4 ms·

Yes. Or you do things that gives you rewards - and do not care what it will result otherwise - but you want to be saved from any responsibility (automatically!

Yes. Or you do things that gives you rewards - and do not care what it will result otherwise - but you want to be saved from any responsibility (automatically!) for what it causes just because it is an algorithm? The enjoying the benefits but running away from responsibility is a cowardly and childish act. Childish acts need supervision from adults.

EasyMark 2y ago
What happened to that child is on the parents not some programmer who coded an optimization algorithm. It’s really as simple as that. No 10 year old should be on TikTok, I’m not sure anyone under 18 should be given the garbage, dangerous misinformation, intentional disinformation, and lack of any ability to control what your child sees.
- itishappy 2y ago
  Do you feel the same way about the sale of alcohol? I do see the argument for parental responsibility, but I'm not sure how parents will enforce that if the law allows people to sell kids alcohol free from liability.
  - tines 2y ago
    This is a good argument I didn't think of before. What's the response to it?
    - Flozzin 2y ago
      We regulate the sale of all sorts of things that can do damage but also have other uses. You can't buy large amounts of certain cold medicines, and you need to be an adult to do so. You can't buy fireworks if you are a minor in most places. In some countries they won't even sell you a set of steak knives if you are underage. Someone else's response was that a 10 year old should not be on ticktoc. Well then how did they get past the age restrictions?(I'm guessing its a check box at best). So its inadequately gated. But really, I don't think its the sort of thing that needs an age gate. They are responsible for a product that is actively targeting harmful behavior at children and adults. It's not ok in either situation. You cannot allow your platform to be hijacked for content like this. Full stop. These 'services' need better ways to moderate content. If that is more controls that allow them to delete certain posts and videos or some other method to contain videos like this. You cannot just allow users to upload and share whatever they want. And further, have your own systems promote these videos. Everyone who makes a product(especially for mass consumption), has a responsibility to make sure their product is safe. If your product is so complicated that you can't control it, then you need to step back and re-evaluate how it's functioning. Not just plow ahead, making money, letting it harm people.
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    Alcohol (the consumption form) serves only one purpose to get you buzzed. Unlike algorithms and hammers which are generic and serve many purposes, some of which are positive, especially when used correctly. You can’t sue the people who make hammers if someone kills another person with one.
    - rbetts 2y ago
      You could sue a hammer manufacturer if they regularly advertised hammers as weapons to children and children started killing each other with them, though.
      - tines 2y ago
        You said sue the hammer manufacturer. Why didn’t you say to sue the newspaper that ran the ads? The fact that you couldn’t keep that straight in your analogy undermines your argument significantly imo.
    - nmeagent 2y ago
      > Alcohol (the consumption form) serves only one purpose to get you buzzed. Since consumable alcohol has other legitimate uses besides getting a buzz on, I don't think this point stands. For example, it's used quite often in cooking and (most of the time?) no intoxicating effects remain in the final product.
    - rfrey 2y ago
      We're not talking about "all algorithms" any more than the alcohol example is talking about "all liquids". Social media algorithms have one purpose: to manipulate people into more engagement, to manoeuvre them into forgoing other activities in favour of more screen time, in the service of showing them more ads.
    - OfficeChad 2y ago
      [dead]
anigbrowl 2y ago
You seem to be overlooking the fact of the late plaintiff being 10 years old. The case turns on whether it's reasonable to expect that Tiktok would knowingly share content encouraging users to attempt life-threatening activities to children.
- mihaaly 2y ago
  Installing a mechanism that will output harmful results if certain input is provided that is negligence! We are talking about pushing random crap into the face of readers for f's sake here not the cure of cancer algorithm with side effects, please be smart!
  - anigbrowl 2y ago
    You seem confused. One minute you're blaming parents, the next Tiktok. I can't work out what point you're trying to make.
Nasrudith 2y ago
You want to bake cookies yet refuse to take responsibility for the possibility of somebody choking on them, or sell cars without maling crashes impossible! Impossible goals are an asinine standard and "responsibility" and "accountability" are the favorite weasel words of those who want absolute discretion to abuse power.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  Aren’t there lots of regulations on safety standards for food and for cars? I think you might have chosen the wrong examples.
  - pigeonhole123 2y ago
    Is Mercedes liable if I run over someone on purpose in a car they made?
    - leereeves 2y ago
      That's a poor comparison to this case. Would Mercedes be liable if the car (i.e. the algorithm) decided to run over someone?
      - int3 2y ago
        Does the algorithm "decide" to show something, or is it operating mechanically, driven by the inputs of the user?
        leereeves 2y ago
        If it is operating mechanically, then it is following a process chosen by the developers who wrote the code. They work for the company, so the consequences are still the company's responsibility.
        int3 2y ago

