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

Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 276 posts

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#151

Post by felixg3 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #138
jmye wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does Zuckerberg have some kind of clinical condition where he just can't imagine how other people might see him? Nah, he just doesn't care. Nothing he does will ever get people (en masse, onesie, twosies don't matter) to stop using Meta products. People can/will complain about him forever, but shitty people will continue to help him build things, and shitty people will continue to use them.

Well Meta products are decaying like Cobalt 60; people are stopping https://trends.google.com/explore?q=facebook&date=all&geo=US and maybe Zuck doesn't think he can do anything about it. There are different theories but i like this one: -- originally you would put some imagination and elbow grease into using Facebook and get some intention which made it very attractive and interesting to people around 2010 -- then it…

Half-ing every 5.2-or-so-years?

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#154

Post by shevy-java »

I think it is time to disband Facebook. Ever since they attempted to infiltrate the linux ecosystem via age sniffing, they really need to go. Corporate systemd can also go - we should really clean up the whole ecosystem. What ever happened to "privacy first?

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#157

Post by hansvm »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #47
hansvm wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies have to inform affected individuals of data breaches, especially when HIPAA gets involved. Brokers have to inform clients of transaction errors. Auto manufacturers have to inform owners of recalls. Retirement funds have to inform plan participants of lawsuits involving those funds. You don't even have to invoke the idea that Meta is big enough to be regulated as a public utility for this to have broad prece…

Well we aren’t discussing the government requiring meta to inform users. We are discussing whether meta can choose which private actors’ ads to allow. It would seem silly that a platform would be forced to allow all ads.

Aha, how clever. We aren't discussing whether they can be forced to display messaging; we're discussing whether they're going to later get slapped down for blocking that messaging.

I get that the distinction matters a bit from time to time (court cases keep blurring the line in the US though), but:

1. With all the other shit that makes it through the filter, this was pretty clearly a targeted, strategic takedown rather than some sort of broad "we don't allow bad ads on the platform." Allowing "all ads" isn't the thing being argued; it's allowing "this ad."

2. The non-offensive idea of "abusers shouldn't be allowed to deceive and gaslight their victims" is pretty strongly in favor of this being a bad move on Meta's part if it was an intentional act. Maybe it shakes out fine for them legally in this particular instance, but the fact that as a society we routinely require companies and individuals to behave with more appearance of moral standing than this suggests that blocking this particular ad is over the line, and it's neither naive nor utopianistic to think so. Even if it's legally in the light-grey, it's an abuse of power worth talking about, and hopefully it inspires more people to leave their platform.

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#159

Post by hn_acker »

PaulHoule wrote: post #114
mrwh wrote: post #21

Meta wants to be an impartial platform only and exactly when it suits them to be.

Wow. Does Zuckerberg have some kind of clinical condition where he just can't imagine how other people might see him? Sure this will slow down the personal injury lawyers finding clients but it won't stop them, meantime it is more ammunition for Facebook's enemies to use against it. It is one thing to do shady business, it is another thing to incriminate yourself. If you were involved with weed and somebody sent you…

> Does Zuckerberg have some kind of clinical condition where he just can't imagine how other people might see him?

Cory Doctorow describes Mark Zuckerberg's and Elon Musk's attitude toward other people as billionaire solipsism [1].

[1] https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/05/fisher-price-steering-whe...

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#160

Post by matheusmoreira »

PaulHoule wrote: post #114
mrwh wrote: post #21

Meta wants to be an impartial platform only and exactly when it suits them to be.

Wow. Does Zuckerberg have some kind of clinical condition where he just can't imagine how other people might see him? Sure this will slow down the personal injury lawyers finding clients but it won't stop them, meantime it is more ammunition for Facebook's enemies to use against it. It is one thing to do shady business, it is another thing to incriminate yourself. If you were involved with weed and somebody sent you…

> Does Zuckerberg have some kind of clinical condition where he just can't imagine how other people might see him?

Yeah, it's called having-too-much-money-to-careitis.

Post reply on HN