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

Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

sherwood.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 549 posts

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#271

Post by swarnie »

throw7 wrote: post #248

"...scammers obtain sexual images of a user, often a teenager, under false pretenses and then blackmail them – ... was becoming commonplace on Meta’s platforms" There you go U.K. OFCOM. Here's child endangerment propagated knowingly by Facebook. Don't worry, I know you won't do anything to Facebook because you "protecting" kids is pretext.

Listen throw7, Meta paid almost £30 million in tax in 2023, an effective tax rate of 12%. I'm unsure why numbers for 2024 aren't available but you'll need to speak to legal about that.

If you want to throw7 that all away over some media speculation be my guest. I'll tell the NHS to fund themselves for 11 minutes next year to make up the shortfall.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#272

Post by random9749832 »

carefulfungi wrote: post #203

Snakeoil on every corner these days - from online scams to text message scams to the whole supplements industry to prosperity gospel to ... it sure feels like we're surrounded by hustlers and charlatans.

Supplements industry? I only take whey protein and creatine from known sources. Anything on this?

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#273

Post by [deleted] »

berkes wrote: post #87
deaux wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A little ironic when Amazon is filled to the brim with scams.

Not sure how this works on Amazon, but Bol.com (dutch "amazon competitor") sells a lot of crap too. Stuff that sometimes has the images and literal description taken from e.g. aliexpress. People literally re-sell stuff from chinese webshops on there with profit. Technically, on Bol.com, a EU-platform, EU consumer protection is in place. So if a product breaks within guarantee terms, is dangerous, never gets delivered…

[deleted]

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#274

Post by brians »

malfist wrote: post #29
macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

This isn't a situation we accept out of other industries. You water provider doesn't get to pipe you sewage every now and again because its too expensive to moderate. We shouldn't accept it for big tech either. And we certainly shouldn't make it the responsibility of the end use to protect themselves

The permitted number of rat parts per pound of breakfast cereal is not zero.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#275

Post by stusmall »

iammrpayments wrote: post #177
stusmall wrote: post #129

Once I got an Instagram ad for buying ketamine that just linked to a telegram channel. They didn't even bother being coy or using mispelling or slang. A simple keyword search to flag for more review would have caught it. I can't even wrap my head around what internal controls exist when something like that makes it out to users.

There’s zero to none manual review. The people who run these type of ads probably burn 100 facebook ad accounts per day

Oh definitely. I have zero expectation of high level of manual reviews. You can run limited runs of adds for next to a couple dollars. The math could never work out. I understand a lot with make it through the system, this was just so blatant. It should be so easy to catch with an automated system. It was nothing but red flags. The automated systems could reject outright or maybe escalate to manual review if it met enough criteria (account reputation, spend floor, etc)

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#276

Post by stusmall »

cantor_S_drug wrote: post #225
stusmall wrote: post #129

Once I got an Instagram ad for buying ketamine that just linked to a telegram channel. They didn't even bother being coy or using mispelling or slang. A simple keyword search to flag for more review would have caught it. I can't even wrap my head around what internal controls exist when something like that makes it out to users.

Zuck and Meta are playing the role of Robinhood. They take the money from scammers and advance their philanthrophy. https://x.com/a16z/status/1986486508355002584 Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg on Curing All Disease We sat down with Dr. Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg, co-founders of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, to discuss their ambitious plan to cure, prevent, and manage all disease by the end of the centur…

Did Facebook's LLM write this comment?

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#277

Post by ryandrake »

grayhatter wrote: post #222
iso1631 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My TV has ad block for youtube. I pay 20 minutes salary per month and see no adverts at all, on TV, on phone, on computer. I never understand why well-paid HN commentators refuse to pay for their entertainment. On the web at large, sure use an ad blocker, there's no choice there. There is on youtube though.

> I never understand why well-paid HN commentators refuse to pay for their entertainment. People don't want to pay (help) people they don't like. YouTube ads do not feel fair, they feel manipulative and unethical. It's expected that most people wouldn't want to willingly engage with that kind of asshattery. Contrast that with platforms like twitch. I'd say the average twitch viewer (that interacts with streams/chats)…

I don't pay because it feels like paying protection money to the mafia. "Here's an annoyance/danger we created for you. If you pay us, we'll stop doing it."

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#278

Post by mmmlinux »

malfist wrote: post #29
macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

This isn't a situation we accept out of other industries. You water provider doesn't get to pipe you sewage every now and again because its too expensive to moderate. We shouldn't accept it for big tech either. And we certainly shouldn't make it the responsibility of the end use to protect themselves

Water providers in Flint,MI disagree.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#279

Post by koakuma-chan »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #212
koakuma-chan wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you take YouTube to court

Ideally this but Section 230 guarantees that you will lose. The laws need to be changed.

I don't know if ads count as content posted by users.
Post reply on HN