this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
91 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37734 readers
546 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
91
TikTok must face U.S. lawsuit over the platform's viral “blackout challenge” that several parents blame for their children’s deaths, an appeals court ruled (www.theverge.com)
submitted 2 months ago by tardigrada@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

TikTok has to face a lawsuit from the mother of 10-year-old Nylah Anderson, who “unintentionally hanged herself” after watching videos of the so-called blackout challenge on her algorithmically curated For You Page (FYP). The “challenge,” according to the suit, encouraged viewers to “choke themselves until passing out.”

TikTok’s algorithmic recommendations on the FYP constitute the platform’s own speech, according to the Third Circuit court of appeals. That means it’s something TikTok can be held accountable for in court. Tech platforms are typically protected by a legal shield known as Section 230, which prevents them from being sued over their users’ posts, and a lower court had initially dismissed the suit on those grounds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Come on dude, you know exactly what he meant. Social media is a broad category, but when someone mentions it in this context, it's very clear what they mean.

[–] null 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I disagree. I don't think it's clear at all what he considers dangerous about social media if he's excluding things like Lemmy, Reddit, and other message boards.

[–] DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.com 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Later in the same comment I mention how I think social media only benefits the corporations that run it.

It’s pretty clear what I meant.

[–] null 2 points 2 months ago

So a family group-chat, that's a no-no, right?