Getting a 403 error on their site, but the archive remembers [0] and yeah - that website is wildly sus.
Lil offtopic: This is interesting stuff on its own, so I don't want to distract from the important discussion. However, OP might want to know: I don't think I've ever seen a new account's first (utterly inoffensive) comment show up [dead] like theirs [1]. (You might need [showdead] on to see that, idk.)
What’s striking here is how much of this is technically public information, yet practically impossible to see without doing the kind of stitching you did. It highlights how “transparency” can exist on paper while the real picture remains buried across dozens of filings and databases.
I think the automatic answer people have for big corporation - to have more data is usually false. I think they don't care about your data that much. And generally they respect it. They mostly need data to target ads and they have it already.
I think in case of regulations like this, it would be harder for small players to participate in the market, and thus they would prefer to use Facebook or Instagram instead of opening a website or their own system.
The same with cookies alerts, GDPR, DMA, etc. It is not a problem for a large player to implement it, but now creating a fully legal website processing data becomes quite expensive and it is easier to just use a platform provided by a large player.
I sometimes wonder who is insane enough to be behind these schemes.
I mean what degree of alienation does it require to setup a website that claims to be about an advocacy group for children safety, while it is in fact a fake site for an org funneling lobbying money into passing laws that makes their boss more money. How can they live like this?
And then I remember the Monsanto lobbyists, the Sacklers' enablers, the cigarette people and the oil lawyers. I guess there is just a ton of people who are natural born minions.
> there is just a ton of people who are natural born minions
Yeah I think that's kind of it.
I'd prefer to believe that it's school/culture/religion making people like that... And those are definitely factors.
However, I personally think that it's probably just more effective, evolutionarily speaking, to not have too many independent thinkers in a tribe.
The 'funny' part is that we call the people who are naturally resistant to following the herd "neurodivergent" - and then try to medicate them into conformity. As if the herd is doing such a great job right now.
There's got to be a better way to share this than:
Where your HN post says "several months of work" but your repo doesn't have months of commits, and claims you started researching... 2 days ago.> Research period: 2026-03-11 to present
Yeah, a way where they hand you all their personal info for profiling, cyberbullying and threats?
You can run a git repo indefinitely without connecting it to github. Creating anonymous accounts on HN and GitHub doesn't open you to threats.
Technical expertise that most journalists don't have.
Update regarding UK, Brazil, Meta global involvement, Heritage Foundation, et more: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rtd51g/update_i_pul...
Similar info to the reddit post that's been linked here
https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_b...
Getting a 403 error on their site, but the archive remembers [0] and yeah - that website is wildly sus.
Lil offtopic: This is interesting stuff on its own, so I don't want to distract from the important discussion. However, OP might want to know: I don't think I've ever seen a new account's first (utterly inoffensive) comment show up [dead] like theirs [1]. (You might need [showdead] on to see that, idk.)
Anyone have any insight?
0 - https://web.archive.org/web/20250324144815/https://www.digit...
1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47361290
It is a bit bizarre . Isn't it just a link [0] to their github repository? The same as in OPs post?
0 - https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings
What’s striking here is how much of this is technically public information, yet practically impossible to see without doing the kind of stitching you did. It highlights how “transparency” can exist on paper while the real picture remains buried across dozens of filings and databases.
Findings: https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings...
Fantastic research
The real question is why? How does this make meta more money?
I think the automatic answer people have for big corporation - to have more data is usually false. I think they don't care about your data that much. And generally they respect it. They mostly need data to target ads and they have it already.
I think in case of regulations like this, it would be harder for small players to participate in the market, and thus they would prefer to use Facebook or Instagram instead of opening a website or their own system. The same with cookies alerts, GDPR, DMA, etc. It is not a problem for a large player to implement it, but now creating a fully legal website processing data becomes quite expensive and it is easier to just use a platform provided by a large player.
This is not about making money.
Because it allows them to collect more personal information which is illegal, at least in EU ( for the moment,)
Afaik whole scheme started when Australian politicians threatened gambling advertising ban.
"It's for the kids," they say.
Yeah, right..
Damn good work! Love it.
Re-posting findings, cause somehow OP's message was downvoted:
https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings...
I sometimes wonder who is insane enough to be behind these schemes.
I mean what degree of alienation does it require to setup a website that claims to be about an advocacy group for children safety, while it is in fact a fake site for an org funneling lobbying money into passing laws that makes their boss more money. How can they live like this?
And then I remember the Monsanto lobbyists, the Sacklers' enablers, the cigarette people and the oil lawyers. I guess there is just a ton of people who are natural born minions.
> there is just a ton of people who are natural born minions
Yeah I think that's kind of it.
I'd prefer to believe that it's school/culture/religion making people like that... And those are definitely factors.
However, I personally think that it's probably just more effective, evolutionarily speaking, to not have too many independent thinkers in a tribe.
The 'funny' part is that we call the people who are naturally resistant to following the herd "neurodivergent" - and then try to medicate them into conformity. As if the herd is doing such a great job right now.