1193
Meta found liable in child exploitation case (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
148 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

... while they feign child protection to avoid costs

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 7 months ago (6 children)

What actually might help: hold people who design these tools criminally liable. Everyone knows what they are doing but you can't really say no to your employer because "don't worry you're not liable" so everyone continues on building the Torment Nexus.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Are you suggesting that we should be able to criminally prosecute people who build end to end encryption software and tools? Or algorithms that find people you may know? Because that seems to be key to the Meta lawsuit as far as they are involved. That and the fact that Meta deliberately mislead the public about the safety of the website for kids. Because social media as it exists today isn't really safe for children and a best the people responsible for that are the executives who made the decision to lie accountable.

    But your average programmer isn't designing tools for the purpose of making kids less safe. They aren't designing tools for the purpose of being addictive. And they aren't designing tools for predators. They happen to have designed tools used by predators because of the flaws in the design and the fact that their executives found those flaws to be advantageous to their bottom line so they played them up. Leaned in if you will.

    It was literally part of the leak in 2021 that they had discovered that their algorithm had certain effects and the C-Suit literally went about making sure they could use that for monetary gain to keep people on the site and scrolling. Not just young users, but users of all ages.

    The main thing is that it's really easy to social engineer on a social media website where people are encouraged to give out all kinds of information that can be used against them in social engineering attacks. That, combined with the addiction fostered there and the encrypted chat methods owned by Meta and used by quite a bit of the world en masse is what created this situation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

    There's difference between making an encryption tool and hiring top psychologists to design abusive systems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    The "these tools" that the government is targeting include end-to-end encryption, and I am of course of the position that and end encryption is a good thing.

    When we talk about "abusive systems" we need to be very clear about what kinds of technology or system behaviors we are discussing, or else the government solution by default will usually be "well it can't be only the platform that spies on you."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    Have you read the whistle blower's book? Or even just the exerpts from it that have been floating around for ages?

    I'm curious, because it's clear to me that the C-Suit c-suite at Meta and companies like it absolutely do employ some really shitty people, but at the same time, that doesn't mean you can paint the janitor with the same brush as the lean in woman who made her personal assistant but lingerie and model it in her home for her. Or tried to force another woman to cuddle with her while she was pregnant.

    So what I'm saying is, I don't agree with the sentiment that everyone who works there is a power mad executive intent on algorithmic domination of the internet, and for at least some of the programmers in question a job is a job.

    I will say that is different if they know what's going on and have the proper ability to make the decision to fight against such a thing.

    But I question where your line of complicity starts and ends here.

    I guess I'm also pointing out that part of what makes meta properties particularly attractive to pedophiles is the same thing that makes it attractive to other online criminals and it's the encryption.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •