I fail to see a substantial connection to the case as it is, at least outside the court of public opinion.
Zatko does not seem to bring obviously true and relevant information with respect to the impact of the `mDAU`-metric on the adversing business to the table. There is a lot of "Zatko is of the opinion/Zatko has observed/Zatko came to the conclusion"; that's what Discovery is for. Also, there are a lot of gems that actually state the obvious, like Zatko learned from sensitive sources that if accurate measures become public, it might hurt Twitter's image or valuation - duh, did those sensitive, secret sources also assert that Cigarettes cause cancer and Cigarette companies fail to mention that?
As far as a possible MAE may or may not be likely: It is unknowable how the actual business had been affected, or how regulatory action might affect Twitter in the future, because there has not actually been an Effect yet; the FTC or SEC or whoever could very well come out with a Non-Action. So as far as this is not a slam-dunk Cought-The-CEO-With-A-Briefcase-Full-Of-Money-And-Cocaine Whistleblower, how can we assume a MAE - after all, there are serious Whistleblowers all the time, and the Companies mostly survive, mostly unaffected (while management might get shitcanned).
I fail to see a substantial connection to the case as it is, at least outside the court of public opinion.
Zatko does not seem to bring obviously true and relevant information with respect to the impact of the `mDAU`-metric on the adversing business to the table. There is a lot of "Zatko is of the opinion/Zatko has observed/Zatko came to the conclusion"; that's what Discovery is for. Also, there are a lot of gems that actually state the obvious, like Zatko learned from sensitive sources that if accurate measures become public, it might hurt Twitter's image or valuation - duh, did those sensitive, secret sources also assert that Cigarettes cause cancer and Cigarette companies fail to mention that?
As far as a possible MAE may or may not be likely: It is unknowable how the actual business had been affected, or how regulatory action might affect Twitter in the future, because there has not actually been an Effect yet; the FTC or SEC or whoever could very well come out with a Non-Action. So as far as this is not a slam-dunk Cought-The-CEO-With-A-Briefcase-Full-Of-Money-And-Cocaine Whistleblower, how can we assume a MAE - after all, there are serious Whistleblowers all the time, and the Companies mostly survive, mostly unaffected (while management might get shitcanned).
Your analysis continues to be on-point, Lukas. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.