401–410 of 455 posts
Nevertheless, they still need to revise how their algorithms work because if adults spend a lot of time watching reels for younger minds it might be a lot more harmful.
A lot of people on this story are making the usual snarky remarks that, oh, this is just a slap on the wrist—some trivial proportion of Meta’s global revenue. And that is true, but unlike the EU, for example, New Mexico is a tiny jurisdiction. It only has a little bit more than 2 million people. So actually, a fine—or a judgment—of $942 million that applies just to New Mexico is enormous. If you look at Meta’s revenu…
I don't disagree with anything said here, but it sure would be nice if Meta (and any other companies building social media applications) focused more on what's right for children, both short and long term, than the math of what is profitable.
https://about.fb.com/news/2025/10/instagram-teen-accounts-13...
I guess you could still make the claim that this is just doing the math on what is profitable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of a fine is to change behavior. It's not outsize if it's enough to do that. >If this fine remains, and Meta pays out to the affected parties, these kids could end up rewarded with thousands of dollars for just for having a Facebook or Instagram account. Good. https://www.thefader.com/2015/12/03/on-fleek-peaches-monroee... These platforms are so profitable precisely because they fleece users for way more va…
> The point of a fine is to change behavior. It's not outsize if it's enough to do that. This is definitely not true, or legal. Would a billion dollar fine for speeding change some behaviors? Yes. Is it completely out of proportion? Also yes. There’s a reason punitive damages are capped. Yeah one way to stop bad corporate behavior is fining them into insolvency, but that doesn’t really help anyone unless the company…
Maybe not if the speeder is Mark Zuckerberg. If you have 200 billion, any fine substantially less than a billion might not modify your behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This analysis actually understates how massive and outsized the penalties are. The court ruling only applies to children in New Mexico under age 18. New Mexico has ~450,000 people under age 18, of which roughly 140,000 are between ages 13-17 (Meta officially requires age 13+ to use their platforms). Recent Pew surveys of U.S. teens ages 13–17 show ~70% of teenagers use Instagram and ~30% use Facebook. In New Mexico,…
Kids are not going to see a dime of that money. It will get spent on a lot of political churn, propaganda, pet projects, and maybe some programs that will pay for a couple of hours of counseling for the kids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it already is the dominant culture. just look at the birth rate, as well reported damage from hardcore sex eg anal fissure rates, as well the existence of the western term gooning.
> it already is the dominant culture. just look at the birth rate, as well reported damage from hardcore sex eg anal fissure rates, as well the existence of the western term gooning. When I was about 10, playground rumour was that alllllll men who have sex with men end up in hospital for torn anuses ("my mum says so and she's a nurse!"; I did not believe this at the time, but I was 10 and this was 1993, what was I go…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are of course free to not view it. Why do you think that you should decide for others what they should view? How do you know better than they do, what they should or should not be viewing?
As I got older I began to recognize that some things are just bad for society at large. My refraining from a thing doesn't fix the societal ill the thing causes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I got older I began to recognize that some things are just bad for society at large. My refraining from a thing doesn't fix the societal ill the thing causes.
I suspect this view is actually the majority. Chat Control, the Great Firewall, Indian VoIP control, the Spanish Cloudflare ban and so on point to many societies finding that many things are just bad for society at large. We’re all just fighting over what things are just bad for society at large. In the US, the first amendment exists but in Germany simply displaying the flag of the Nazi party is illegal. The latter h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m doubtful, I think you’re reading it too much as plain English. “Lawful” in a legal context means “in accordance with the law”. You are immune to this law if you are operating under authority granted by law. It would be generally understood that the intent is to immunize police officers, ambulances with sirens, highway construction, etc. People granted specific authority over something by law. Meta has very little…
Not to take one side or another but these assertions are wrong on their face: > Phillip Morris is fundamentally different as a product because it lacks network effects. I can start smoking, quit smoking, change brands, nothing outside of me really changes. Missing out on the socialization of smoke breaks is a huge cultural pull. And remember all the 90's/00's campaigns highlighting the dangers of peer pressure. Not t…
Sure. But the specific claim was that
Phillip Morris is fundamentally different as a product because it lacks network effects.
It's very easy for the members of a smoke break group to continue to interact fully with a member who switches from Marlboro to American Spirit cigarettes. It's a right pain in the ass for the members of a Facebook group to continue to interact fully with someone who switches from Facebook to X/Twitter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And yet, women dont create whole networks of sexual abuse That explains why women like Ghislaine Maxwell or Kat Torres don't exist I guess.
The fact the list ends at 2 women who were already named, when the men involved number in the hundreds and are still being protected, kind of ruins your point…