• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Zuck Crushes 29 States Lawsuit

DesertRatt

All Bark, No Bite!
The early estimates were that the 29- state lawsuit might get a trillion dollar judgment.

They quickly folded and accepted a measly $17 billion. OUCH! Once again, the idea of accountability gets demolished by corporate power. $17B for META doesn't even rise to the proverbial "slap on the wrist" for META. This US a company that LOST $80B in 4 years on the numbskull idea of Metaverse without blinking an eye. They lost lawsuits to other states--they were on the ropes with evidence stacked against them, and some how the state attirneys general caved in the first week of the trial.

The stench of rot is in the air.
 
Register to hide this ad
The early estimates were that the 29- state lawsuit might get a trillion dollar judgment.

They quickly folded and accepted a measly $17 billion. OUCH! Once again, the idea of accountability gets demolished by corporate power. $17B for META doesn't even rise to the proverbial "slap on the wrist" for META. This US a company that LOST $80B in 4 years on the numbskull idea of Metaverse without blinking an eye. They lost lawsuits to other states--they were on the ropes with evidence stacked against them, and some how the state attirneys general caved in the first week of the trial.

The stench of rot is in the air.
META. It is run by an alien, at least that is what some people call him. Have to admit, that was my impression first time I saw a picture of him. I've heard he hates to hear it. The 17 billion, a wink and a nod, telling.
 
Not to be overly dramatic, but Zuck seems like the man who could order the death of a billion people without blinking.

When you imagine the farthest outlying statistical reaches of the human gene pool, he's on that list.
That might be true about not blinking but the farthest outlying statistical reaches, the farthest greatly out pace him, he is a hireling in my view of all things.
 
I don't think he's an alien, but he might be one of the lizard people.

Also, any of y'all classic Doctor Who fans? I'm pretty convinced that some of the crackpot theories came from someone getting really high, watching old Doctor Who, and then posting nonsense on the internet.

The lizard people are the Silurians
Aliens in human suits are the Slitheen
 
I saw a pretty well-written opinion on this.

In essence- the monetary amount isn't the point. It's whether the POLICY and PROCEDURAL requirements in the settlement- which, if enforced, could put some pretty significant restrictions on Meta and the other social media companies, in terms of what's allowable in algorithm development and other marketing factors, in terms of addiction risk- ARE actually enforced. That's potentially worth a lot more, in terms of total benefit to society, than whatever amount of money could have been extracted...

Regards,
Gordon.
 
I saw a pretty well-written opinion on this.

In essence- the monetary amount isn't the point. It's whether the POLICY and PROCEDURAL requirements in the settlement- which, if enforced, could put some pretty significant restrictions on Meta and the other social media companies, in terms of what's allowable in algorithm development and other marketing factors, in terms of addiction risk- ARE actually enforced. That's potentially worth a lot more, in terms of total benefit to society, than whatever amount of money could have been extracted...i

Regards,
Gordon.
Yes, the policy changes are essential.
But so is punishment. Companies consider fines and judgments as cost of doing business. Even those costs are low, they will skirt the law. Years and years of their abuse of customers has got to come with so much pain they will think six tones before doing it again.
 
Everyone has probably heard the story of the Ford Pinto's flaming tanks and how it was ignored because Ford determined that the lawsuits were cheaper than the recall. I'm sure that same sort of math happens all the time, if its cheaper to pay the fine than to do the work, you pay the fine.
 
Everyone has probably heard the story of the Ford Pinto's flaming tanks and how it was ignored because Ford determined that the lawsuits were cheaper than the recall. I'm sure that same sort of math happens all the time, if its cheaper to pay the fine than to do the work, you pay the fine.
Pharma executives openly admit to such. A billion dollar fine is just the "price of admission."

People hear "billion" and they think it is a huge, preposterous penalty. A billion in today's business world is mere parking meter change.
 
Last edited:
Pharma executives openly admit to such. A billion dollar fine is just the "price of admission."

