Connect with us

Technology

Instagram co-founder: Zuckerberg saw us as a ‘threat’ to Facebook

Published

on

Instagram co-founder: Zuckerberg saw us as a ‘threat’ to Facebook

When Instagram was acquired for $1 billion in 2012, co-founder Kevin Systrom believed that joining Facebook would help Instagram’s “skyrocketing growth” reach even greater heights.

In some ways, it did. Instagram now has billions of users and has since “generated many multiples of that price and then some,” Systrom said on Tuesday from a Washington, DC courtroom. But according to him, that success often came in spite of, not because of, Facebook’s help.

While testifying in the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit to force the spin-off of Instagram and WhatsApp from Meta, Systrom said that CEO Mark Zuckerberg repeatedly withheld critical resources from Instagram and constrained its growth to avoid harming Facebook’s engagement. To the chagrin of Meta’s attorneys, Systrom also made predictions about how, in hindsight, Instagram would have probably still succeeded on its own.

Over the course of about six hours, Systrom remained steady and confident on the witness stand. Zuckerberg himself sat in the same seat last week, describing how Instagram would likely not have become the social media powerhouse it is today without his help. In contrast, Systrom’s testimony portrayed Zuckerberg as a withholding and jealous boss. He described how he and Instagram’s other co-founder, Mike Krieger, quit in 2018 after growing increasingly frustrated with Zuckerberg’s meddling in Instagram’s operations.

In court, Systrom was presented with an internal chart from that same year detailing the feature integrations Facebook had made with Instagram. With the help of features like notifications promoting Instagram within Facebook and cross-posting between the apps, Instagram experienced growth, while Facebook saw a neutral effect.

Advertisement

Systrom said that, shortly before he and Krieger quit, Zuckerberg decided to end the feature integrations because, in Systrom’s view, he didn’t want Instagram to grow at the expense of Facebook. “We were a threat to their growth,” Systrom testified.

“If Instagram didn’t grow as quickly, Facebook wouldn’t shrink as quickly, or plateau as quickly,” Systrom said in court. “I don’t think he [Zuckerberg] ever said it out loud that way, but that was the only reason we were having this discussion.”

At the time, Instagram had just reached one billion users, which was about half of Facebook’s user base, with a fraction of the employees. Systrom felt that Zuckerberg was “underinvesting” in Instagram and giving it “zero resources,” which Systrom thought was “in stark contrast to the effort I was putting in.”

According to Systrom’s telling, ego played a role. Zuckerberg was “very happy to have Instagram in the family,” he testified. “But also, I think as the founder of Facebook, he felt a lot of emotion around which one was better, meaning Instagram or Facebook, and I think there were real human emotional things going on.”

“I think there were real human emotional things going on”

Advertisement

Systrom recalled other instances where Instagram was denied the resources it needed. When Mark Zuckerberg declared that video would be the next big shift in social networking, Facebook started allocating internal resources towards the push. The company initially allocated 300 employees to making video a prominent part of Facebook, while Instagram received no additional headcount.

Following the Cambridge Analytica data scandal that embroiled Facebook in controversy over its privacy practices, Systrom stated that his organization received “zero” of the billions of dollars in trust and safety resources that Zuckerberg had publicly committed to spending. Instead, he said Instagram was given access to a centralized team that was more focused on Facebook. He also described how, years earlier, Zuckerberg suddenly yanked members of the Facebook growth team who had been deployed to help Instagram.

During cross-examination, Meta attorney Kevin Huff attempted to discredit Systrom’s testimony. He hardly gave an inch by maintaining that Instagram would have likely been successful as an independent company. “You deal in a world of probabilities,” he said. “You can never be sure. Some things you can be more sure of.”

Huff’s questioning of Systrom got tense on several occasions. His stone-faced, one-liner responses prompted rounds of laughter in the courthouse media room, though Judge James Boasberg rarely cracked a smile. When Huff brought up an early email Systrom sent to Zuckerberg crediting an integration with Facebook for much of Instagram’s early growth, Systrom said he was only emphasizing the benefit to appease Zuckerberg.

Huff then asked Systrom if he was lying to Zuckerberg in the email. Seemingly irritated, Systrom stared back and simply said, “Sir.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Technology

Meta asks judge to throw out antitrust case mid-trial

Published

on

Meta asks judge to throw out antitrust case mid-trial

Meta has filed a motion for judgment on the antitrust case it’s currently fighting in court. The motion argues that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has failed to produce any evidence that Meta unlawfully monopolized part of the social networking market, something the government argues it did through its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.

The filing was submitted this evening, shortly after the FTC rested its case in a protracted trial before DC District Court Judge James Boasberg. “After five weeks of trial, it is clear that the FTC has failed to meet the legal standard required under antitrust law,” said Meta spokesperson Christopher Sgro. “Regardless, we will present our case to show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram competes with TikTok (and YouTube and X and many other apps). The FTC spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars bringing a weak case with a market definition that ignores reality.”

A judgment on partial findings asks a judge to consider a case’s merits before it has been fully argued in court, attempting to speed its resolution. The trial is still currently scheduled to proceed, with Meta launching into its defense against the FTC’s allegations, but the filing offers a preview of its case.

