Here we go again with the Kids Online Safety Act. The problem is enforcing anti-trust and ending citizen united. They are just using this to increase the surveillance state.
Interesting mix of active and passive language in the headline. He covered up that he knew? He covered up that the kids were being hurt? Who was hurting the kids — they were just being in a state of hurt, and as a CEO, somehow looked outside the palace walls and saw that suffering existed, yet did not meditate for seven years under an oak tree in response.
Insane the same government coming to these conclusions will be fine with this same CEO requiring the ID of kids
This seems about the equivalent of "Coca-cola knew sugar was bad, but they put it in their drink anyway!"
Am I missing something?
Is this more like tabacco for some reason? Why do we accept sugar and not tabacco?
Here we go again with the Kids Online Safety Act. The problem is enforcing anti-trust and ending citizen united. They are just using this to increase the surveillance state.
Discussions on a number of the linked posts instead of this digest:
Mark Zuckerberg Grilled on Usage Goals and Underage Users at California Trial https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47075245
Zuckerberg overruled 18 wellbeing experts to keep beauty filters on Insta https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47070743
Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress. We Can't Trust His Testimony https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47060486
So what? Abusing children is normal in America
Interesting mix of active and passive language in the headline. He covered up that he knew? He covered up that the kids were being hurt? Who was hurting the kids — they were just being in a state of hurt, and as a CEO, somehow looked outside the palace walls and saw that suffering existed, yet did not meditate for seven years under an oak tree in response.
[dead]