Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms • Hacker News Board

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

#341

Post by simion314 » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:02 PM UTC

jprjr_ wrote: post #295

simion314 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>to push the age verification requirement off to the app store providers, and makes more sense, Apple and Google have your credit card , or if you are a parent that bought soem phone for you child then at first boot up as a parent should be your job to setup a child account.

> at first boot up as a parent should be your job to setup a child account. Something I would be 100% OK with is some regulation that at first boot, you have to present information about what parental controls are available on the device and ask if you'd like them enabled. I haven't set up a phone in a hot minute, I only do it once every few years, is this something they already do? I'd imagine there's a lot of cases…

Exactly, I did not seen such a screen, but this giants have the budget to hire UX experts to clearly design the initial setup to clearly ask if this device is for a child or if is for multiple users to make more accounts. Also to make happy the other guy that commented they could ask you if you do not want to sure adult content too and in that case set same flags int he system.

Seems such a simple solution rather then each appa nd website having to figure out a way to do it.

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

#342

Post by tinfoilhatter » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:09 PM UTC

Quarrelsome wrote: post #289

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you require everything you read to spell out everything for you point blank? Are you unable to connect dots? The DARPA lifelog project ended the day Facebook was announced by a college dropout no one had ever heard of before. Facebook just happened to have the exact same goals / features as the lifelog project. Must just be a giant coincidence huh?

yeah I'm sure an immensely powerful and shadowy conspiracy trusted their most critical operation to a 20 year old college dropout. Makes sense to me.

Have you ever considered the idea that Zuck is just an actor / a face?

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

#343

Post by tombert » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:10 PM UTC

They had to pay about $375 million. That's a lot of money, but I suspect that Facebook has made considerably more than that on targeting children.

I'm hardly the first person to use this logic, but if they make more money breaking the law than they have to pay in fines, then it's not a fine, it's a business expense.

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

#344

Post by billfor » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:12 PM UTC

and also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47514916 It might be good to roll all the comments together.

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

#345

Post by kakacik » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:13 PM UTC

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

Well then don't give them money to do so, its not like phones grow on trees. If you make selling phone/internet device to a minor under certain threshold an illegal act severely punished by law in same way alcohol and cigarettes are, many cases of access are solved. Also, paid internet subscription doesn't grow on the trees even though there are free wifi networks.

All imperfect solutions, but they slice original huge problem into much smaller chunks which are easier to tackle with next approach.

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

#346

Post by NickC25 » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:17 PM UTC

1. This fine is 1/100th the size it should be. Make them pay, and break up Meta/facebook. 2. Age verification pushes coming from several different actors across gov't and private sector is worrying. I trust no actor here, and neither should you. 3. Zuck should be in jail.

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

#347

Post by fridder » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:18 PM UTC

I wonder if this stand and if it will lead to more suits against Meta.

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

#348

Post by WarcrimeActual » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:22 PM UTC

I haven't read this article, but I can tell you for certain that no verdict was handed down that will punish them in any way that matters. They have and generate more money than they could ever spend and they're functionally above the law because of the money and lawyers they can afford. The law itself is broken in this country and when you get big enough you can literally get away with murder.

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

#349

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Mar 25, 2026, 5:22 PM UTC

zeeshana07x wrote: post #213

Fines like this only work if they're large enough to change behavior. $375M for a company Meta's size is more of an accounting entry than a deterrent.

What is Meta’s revenue in New Mexico?

Also, “the total civil penalty of $375m was reached after the jury decided there were thousands of violations of the act, each with a maximum penalty of $5,000. Meta is also involved in a separate trial in Los Angeles, in which a young woman claims that she became addicted to platforms like Instagram and YouTube, owned by Google, as a child because of how they are intentionally designed.

There are thousands of similar lawsuits winding their way through the US courts.”