this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
191 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

83032 readers
4100 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 2 points 42 minutes ago

The robot is tired.

[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 2 points 25 minutes ago

Any links to Epstein are entirely irrelevant.....

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 8 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

"The design feature changes the state is seeking include “enacting effective age verification, removing predators from the platform, and protecting minors from encrypted communications that shield bad actors”."

Oh fuck right off.

I'm sorry but this is a bad "think of the children" decision. There are limits to what Meta or any platform can do about bad actors at that size without structural changes.

What might actually help: only show people content from groups and people that they follow, preferably in chronological order, rather than suggesting new groups and pages algorithmically all the time and thereby increasing the likelihood of children interacting with strangers on the Internet.

And improve parental controls for children's accounts. I'm sure there's nothing currently giving a "parent" account high level control over a "child" account, but I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

But also: require intercompatibility with other platforms and a standardized form of profile data export so people can leave Facebook but stay in touch with the people who still use it.

[–] RecallMadness@lemmy.nz 1 points 4 minutes ago

Unfortunately can’t codify how platforms work soecifically into law.

But you could possibly explicitly make companies liable for promoting “detrimental” content. Then define “promoting” as something like “surfacing content to a user beyond the reach of the users immediate network. Ie algorithmic suggestions or advertising”

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 9 minutes ago

What might actually help: only show people content from groups and people that they follow, preferably in chronological order, rather than suggesting new groups and pages algorithmically all the time and thereby increasing the likelihood of children interacting with strangers on the Internet.

You would simply have big groups like "I ❤️ New Mexico" where people will comment on the same posts and interact. If you would limit all the content including comments and likes to users someone personally follows without the ability to discover other users you would turn facebook basically into WhatsApp. It would definitely solve the issue but it would also make the platform look empty and kill it. Which would not necessarily be bad but sadly killing facebook is too radical for anyone to support.

[–] BlackCat@piefed.social 5 points 2 hours ago

Meta has generated high volumes of “junk” reports by overly relying on AI to moderate its platforms, investigators said. These reports were useless to law enforcement, and meant crimes could not be investigated, they said.

shocker.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 27 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

So...it's a fucking fine, which way less then he made by doing this. Until throw these fucks in jail this shit will continue.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Until throw these fucks in jail this shit will continue.

Which is exactly why that won't happen. Our president is a pedophile. There's a whole network of wealthy pedophiles who no longer have an island. The pedophiles are in power.

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

who no longer have an island

*who now have a different island that we don't yet know about.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

NO!!! NO NO NO NO NO!!! They can't just Jurassic Park this thing, and just have an infinate amount of islands!

[–] staircase@programming.dev 9 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

In the next phase of the legal proceedings, due to begin on 4 May, the attorney general’s office will seek additional financial penalties and court-mandated changes to Meta’s platforms that “offer stronger protections for children”, said Torrez.

The design feature changes the state is seeking include “enacting effective age verification, removing predators from the platform, and protecting minors from encrypted communications that shield bad actors”.

Unclear how age verification would play out with their Digital Childhood Alliance efforts.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 14 points 4 hours ago

I promise you whatever happens it won't be good for the rest of us.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

And that shit is why I'm hesitant to endorse these big tech lawsuits

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 1 points 29 minutes ago* (last edited 28 minutes ago)

Because you think they are conspiracies with goals to spy on you?

[–] randompasta@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Fine based on % income of the company.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 4 hours ago
[–] andybytes@programming.dev 4 points 3 hours ago

People just need to get off these platforms. Enless I can just pop off I don't want what you got and these techno turdz can eat my arse. Facebook needs to die along with roblox

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

You mean we shouldn't have put our children's safety in the waxy grasp of a sentient Annabel in a t-shirt and jeans?

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 5 points 4 hours ago

“We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal. We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content,” said a Meta spokesperson. “We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.” Internal Meta documents and testimony obtained by the New Mexico department of justice during the litigation revealed that both company employees and external child safety experts repeatedly warned about risks and harmful conditions on Meta’s platforms. Evidence presented to the jury included details of the 2024 arrest of three men charged with sexually preying on children through Meta’s platforms, and attempting to meet up with them. This was part of a sting investigation operated by undercover agents and dubbed “Operation MetaPhile” by the attorney general’s office.

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

Go figure, a company that exploits habits is found guilty of exploiting children....

[–] darklamer@feddit.org 2 points 3 hours ago

So they want us to believe that the company that knowingly profited from genocide in Myanmar also knowingly profited from child exploitation? Really? OK then, I can believe that.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

to be fair, that's the face that I'm making all the time

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, but you're a nutsack. It's fine when YOU make that face.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Are you suggesting that Mark isn't also a nutsack?

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 3 points 2 hours ago

No, nutsacks are fun to play with, and he very much isn't.

[–] staircase@programming.dev 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Alas

In the next phase of the legal proceedings, due to begin on 4 May, the attorney general’s office will seek additional financial penalties and court-mandated changes to Meta’s platforms that “offer stronger protections for children”, said Torrez.

The design feature changes the state is seeking include “enacting effective age verification, removing predators from the platform, and protecting minors from encrypted communications that shield bad actors”.

sounds like they're playing right into Meta's hands with the age verification.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 7 minutes ago

The jury ordered Meta to pay the maximum penalty under the law of $5,000 per violation, totaling $375m in civil penalties for violating New Mexico’s consumer protection laws.

Meta: I guess I will only be able to spend $79.635.000.000 on my next useless venture.