Technology

technology@lemmy.world

82227 readers

4573 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
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.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can’t Trust His Testimony. (techoversight.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by Beep@lemmus.org to c/technology@lemmy.world

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Dispatch.

It’s important to remember that Meta has hidden behind Section 230 for so long that people like Mark Zuckerberg thought they were bulletproof. Meta’s team of attorneys bet on the fact that these documents would never see the light of day because a product liability case would never make it to trial, and they guessed wrong,” said Sacha Haworth, Executive Director of The Tech Oversight Project. “Never-before-seen documents prove that Zuckerberg lied to Congress. We know that they will lie, bury research, and continue recklessly harming young people until Congress forces them to clean up their act. The only way to outlaw Meta’s dangerous and egregious behavior is to pass legislation, like the Kids Online Safety Act, which will hold their feet to the fire and force them to protect children and teens.

top 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] arcine@jlai.lu 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

No. Fuck the KOSA, it's the equivalent of burning down your house to get rid of a cockroach infestation.

Meta should be liable for their algorithm, no more, no less.

[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child)

I am curious how you could liable for an algorithym. All advertising and entertainment try and capture marketshare and retain people.

How exactly would you define that as illegal?

I am having a hard time not just saying stupid people do stupid things, but of course that is the definition of a child, so it's the parents that should be held responsible... For wanting to keep using something?

Dont get me wrong, using a tool to leverage weaknesses of the uneducated and disadvantaged is shitty as can be, but that has always been true.

Education and knowledge that this shit is doing what it is designed to do seems like the only long term solution.

[–] Spur4383@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Section 240 protects you from users posts, but not necessarily from promoting them above others algorithmically. You could find them liable for their prioritization choices on the timeline over one that just displays things chronologically. It’s been down time and time again that the display is not a chronological one to increase engagement. That is an editorial decision that should be liable for.