I suspect the GP was being facetious, but the point that meta is massive is a good one imo. With billions of users your platform can become 'the largest market for x' for many niche use cases without it really saying much about the platform itself.

I try not to be facetious these days, especially on HN. What you said is basically what I was attempting to point out.

To jansan: The angled brackets is what I've used for a long time to represent a variable or as-yet-unknown value, ie. <Fill in the Blank>

I'm missing something or you guys are? They still should answer and pay for being the biggest market for criminal activities

Why Meta and not the ISPs trafficking the child exploitation bits, or Xiaomi and Apple for selling the silicon that enables it? Or the GNU project for providing disk encryption software that hides it.

The end goal is to morally and legally blackmail every company to act as an active spy for the panopticon.

Because Meta makes more money than all the ISPs together and the ISPs offer a much more useful value to the users. And no, the end goal is to not allow companies to profit from human misery which it seems you aren't against.

And there's the moral blackmail. Tell me, how does Meta "profit from human misery"? Do they take a cut from sex-abuse sales, deliberately turn a blind eye to it, and it represents a significant fraction of their profits? Or do they just imperfectly enforce bans on it, and to them it's nothing but a liability for their ad sales?

> And no, the end goal is to not allow companies to profit from human misery

So says you. But the end result will be a panopticon. Good thing government and corporate oppression are solved issues, so there's no need for impractical things like privacy or freedom anymore.

Countries have laws. At least in my country if a company allows criminals to advertise and scam using their resources they respond for the crimes.

> Do they take a cut from sex-abuse sales, deliberately turn a blind eye to it

that's exactly it.