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

Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#41

Post by stevewodil »

wussboy wrote: post #36
akersten wrote: post #18

This is absurd. Even if Snapchat had a banner on the speedometer that said "too fast too furious," is that not their First Amendment right to expression? Since when is encouraging reckless driving a crime? (They didn't do that, for clarity.) By the way, my speedometer in my car goes up to 160Mph. That number looks pretty enticing. Is Dodge liable if I decide to try it out?

Are technology companies immune to all social responsibility? It sounds like you think they might be. But can we not think of a scenario where that would not be true? For example, if Snapchat makes a filter that detects blood and "counts kills" as you stab people, are they not responsible for any actions that result? It sounds like you might claim "no", because "I could kill someone on my own if I wanted".

Not to completely derail your point, but I think if Snapchat added a "confirmed kills" counter it would be a net social positive and would make catching murderers really easy

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#42

Post by mhh__ »

akersten wrote: post #18

This is absurd. Even if Snapchat had a banner on the speedometer that said "too fast too furious," is that not their First Amendment right to expression? Since when is encouraging reckless driving a crime? (They didn't do that, for clarity.) By the way, my speedometer in my car goes up to 160Mph. That number looks pretty enticing. Is Dodge liable if I decide to try it out?

The first amendment does not give you the right to say anything, in the sense that you can be prosecuted for convincing someone to commit suicide for example.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#43

Post by hollerith »

GavinMcG wrote: post #35
hollerith wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a civil suit, so criminal law is a peripheral issue. In particular, in a civil suit, most defendants found liable (i.e., most defendants who lose) have comitted no crime .

Yeah, but the commenter had asked "Since when is encouraging reckless driving a crime?"

A rhetorical question offered in support of the thesis sentence, "This is absurd," where "this" refers to a civil suit.

I pointed out that whether Snap, Inc, committed a crime has little bearing on whether the civil suit under discussion is absurd.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#44

Post by wussboy »

curiousgal wrote: post #11
offtop5 wrote: post #2

My gut reaction was to say 'No if social media makes you do something stupid, that's your fault' But a speed filter , which outright encourages breaking traffic laws is a whole different story. Who ever greenlit this trash needs to be put in jail.

Since we're throwing blame around how about the parents take actual responsibility for their shitty parenting?

This lame excuse is as infuriating as it is erroneous. If I hand your child a gun and drive them to a school and help them squeeze the trigger as I use every psychological trick to coerce them in to killing their peers, is it my fault or yours? Sounds like you think it's yours.

Perhaps modern social media isn't coercing kids in to crimes quite as overtly, but they are absolutely using their billion dollar budgets to manipulate our children in any way they conceivably can. And you want to blame the parents for what happens?

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#45

Post by forgingahead »

This and many other court decisions are making a mockery of the courts, and makes it impossible to have a simple and fair justice system. This is not about being sympathetic to Snapchat per se, but as with any precedent, you want the rules to apply equally across the board, regardless of the parties involved.

This is the same nonsense that has trained people (and I've definitely done it myself) to write "I'm not a lawyer" and "This is not financial advice" when posting online - as if common sense no longer applies to people reading random internet comments.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#46

Post by curiousgal »

wussboy wrote: post #44
curiousgal wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since we're throwing blame around how about the parents take actual responsibility for their shitty parenting?

This lame excuse is as infuriating as it is erroneous. If I hand your child a gun and drive them to a school and help them squeeze the trigger as I use every psychological trick to coerce them in to killing their peers, is it my fault or yours? Sounds like you think it's yours. Perhaps modern social media isn't coercing kids in to crimes quite as overtly, but they are absolutely using their billion dollar budgets to…

Last time I checked parents can confiscate their children's smartphones or at least ask about their whereabouts and which friends they're hanging out with.

Children are children, you can't expect the world to be a safe place, our job as parents is to protect them, not Let them run amok and then hold the world accountable.

I am not saying it's the parents' fault this happened but they bear more responsibility than Snapchat in my opinion.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#47

Post by magikaram »

varsketiz wrote: post #40
sebastialonso wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO this is an inconsistent approach of placing responsability. What about regular people who start viral challenges that might get people killed? Should they also be held responsible? If the answer is no (in the real world, the answer is no), then why should Snapchat should be held accountable? I cannot help the feel that this "social incentive" argument is the adult cousin of "but everyone's doing it, mom!".

I'm not so sure the real world answer is "no". What are you basing it on? Why are organisations that promote dangerous activities (e.g. paragliding, cycling challenges) asking me to sign liability waivers? I think this is evidence against your claim in the real world.

I believe the comparison to "viral challenges" is in relation to the "Tide Pod Challenge" as it was started by people of the general public - not an organization.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#49

Post by gibspaulding »

stevewodil wrote: post #19
stinkytaco wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A speedometer does the opposite of encouraging unsafe behavior by alerting you to the unsafeness of that behavior. The filter in question encouraged unsafe behavior by incentivizing such behavior for social engagement, however absurd you think that incentivization is personally. This is a bit like saying a frat house hazing isn't wrong because no one actually makes the kids drink, the social incentive remains dangero…

A speedometer is completely neutral in the same way the filter is. It displays speed. It does not indicate to you that what you are doing is safe or unsafe. If it wasn't the filter then people would be sharing pictures of their speedometer while going fast thinking it's cool. What's the difference? This is not at all like frat hazing, no one is forcing you to take a snapchat to be a part of their organization.

Having been a teen not that long ago, I've definitely seen camera photos of 100+ mph on a physical speedometer posted to social media. I don't see the difference here.

Re: Snapchat Can Be Sued for Role in Fatal Car Crash, Court Rules

#50

Post by darick »

sebastialonso wrote: post #24
darick wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the crucial difference is context. A speedometer built into a social media app based around sharing video clips/photos is vastly different from a speedometer built into a car.

Context matters as hell. But context can also add layers of discussion. Say I've created a filter showing how many meters underwater I am. Should I be held accountable for people who drown using it? How this is different from the speed filter? If the difference is "because people don't dive with cellphones" then you are putting the intention (and responsability) on users by default. Why not do that in the case for th…

For me the difference is in the main utility of the app. If all it does is measure, there's no issue IMO, but Snapchat is specifically for sharing content with others. It'd be like having a speedometer or depth meter with a load of 'share your speed/depth to twitter/fb/etc buttons. I would see that as just as bad.
Post reply on HN