Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 579 posts

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#51

Post by polyomino »

skybrian wrote: post #33
fourside wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the concern but then to make this available for adults you now have to provide proof of age to companies, which opens up another can of privacy worms.

Theoretically we don't actually need proof of age. Websites need to know when the user is attempting to create an account or log in from a child-locked device. Parents need to make sure their kids only have child-locked devices. Vendors need to make sure they don't sell unlocked devices to kids.

Children do not want child locked devices and they will find alternatives

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#52

Post by ndriscoll »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #49
triceratops wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And many don't. Bars, nightclubs, liquor stores, tobacconists, R-rated movies.

We don't see people worried that bars, nightclubs, liquor stores, tobacconists, R-rated movies asking for age verification will slip into requiring names too. It honestly looks like an emotional panic. People who take seriously slippery slopes aren't to be taken seriously themselves. Social media is like e-cigarettes in the sense that the shift toward nicotine salts (think Juul) around 2015 resulted in e-cigarettes b…

Digital age verification laws I've read also literally specifically ban recording that information, unlike in person. People were arguing with me that companies would decide they need to retain that info for audit purposes when there are no audit requirements and when it's illegal to store it for any reason.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#53

Post by skybrian »

polyomino wrote: post #51
skybrian wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically we don't actually need proof of age. Websites need to know when the user is attempting to create an account or log in from a child-locked device. Parents need to make sure their kids only have child-locked devices. Vendors need to make sure they don't sell unlocked devices to kids.

Children do not want child locked devices and they will find alternatives

True, it's never going to be 100%, but at least it's a tractable problem for parents. Enough to change what the culture considers "normal," anyway.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#54

Post by pylua »

simmerup wrote: post #44
pylua wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem like it could potentially be used to enforce mass surveillance over the people of the United States

Alphabet can grep your emails, Amazon has literal microphones and cameras in most peoples houses That ship has sailed

Yes google analyzes everything you upload to it and if it finds a violation will report to the proper gov agencies.

It is actually terrifying . If you write something out of context or upload an image out of context you can be in big trouble.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#55

Post by vel0city »

deepsun wrote: post #45

I cheer any decision that holds any private web property (like Facebook) accountable for it's user actions. It helps to reduce hegemony of large social platforms and promotes privately owned websites. For example, I know everyone who has permissions to post on my website (or pre-moderate strangers comments), and is ready to take responsibility for their posts, what my website publishes. Currently the legal stance see…

If you haven't already, you should look at the court case that prompted the creation of the current legal framework of Section 230. Prodigy was sued because of the things being said in public chatrooms. Should the host for an IRC server be responsible for everything said on the IRC server? Should they pre-moderate all the messages being said there? Should dang premoderate every post on this site?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratton_Oakmont,_Inc._v._Prod....

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#56

Post by triceratops »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #49
triceratops wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And many don't. Bars, nightclubs, liquor stores, tobacconists, R-rated movies.

We don't see people worried that bars, nightclubs, liquor stores, tobacconists, R-rated movies asking for age verification will slip into requiring names too. It honestly looks like an emotional panic. People who take seriously slippery slopes aren't to be taken seriously themselves. Social media is like e-cigarettes in the sense that the shift toward nicotine salts (think Juul) around 2015 resulted in e-cigarettes b…

> People who take seriously slippery slopes aren't to be taken seriously themselves

> Eventually a predatory lending industry developed and we increased the age and ID requirements

I have no idea if you're arguing for or against verification. You dismissed the idea that age verification is a slipper slope to more stringent ID requirements. Then provided an example where the exact opposite happened.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#57

Post by kelseyfrog »

triceratops wrote: post #56
kelseyfrog wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't see people worried that bars, nightclubs, liquor stores, tobacconists, R-rated movies asking for age verification will slip into requiring names too. It honestly looks like an emotional panic. People who take seriously slippery slopes aren't to be taken seriously themselves. Social media is like e-cigarettes in the sense that the shift toward nicotine salts (think Juul) around 2015 resulted in e-cigarettes b…

> People who take seriously slippery slopes aren't to be taken seriously themselves > Eventually a predatory lending industry developed and we increased the age and ID requirements I have no idea if you're arguing for or against verification. You dismissed the idea that age verification is a slipper slope to more stringent ID requirements. Then provided an example where the exact opposite happened.

I'm not arguing that social media will get worse, I'm arguing that it has gotten worse. A slippery slope argues that something will happen. I'm pointing out that it has happened. Huge difference.

Even more, my point is that rules, regulations, and requirements adapt when these changes become unbearable. That has happened with social media, therefore a change in rules, regulations, and requirements is deserved.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#58

Post by ronsor »

vel0city wrote: post #55
deepsun wrote: post #45

I cheer any decision that holds any private web property (like Facebook) accountable for it's user actions. It helps to reduce hegemony of large social platforms and promotes privately owned websites. For example, I know everyone who has permissions to post on my website (or pre-moderate strangers comments), and is ready to take responsibility for their posts, what my website publishes. Currently the legal stance see…

If you haven't already, you should look at the court case that prompted the creation of the current legal framework of Section 230. Prodigy was sued because of the things being said in public chatrooms. Should the host for an IRC server be responsible for everything said on the IRC server? Should they pre-moderate all the messages being said there? Should dang premoderate every post on this site? https://en.wikipedia…

The reality is that people who cheer for this stuff are going to be unreasonably shocked when it comes to bite them later. Once the government's done going after the big guys, the little guys are next, and unlike the big guys, they can't absorb a few fines and judgments.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#59

Post by ronsor »

Aurornis wrote: post #4

Many will cheer for any case that hurts Meta without reading the details, but we should be aware that these cases are one of the key reasons why companies are backtracking from features like end-to-end encryption: > The New Mexico case also raised concerns that allowing teens to use end-to-end encryption on Instagram chats — a privacy measure that blocks anyone other than sender and receiver from viewing a conversati…

This is the core issue.

We know that this isn't really going to reduce harm for children, we know Meta is not seriously going to suffer or change, and we know this is going to be used as a cudgel to beat down privacy and increase surveillance.

Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms

#60

Post by bdangubic »

Aurornis wrote: post #4

Many will cheer for any case that hurts Meta without reading the details, but we should be aware that these cases are one of the key reasons why companies are backtracking from features like end-to-end encryption: > The New Mexico case also raised concerns that allowing teens to use end-to-end encryption on Instagram chats — a privacy measure that blocks anyone other than sender and receiver from viewing a conversati…

This is a good thing for “social” media. If you use any social media app (especially those owned by Meta) you should assume that absolutely everything you do is for full public consumption. Maybe these changes will make everyone stop thinking that anything is private when using “social” media apps.
Post reply on HN