4 ms·
I understand now that this line >and Meta pays out to the affected parties probably won't come to pass, which I agree is not nearly as good. But I was respond
by 59percentmore 2mo ago
I understand now that this line
>and Meta pays out to the affected parties
probably won't come to pass, which I agree is not nearly as good. But I was responding to that possibility, as put forward by the the parent.
- Petersipoi 2mo agoThe line you conveniently skipped is > Which creates some bizarre incentives
- eastbound 2mo agoOne would argue the kids got paid for finding a dangerous place and entering. Up to the building owner to prevent access. It’s a form of giant bug bounty. I wish I’d be paid a 7k$ bounty for every website where I can find an underage vulnerability.
- ktallett 2mo agoThe key thing is these people will get older and no longer be in that age bracket so you are relying on future groups in that age bracket to know this loophole which will be some but far fewer I suspect.
- abustamam 2mo agoThe status quo is already bizarre. Meta is actively profiting from harming minors. The alternative (minors getting a payout by visiting harmful websites) seems pretty tame by contrast, and in fact puts an active incentive on Meta to stop letting minors be harmed by their software.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]