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

181–190 of 579 posts

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

#181

Post by [deleted] »

Permit wrote: post #172
latexr wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only thing I can say is: No I cannot figure it out On the contrary, looks like you can: > (…) sell the user's data (…) use this information to train AI models (…) use this information to serve Ads

What’s the point in providing a rebuttal to these points (e.g. that Meta doesn’t actually sell data to anyone) if the OP can simply say “that’s not what I meant”? They are taking a position that cannot be argued against or even discussed because they don’t make that position clear.

[deleted]

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

#182

Post by IAmBroom »

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

Imperfect solutions are still called "solutions".

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

#183

Post by IAmBroom »

usr1106 wrote: post #94
pylua wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

There is no reason kids should use so called smart devices, except making certain companies richer. Kids have had a healthy development without such crap for thousands of years. We don't discuss what percentage of alcohol should be allowed in beer and wine for kids.

The French (watered wine) and British (shandies) do.

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

#184

Post by DivingForGold »

electric_muse wrote: post #103

The same company intentionally driving minors towards this content (despite claiming to care about them) is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. Their stated reason? Child safety. Their actual reason? You can figure that out.

Actually. Meta is spending millions to push the age verification requirement off to the app store providers, such as Google and Apple. It's an attempt to shield Meta from liability, transfer it to the app providers.

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

#185

Post by h2zizzle »

rdevilla wrote: post #160
forkerenok wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta is like one giant cancer that grew a few small tumors of benign[1] nature, like some of their efforts in open source and open research (React, Llama, etc.). [1]: I could be wrong thinking those are benign.

Facebook was the Eternal September of the Web. Netiquette died when it was made generally available, as did the culture that spawned it.

As a Millennial, I'm sad to say that it wasn't even older generations' fault, but our own (+Gen X). The tipping point was letting in normies who traded in photos and money instead of text and art.

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

#186

Post by ubiton »

electric_muse wrote: post #103

The same company intentionally driving minors towards this content (despite claiming to care about them) is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. Their stated reason? Child safety. Their actual reason? You can figure that out.

[dead]

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

#187

Post by philipallstar »

netfortius wrote: post #165
forkerenok wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta is like one giant cancer that grew a few small tumors of benign[1] nature, like some of their efforts in open source and open research (React, Llama, etc.). [1]: I could be wrong thinking those are benign.

A few weeks after they expanded access beyond .edu domains, I deleted my account. Haven't looked back since. Not an ounce of regret.

Exactly. Why should furrin students get a look in?

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

#188

Post by philipallstar »

noduerme wrote: post #152
electric_muse wrote: post #103

The same company intentionally driving minors towards this content (despite claiming to care about them) is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. Their stated reason? Child safety. Their actual reason? You can figure that out.

To be fair, they're just an evil corporation making lemonade out of lemons. I'm sure they'd be happier pushing porn and nazism to hundreds of millions of underage users, but if certain governments want them to write all that bunk code to verify everyone's ID, they might as well make money off the data.

They're a lot more likely to push socialism than nazism. Hence all the socialism and the lack of nazism.

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

#189

Post by mnw21cam »

forkerenok wrote: post #107
electric_muse wrote: post #103

The same company intentionally driving minors towards this content (despite claiming to care about them) is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. Their stated reason? Child safety. Their actual reason? You can figure that out.

Meta is like one giant cancer that grew a few small tumors of benign[1] nature, like some of their efforts in open source and open research (React, Llama, etc.). [1]: I could be wrong thinking those are benign.

I think Zstandard would be the most benign example.

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

#190

Post by giancarlostoro »

electric_muse wrote: post #103

The same company intentionally driving minors towards this content (despite claiming to care about them) is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. Their stated reason? Child safety. Their actual reason? You can figure that out.

I mean, their telemetry crap is on a lot of apps too. I remember someone DMing me something very niche on Discord, and by chance I opened up Facebook, it gave me ads for that very, very niche thing I have never even looked up on Google, or Facebook, it was like IMMEDIATE. I opened up Facebook by chance, and voila.

The other one was the time I was speaking to my brother in law, who had just paved his driveway, he said "I could have used airport grade tar, but thought it was too much" and we were in front of his Nest security cam is the only thing I can think of, but the very next morning, I'm scrolling through Facebook, and sure enough, someone local is advertising airport grade tar. Why? I didn't google this, I only heard it from them.

There's some serious shenanigans going on with ad companies, and we just seem to handwave it around.

Coincidentally, I remember both experiences very very vividly, because this was the last time I used either platform in any meaningful capacity.

Post reply on HN