Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works
by nomel on Sunday October 16, 2022 @02:12PM
(#33225811)
“Legal peril” and “I think” are not compatible, for a rational person. “I know” is where you want to be, before putting yourself in front of one of the largest collections of lawyers on the planet.
Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works
by dapids on Sunday October 16, 2022 @02:31PM
(#33225971)
This is not some general blanket approach you can take to talking about internal implementations. You are either right, or wrong. There is no middle ground or "I think". If you've signed an NDA around these internal implementations I would wager that NDA came with a clause to not discuss it without consulting Meta, even after your departure.
Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works
by nindalf on Sunday October 16, 2022 @03:01PM
(#33226227)
I feel like your concern is genuine. But maybe overblown. I haven’t shared any trade secrets so I’m confident I’ll be fine.
Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works
by throwaway98797 on Sunday October 16, 2022 @04:01PM
(#33226731)
technical people want technical confirmation
that does not exist, they can’t understand that
you are fine, thank you for the post
Re:XCheck at Meta: Why it exists and how it works
by shadowgovt on Sunday October 16, 2022 @04:04PM
(#33226754)
And it's obviously BS that companies can abridge a citizen's freedom of speech after the employment agreement ends. If this individual wants to be the case on the lawsuit that's a long time coming, more power to them.
This Supreme Court is not big-tech-friendly; good time to shift up the precedent.
My reasoning is two fold - I haven’t shared anything that could be exploited by anyone. And second, Meta and others in the industry try to share information about how their integrity efforts work so we can learn from each other.