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

221–230 of 579 posts

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

#221

Post by jimbokun »

benrutter wrote: post #120
MildlySerious wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things can be true, and I am in the same boat. Should the next generation have their brains fried by ad-tech corporations and their algorithms? Absolutely not. Should the overdue off-ramp from this trend be the on-ramp to mass-surveillance and government overreach? Also a firm no.

I really wish this take was more prominent. I really don't buy that mass-surveillance should be required for age verification. There are plenty of very smart people who have created much more complicated things than a digital age verification that doesn't track every time you use it. This also isn't helpful, but I think the sudden push of urgency isn't helping. The internet has existed without any kind of age verific…

Best time to plant a tree: 30 years ago.

Second best time to plant a tree: now.

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

#222

Post by Aurornis »

b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #159
dwedge wrote: post #108

Maybe I'm just getting old and cynical but, while I think current social media is bad for children, I'm very suspicious of the current international agreement that it's time to take action, especially with all the ID verification coming from multiple avenues

That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users. Unfortunately, social media users don't have billions of dollars to spend on lobbying and related activities around the world.

> That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users.

These lawsuits and regulations are against the industry, not the users.

The regulations and lawsuits are driving the pressure to ID check users and remove end-to-end encryption.

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

#223

Post by GreenVulpine »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #190
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…

No surprise there, Discord sells user data to Meta and X.

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

#224

Post by jimbokun »

b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #159
dwedge wrote: post #108

Maybe I'm just getting old and cynical but, while I think current social media is bad for children, I'm very suspicious of the current international agreement that it's time to take action, especially with all the ID verification coming from multiple avenues

That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users. Unfortunately, social media users don't have billions of dollars to spend on lobbying and related activities around the world.

The ask is to treat users differently based on age. How can they do that without verifying their users age?

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

#225

Post by thomastjeffery »

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.

You are the only one arguing here. Not every conversation is an invitation to argument.

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

#226

Post by jimbokun »

dwedge wrote: post #142
expedition32 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech bros deliberately made digital crack for kids and corporations refuse to moderate online content. There is no conspiracy the general public is faced with a crisis and they are desperate for a solution. The teen suicide statistics do not lie.

The general public is being told they are faced with a crisis. This has been a problem for at least a decade, yet suddenly it's at the forefront and conveniently ties into ID verification for everyone to use general purpose computing. I'm sorry but if you don't think there's a conspiracy I have a bridge to sell you. It was already unveiled that Meta has lobbied billions towards promoting this legislative change

You're arguing there's a conspiracy, but even if there is, what is the best action for governments to take given the devastating impact social media has been demonstrated to have on young people especially?

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

#227

Post by rdevilla »

Aurornis wrote: post #212
rdevilla wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I think you can tell approximately how old someone is by when they believe Eternal September started on the internet. Nobody believes it was when they started enjoying the internet. It was always when some other generation or service arrived after them. The internet was not a calm and well behaved place before Facebook arrived. The original “Eternal September” was in the early 90s. Usenet, forums, Reddit, comment sec…

Hence... "of the web." IRC is and always was a cesspool but at least they had heard of netiquette, and it was something you could choose to partake in - or not, for the lulz. Nobody said anything about being "calm and well behaved" in particular.

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

#229

Post by thomastjeffery »

Aurornis wrote: post #208
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.

> is also lobbying in secrecy for requiring all of us to scan our ID and face in order to use our phones and computers. You’re conflating different things. The OS-level age setting proposals are not the same as scanning IDs and faces. I’m anti age check legislation, too, but the misinformation is getting so bad that it’s starting to weaken the counter-arguments. > Their stated reason? Child safety. > Their actual rea…

[dead]

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

#230

Post by b00ty4breakfast »

jimbokun wrote: post #224
b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users. Unfortunately, social media users don't have billions of dollars to spend on lobbying and related activities around the world.

The ask is to treat users differently based on age. How can they do that without verifying their users age?

we should be removing the harmful aspects of modern social, which are harmful for everyone not just minors, by making them unprofitable or even outright illegal.

Instead we are saying "only adults should use this" which, while technically regulating the industry, places the restriction on users.

We're treating it like tobacco or alcohol (2 industries who have similarly spent millions upon millions of dollars in lobbying efforts) but we should be treating it like asbestos.

Post reply on HN