As Meta’s lawyers have done in cross-examination, it takes aim at the agency’s description of Meta monopolizing a “personal social networking services” market that people use to share information with family and friends. It argues that the FTC has failed to demonstrate Meta reduced the quality of its services (a key sign that a company lacks competition) or that it bought Instagram to neutralize a potential rival.

The FTC has made its case with testimony from several high-profile players in Meta’s businesses, including Instagram’s co-founder Kevin Systrom — who aired complaints about Meta’s handling of his company — and its current head, Adam Mosseri, who offered a more optimistic take. Meta has countered by emphasizing the company’s persistent struggles against social networks that the FTC doesn’t consider full competitors, particularly TikTok, which, in the war for those aforementioned 17-year-olds’ attention, Meta portrays as a constant scourge.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Technology

What hackers can learn about you from a data broker file

Published

on

What hackers can learn about you from a data broker file

Hackers are pretty scary. Amoral, hooded figures with magical computer skills that can break into anything within minutes. 

At least that is what most of us think of when we hear the term “hacker.” It is not exactly a realistic or particularly representative image, but, at the same time, it is not too far off the mark either. 

What many people do not realize is just how much hackers can learn about you from a data broker file, detailed profiles compiled from your personal information collected and sold by data brokers. This hidden industry fuels much of what hackers use to target individuals today.

Join The FREE CyberGuy Report: Get my expert tech tips, critical security alerts, and exclusive deals — plus instant access to my free Ultimate Scam Survival Guide when you sign up!

Illustration of a person’s personal data. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

Advertisement

What is a data broker, and why should you care?

When most people hear the term “data broker,” on the other hand, they draw a blank. Is it a person or company that buys and sells data? Basically, yes. Data brokers collect, sort, analyze, package and sell access to personal information. Whose personal information? Anyone’s and everyone’s, including yours.

THINK YOU CAN DELETE YOUR DATA YOURSELF? HERE’S WHY YOU’RE PROBABLY WRONG

what hackers can learn 2

Illustration of a person’s personal data. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

THINK YOU CAN DELETE YOUR OWN DATA? WHY IT’S HARDER THAN YOU THINK

What kinds of personal information do they deal in?

Here is a list of possible data points you, random companies, your worst enemy, your neighbors and, yes, hackers can find in a data broker file:

  • Full name
  • Past legal names
  • Known aliases
  • Social media handles
  • Gender
  • Sexual preferences
  • Date of birth or age
  • Social Security number (SSN)
  • Current and past home addresses
  • Current and past phone numbers
  • Current, past and secret email addresses
  • Political preferences and affiliations
  • Occupation
  • Current employer
  • Employment history
  • Business associates
  • Education
  • Marital status
  • Marriage and divorce records
  • Family status (number and ages of children)
  • Relatives
  • Property information
  • Vehicle registration
  • Assets
  • Financial information
  • Bankruptcies, judgments and liens
  • Licenses (drivers license, firearms permits, etc.)
  • Court records
  • Criminal records
  • Mugshots
  • Sex-offender status
  • Health history
  • Location data
  • IP information
  • Device information (phone, tablet and computer models)
  • Web browser information
  • Shopping habits
  • Interests and hobbies.

Quite the list, is it not? It is not exhaustive; there is more that data brokers collect and more yet that they and their customers can infer from data points like these. What exactly a given data broker has will depend on which category it falls into.

HACKERS CLAIM MASSIVE BREACH OF COMPANY THAT TRACKS AND SELLS AMERICANS’ LOCATION DATA

Advertisement
what hackers can learn 3

Illustration of a person’s personal data. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

HOW TO GET RID OF ROBOCALLS WITH APPS AND DATA REMOVAL SERVICES

Types of data brokers: Who’s collecting and selling your information?

The most visible data brokers are commonly known as people search sites or people finder sites. These are the sites that show up when you Google yourself, or a hacker Googles you. They are just the tip of the iceberg, though. There are other data brokers that do not bother indexing individual profiles with search engines, preferring instead to deal with other companies and even governments directly. These are the other major types of data brokers, in addition to people search sites:

Marketing data brokers focus more on your browsing habits, past purchases and interests. They are responsible for “personalized marketing” as well as helping other companies target you with those surprisingly relevant ads you see online.

Recruitment data brokers collect and process personal information to offer background screening services to organizations evaluating job candidates or performing background checks before making an offer. Unfortunately, although illegal, there is nothing actually stopping unscrupulous employers from using the much less regulated and reliable people search sites for the same purposes.

Risk mitigation brokers aggregate a variety of background, criminal, property and other information to provide assessment reports to various investment and business companies. The information they collect is aimed at helping such companies manage risk in taking on new business.

Advertisement

Financial information brokers collect various personal finance and background information for credit companies and banks to calculate your credit score and may influence your eligibility to get loans and lines of credit.

Health information data brokers collect information about your general health and sell it to companies in healthcare and related fields. This information can be used to target you with health product ads and even set your insurance premiums.

