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

Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#471

Post by hsuduebc2 »

bigyabai wrote: post #335
john_strinlai wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gotta give it to Zuck. if "it" is the middle finger, for sure. "terrifying" is a great choice of word for it.

I was equally impressed/terrified by Apple's marketing blitz around client-side-scanning. So many people got paid to advocate for that, and the community barely convinced them it was a bad idea. There's not much hope left for any of FAANG deliberately resisting surveillance.

Well they can profit from that so why resist if ordinary user usually cares only about colors being pretty and Instagram/tiktok/x/your slop generator of choice working properly.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#472

Post by anymouse123456 »

gzread wrote: post #321
kbelder wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree slightly. It may not be good business, but it could be good PR, situationally. I expect a lot of 2nd-tier distros will refuse to implement it, and see a boost in their installs as a result. Debian, Ubuntu, etc., they'll all fall right in line because the clear and immediate losses will outweigh any PR issue.

When they fall in line and add the age bracket drop-down menu, we'll keep using them because throwing a hissy fit over a distribution allowing you to select your age bracket is very obviously stupid.

Stupid take.

The issue is obviously not with adults needing to click a drop-down.

Some of the main issues with this legislation are:

1) Makes it much easier for predators of all kinds to identify and target children on their computers

2) Impossible to implement (i.e., servers don't have a person)

3) The infrastructure this bill introduces will be used by the state and corporations to destroy our last vestiges of privacy and anonymity

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#473

Post by trymas »

NickC25 wrote: post #364
budman1 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in the 1990's there was a woman prime minister of Turkey. she ended up resigning in a scandal caused by her husband accepting a boat (or work on the boat..i don't remember). the scandal was caused by the amount of the bribe. it was too low. the Turkish people could understand some corruption, but to be able to bribe the top leader for $50k. Unacceptable. If it would have been $100 million, it would not have been a sc…

This. Issue in the USA is that if you don't accept the money offered, you get primaried and they bribe money you would have gotten just goes to the campaign of your primary opponent. Rinse and repeat. Unless, politicians band together and say "we need the full ROI of your project, and NONE of us will even talk to you unless we get half the profits, and you can't primary all of us at once"

US needs to get rid of first past the post voting system.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#474

Post by gzread »

anymouse123456 wrote: post #472
gzread wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they fall in line and add the age bracket drop-down menu, we'll keep using them because throwing a hissy fit over a distribution allowing you to select your age bracket is very obviously stupid.

Stupid take. The issue is obviously not with adults needing to click a drop-down. Some of the main issues with this legislation are: 1) Makes it much easier for predators of all kinds to identify and target children on their computers 2) Impossible to implement (i.e., servers don't have a person) 3) The infrastructure this bill introduces will be used by the state and corporations to destroy our last vestiges of priv…

The age bracket dropdown will not be used to destroy your last vestige of privacy and anonymity.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#475

Post by [deleted] »

Fiveplus wrote: post #302

Anyone reading this purely as a child safety or campaign finance story might miss the broader architectural war happening here. If you zoom out a little, this is the inevitable, scorched-earth retaliation for Apple's ATT rollout from a few years back. Apple cost Meta billions by cutting off their data pipeline at the OS level, justifying it with a unilateral privacy moral high ground. Now, Meta is returning the favor…

[deleted]

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#477

Post by mijoharas »

qup wrote: post #117
mijoharas wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I think. I saw someone else on HN suggested provide an `X-User-Age` header to these sites, and provide parents with a password protected page to set that in the browser/OS. Responsibility should be on the website to not provide the content if the header is sent with an inappropriate age, and for the parent to set it up on the device, or to not provide a child a device without child-safe restrictions. It…

Seems simple until you try to figure out what's allowed for what age, which surely will differ by country at a minimum.

To me that's a geo-ip lookup on the online service, which they kinda need to do anyways so seems fine?

(if there are further restrictions then it gets messy, but I feel like that's the current state of things anyways? at least for online services which I'm mostly speaking about here.)

Mostly my point is I don't think attestation is required. I think that responsibility should fall upon parents, and I don't want to have to give my ID to any online sites, because I don't remotely trust them to keep that safe. I'm less worried about them storing a number I send them about how old I am.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#478

Post by NBJack »

mlyle wrote: post #330
mentalgear wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I certainly prefer if big tech fight each other instead of the user as sometimes there might even come something good out of it - like elevated privacy in Apple's ATT case. Overall, that's the reason anti-trust laws must be applied rigorously, otherwise the normal population has no chance.

Sometimes something good (ATT). Sometimes something bad (this terrible age-verification thing that is a huge barrier to entry for small entrants and comes with massive state surveillance risk). In the end, all the little people are just collateral damage or occasionally they get some collateral benefits from wherever the munitions land.

If ATT had been applied uniformly, sure. But Apple has exemption from its own rules. So, less trickle down benefit, and more tilting the playing field wildly in their favor. Its new advertising system is doing great!

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#479

Post by cyanydeez »

Fiveplus wrote: post #302

Anyone reading this purely as a child safety or campaign finance story might miss the broader architectural war happening here. If you zoom out a little, this is the inevitable, scorched-earth retaliation for Apple's ATT rollout from a few years back. Apple cost Meta billions by cutting off their data pipeline at the OS level, justifying it with a unilateral privacy moral high ground. Now, Meta is returning the favor…

Or its a prelude to nationwide digital censorship.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#480

Post by washadjeffmad »

spondyl wrote: post #438
jayers wrote: post #327

I'm incredibly dubious of the conclusions of this researcher. Claude Opus was used to gather and analyze all of the data. I am not skeptical of any of the research, the sources seem to be cited properly. I am skeptical that this researcher has thought through or verified their conclusions in a systematic and reliable fashion. This part gives it away: "Research period: 2026-03-11 to present." This individual dropped h…

I came here to say that this is pretty much my view having poked around a little bit as well. This file does not exactly fill me with confidence: https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings... In one part of the report, there seems to be this implicit assumption that Linux and Horizon OS (Meta's VR OS) are somehow comparable and that Meta will be better equipped than Linux if age verification is requ…

>taking "lots of text" as a signal of quality

Or of authority, when they're not equipped to evaluate the data first-hand.

The Gish gallop technique in debate overwhelms opponents with so many arguments that they're unable to address them all before the time limit. Reports presented like this are functionally that, but against reader comprehension and attention.

Similarly, being the first, loudest, or only voice claim is unreasonably effective at establishing perception of authority, where being unchallenged is tantamount to correctness. This also goes both ways; censorship in media, for instance, can be used to promote narratives by silencing competing views, like platforms selectively amplifying certain topics to frame them as more proven and widely supported than they might actually be.

It's unfortunate that inexpert execution often positions well-meaning and potentially correct arguments to be discredited and derided by prepared opponents before their merits can be established. In this case, it may be true that Meta may have organized a well-coordinated shadow campaign for legislation using technically legal channels, but I'm sure they've anticipated this at some point, or are relying on the inertia of the system and initial buy-in to force the course.

Post reply on HN