deleted by creator
Statistically speaking, that means a child gets sexually harassed on Facebook every 0.864 seconds.
“35 years ago” Sure buddy, AOL must have been terrible for you.
I love the line about "we have 30 tools for [preventing this thing that keeps happening from happening] ". It’s marketing-speak all the way down. Like, wow! Thirty tools!
It’s a GOOD thing those platforms are mainly used by Republicans nowadays! SURELY they’ll put an end to it right? Republicans aren’t sexually harassing children right?
Instagram and Facebook aren’t Republican things. They’re normal people things.
Surely absolutely everything in life is about political bipartism!
What makes you say that?
It’s tempting to just pile on with “Meta bad” here as most of us believe that for a multitude of good reasons, but how would likely alternatives handle this better? Most of us on Lemmy are strongly in favor of encrypted messaging for example. As the article mentions, that makes monitoring by third parties impossible.
What if we got all the kids to come to the Fediverse instead of InstaTok? Would-be abusers would most certainly follow. Will Fediverse admins moderate for child safety better than corporate social platforms? Will teenagers want to stay on tightly-moderated servers?
I don’t think the solutions are as simple as “Meta should stop being shitty and care about the harm it enables”.
I really hate this trend of downplaying valid points by saying “X bad”, as if we need to lay out the argument against X, meta in this case, once again, or else we’re just being idiots arguing blindly. Meta is bad and pointing out that this is just another reason why is fine.
But do they have cred?
can stop saying facebook didn’t do bad thing yet
