Jason Kint Profile picture
Sep 22, 2021 9 tweets 4 min read Read on X
In a company under global scrutiny for ethical lapses and a harmful core biz model, you don’t place your loyal lieutenant Andrew Bosworth in charge of all tech unless you’re preparing for war. Act accordingly. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
This is the language of a company in PR crisis mode. As far as I know, Elliot Schrage (took fall for Definers) also still “works there.” A full exit leads to more questions - this is window dressing and a big deal.
And not to state the obvious but this would make me very uncomfortable if I testified to @CommonsDCMS.
ps it's a comically bad idea for the new internal "Privacy Organization" - set up as a result of the $5 billion settlement - reporting into Andrew Bosworth. mlexmarketinsight.com/news-hub/edito…
And a reminder Bosworth writes memo Facebook leaks. I always thought this one was prob co-written and leaked intentionally in Jan 2020 to shape minds after the FTC settlement. It ran in NYT. A few refreshers. Bosworth also likes to discredit the press similar to Zuckerberg.
He’s willing to rewrite history into a narrative more friendly for his company.
And state things that are blatantly false.
And in the spirit of last week’s Facebook Files from WSJ, he also hates the comparisons to nicotine although as @Moonalice pointed out nicotine never undermined democracy or incited genocide etc etc.
and worth watching this brief video for a look into the person now running technology for Facebook and all of its global impact.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Jason Kint Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jason_kint

May 17
Woah.
Google is effectively trying to buy out the United States by tendering a cashier's check for the claimed max damages from screwing industry with adtech market power abuses. US DOJ's adtech antitrust trial seeking to break them up is months away. 1/4 Image
And then with google's payment, they're trying to get it switched from jury to bench trial. The money is an after thought, what they clearly don't want is a jury of Americans reviewing damning evidence (see Bernanke) which may be harder to appeal leading to structural remedy. 2/4 Image
lol, G. The lawsuit is smart for jury as U.S. explained Google's alleged abuse so Americans understand it by comparing G's market power on all sides to wall street. Hell, Google's own executive made this analogy "if Goldman or Citibank owned the NYSE."
A jury will get this. 3/4 Image
Read 5 tweets
May 14
Bam, clock starts. Facebook just filed its reply brief seeking cert from SCOTUS to reverse its early defeat to dismiss a Cambridge Analytica case. This comes 6+ years after Facebook began laundering press using exhaustion and complexity to whitewash facts of the scandal. /1 Image
But let's start with preposterous argument from Facebook's amici allies as it's also Facebook's core argument to SCOTUS. Facebook argues the scandal was already widely known in 2015. So no reason to disclose in its SEC risk factors in 2016 or 2017 (when it was covering it up!) /2 Image
Let's turn to the opposition which has really pinned down the facts over time correcting press mistakes. They call Facebook out directly on their bad argument. One that would require belief that the stock dropped for other reasons in 2018 when it finally became widely known. /3 Image
Read 10 tweets
May 5
Department of Justice has now posted its hundreds of great slides from closing arguments. I’ll share 13 slides that tell story imho captured by this list.
First, if search defaults don’t matter, why pay approx $30B, 40% of revenue to maintain them? 1/13 Image
DOJ cleverly took this sentence from the DC circuit opinion in U.S. vs Microsoft and replaced it with Google’s search defaults story in red. “Fits like a glove” as they said to Court on Friday. Hard to argue. 2/13 Image
The story on importance of Google’s data harvesting to monopoly maintenance was crystal clear so let’s move on to how DOJ alleges Google was able to use its market power to impact ad prices which drive much of their revenues. 3/13 Image
Read 14 tweets
May 1
There is a report going around Apple is going to facilitate blocking of ads in Safari - it deserves your attention. Meanwhile, I want to connect dots w/ a number of redactions lifted (yellow) late last night in the post-trial docs of US v Google - closing arguments are tmw. /1 Image
It's critical to understand the importance of Safari to their Google deal under microscope. It's reasonable to say Safari delivers nearly 20% of Apple's Income from Ops almost entirely subsidized by Google. Without Safari, there is no Google deal. /2 Image
As the expert witness in the trial pointed out, there isn't a rational explanation for a 40% revenue share on traffic that Google's proxies argue would happen without Apple. But hey, maybe that cash also pays for special influence into Safari's roadmap, too? /3 Image
Read 5 tweets
Apr 11
!!!!! just unsealed, and higher than prior news reports. /1 Image
we learned last Fall in a different G lawsuit (NdCal) during widely reported testimony the number 36% as the share Google paid Apple to be locked in as default search across Apple's surfaces.
But now this was just unsealed from the two key contracts (here is 2014 which even then was 37.5%) /2Image
Here are the various Google and Apple contracts where those screen caps originate. /3 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Read 4 tweets
Mar 26
Whoa. Facebook had a secret "Project Ghostbusters" (get it?) which allegedly was to decrypt "man-in-the-middle" style Snapchat traffic to copy it. Yellow highlight indicates redactions just lifted in nine unsealed plaintiffs briefs in private antitrust lawsuit. Wild stuff. /1 Image
A lot of new stuff. There was lots of reporting (including Apple threats to boot Facebook) at the time on Facebook's software and Onavo acquisition allowing it to "spy" on competitive apps but I recall the decryption was written as a hypothetical. CEO email kickstarting it. /2 Image
You can read the press back in Jan 2019 spoon fed by Facebook PR to friendlies with no mentions of decrypting SSL then compare to this internal email below sent to Facebook's most senior executives - "currently includes SSL decryption"... /3 Image
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(