Live data from Hacker News

New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

theguardian.com

421–430 of 454 posts

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inverse incentive is what's in place today: a platform actively harming the users who signed up for it, in pursuit of ad dollars. The incentive is to extract maximum revenue while disregarding the real-world effects of actions, including driving children to self-harm or mental illness. That's bizarre. But I know for some people, it doesn't seem bizarre, and just seems like "capitalism."

The platform isn't actively harming. It's actively driving them to content they engage with. What they're choosing to engage with is harmful. The fact their parents let them on the platform is the crazy part, but the state already extracts vast amounts of money from them.

Governments regulate all sorts of things that could be handled by the parents. However it works better setting a standard via regulation.

The world is moving to regulate these companies due to the harm they are causing.

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#422
This article puts it well: "Bad defendants make bad law".

https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/26/everyone-cheering-the-so...

I am not a fan of this case. The plaintiff suffered from severe emotional and physical abuse and turned to social media as an outlet. Social media abuse is certainly associated with poor mental health but the evidence that social media harms mental health is very thin. It's not like cigarettes or alcohol because there are plenty of beneficial uses of social media.

Meta is annoying as hell and should be broken up, but holding them liable for bad design features creates a disturbing precedent that weakens Section 230, free speech, and even E2E encryption, as the NM DOJ themselves said:

> [NMDOJ will ask Meta for specific changes] including enacting effective age verification, removing predators from the platform, and protecting minors from encrypted communications that shield bad actors.

https://nmdoj.gov/press-release/new-mexico-department-of-jus...

State AGs acting in bad faith are going to weaponize this. In fact, they're doing this now, and much of the "protect the children" laws, like KOSA or social media bans, have a transphobic coalition behind them to cut off LGBTQ+ kids from resources online.

This reminds me of US v. Andrew Auernheimer where the DOJ wanted to make an example out of weev, a terrible person, to expand the government's enforcement powers under CFAA.

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

However you put it, the parent (if around) is the closest and most frequent point of contact for any child. A parent doing an OK job would be a reliable resource whom the child can approach with any questions arising from weird "discoveries" online or even in the community. A parent doing a splendid job would proactively educate their child about the world and it's messiness so said child is equipped to confidently h…

If it were a human predator doing the same thing, it would be very obviously illegal, no questions. So to spend hundreds of millions to build a tech that does it at scale is objectively ALSO evil - transitive property here, because it is the same betrayal of ethics and violation of innocents, regardless of "who" is doing it -- AND orders of magnitude worse.

The fact is you are defending pedophilic predation upon millions if not billions of children. What the fuck is your problem.

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By being an actual fucking parent and not a push over who thinks that because your kids friends are doing heroin it's fine for them to do too. I know it's difficult for you to say no to your children. But it's critical for their well-being. And no you cannot wait until the rest of society decides to criminalize the things you want criminalized before you decide to try to be a parent. The dividing line is the limits y…

Do your children have phones?

Yes. But only when they started taking the bus to school and having extra-curricular activities. They had zero portable screen time until they were double digit ages. When they got their iPads, it was made extremely clear that they were not to be used to avoid social situations. It doesn't come out when people are over. It doesn't come out during dinner. It doesn't come out when we're engaged in a family activity. That of course carried over to their phones.

They have zero issues with phones. They even use social media. Somehow they aren't the mindless zombies everyone else's children seem to be turning into. My daughters are in dance and show choir. My youngest plays flute, saxophone and cello. My middle daughter plays clarinet and violin and is learning on her sister's cello. She has a 4.1 gpa so far in high school and just received an award for it. She was one of seven students to receive it out of a class size of almost 600. Because of her musical accomplishments she was invited to play in the UK with other students from around the state next year. They both play tennis and volleyball and have recently taken up pottery. Both are voracious readers who keep testing my limits at Barnes & Noble.

It's amazing what mature and responsible people children can turn into when that's what you expect from them instead of constantly giving into everything they want. All of those activities are voluntary at this point. We don't force them into any of those things. They know that if they didn't do any activities we would find things to keep them occupied like we did when they were younger. So they do a good job of staying busy themselves choosing the things they want to do but still have plenty of time to chat with friends and play roblox and minecraft and even scroll tiktok when they want. Neither of them have a set bedtime. But they know staying up late won't get them out of getting up in the morning so they manage that themselves as well at this point.

We set expectations around them being responsible and mature and they have delivered and have many privileges as a result of it. They have definitely slipped. They are humans. They have bad days and sometimes bad weeks. And when they stop being responsible, they lose those privileges including their phones. Earlier this year my youngest lost all of her electronics for over a month because she's stubborn and still tests things. It wasn't difficult at all to remove and keep the devices from her until behavior changed. The fact that so many parents on HN find it impossible without legal enforcement on everyone is quite frankly fucking insane. But it also seems to explain things like the literacy crisis. These "parents" cannot even take phones away from their children. No way in hell they are making them read.

