alt Hacker NewsJury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms
Comments
This particular verdict is a long time coming. How it drives meaningful change is the bigger question.
One of the challenges we need to resolve is the race to the bottom for online communities - engagement metrics will always result in a PH level that supports more acerbic behavior.
There’s multiple analyses that you can find, if not your own experience, to believe that we should be able to do better with our information commons.
Just today, I found a paper that studied a corpus of Twitter discussions and found that bad-faith interactions constituted 68.3% of all replies (Twitter data).
The engineer and analyst side of us will always question these types of analyses.
I’ve read enough papers at this point for the methods to matter more than the conclusion.
1) meta, and the other tech platforms need to open up their research and data. NDAs and business incentives prevent us from having the boring technical conversations.
2) tech needs someone else to be the bogeyman - the way we did for tobacco. The profit incentive ensures profitable predatory features pass review. Expecting firms to ignore quarterly shareholder reviews for warm fuzzies is … setting ourselves up for failure.
Regulators (with teeth) need to be propped up so that the right amount of predictable friction (liability) is introduced.
3) tech firms need an opportunity or forum to come clean. The sheer gap between the practical reality of something like content moderation vs the ignorance of users and regulators - results in surprise and outrage when people find out how the sausage is made.
4) algorithm defaults decide the median experience for participants in our shred market place of ideas. The defaults need to be set in a manner that works for humans and society (whatever that might be).
Economies are systems to align incentives to achieve subjective goals.
Age verification isn’t misleading is it?
can someone explain how the fine size is calculated?
Until the fines are large enough to impact business and cause heads to roll, and maybe we even see some prison time for executives, companies will continue to not give a fuck. This is chump change for Meta.
We used to believe in freedom of speech and freedom of association.
Since the dawn of the Internet era, we've had a legal principle that platforms are relatively shielded from liability for what their users do.
It's the Internet. There's sexual content and sketchy characters on it. Occasionally people will encounter them -- even if they're under 18.
Anyone who grew up in the mid-1990s or later, think back to your own Internet usage when you were under 18. You probably found something NSFW or NSFL, dealt with it, and came out basically OK after applying your common sense. Maybe it was shocking and mildly traumatizing -- but having negative experience is how we grow. Part of growing up is honing one's sense of "that link is staying blue" or "I'm not comfortable with this, it's time to GTFO". And it seems a lot safer if you encounter the sketchy side of humanity from the other side of a screen. Think about how a young person's exposure to the underbelly of humanity might have gone in pre-Internet times: Get invited to a party, find out it's in the bad part of town and there are a bunch of sketchy people there -- well, you're exposed to all kinds of physical risks. You can't leave the party as easily as you can put your phone down.
I stopped logging onto Facebook regularly around 2009; I only log in a couple times a year. I hate what Facebook has become in the past decade and a half.
But giving a site with millions of users a multi-hundred-million-dollar fine because some of those users behave badly seems...asinine.
If your kid is old enough and responsible enough to be given unsupervised Internet access, you'd better teach them how to deal with the skeevy stuff they might encounter.
What is so fucked up about this is that THEIR WHOLE RAISON D'ÊTRE is knowing more about you than you do.
You think they need this to know your age? Your gender? Your home, your birthplace, your political stance?
That penalty is about a couple orders of magnitude too small
This is less than 4 days of profit.
Still just a drop in the bucket compared to their quarterly profits. When will regulators get wise?
This is a good flag that you should be rolling your own safety checks. It's not hard, here's a writeup of an ancillary problem/solution: https://mixpeek.com/blog/ip-safety-pre-publication-clearance
the fine is 0.6% of last year's profit. the lobbying budget probably costs more.
Calculated risk cost by them
What about X?
Name and shame the managers and leadership at this time. I dream of a world where they'd be recognized and shamed in the streets for all the damage they've done to society. Instead they get to do all kinds of side quests with their money.
So... Question. Seeing as Zuck is the majority voting shareholder and highest ranked executive, why isn't there a piercing of the corporate veil going on? This isn't some distributed blame case. Ultimately, his decision making led to what the jury finds objectionable. I find it absurd that somehow, the corporate veil is able to absorb even this? Somebody accepted the risk. That somebody is at the top of the pyramid. Want to send a message? Get 'em.
and who gets that money ^^
1. This fine is 1/100th the size it should be. Make them pay, and break up Meta/facebook. 2. Age verification pushes coming from several different actors across gov't and private sector is worrying. I trust no actor here, and neither should you. 3. Zuck should be in jail.
Meta can do more and should do more. I think that's the short of it. The company made 59 Billion last year. It's completely reasonable to expect that they expend effort and budget on reducing their harm to children.
I don't know who they have to pay it to but that's only for New Mexico, which has about two million people which works out to about $187.50 per person.
That's pretty cheap when it comes to deception.
The eyes of Texas should be upon this, which is 15X the size and should not settle for less than $1000 per person, where deceptive trade practice is much more serious than other places.
Now that would set a $30 billion example which may not be enough of a deterrent either.
But there are probably plenty of people for whom a $5000 one-time payment might not come close to being fair compensation for what's already happened, especially with Meta allowed to continue as an ongoing concern, that's got to be psychologically harmful.
To really fix it each state would have to follow "suit" while greatly upping the ante so there's at least hundreds of billions at stake.
Meta can afford it and who else is responsible for so much widespread sneaky deception at this scale for so long ?
“Pay them, in the scheme of things it’s a speeding ticket”
Another poster child for Meta's lobbying (bribery) to encourage OS level age verification. (numerous recent references in HN posts)
They very much want to push this liability off onto someone else...
As far as end-to-end encryption, on SM sites (social media or SadoMasochism, however you want to read it) I don't really see the need.
Now sue them for lobbying against GNU/Linux with CSA, their front lobby.
As much as everyone hates Meta for selling people's personal data, this is absolutely ridiculous. The hysteria regarding forcing companies do parents' job doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
Drop in the bucket for them. Giving Zuck some jail time would be the more appropriate message - there's no doubt he knows and approves of the kind of evil activity the New Mexico law enforcement dug up.
lol. And you think we will ever legalize drugs (and people can take responsibility), when large companies are being sued for being addicted to social media?
Meta should be disbanded for the damage it caused to mankind. Age verification tainting Linux also is heavily attributable to Meta buying legislation; systemd already quickly went that path, in order to appease their corporate-gods. Private user data to be released to random actors willy-nilly style - and the constant appeasement "no, this is not what is happening". Until it suddenly is happening precisely as people predicted it to be happening. Everyone runs a meta-agenda nowadays, Meta more than most others.
Shareholders: Worth it!
Alternative headline: household spyware cash machine forced to pay $20 for being bad.
If you want to punish Meta then you have to punish the wonder boy who runs it. Not even share holders can fight off the guy spending 80B on the metaverse.
Why do we have prison sentences for insider trading, which is arguably (much) less harmful to the society, and not for this?
That's peanuts.[a]
[a] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/peanu...
Does this mean Apple, Nintendo, and Disney are at risk too?
I would love to see some justice.