That's why companies are fined and not just one person.
To protect teens, Apple, Google and Microsoft must implement one-click "child mode" and block installing or accessing social network in this mode. It is stupid to blame Meta for what is parents and OS developers responsibility. An app should not require selfie and a passport to use it.
UPD: Indeed the subject is selfies and passports, let me quote [1]:
> As part of the case, Torrez was seeking to force Meta to overhaul its apps by implementing features like effective age-verification technologies, altering recommendation algorithms that don’t compromise child well-being and making other modifications that result in “fundamentally restructuring how Meta is allowed to do business in the state,” the AG said at a press briefing before the second phase of the trial began.
> In addition to the abatement fund, Thursday’s order requires Meta to continue improving “age assurance models and tools in New Mexico” using AI, and to attempt “to develop, within two years, a dedicated under-13-years-of-age prediction model.”
First, children should not be on Facebook, second, there should be no selfies (which is what states want) but instead a one-click "child mode" set up by parents without any selfies.
Also note how journalists hide the main issue deep in the text so that by seeing the header you do not get the real issue and be deceived. Typical propaganda trick.
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/06/meta-to-pay-into-567-million...
- 1996 Purdue Pharma "began a massive marketing campaign", based on a "unique claim" for OxyContin, with FDA permission, that, "as a long-acting opioid, it might be less likely to cause abuse and addiction than shorter-acting painkillers like Percocet."
- 3 February 2021 Consultancy McKinsey and Company agreed to pay $573 million to 47 state governments to settle claims it advised "Purdue Pharma and other drug makers to aggressively market opioid painkillers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_opioid_epidemi...
give it 25 years i guess
Apparently, there’s somthing so addictive that our society cannot function properly with everyone glued to screen microdosing dopamine into their brains.
That is not fair at all. Meta spent millions A/B testing and engineering the most addictive product possible. On purpose.
It is entirely fair to blame them for the addictive result. And for outrage they intentionally engineer too.
1. Doomscrolling Facebook/Instagram is not equivalent to rest
2. Although rest is a good reward for a hard day's work, you're conflating Social Media Usage with resting, which has been proven to be detrimental to overall well-being [0], and associated with poor sleep quality (i.e. detrimental to rest).
3. You were saying that addiction was a user problem, but now you're acknowledging the addictiveness of the platform
Your response may have been facetious and sarcastic, but your previous replies suggest that that wasn't the case.
[0]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12529-025-10411-9...
> To be fair, addiction is the problem of the users
You're not wrong, per say, but it feels like saying the crack epidemic is the fault of the users, when there's lots of auxiliary factors. There's way more social pressure for social media. Really we're even actively encouraging "crack use" here. There's tv ads and lots of public support. Hell, anyone that deleted their Facebook (especially around or before the Cambridge Analytica scandal) knows how sticky the platform is. Network effects aren't nothing. Hell, just getting my friends to talk to me on Signal rather than WhatsApp or Facebook messenger (which I don't have) is a pain.You're not wrong that it's an addiction but there's a big difference between a person being addicted to something and a society being addicted. The response should be different because the situation is different