Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

231–240 of 502 posts

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

#231
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I'd prefer facebook to not give away free drugs to the drug addicts.

Social media is one of the most insidious addictions, it doesn't cost money and your physical health is largely unimpacted. The real impact is on society and the family. My Facebook addict mother could be talking to friends, reading a book, or doing anything mentally/physically/socially productive other than scrolling for hours looking at junk content and AI slop.

A parent of young children could be interacting with their kids and building lasting connections instead of scrolling through tiktok to watch the mommy bloggers interacting with their kids. Or alternatively, setting unrealistic expectations of what a good parent does for their children and basically saying anyone not doing the same is a bad parent. My parents loved me and gave me a great childhood but my working mom wasn't up at 4am making trad wife breakfasts and lunches in the kitchen. My wife likes watching that stuff. I always point out how fancy of a kitchen the trad wife has and that she can afford to spend hours a day baking and cooking because she is wealthy, doesn't need to work a 9-5, and likely has a nanny to take care of the kids while she's filming and editing daily content. These aren't baking recipes being shared, this is content implying that to be a good mother you need to only shop at Whole Foods and bust your ass in the kitchen for hours on end.

A young adult is consuming vast amounts of unrealistic body imagery (whether it's "fitness" influencers or porn) and harming themselves to achieve the same. Sure, a fat and ugly person doesn't attract the same views as fit and pretty person but it turns a dark corner when the algorithm starts pushing ED content.

Grandpa is addicted to false or misleading political feeds to the point where he's near militant in his support for someone that's more interested in leveraging identity politics for power and money than actually helping improving the life of someone like grandpa. I'm still convinced that the vast amount of radical/alarmist traditional and social media my grandfather was fed manifested into depression and contributed to his suicide.

I don't think there needs to be strong limits on the content itself. Maybe some restriction on outright lies if it's not presented as entertainment or fiction. But what needs to happen is some sort of rollback on how good these feed algorithms are. It's not really healthy and no one except the social media companies are truly benefiting at the end of the day.

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

#233
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but politicians get to claim this is a win. Let's be honest, that's the real reason the prosecution went for a deal this small.

And if people do not think Meta settled without input from the Trump administration and a possible reward for doing so, well, I got this bridge in Brooklyn to sell you, barely used. I wonder which way Facebook's algorithms will tilt in this years mid-term elections....

Do you have any evidence of this, or is this just another anti-Trump conspiracy theory?

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

#234
post #32
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

>[irreparably damaging] children's minds I’d love for someone to get me into Mark Zuckerberg’s head on why he should keep doing what he’s doing.

People are always the hero from their own perspective. I'm certain in his mind that he's just connecting friends, family, and improving society's ability to socialize, so forth and so on. Put more cynically - the first person a good liar lies to is themselves, though I think often it doesn't even start as a lie. People just end up pursuing something and ultimately creating something entirely different, but remain unable to see that.

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

#235
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

The sibling comment, talking about Schrödinger, is correct for the wrong reason.

The share price is essentially always fake, because the ticker price of any given symbol is in a superposition of all possible values until it gets traded. The bigger the trade you try to make, the bigger the shift you directly cause to the value while you're attempting to make the trade.

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

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't make that argument. I responded to the statement: > You think the state should restrict what adults do on their phones? The state already does that.

You know what point I was making, why are you being pedantic? What are you bringing to this conversation?

There's a big difference between "the state should start doing something that it does not do/hasn't ever done" and "the state controls something and it should change the way it does that".

That's not pedantry. That's the difference between "darn gub'mint won't let me land my private jet on the freeway" and "darn gub'mint lowered the speed limit on the freeway".

If you want to argue that the state shouldn't control phone use related to social media, you need to engage with the ways they already control phone use, and whether/how well those work (and have a complex conversation about the costs/benefits of adding an additional control); it's dishonest to frame it as a qualitative shift from not restricting what adults do on their phones to doing that.

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

#237
post #213

So a literal slap on the wrist that doesn’t discourage or stop the actually harmful behavior. Look, I get that certain demographics are terrified of another Arthur Andersen-esque collapse of a firm, but if we don’t punish companies to the point of possible insolvency, then we’re creating a moral hazard wherein more companies will continue engaging in harmful behavior because they know they won’t ever be held properly…

What do you do about people who make their livelihoods on these platforms? Personally idgaf about them - I feel they contribute. But I want to know what you think.

It sucks.

On the one hand, I think destroying Meta and social media in its current form would be a net good; same with fossil fuel companies.

Though you raise an issue (“what about folks whose livelihoods depend on the harm perpetuated”) rather than reject the premise using such reasoning, which is the absolute right attitude to have. It’s easy to sit on my high horse and tut-tut folks reliant on Facebook Marketplace or Gas Station Convenience Store shifts for their livelihoods, but that’s not helping jack shit. Personally, I believe part of the punishment should be leveraging the fines or damages collected to build social support systems for genuine victims - which includes working class folks who had to choose between starving/homelessness or survival. I lack the policy expertise to make specific pitches, but we do need to keep those folks in mind as a means of learning from Arthur Andersen and Enron: punish those creating the harm, while helping those who were casualties of the collapse but not directly complicit themselves.

It’s hard. It’s complex. Some folks will fall through the gaps due to our abysmal social safety nets. That being said, those numbers are infinitely smaller than the folks harmed by social media in its current form, and thus the trade is a net good.

Using this new problem to justify not addressing the current one is the worst move we could make.

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

#238
post #45
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

The smoking gun here is that they actually hired psychologists and experts in creating addictive stuff from e.g. the gambling industry. It clearly shows that their intent was "make this as addictive as possible." Then they ignored tons and tons of warning signs that this was having a negative effect especially on children and the elderly. Now I think they need to hit YouTube, TikTok, and addiction-engineered loot box…

From the casinos (Natasha Dow Schull and Addiction by Design) to Stanford and BJ Fogg's Persuasive Design Lab fast forward to AI to hyperboost the addiction and that's where we're at.

Not even grown ups have the capacity to resist the brainwashing capacity and the power asymmetry.

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

#239

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.

There is a way. Disable your viewing history and puff, shorts are gone

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

#240

Meta has warped society to think that life is meaningless without affirmation. No amount of money can fix that or punish them. I think that sharing things can be wonderful, but monetizing that or adding Like counts to gamify it is very damaging to people. This idea that everyone should know better and take a ideological stand against some dumb app is ridiculous. Life can be hard at times, and these apps manipulated t…

>Meta has warped society to think that life is meaningless without affirmation. No, Meta just amplified it to the nth degree. Humanity has always put an outsized emphases on such affirmation, whether it's reputation, status, belonging, approval, prestige, attractiveness, respectability, yadda yadda yadda. Consumer culture and mass media were already firmly entrenched and doing a damn good job of turning those into vi…

> Meta has warped society to think that life is meaningless without affirmation

> No, Meta just amplified it to the nth degree. Humanity has always put

Those statements are the same. Our species was not designed to deal with the pressures of a A/B tested content fairy, designed by the most well paid minds our most advanced societies have trained, running on infrastructure that is more expensive than the GDP of many nations.

There are bounds within which a system functions optimally. When pushed far beyond those bounds, indefinitely, it is absolutely accurate to say the system becomes warped.

Post reply on HN