajani (President of the European Parliament
since January 2017) who set up the hearing such that Zuckerberg could cherry
pick his favorite questions and answer only those.

------
gesman
>> So while Facebook’s contract change for international users looks largely
intended to shrink its legal liabilities under GDPR, it’s possible the change
will open up another front for individuals to pursue strategic litigation in
the coming months.

Most definitely. Too much at stake.

------
lazyjones
He doesn't need friends, he has everyone's private chats...

------
zerostar07
And it didn't seem as he wanted to make any friends either. I'm pretty sure
the EC is already drafting regulation or actions against facebook based on
this hearing... but i m not sure what facebook plans to do. Perhaps they 'll
spin off a separate EU facebook? Go back to US and wall off EU? The EU
parliament seems to think that facebook's users are their users but Zucc has
not said a word about this.

------
ribchinski
In every one of the interviews that I have seen, he is cherry picking answers.
He never directly answers them and purposefully makes broad statements that
cannot be actually proved. This man created the biggest social media to date,
which I thankfully do not use, which spies on its own customers, censors
anyone who does not agree with the company's political views and sells
personal data to anyone who can make a high bid. I wouldn't be surprised if
Putin asked him to compile a list of all of the Russian people who talk poorly
of him and Zuck just gave that list to him for a quick buck.

EDIT: I also love how he orders the court to stop and then "[He] seemed most
uncomfortable at not having his orders instantly carried out."

------
a_imho
He is clearly asking for it.

------
falcon620
Well, he seems to have made one friend:

[https://twitter.com/CeciliaWikstrom/status/99898468946035916...](https://twitter.com/CeciliaWikstrom/status/998984689460359169)

(Zuckerberg posing with a Swedish MEP, all smiles.)

------
nodesocket
How is TechCrunch still making the front page of HN? They are the masters of
incendiary and polarizing "news" with the only goal to generate "outrage" and
clicks and thus revenue. Hacker News audience still eats it up I guess.

Have we not learned anything by exposing the Russian mind-warfare ads that
targeted US citizens? They played both-sides, with the goal of polarization,
destabilization, and control. The same can be attributed to media such as
TechCrunch, just with less lofty goals that of Russia.. Money.

~~~
zerostar07
TC is fine

------
known
FB is perfect example for monopoly abuse

~~~
Cthulhu_
Do explain. Also, unlike e.g. Intel who got a huge fine from the EU for price
deals with OEMs, Facebook didn't use dirty tricks to gain market share.

~~~
reitanqild
Lying about their capabilities and intentions when buying WhatsApp doesn't
count?

------
csomar
Facebook should be moving to a decentralized, blockchain powered solution as
fast as possible.

Ethics aside, the regulators are looking to regulate and looks like ready to
hammer facebook. I’m pretty sure they’re interested in the data and
surveillance Facebook can provide for them.

A blockchain solution can give Facebook some time. They have the userbase and
the money.

------
sparkling
The EU and its officials are a joke. I cringe when these EU bureaucrats act
like they are going to "get tough" on US businesses and the Trump
administration.

They lack digital sovereignty and nation state sovereignty. Local and federal
EU agencies continue to depend on Microsoft and other US tech giants. They
didn't even manage to unveil the NSA wiretapping, to this day still not a
single person or company has been charged with wiretapping Germanys biggest
internet exchange hub (DeCIX).

They rage about US tax cuts and tech companies using tax loopholes while doing
nothing about the greatest tax haven on earth located within their own
borders: Luxembourg.

The EU is a joke and i sincerely hope it falls apart soon.

~~~
AstralStorm
Other than being politics as usual (which are a joke because politicians are
not equipped for dealing with complex issues other than public relations)...

If EU died, who do you think would take over and why do you think they'd be
any better?

US has problems of its own with "digital sovereignty" as it allowed China to
take over most of manufacturing. Russia is saddled with social debts and
social warfare. EU nation states on their own can't do nothing - the business
mostly goes to "where value is". (Just look at what is happening in Romania -
the question is, how long can they keep it up.)

As for the tax haven, the new regulations in quite a few baton states of the
EU now require paying tax in the country where business is done, not
registered. Obviously companies try to dodge this as much as they can.

~~~
repolfx
_If EU died, who do you think would take over and why do you think they 'd be
any better?_

Easy. Nation states would. And they'd do better, at least some of the time,
because they're more accountable.

Just compare the Congress vs EUP performance. The USA is arguably too large
and too centralised. But Congress, despite having many ancient politicians who
clearly have never used the internet let alone Facebook, _still_ managed to
run rings around the EU "Parliament" (it's not really a parliament). The EU
apparently allocated nearly all the hearing time to politicians speaking,
leaving only minutes for Zuckerberg to reply, allowing him to pick and choose
which questions he answered.

And yet there won't be any real impact on the EUP for this because it's not a
real parliament, it can't actually change laws by itself. So the people who
run can't have any real policies, and as a result it's stuffed with political
nobodies with no ideas beyond rah-rah EU and sometimes boo-boo EU, so voters
tune out and ignore it. There's little competition.

~~~
pmlnr
> And they'd do better

Not a chance. Not in Europe. Go and read about our history when there was no
EU.

------
patkai
Zuckerberg is a very rational and collected person, so if he didn't make
friends then he didn't want to make friends. It also implies the actual
significance of the EU.

