can someone explain how the fine size is calculated?
Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
311–320 of 579 posts
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#312It takes 7 clicks to turn off ads that promote eating disorders. Thats enough proof.
You can click infinite times not interested on dangerous or adult reels and they’ll just show up more and more.
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#313can someone explain how the fine size is calculated?
Head of a chicken is cut off over a giant dart board, and wherever its headless body lands determines the fine
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#314Make the fine scale, and fit the severity of the issue. This should be $375 Billion not $375 Million. These are our future generations they're destroying.
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#315This is less than 4 days of profit.
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#316Why do we call this company "Meta"? It's the same old "Facebook".
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elitism and selectivity were actually features of the early Internet. High barriers to entry (tech savvy, literacy) ensured that there was a high signal to noise ratio, and thus you had, let's say, upper quartile participants concentrated in one (forum of) fora. LLMs are now heralding the Eternal September of even software engineering, and now I am wondering where to hang up my Techpriest robes in search of more elit…
Elitism and selectivity were actually features of the early Internet. High barriers to entry (tech savvy, literacy) ensured that there was a high signal to noise ratio, and thus you had, let's say, upper quartile participants concentrated in one (forum of) fora. I disagree. I'm of the Neopets/Pokemon forums generation. Elitism and selectivity were not what made that era a good balance between the caustic free-for-all…
[deleted]
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#318Why do we call this company "Meta"? It's the same old "Facebook".
The name of the company is literally Meta. That’s why people call it that…
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#319Why do we call this company "Meta"? It's the same old "Facebook".
[deleted]
Re: Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't figure it out so please enlighten me.
Basically these age attestation/verification laws are being pushed as a "save the children!" scenario. But if you read the laws - all they really do is shift responsibility around. Currently, websites and apps are supposed to ensure they don't have kids under 13, or if they do - that they have the parents permission. That's federal law in the US. These laws make the operating system or app store (depends on the parti…
Forget about the stated reason for the laws. The fact is that it makes sense that people using a service are age-appropriate. And there is no market mechanism (I mean tort law) because of Section 230.
Now the easiest law change - that wouldn't required anyone to change anything - would be to revoke Section 230. This would make service providers liable. Everything else is a band-aid. I doubt that this verdict will survive appeal (due to Section 230). But if it does, then again there is no need for any new regulations. The tort lawyers will solve the problem for us.
If we do have device age verification, then it still doesn't shield Meta. The lawyers will sue everyone involved, and disclosure will show if Meta had data that will have shown that user should have been blocked.
The purpose of age verification is to avoid all this. Of course the current proposals suck and won't achieve this. The market will not accept an approach that would work - which would be for anything with a screen or speaker to be permanently tied to an individual user. "OS verification" cannot succeed - it must be one-time hardware attestation. Even a factory reset wouldn't remove the user assignment.