EasyMark 2y ago

What happened to that child is on the parents not some programmer who coded an optimization algorithm. It’s really as simple as that. No 10 year old should be on TikTok, I’m not sure anyone under 18 should be given the garbage, dangerous misinformation, intentional disinformation, and lack of any ability to control what your child sees.

itishappy 2y ago
Do you feel the same way about the sale of alcohol? I do see the argument for parental responsibility, but I'm not sure how parents will enforce that if the law allows people to sell kids alcohol free from liability.
- tines 2y ago
  This is a good argument I didn't think of before. What's the response to it?
  - Flozzin 2y ago
    We regulate the sale of all sorts of things that can do damage but also have other uses. You can't buy large amounts of certain cold medicines, and you need to be an adult to do so. You can't buy fireworks if you are a minor in most places. In some countries they won't even sell you a set of steak knives if you are underage. Someone else's response was that a 10 year old should not be on ticktoc. Well then how did they get past the age restrictions?(I'm guessing its a check box at best). So its inadequately gated. But really, I don't think its the sort of thing that needs an age gate. They are responsible for a product that is actively targeting harmful behavior at children and adults. It's not ok in either situation. You cannot allow your platform to be hijacked for content like this. Full stop. These 'services' need better ways to moderate content. If that is more controls that allow them to delete certain posts and videos or some other method to contain videos like this. You cannot just allow users to upload and share whatever they want. And further, have your own systems promote these videos. Everyone who makes a product(especially for mass consumption), has a responsibility to make sure their product is safe. If your product is so complicated that you can't control it, then you need to step back and re-evaluate how it's functioning. Not just plow ahead, making money, letting it harm people.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  Alcohol (the consumption form) serves only one purpose to get you buzzed. Unlike algorithms and hammers which are generic and serve many purposes, some of which are positive, especially when used correctly. You can’t sue the people who make hammers if someone kills another person with one.
  - rbetts 2y ago
    You could sue a hammer manufacturer if they regularly advertised hammers as weapons to children and children started killing each other with them, though.
    - tines 2y ago
      You said sue the hammer manufacturer. Why didn’t you say to sue the newspaper that ran the ads? The fact that you couldn’t keep that straight in your analogy undermines your argument significantly imo.
  - nmeagent 2y ago
    > Alcohol (the consumption form) serves only one purpose to get you buzzed. Since consumable alcohol has other legitimate uses besides getting a buzz on, I don't think this point stands. For example, it's used quite often in cooking and (most of the time?) no intoxicating effects remain in the final product.
  - rfrey 2y ago
    We're not talking about "all algorithms" any more than the alcohol example is talking about "all liquids". Social media algorithms have one purpose: to manipulate people into more engagement, to manoeuvre them into forgoing other activities in favour of more screen time, in the service of showing them more ads.
  - OfficeChad 2y ago
    [dead]

anigbrowl 2y ago

You seem to be overlooking the fact of the late plaintiff being 10 years old. The case turns on whether it's reasonable to expect that Tiktok would knowingly share content encouraging users to attempt life-threatening activities to children.

mihaaly 2y ago
Installing a mechanism that will output harmful results if certain input is provided that is negligence! We are talking about pushing random crap into the face of readers for f's sake here not the cure of cancer algorithm with side effects, please be smart!
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  You seem confused. One minute you're blaming parents, the next Tiktok. I can't work out what point you're trying to make.

Nasrudith 2y ago

You want to bake cookies yet refuse to take responsibility for the possibility of somebody choking on them, or sell cars without maling crashes impossible! Impossible goals are an asinine standard and "responsibility" and "accountability" are the favorite weasel words of those who want absolute discretion to abuse power.

BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Aren’t there lots of regulations on safety standards for food and for cars? I think you might have chosen the wrong examples.
- pigeonhole123 2y ago
  Is Mercedes liable if I run over someone on purpose in a car they made?
  - leereeves 2y ago
    That's a poor comparison to this case. Would Mercedes be liable if the car (i.e. the algorithm) decided to run over someone?
    - int3 2y ago
      Does the algorithm "decide" to show something, or is it operating mechanically, driven by the inputs of the user?
      - leereeves 2y ago
        If it is operating mechanically, then it is following a process chosen by the developers who wrote the code. They work for the company, so the consequences are still the company's responsibility.
        int3 2y ago