4 ms·
It should be based on no. of user impacted and avg. impact to each user. Revenue/Margin are should not be primary driver. We don't convict murderer/thief depend
by blackoil 7y ago
It should be based on no. of user impacted and avg. impact to each user. Revenue/Margin are should not be primary driver. We don't convict murderer/thief depending on their net worth (if any it is tilted on wrong side).
- Signez 7y agoSome jurisdictions do (in Europe, for example).
- ouid 7y agoThere is a greater impact to society than measurable direct impact to users. Facebook should be liable for their total net externalities, divided by the probability of being caught for such actions. That is the economic premise of the FTC. This should include fines and remedies for anti-trust violations as well, and since this is an opportunity cost, it does scale with the size of the company. In fact you should probably subtract the direct costs to users, as there is already a mechanism in place for collecting damages, and any government intervention on this axis should go to something reminiscent of a victim's fund.
- AlexandrB 7y agoThis makes no sense. Violating the law should not be a business expense, it needs to hurt. If Facebook was a person the remedy might be jail time, but you can’t imprison a business.