this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2026
709 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

87575 readers
3749 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Meta: “There’s no problem.” Also Meta after getting sued: “Here are the safety changes everyone should adopt.” 😆

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

It shouldn't take lawsuits to prevent actions that have unknown affects on the world but that's what the powerful have argued for. "Prove what I'm doing is harmful enough to justify stopping me from doing it." Its exactly the mentality of the right wing, of MAGA, of Trump, of CEOs and the entire business community. We have to prove harm before we can stop them from acting. And then they just undermine the entire process of determining that.

This is a much broader question about the tendency of the wealthy and powerful to act without any regard or responsibility to the communities and world they affect. They control vast systems of resource management and want to be beholden only to their own interests and only in the way they perceive them. They want to be tyrants, kings and emperors with absolute authority to decide what they do and what their systems do. Its absolute, pure narcissism, the ego and interest of the ones on top becomes the priority of the entire system they control.

Its insane to leave the direction of humanity solely to the egos of the wealthy and powerful. But that's exactly what they argue we should do.

[–] Clanket@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Deleted my Facebook account after the Cambridge Analytica scandal years ago, when it became clear they were a scumbag company, run by a scumbag. Haven't missed it once since, good riddance

[–] naticus@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

That's exactly when I did it too since it had literally nothing to do with my own privacy settings but the privacy settings of friends. I now have an account on there with literally no info on it for connecting to things like my Meta Quest 3 (yeah I know, I hate that I gave them money too, but I like the occasional VR). It kinda was what made me stop using social media except for things like Lemmy.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 23 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Businesses are not people. Don't expect them to act like "good" people. Regulation and unions are the only things that shape the morality of a busniess.

[–] MadPsyentist@lemmy.nz 6 points 9 hours ago

If i could upvote you twice i would.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 16 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Profit is valued more than life or ecology. Everything is short term gain with these heartless, greedy motherfuckers.

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

It is valued more than even the long tern stability of the company. Wall St only wants to see the next quarter and executive bonus revolve around it.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

It takes a lawsuit or a threat of a lawsuit to get any company to do anything that might affect their bottom line negatively.

We need a corporate death penalty.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 9 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

So they pay an inconsequential fine, and they will be "forced" by the government to implement age verification checks, so everybody on Facebook and Instagram will be identifiable by the MAGAs.

Gee, I feel so defended. /S

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

To be fair $18 billion is not inconsequential. Meta Platform's net income for the twelve months ending June 30, 2026 was $68.098 B so that is 26% of their net profits. A pretty severe hit.

[–] Fluke@feddit.uk 2 points 9 hours ago

Paid over ten years.

Merely the cost of doing business.

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 13 points 13 hours ago

Dude, the judicious application and consequences of the law are the only reason corporations even vaguely wave a hand towards being responsible.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 13 hours ago

Zuck needs to be impaled, Vlad the Impaler style impaled. We need to make that a legal execution method, and then apply it to him.

If you think this is a joke, China and Vietnam literally execute CEOs they find guilty of massive financial crimes.

They're more humane about it than impaling, but Zuck doesn't deserve humanity.

[–] Alexfire@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

They will keep doing what they want, in other ways or the same and hide it better, and pay fines if caught again. These states should have kept it going to expose all the evidence for We The People to see, but no, they don't really work for us as they are supposed to.

[–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 56 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

As much as i despise Meta and our governments who collude with them, my biggest disappointment is our fellow citizens who enable them the most.

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 10 points 18 hours ago

If it restores any faith in humanity, they're specifically designed to maximize addictiveness and minimize perceived harm.

I even understand (and condemn) those who work there for the fat paychecks

[–] Tehdastehdas@piefed.social 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Governments push citizens onto Facebook by not providing a publicly funded alternative for what it does, like finding local events, marketplace, and dating. There has to be some central place for everyone to find each other, and even European governments seem to have decided a foreign monopolist should do that.

[–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago

Yes, and the EU is currently promoting a very dodgy EU platform. When respected individuals report on the dodgyness , the get smeared as spreading “targetted disinformation” https://mastodon.ie/@elena@aseachange.com/117149520169152585

[–] Toasticus@piefed.social 6 points 18 hours ago

It's how I feel deeply about social media's existence. Facebook, Reddit, MySpace, Twitter .etc weren't 'evil' just for simply being made and standing on its own. It needed fuel and that fuel is in the form of the many thousands to millions of people who've used them for years.

And those same people have turned around and now put blame on said social media sites for how bad they've become. Never caring to realize that they majorly were built that way off the behaviors of what people did and continue to do on there.

[–] IAmYouButYouDontKnowYet@reddthat.com 15 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

It's sick. Just being on reddit is sick. Fuck having iOS or android is fucking sick.... We are a part of the problem feeding them data as they build data centers and infrastructure of surveillance and ai profiling to further rape freedom and humanity.

People act like this isn't a goal or objective... But look back... So much laid the path for this and it wasn't genuine, it was manipulated, from the top down. It's every man for themselves.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 86 points 1 day ago (14 children)

Proves they know exactly what they're doing, and that they profit from it. They won't stop doing something profitable without being forced to by law.

[–] credo@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

But no, regulations are bad right? Corporations will police themselves because bad actions will become unprofitable I thought.

Ohh my head hurts now.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] FreddiesLantern@leminal.space 8 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

They'll use it as an excuse to double down on spying for the orange fascist.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

What do you mean, "excuse"?

In the New Mexico lawsuit, an accusation was explicitly that Meta was encrypting private messages. That it did not and could not spy on private communication was found to be a "design flaw".

That's what people here are cheering for: More surveillance and control, administered by Meta.

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

And probably age verification so Meta can tell who's a minor.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

Yup. Age verification is in the new settlement. They also have to continue monitoring accounts to find minors who defeated the initial verification.

[–] FreddiesLantern@leminal.space 1 points 12 hours ago

That's kinda what I was referring to. My pov is that meta are liars and they are deff spying as it is.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 27 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They're paying a fine

Are they even implementing safety measures? Doubt it.

[–] rants_unnecessarily@piefed.social 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

How much is 18bn of their 200 bn yearly revenue? 9%. That's not bad.

Except it's not actually 18bn. It's 18bn to be paid over 10 years, 1,8bn/year. Which makes it less than 1% of the yearly revenue.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 1 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not sure what you're arguing against.

Not everything is an argument online ;)

Just pointing out that it's actually a good percentage for once. But then realising it's tiny per year, due to the way it's layed out.

[–] Fluke@feddit.uk 0 points 9 hours ago

One could argue that the fine is merely the cost of doing business given the way it's structured and what it actually costs the company.

ie. That fine should arguably be significantly higher to have any substantial effect on the company's behaviour.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago

why not? they're beholden to the shareholders. what do the shareholders care about safety?

[–] DudeWhoYapsTooMuch@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

"it shouldn't have taken a lawsuit for this evil company to implement safety measures" it's like the whistleblower never met humanity.

[–] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 11 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

Too big to fail is also too big to care.

You can tell when they get too big because they stop caring.

A little competition goes a long way. When that doesn't work, government intervention.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Now watch as the users ignore, or bypass them altogether.

load more comments
view more: next ›