People Cheering Verdicts Against Meta Should Understand What Theyre Cheering For
WarOnPrivacy
22 points
3 comments
March 26, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 51.3ms across 3,471 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case mrjaeger · 437 pts · March 25, 2026 · 59% similar
- Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Social-Media Addiction Trial 1vuio0pswjnm7 · 67 pts · March 26, 2026 · 58% similar
- Jury signals tech titans on hook for social media addiction Brajeshwar · 31 pts · March 21, 2026 · 56% similar
- Meta and Google found liable in social media addiction trial ColinWright · 97 pts · March 25, 2026 · 56% similar
- Jury finds Meta liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platforms billfor · 144 pts · March 24, 2026 · 54% similar
Discussion Highlights (2 comments)
superkuh
Even beyond the dangerous legal precedent it sets, we're all cheering for a legal precedent that human persons don't have volition or free will and that multi-media can somehow bypass normal sensation pathways a act directly on want like drugs do. And that's simply not true. Believing that and setting up a legal precedent means that now the government can use violent force to regulate anything shown on a screen. This is going to cause incredible damage to our society as a whole and to individual peoples lives. Government use of force is far more dangerous than unsupported memes/old-wive tales from the 1970s.
j_bum
> Here's a thought experiment: imagine Instagram, but every single post is a video of paint drying. Same infinite scroll. Same autoplay. Same algorithmic recommendations. Same notification systems. Is anyone addicted? Is anyone harmed? Is anyone suing? I do not buy this argument. Of course, most of the content on these platforms is innocuous, and may as well be paint drying. What's harmful are the harnesses that these companies have built to exploit the content. > Of course not. Because infinite scroll is not inherently harmful. Yes it is [0]. > Autoplay is not inherently harmful. Algorithmic recommendations are not inherently harmful. Yes, they can be [1] [2]. > These features only matter because of the content they deliver. The "addictive design" does nothing without the underlying user-generated content that makes people want to keep scrolling. These harnesses only work because people feed the machine. The harnesses are still harmful. This whole argument is predicated on a strawman that makes no sense. A gun doesn't work without bullets. But if a company designs and hands out the gun to the world, they should be liable for the consequences, even if they rely on users for the ammunition. [0] https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580729 [1] https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3519829 [2] https://counterhate.com/research/deadly-by-design/