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#425

Parent your kids. There are countless services to block content you don't want. There are dedicated ISPs and cell phone providers that block content you don't want. Quit thinking that government regulation & registration are the only ways to prevent children from accessing objectionable content. Removing internet anonymity as a rule will do far more harm than good. Just because the people you agree with are driving t…

It's not about kids imo. They're purposely designing things to be as addicting as possible. To me, that is morally wrong, akin to what gambling and "prediction" markets do. Beyond morals, I think it creates deep problems in society, beyond just "who owns the thing recommending" (seriously. If you're not ok with Trump or Kamala Harris controlling what you watch, why are you ok with a nameless exec doing it?)

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By being an actual fucking parent and not a push over who thinks that because your kids friends are doing heroin it's fine for them to do too. I know it's difficult for you to say no to your children. But it's critical for their well-being. And no you cannot wait until the rest of society decides to criminalize the things you want criminalized before you decide to try to be a parent. The dividing line is the limits y…

Apologies in advance, but this reads like someone who hasn't actually had kids. Keep in mind that people who have kids still only have a small number, and there is luck involved. You can't decide that they will eat their vegetables. You can't decide that they are going to be diligent in doing their homework. And you can't decide whether they take an interest in what society shows them. Yes, you can open your mouth, s…

Honestly this really just reflects on you and what you're capable of doing. All of my children eat vegetables. My middle daughter decided to become a vegetarian at 14. I can absolutely make sure that they do their homework. Otherwise there will be consequences. It's not been an issue. They are smart and get excellent grades. I can absolutely influence their ability and desire to take interests in things. It starts with taking interest yourself. My wife and I read books like they are going to disappear and my children have followed suit. We required our children to do some sort of extra-curricular activities and if they didn't choose them then we would. They learned pretty quickly to pick out things they are actually interested in doing.

All of these things that are somehow "impossible" for you are just facts about how my children were raised. And no, their success or failure is not up to the lowest common denominator in society. It's up to us as parents to raise them and equip them for the world. Not complain about how the world should change so you don't have to tell your kids "no".

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#427

It's a bit ironic, as New Mexico is absolutely terrible at treating mental health; especially in poor folks. I'll lay odds that it's down near the bottom of the list. I have known a few folks with relatives in New Mexico that have had mental heath issues, and it was a nightmare for them. They were brought to New York, where they finally got decent treatment. I am told (by New Mexicans), that this is because New Mexic…

> It's a bit ironic, as New Mexico is absolutely terrible at treating mental health; especially in poor folks. I'll lay odds that it's down near the bottom of the list. This is probably true and not surprising. New Mexico is usually near the bottom of any “good” list and near the top of any “bad” list. > I am told (by New Mexicans), that this is because New Mexico voters don't want any healthcare going to immigrants.…

> No, that’s ridiculous.

Thanks for setting that straight. makes sense (the people that told me this were just a bit to the left of Che Guevara, and have obvious political axes to grind).

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#428
post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point of a fine is to change behavior. It's not outsize if it's enough to do that. This is definitely not true, or legal. Would a billion dollar fine for speeding change some behaviors? Yes. Is it completely out of proportion? Also yes. There’s a reason punitive damages are capped. Yeah one way to stop bad corporate behavior is fining them into insolvency, but that doesn’t really help anyone unless the company…

>>"Would a billion dollar fine for speeding change some behaviors? Yes. Is it completely out of proportion? Also yes." Maybe not the best example, since Finland does asses speeding fines based on income. So a 1bn fine would be appropriate if someone was ludicrously wealthy, although I'm not sure there's anyone rich enough on the planet to hit that mark. But for example, this guy [0] got a €54,000 speeding ticket in 2…

Can't remember where I saw it but some years back someone wrote something like "if the punishment for a crime is financial then it only deters poor people" which makes sense.

Re: New Mexico court orders Meta to pay $567m over harms to children’s mental health

#429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inverse incentive is what's in place today: a platform actively harming the users who signed up for it, in pursuit of ad dollars. The incentive is to extract maximum revenue while disregarding the real-world effects of actions, including driving children to self-harm or mental illness. That's bizarre. But I know for some people, it doesn't seem bizarre, and just seems like "capitalism."

The platform isn't actively harming. It's actively driving them to content they engage with. What they're choosing to engage with is harmful. The fact their parents let them on the platform is the crazy part, but the state already extracts vast amounts of money from them.

> The platform isn't actively harming.

> It's actively driving them to content they engage with

Regardless of whether or not that content is harmful or not

Post reply on HN