Meta faces 'astronomical' consequences as California trial begins
Meta faces 'astronomical' consequences as legal fight reaches critical moment
California's attorney general is co-leading a coalition of 29 states in a federal trial against Meta, alleging the company designed addictive features that harm teens and children. The stakes are higher than in New Mexico, where Meta lost a $1 billion case. A loss in California could force major changes to algorithms and design, with damages potentially reaching $200 billion. Meta denies the claims and says the demands are disproportionate.
“That California judgment by itself could be gargantuan enough that it changes the ability of this company to do what it needs to finance into the future.”
- holtkam2
At a certain point, can a judge just please rule that Meta has lost its right to do business in the United States? It repeatedly ignores rulings and has lost credibility when it claims that it will change its practices. I don't see why they 'need' to exist. Another, more responsible social media platform company would quickly spring up in its place if it were dissolved.
- ticulatedspline
So imma play devil's advocate a bit, cuz I think it's fun, also I dislike bandwagoning.
Meta may not be a great company but I don't think their loss here is all that great either:
>In New Mexico, Meta is being required to improve "age assurance models and tools" using AI, and to attempt "to develop, within two years, a dedicated under-13-years-of-age prediction model."
None of that sounds really desirable to me. I read that as "death of the anonymous internet", Meta's loss (to the cheers of everyone) is ushering in ubiquitous age verification.
I also see stuff like this:
> [google and youtube were] negligent and failed to warn users of the dangers associated with using their platforms.
and
> Industry experts are calling it social media's "Big Tobacco" moment, with Meta as the centerpiece
While psychological addiction is a thing lets not conflate that with literal physical addiction to a chemical. "warn users of the dangers",really? what do they want; a big banner that says "Warning! youtube might be too entertaining"?
While I don't doubt Meta's done some shady stuff, or at least mildly negligent stuff because it benefits them I think in some respects they have an impossible task. I also thing they've become a scapegoat such that lazy parents and bored adults can eschew any personal responsibility for their actions. "its not my fault I let my kid on Facebook unfettered, or spent all Tuesday doomscrolling, it's these damn companies giving me everything I want!", hell I do it he […]
- PcChip
why just meta and not also instagram and tiktok?
- alexthedigger
Never gonna happen, meta is too big. But you can hope.
- gausswho
Imagine a world where Meta announced it was legally required to shut down.
Put aside the obliteration of stock value and job loss. What would be lost, and how hard would it be for folks to replace it with something else?
I imagine it would be all the talk for a hot few days. There'd be a hustle and a bustle as folks tried to entice their friends to other services. There'd be a land grab to recreate network effect lock in. There'd be talk even among normies to avoid it.
It'd be glorious, I tell you.
And three weeks later, there'd be a winner that got most of the exodus. A few people standing around looking for a chair in a 21st century version of duck-duck-goose.
A year later, things would be largely the same. Just as abusive. Serfs to different lords. No one would miss Meta.