Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 493 posts

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#81

Post by superxpro12 »

hugodan wrote: post #16

still feels like they got away easy for raping children's minds "Meta has long argued it could not have misled consumers about whether its services were addictive because "social media addiction" is not a recognized psychiatric condition." that's a nice escape hatch, considering that they are using all the tricks in the book (from online gambling, etc) and then some

not a recognized psychiatric condition as they employ how many psychiatrists on staff to specifically engineer this addition. i hate that the standard of evidence for these claims is impossibly high. Like you need an email from zuck himself that says "i want to mind rape young boys"... when there's mountains of evidence of them working to that exact goal... they just didnt say "mind rape young boys". The actions and results speak plainly enough. WE dont need zuck himself to confirm it.

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#82

Post by richwater »

kwanbix wrote: post #11
julianpye wrote: post #4

The WSJ reports: "As part of the settlement agreement, Meta will also make sweeping changes to its services, Facebook and Instagram, including implementing a default two-hour time limit on its apps for users under 18." The question is of course if these limits are enforced and if they are shared across other services.

Two hours is one hour too long if you ask me. This should be implemented also for adults. And non-avoidable.

Why do you support a nanny state that tells adults what content they are allowed to consume?

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#85

Post by tiahura »

hugodan wrote: post #16

still feels like they got away easy for raping children's minds "Meta has long argued it could not have misled consumers about whether its services were addictive because "social media addiction" is not a recognized psychiatric condition." that's a nice escape hatch, considering that they are using all the tricks in the book (from online gambling, etc) and then some

America defaults to free. That's very unsettling for those that prefer an authoritarian approach.

Maybe all these state AGs knew there was a good chance of losing because the facts aren't as strong as the narrative?

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#86

Post by DamnInteresting »

jcmoscon wrote: post #55

I think worse than social media nowadays is youtube shorts. That thing is so addictive to kids. I wish there was a way to delete shorts from youtube and have only long form videos available in the app.

Agreed, YouTube Shorts and similar pap (e.g., Tik Tok) seem corrosive to a developing mind...the mindless content, automatic looping, serving up one shallow video after another. It's no wonder the tech CEOs insulate their own kids from this stuff[1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/technology/silicon-valley...

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#87

Post by jimmyjazz14 »

hax0ron3 wrote: post #61

So if I write a book that your kid just can't stop reading it over and over again because I deliberately made it compulsively re-readable, and then your kid develops some kind of issues because my book is so interesting to him, you can sue me and win? I don't like that idea. Personally, I value free speech more than some supposed "harms" done to children by content. Content that they can easily stop consuming by just…

Agreed, this is just setting the stage for requiring age verification (and surveillance) under the pretense of "saving the children".

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#88

Post by sajithdilshan »

julianpye wrote: post #4

The WSJ reports: "As part of the settlement agreement, Meta will also make sweeping changes to its services, Facebook and Instagram, including implementing a default two-hour time limit on its apps for users under 18." The question is of course if these limits are enforced and if they are shared across other services.

It’s gonna be like micro dosing drugs. Like what kind of a lawmaker would think that’s okay

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#89

Post by slopinthebag »

kwanbix wrote: post #11
julianpye wrote: post #4

The WSJ reports: "As part of the settlement agreement, Meta will also make sweeping changes to its services, Facebook and Instagram, including implementing a default two-hour time limit on its apps for users under 18." The question is of course if these limits are enforced and if they are shared across other services.

Two hours is one hour too long if you ask me. This should be implemented also for adults. And non-avoidable.

You think the state should restrict what adults do on their phones?

Re: Meta reaches $17B settlement over social media harms to children

#90

Post by kingleopold »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #64
dbbk wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Market cap isn't real money

it's funny how it's real money when it's useful and fake money when it's not

well that is Schrödinger's finance for you, they decide whether to say its fake or real based on their own benefit.
Post reply on HN