People hear "billion" and they think it is a huge, preposterous penalty. A billion in today's business world is mere parking meter change.

The salient question is- is the goal to cripple the company financially, cause it to potentially go out of business, causing the loss of the jobs of a lot of people- or to curb the behavior, to result in products that more suit the interest of society in general?

Having the companies exist, and provide jobs, but producing a product that isn't detrimental to society- that should be the reasonable goal, IMHO. Changing the behavior to where this happens, is where real long-term sustainable change can happen.

Regards,
Gordon.
 
The salient question is- is the goal to cripple the company financially, cause it to potentially go out of business, causing the loss of the jobs of a lot of people- or to curb the behavior, to result in products that more suit the interest of society in general?

Having the companies exist, and provide jobs, but producing a product that isn't detrimental to society- that should be the reasonable goal, IMHO. Changing the behavior to where this happens, is where real long-term sustainable change can happen.

Regards,
Gordon.
Right...I understand that POV. We need industry for a useful economy. But, do we need EVERY company? Are there some that are just plain BAD for society, for humanity? Should we allow the trashy bad actors to " shoot fish in the barrel " just because they are big, or well known?

Do we really want the Purdue opioid company in the economy? FLOCK? Facebook?
 
the goal of any company is to make money. Morality isn't a factor beyond how it affects profits. This is why I have a problem with the notion of "corporations are people".
Absolutely true. But in making money - they can't break the law. As it stands now, I think juries have said that FB "harmed" young girls in particular. I'm being generic because I am not legal scholar and I don't know all the precedents for this kind of harm. However, I think they have admitted it, so it might even be moot at this point. Put them out of business. Since you can't put a corporation in jail, there are only money fines, or closure decrees. Best example: Purdue Pharma was FORCED into bankruptcy by the legal process. GOOD RIDDANCE! Not sure if that is a precedent, but it was universally considered the right move.
 
yeah it is still a fairly rare thing that law breaking at a corporate level is punished with anything beyond fines. Even bankruptcy isn't necessarily the end. Depending on the particulars they may be allowed to re-organized and just keep on, or it gets broken up and the various parts become independent or part of some other company.

way too many cases of "too big to fail" that has actively prevented any sort of meaningful consequence too, but that all gets us down a rabbit hole that is not allowed here.

Meh.

Can we go back to arguing about speaker cables or something? :)
 
One of the things mentioned was "endless scrolls".

I'd personally like to see that go away.

Especially if it gets farther and farther from the relevant search terms, but occasionally a good one gets thrown in to keep you scrolling.

...and not just limited to FB.
 
Last edited:
The salient question is- is the goal to cripple the company financially, cause it to potentially go out of business, causing the loss of the jobs of a lot of people- or to curb the behavior, to result in products that more suit the interest of society in general?

Having the companies exist, and provide jobs, but producing a product that isn't detrimental to society- that should be the reasonable goal, IMHO. Changing the behavior to where this happens, is where real long-term sustainable change can happen.

Regards,
Gordon.
I, for one, would be happy if Fakebook went out of business. Frankly it is nothing but a cesspool of surveillance capitalism and it adds no value at all to our society. Not to mention that Zuckerturd has made no secret of the fact that he is now buddying up to the government in order to get special treatment.

As a society we can do better than Fakebook and a clown named Zuckerturd. He is a very big part of the problem with society right now. Idiocracy...
 
I, for one, would be happy if Fakebook went out of business. Frankly it is nothing but a cesspool of surveillance capitalism and it adds no value at all to our society. Not to mention that Zuckerturd has made no secret of the fact that he is now buddying up to the government in order to get special treatment.

As a society we can do better than Fakebook and a clown named Zuckerturd. He is a very big part of the problem with society right now. Idiocracy...

YOU WIN! That is my favorite Post O' the Day! Made me smile.

Go have a cup of coffee on me -- the check is in the mail-----:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom