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

281–290 of 508 posts

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

#281

Post by butlike »

matherial wrote: post #258
jjulius wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The affirmation we were accustomed to generally had some substance. If someone called, sent you a postcard, or met with you, it probably meant they cared at least to some extent. For the Average Joe, absolutely! Completely agreed. >Social media strips all that away to the point where affirmation costs no effort to give but also means nothing. Here's a test I like to recommend: don't post anything on HN, X, or Facebo…

I don't think it's the same. People usually don't see their "relationship" with celebrities as peer-to-peer. They either look up or look down on them (i.e., idolize or hate). So the attention you get from fans as a celebrity is actually a lot more meaningful. People go to great lengths to tell you about the impact you had on their life and they don't forget you easily. The scale makes it awkward, but the emotions are…

I always thought fandom was '3rd party.' Like, you have an actor in a high-exposure job, but the more the middleware companies boost the allure of any arbitrary celebrity, the more money they'll make. The actor may address 'the people at large' during press events, but by-and-large, don't really interface with fans all that much.

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

#282

Post by intended »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #228
yodsanklai wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this has to do with free speech. If companies can deliberately harm kids, they should be regulated.

This isn't regulation. If it was regulation, Meta could just read the regulation and comply and they'd be in the clear. This is the judicial branch making up and enforcing regulations that don't exist based on their own personal opinions about what causes "harm". No way to know what you need to do to comply until after you're already getting sued.

> personal opinions about what causes "harm " Source that it was their personal opinion?

I've personally read multiple research papers, worked in the field, AND read the transcripts where people at Meta told their leadership that their choices were causing harm. For years.

Sorry, but have you read the details of the case, or am I missing something?

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

#283

Post by intended »

tftr wrote: post #213
stego-tech wrote: post #51

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.

The cost to society for smoking cigarettes was more than the benefit of people who worked in those industries.

No industry this large, will be without second and third degree effects.

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

#286

Post by cryptonym »

ben_w wrote: post #226
cryptonym wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may earn 100k/y and have 10M real estate + 2M in bank. Why would you dumb down market cap to earnings? Anyway, 6K for harming children at that scale remains ridiculous.

> Why would you dumb down market cap to earnings? The point is "Market cap is BS". > Anyway, 6K for harming children at that scale remains ridiculous. One person managing to harm children at this scale would likely get a penalty much smaller than $16 bn. Of course even "20-life" is a penalty much smaller than $16 bn, given the average American's lifetime earnings are around the $3m level, i.e. it would take 5000 mean…

Sure, sure. Put Zuck in jail and let's see if it's much smaller than $16 bn.

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

#287

Post by BeetleB »

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.

If you're on Android, install F-Droid and get one of the apps there that let you watch Youtube. No ads[1] and you can disable shorts.

[1] I'm not fundamentally against ads, but the Youtube ad situation has gotten ridiculous. They're far worse than cable TV ads.

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

#288

Post by nrmitchi »

slopinthebag wrote: post #89
kwanbix wrote: 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.

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

No, but I sure as shit think it should be an opt-in feature that adults are aware of and can make a decision to turn on for themselves.

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

#289

Post by SoftTalker »

bsimpson wrote: post #260
oneneptune wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article outlines several changes Meta is having to implement that curbs the "and be able to continue doing so" argument a bit. That said, I wish these settlements included tobacco-esque requirements for ongoing funds to educate people. The tobacco settlement funds have been somewhat successful.

Have they? I know a lot of my peers went to college for free with the Millennium Scholarship. But so many young people vape now that it's becoming cool to smoke analog cigarettes. I barely knew anyone who smoked 10-20y ago. Many people that age now do.

Smoking tobacco is something people have done for centuries. Pretty unlikely that we'd eliminate it in a few decades.

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

#290

Post by webo »

foolinaround wrote: post #71

who receives (or has received) actual payments ( other than the lawyers)? I think we need some service that is able to break this out

this is what is most interesting to me as well. does any of this actually go towards helping the impacted children and families?

>The settlement resolves claims brought by 29 U.S. states, and will end a federal trial that had been one of the highest-profile tests yet of allegations that social media companies harmed young users.

>Wednesday's settlement also resolves lawsuits by California, Illinois, New Mexico and Washington, D.C., over privacy claims related to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where the consulting firm collected personal data of millions of Facebook users. Those states will receive $459.3 million to resolve those lawsuits.

Post reply on HN