Hacker News Reader

Comment by quercusa | Hacker News Reader

Is this not standard for BigCorps?

Indeed. I've worked for several and my recollection is that cautions around both what you do and how you talk about things that may be sensitive to regulators (like antitrust, export controls, etc.,) were present in the annual mandatory business conduct training at all of them.

(edit: fix grammar nit)

It is, every big company does this.

_While being explicitly told not to do this_

To be fair, _every big company_ should probably be scared of future anti trust suits.

No one is telling them not to do this. The news just takes things out of context to push agendas.

What's the agenda news is pushing?

You said you work at Google, so open the docs for network QoS. Find the section explaining the difference between AF3 and AF4. Does it still use the "captive" verbiage? Or have they rewritten it to sugarcoat that some customers are locked in with Google products, and they cut costs when they recognize that?

How stupid do you think the judicial system is to see internal networking terminology as an anti competitive thing? How stupid do you think the defendants lawyers are to not show that’s absurd?

Like, intent is a huge portion of the law.

I swear half the time here on HN I feel like I’m talking to robots that ignore context.

Sounds like the post you are replying to is referencing something concrete. I'm not sure what you are saying other than insulting them.

For anyone who knows what they’re talking about, it’s absurd.

Also, I did not insult them. The example they used is entirely unrelated to what this topic is about.

You literally called them stupid.

Where? I said how stupid do you think the judicial system is?

The financial sector has a bunch of regulations on internal communication (mostly around retention and availability), but others don't really, so "explicitly told not to do this" seems like a misrepresentation.

Does that make it OK when the Justice Department comes around?

They were specifically told not to do it by the DOJ and did it anyways.

Can you provide a reference to that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com