Hacker News Reader

Comment by scotuswroteus | Hacker News Reader

Reading Facebook's own reports? "“If a new transatlantic data transfer framework is not adopted and we are unable to continue to rely on SCCs (standard contractual clauses) or rely upon other alternative means of data transfers from Europe to the United States, we will likely be unable to offer a number of our most significant products and services, including Facebook and Instagram, in Europe."

View on HN

That's not a "threat". It's a legally-required warning in a regulatory filing for investors of a possible negative event which might occur.

That doesn't mean it's not also a threat. It just means that if it is a threat they can always say "That's not a "threat". It's a legally-required warning in a regulatory filing for investors of a possible negative event which might occur." Facebook knew journalists would see this and may have wanted it to be reported on.

LOL Impossible to argue with such "logic".

Given that the warning is, as you say yourself, legally required, what do you consider to be the most likely primary reason for it being published? It being legally required (and the consequences of violating that), or "knowing journalists would see this"?

Especially since this wasn't the first report where it was included...

It's also enough to make news and sound bites. We are talking about mass media here, not a peer review scientific journal.

They are telling their shareholders if something becomes illegal they will have to cease doing it. You will find similar "threats" in every financial statement or disclosure by every public company.

It already is illegal. Just no regulatory body made a crackdown on it, not yet at least.

That's not a threat, that's a disclosure of what the law says. Every multinational non-user-siloed company makes the same disclosure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com