It is a mere declaration, as specified at the top of the page, that "is widely recognized as having inspired [...] the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties"

That does not make it an enforceable law. Moreover, treaties are agreements between countries, not laws, which a country can violate at will.

People might create supranational organizations like the UN or the ECHR, but that has, untimately, no enforcement power because that always belongs to sovereign countries. Violating a treaty can also lead to retaliation by other signatories or even war, but it still does not make a treaty law.

It might well be that the US has specific laws that prevent charging a citizen when they wipe their phone. But that must be a law passed by the US legislature, not a "universal declaration".

However, I would like to play devil's advocate for a moment to brainstorm another issue.

Let's say I build a product that is better than others in the market. We all agree that competition is good becuase it leads to better products and lower prices.

However, the algorithm favors entrenched players. A product that has been bought many times and has positive reviews will be the first in the search results and people usually buy that. Which means I have no way to compete other than paying my way at the top of the list.

I'm not stating this as the ultimate solution or even a good one. But I think it's worth to ask the question.

Globally, Firefox has ~2.2%.

On desktop alone that's still only 6.4%.

Where is the threshold?

First, how likely is it that similar rulings happen in other states or countries? While proportionally to the population the fine is significant, it isn't over Meta's global market. It can be only if similar fines will happen at a high enough rate.

Second, what is the global cost of adapting the whole platform to the ruling? (Assuming they don't build exceptions for users in New Mexico like Apple does)

Both factors have an influence, so if the fine is unlikely to be replicated, which it probably is, and the cost of adapting is exceedingly high, which certainly is, then Meta will continue their practices.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49209391

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49004534

Points: 5

# Comments: 2

"I complain about some people doing X openly while I ignore others also doing the same X behind the scenes"

is absolutely not equivalent to:

"Complaining that X sucks does not imply I am ignoring that some other unrelated Y also sucks".

Societies that practice(d) slavery and human sacrifice clearly do not share such a "universal" value.

However, from what I have observed, Israeli government officials have often expresses that intent publicly, despite claiming otherwise at the UN.

And 30% of casualties are children. The two are not mutually exclusive and this is the data point currently under scrutiny.

Given that it's the most-voted post, it looks like it already happened.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48540740

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Granted, that is not the market that would buy a Ferrari, but one of the point of buying luxury cars is the status they grant. There is not much status in a car mocked by the public.

Are there? That's a pretty bold claim.

I'm sure they think the same at Ferrari, but plenty of successful companies create products that flop miserably based on the wrong assumptions.

I would personally think that the public interested in high-performance combustion-engine luxury cars is not interested in generic-looking electric cars even if they come from the same company.

One person learning something is good. At scale, that becomes everyone learning something. That's even better.

Machine learning is not scaling up people learning. It's completely different even if it's called "learning".

As the article argues, it's plagiarism at scale. In that sense, one person plagiarizing content is bad. Everyone plagiarizing at scale by using LLMs is even worse.

I understand that Google is feeling an existential threat from other AI products that provide answers directly. But they must also understand their symbiotic relationship with the web.