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

261–270 of 579 posts

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

#261

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

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…

Can confirm.

Source: I was a bad, bad, boi, on UseNet.

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

#262

Post by patrickmcnamara »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #251
eqvinox wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We went a little over the line to figure out where the line is, so, we can now guarantee you, dear shareholder, that we're extracting the absolute maximum possible value! Isn't that splendid!"

More like “we found a company doing business in the EU who has deep pockets. I bet we can get 500 mil from them and they won’t leave.”

Who issued this fine?

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

#263

Post by latexr »

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.

> providing a rebuttal to these points (e.g. that Meta doesn’t actually sell data to anyone)

So one of your suggestions of what the OP could mean was something you explicitly don’t think is true and would argue against? That sounds like a bad faith straw man set up.

Perhaps it’s just as well that the OP didn’t provide one specific reason to be nitpicked ad nauseam by an army of “well ackshually” missing the forest for the trees.

You could, as the HN guidelines suggest, argue in good faith and steel man. The distinction between “selling your data” and “profiting from your data” isn’t important for a high level discussion.

Can you truly not see through Meta’s intentions? There are entire published books, investigations, and whistleblowers to reference. Zuckerberg called people “dumb fucks” for trusting him with their data and has time and again proven to be a hypocrite who doesn’t care about anyone but himself.

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

#264

Post by BrtByte »

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 get the frustration, but I think it's worth separating two things: failing at moderation vs pushing for stricter identity controls

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

#265

Post by tinfoilhatter »

rolandog wrote: post #252
kryogen1c wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Meta is like one giant cancer Cancer is a great metaphor because its a perversion of natural, healthy processes. So called social media is nearly that, but actually grotesquely unhealthy. People are dramatically unwell when they are not social, but that unregulated process is also negative up to and including being lethal.

Exactly. It started out as something good: see what friends and family are up to. But now: scroll infinite algorithmically placed or sponsored rage bait trying to trigger you into behaving the way that advances certain corporate or foreign interests at the expense of whatever was left of our already tattered social fabric and our collective mental or literal health.

[flagged]

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

#266

Post by 1over137 »

rolandog wrote: post #252
kryogen1c wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Meta is like one giant cancer Cancer is a great metaphor because its a perversion of natural, healthy processes. So called social media is nearly that, but actually grotesquely unhealthy. People are dramatically unwell when they are not social, but that unregulated process is also negative up to and including being lethal.

Exactly. It started out as something good: see what friends and family are up to. But now: scroll infinite algorithmically placed or sponsored rage bait trying to trigger you into behaving the way that advances certain corporate or foreign interests at the expense of whatever was left of our already tattered social fabric and our collective mental or literal health.

> It started out as something good

No it didn’t. That was just like the first free sample from the drug dealer. Give a “good” free service to rope them in, always with the next steps in mind.

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

#267

Post by BrtByte »

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

[dead]

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

#268

Post by BrtByte »

csense wrote: post #239

We used to believe in freedom of speech and freedom of association. Since the dawn of the Internet era, we've had a legal principle that platforms are relatively shielded from liability for what their users do. It's the Internet. There's sexual content and sketchy characters on it. Occasionally people will encounter them -- even if they're under 18. Anyone who grew up in the mid-1990s or later, think back to your own…

I think the difference is scale and targeting

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

#269

Post by fuzzfactor »

I don't know who they have to pay it to but that's only for New Mexico, which has about two million people which works out to about $187.50 per person.

That's pretty cheap when it comes to deception.

The eyes of Texas should be upon this, which is 15X the size and should not settle for less than $1000 per person, where deceptive trade practice is much more serious than other places.

Now that would set a $30 billion example which may not be enough of a deterrent either.

But there are probably plenty of people for whom a $5000 one-time payment might not come close to being fair compensation for what's already happened, especially with Meta allowed to continue as an ongoing concern, that's got to be psychologically harmful.

To really fix it each state would have to follow "suit" while greatly upping the ante so there's at least hundreds of billions at stake.

Meta can afford it and who else is responsible for so much widespread sneaky deception at this scale for so long ?

Post reply on HN