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

61–70 of 579 posts

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

#61

Post by newscracker »

pylua wrote: post #27
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…

I’m actually okay with not letting under age people use e2e. I’m not okay with blocking everyone. I have 2 kids.

In a way, this is like saying that one trusts total strangers in some random large tech company and total strangers in government agencies to read and/or manipulate conversations that kids have. This also paves the way to disallow E2EE for other classes of people based on arbitrary criteria. I don’t believe this is good for society overall.

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

#62

Post by thorncorona »

gzread wrote: post #16
Aurornis wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as end-to-end encryption, on SM sites (social media or SadoMasochism, however you want to read it) I don't really see the need. You don't see any benefit to allowing people to encrypt their private communications in a way that can't be accessed by the company? It's weird to see tech news commenters swing from being pro-privacy to anti-privacy when the topic of social media sites come up.

Meta has a way to read your E2EE messages. I don't know what it is, but if they didn't then they wouldn't do it. There's a difference between E2EE between friends who want to remain secure, and E2EE between strangers in an attempt for the platform to avoid legal liability for spam.

for an account 41 days old you participate in a lot of controversial topic threads.

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

#66

Post by randycupertino »

This is one of the first times the court found the platform itself can be liable, overruling frequent industry claims that they just host content and are never responsible for the content. $375 million sounds big but is peanuts compared to their annual revenue. And of course Meta will appeal and then try to drag everything out for years and years. Expect copycat lawsuits.

These platforms expose minors to predators and bad actors, and Meta was proven lying about safety.

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

#67

Post by gostsamo »

fragmede wrote: post #63

So... end to end message encryption means meta can't see messages child molesters are sending to children.

When you see traffic between 40 yo man and 12 yo girl which don't have any common social connections and the messages are initiated by the man, you don't have to crack e2e to suspect dickpicks.

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

#68

Post by b112 »

gostsamo wrote: post #67
fragmede wrote: post #63

So... end to end message encryption means meta can't see messages child molesters are sending to children.

When you see traffic between 40 yo man and 12 yo girl which don't have any common social connections and the messages are initiated by the man, you don't have to crack e2e to suspect dickpicks.

So you want the platform to be creepier and investigate connections more intensely? And you want to intercede on an arbitrary method you just made up, without examining all traffic first?

I seem to recall someone taking pictures of their baby, naked, because it was sick, and emailing them to the doctor -- and having their Apple account terminated. Terminated, with the father being labeled a pedophile, and the police contacted (all automatically).

Everyone was quite upset. Everyone felt it was too intrusive.

Frankly, communication platforms have no business trying to police anything at all. I wouldn't want the phone company recording all my conversations, hunting for trigger words, and then contacting the police or cutting off my phone if I sad "bad word".

Yet somehow it's OK to have this level of intrusion because.. um "computers".

The state has no business listening in on private citizen's communication.

Corporations have no business doing so.

To protect the 12 year girl, something called "her parents" need to pay attention and watch what she does. That's their job. They're her guardian.

Some random corporation has no business in that. Some random corporation has no business being an 'algorithmic parent', an automated machine with no appeal.

Here's something I'd support -- a way for parents to prevent children from registering for accounts, and, to be able to examine children's accounts.

But... then we get into ID verification. Of course, surely you support ID verification for platforms, because if you support platforms knowing the age of people (40 and 12, you listed), then you therefore must support a way to verify those ages.

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

#69

Post by gostsamo »

b112 wrote: post #68
gostsamo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you see traffic between 40 yo man and 12 yo girl which don't have any common social connections and the messages are initiated by the man, you don't have to crack e2e to suspect dickpicks.

So you want the platform to be creepier and investigate connections more intensely? And you want to intercede on an arbitrary method you just made up, without examining all traffic first? I seem to recall someone taking pictures of their baby, naked, because it was sick, and emailing them to the doctor -- and having their Apple account terminated. Terminated, with the father being labeled a pedophile, and the police…

So nice of you to know what I want without me even implying it using examples that are contrary to the conversation making arguments that you've invented for purposes that only you can imagine.

But just imagine that kids' accounts are coming with restrictions and privileges and when one account is marked as such, accounts marked as adult cannot initiate contact and the kids's data is automatically private, and those accounts cannot be comercialized under any shape or form.

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

#70

Post by lostlogin »

randycupertino wrote: post #66

This is one of the first times the court found the platform itself can be liable, overruling frequent industry claims that they just host content and are never responsible for the content. $375 million sounds big but is peanuts compared to their annual revenue. And of course Meta will appeal and then try to drag everything out for years and years. Expect copycat lawsuits. These platforms expose minors to predators an…

After you’ve been complicit in genocide, lesser charges are just not that shocking.

They immunised us.

Post reply on HN