Hackers are most likely to use people search sites, though; they are easily accessible, eminently searchable, relatively cheap (with trial offers for as little as a dollar) and do not ask any questions. Other data brokers may also sell personal information to hackers, but they tend to sell profiles in bulk.

DATA REMOVAL DOES WHAT VPNS DON’T: HERE’S WHY YOU NEED BOTH

Want your data taken off this market?

It is perfectly normal to want no part in any of this. Unfortunately, there is no federal law on the books in the U.S. that would either prevent this kind of data trade or give you an easy, legally enforced way to opt out.

Advertisement

The good news is that, thanks to an incomplete patchwork of state laws, personal information removal services can approach hundreds of individual data brokers on your behalf with legally binding data-removal requests.

While no service can guarantee the complete removal of your data from the internet, a data removal service is really a smart choice. They aren’t cheap — and neither is your privacy. These services do all the work for you by actively monitoring and systematically erasing your personal information from hundreds of websites. It’s what gives me peace of mind and has proven to be the most effective way to erase your personal data from the internet. By limiting the information available, you reduce the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web, making it harder for them to target you. Check out my top picks for data removal services here. 

Kurt’s key takeaways

It is easy to feel overwhelmed when you realize just how much of your personal information is out there, and how many different players are collecting, selling and using it. But knowing how data brokers operate is the first step to taking back control. Whether it is people search sites or the less visible brokers working behind the scenes, your data is valuable, and you deserve to know who has it and what they are doing with it. The good news is, there are tools and services out there that can help you clean up your digital footprint and protect your privacy. So, do not just sit back and hope for the best — take action and make your data work for you, not against you.

In your opinion, what should be done to give people more control over their data? Let us know by writing us at Cyberguy.com/Contact

Advertisement

For more of my tech tips and security alerts, subscribe to my free CyberGuy Report Newsletter by heading to Cyberguy.com/Newsletter

Ask Kurt a question or let us know what stories you’d like us to cover.

Follow Kurt on his social channels:

Answers to the most-asked CyberGuy questions:

New from Kurt:

Advertisement

Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.  

Continue Reading

Technology

Love, Death, and Robots keeps a good thing going in volume 4

Published

on

Love, Death, and Robots keeps a good thing going in volume 4

At its best, Netflix’s Love, Death, and Robots creates the same feeling as picking up a collection of sci-fi short stories. You don’t always know what to expect, and not everything is brilliant, but you’re guaranteed to experience something interesting. That was especially true of volume 3 of the animated anthology, which offered nine shorts, all of which were excellent. The latest volume doesn’t quite hit the same heights, nor does it have a singular standout episode like “The Very Pulse of the Machine,” but it’s still a strong offering.

What volume 4 does do well — and it’s something that’s a strength of LDR as a whole — is offer a wide variety of tones and styles. There are still the dark, violent, and hyperreal episodes that are so closely associated with LDR, like “Spider Rose,” a follow-up to last season’s “Swarm,” which tells a cyberpunk story about a woman consumed with revenge who ends up finding it with the help of a very strange creature. There’s also “The Screaming of the Tyrannosaur,” in which trained warriors fight to the death in front of rich dignitaries and royalty, all while racing on dinosaurs. In a strangely inspired bit of casting, the death races are hosted by MrBeast.

But the show also continues to push beyond classic, darker science fiction. There’s a lot of comedy here, for instance. One episode is a confessional for smart devices like connected toothbrushes and toilets, which complain about how horrible it is to serve humans. Another follows a cat intent on world domination, who finds the perfect accomplice when its owners bring home a robotic assistant. And if you enjoyed last season’s “Night of the Mini Dead,” there’s a sequel that similarly turns an alien invasion into a cutesy diorama of death and destruction.

And while the show still skews heavily toward CG animation, there are a pair of great 2D episodes, as well. “How Zeke Got Religion” is pure Heavy Metal and is a story about a group of WWII soldiers who end up fighting a demonic monstrosity summoned by the Nazis. It’s filled with copious amounts of blood and gore and a truly terrifying monster that’s all hands, mouths, and screams. That’s joined by “400 Boys,” a wild and kinetic post-apocalyptic action story about a world filled with warring gangs that join together to fight a group of towering, naked babies that are simply called “boys.”

Volume 4 takes a few fun risks, as well. “Golgotha” is the show’s first fully live-action short, a simple story about a priest, an alien invasion, and a resurrected dolphin who might be the messiah. Like the best of LDR, the episode is satisfying on its own, but it also leaves you wanting to see and learn much more about its world. Not all the episodes are quite so successful. “For He Can Creep” is a fine-if-forgettable tale of a cat fighting Satan, while “Can’t Stop” is an impressive-looking music video that turns the Red Hot Chili Peppers into marionettes but feels pretty out of place amid the rest of the season (and LDR as a whole).

Advertisement

But even the worst episodes of volume 4 are still interesting, and that’s the promise of Love, Death, and Robots, really. Streaming services have helped usher in a new wave of sci-fi anthologies, which have ranged from prophetic and impactful to completely unnecessary. LDR might be the most consistent modern example of the form. It’s funny, violent, and surprising — and almost never boring.

Volume 4 of Love, Death, and Robots is now streaming on Netflix.

Continue Reading

Trending