Meta has run hundreds of ads for cocaine, opioids and other drugs

Post by nadermx » Wed, Jul 31, 2024, 6:51 PM UTC

ricardo81 wrote: post #66

aeturnum wrote: post #42

This is part of a larger pattern for Facebook and other "large scale" advertisers where it's clear they are breaking laws at some rate and are protected from paying a real consequence by the cost of discovering the exact rate of misbehavior. Facebook recently settled a lawsuit related to racially discriminating in housing ads (a federal crime)[1]. I suspect this will get added to the pile of illegal services Facebook…

It does seem like many of the web scale FAANG's had no scaling solution. Facebook and Google in particular are egregious beyond their marketing. e.g. YouTube, how much copyrighted content does G profit off from. And then the 100 variations that slip the 'copyright algo.' I see stuff on there that as a UK TV license payer I've already paid for, and then have to suffer ads. They could not give a hoot.

Post by ricardo81 » Wed, Jul 31, 2024, 6:54 PM UTC

nadermx wrote: post #71

ricardo81 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem like many of the web scale FAANG's had no scaling solution. Facebook and Google in particular are egregious beyond their marketing. e.g. YouTube, how much copyrighted content does G profit off from. And then the 100 variations that slip the 'copyright algo.' I see stuff on there that as a UK TV license payer I've already paid for, and then have to suffer ads. They could not give a hoot.

YouTube is probably a bad example in terms of copyright. They in fact have the most restrictive system of reuse of others work in your work, as a large portion of the videos that are auto struck would probably err more on fair use.

Post by qsdf38100 » Wed, Jul 31, 2024, 6:56 PM UTC

deathanatos wrote: post #43

YouTube has been hitting me up with "ads" which are Ethereum scams¹ recently. Of what I've reported, 60% are still up. Some of these were reported in March. Recently I also got an "ad" for what was almost certainly Sovereign Citizen propaganda, which … wow , I didn't even know they ran YT ads?² Today's ads (since I checked just to see for this comment) is all normal stuff. ¹they allege to have written an "arbitrage"…

Post by rout39574 » Wed, Jul 31, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

nadermx wrote: post #71

ricardo81 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem like many of the web scale FAANG's had no scaling solution. Facebook and Google in particular are egregious beyond their marketing. e.g. YouTube, how much copyrighted content does G profit off from. And then the 100 variations that slip the 'copyright algo.' I see stuff on there that as a UK TV license payer I've already paid for, and then have to suffer ads. They could not give a hoot.

YouTube is probably a bad example in terms of copyright. They in fact have the most restrictive system of reuse of others work in your work, as a large portion of the videos that are auto struck would probably err more on fair use.

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 31, 2024, 7:00 PM UTC

RIMR wrote: post #37

singleshot_ wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prosecutors have a professional responsibility only to bring a case that has a substantial likelihood of a conviction.

When you're Ross Ulbricht (not rich) you get life without parole. When you're Mark Zuckerberg ($166B) "there isn't a substantial likelihood of conviction". You're not wrong, but I wouldn't call maintaining a two-tier justice system a prosecutor's "professional responsibility".