4 ms·
I find this sort of litigiousness to be bullshit because it incentivizes signing up for Facebook. I can't be party to some lawsuit against Facebook if I don't h
by isoskeles 7y ago
I find this sort of litigiousness to be bullshit because it incentivizes signing up for Facebook. I can't be party to some lawsuit against Facebook if I don't have an account ("users").
I deleted my Facebook a few years ago, so if some class-action suit comes out for people who were users in 2018+, where's my payout? How is such a system fair to people who had the sense to either delete before whatever time horizon is used in a case or people who never created an account? None of these people who could win the lottery in court suffered a real loss.
- matt-tingen 7y agoWhy do you feel entitled to a payout for an event in which you were not involved and for which you experienced no damages?
- thatcat 7y agoPeople can upload your photos without you having an account
- isoskeles 7y agoI don't. I don't think anyone is entitled to a payout, as Facebook users did not pay Facebook causing some sort of breach of contract. They are owed nothing IMO. Yet the legal system gives people an incentive here to sign up for free services so they can one day reap the rewards when Free Service X slips up and breaks State Law Y. Admittedly, the rewards will be small. But nonetheless, it is an incentive and aggregated across society it isn't nothing. This sort of litigious behavior just slides us further and further into a culture of dishonesty and makes a mockery of the justice system. Also, let me be more specific given there's another thread on here about this. What makes anyone think they're entitled to "$5,000" for signing up for a free service and uploading their photos to it? This is absurd. Please explain specifically how running a facial recognition algorithm on person's photos is equivalent to "$5,000" worth of damages. Where did that number come from? Why not $1 or $1,000,000?