Asked to comment, a Meta spokesperson told The Register, "We value input from civil society organizations and academic institutions for the context they provide as we constantly work toward improving our services. Meta's defense filed with the Brazilian Consumer Regulator questioned the use of the NetLab report as legal evidence, since it was produced without giving us prior opportunity to contribute meaningfully, in violation of local legal requirements."
translation: they knew we would either squash the investigation attempt outright or change their research methodology and results until we looked like the good guys, and that kind of behavior cannot be tolerated
no one said this
if you had actually read the article instead of just reacting to it, you would probably understand that the purpose of the second paragraph is to lead to the first section where he tears down the field of data science as full of opportunistic hucksters, shambling in pantomime of knowledgeable people. he's bragging about his creds, sure, but it's pretty clearly there to lend credence that he knows what he's talking about when he starts talking about the people that "had not gotten as far as reading about it for thirty minutes" before trying to blindly pivot their companies to "AI".
hello? oh, yes, i'll have one drive-by projection with a side of name-dropped fallacy. yes, reddit-style please. and a large soda
"not reading" isn't a virtue