A US jury found Meta and Google liable for addictive platform design that harmed a young user, marking a shift from content-based to design-based liability. While this verdict is significant, the policy responses emerging globally — age verification laws in Australia, OS-level age APIs in California, and EU DSA enforcement — risk entrenching a more surveilled, centralized internet. These compliance regimes favor large platforms and disadvantage federated, FOSS, and community-run alternatives. The author argues the real solution isn't wrapping the same addictive machines in more surveillance, but redirecting resources toward community-run, open-source digital spaces for young people where institutions have a duty of care rather than a duty to shareholders.

10m read timeFrom feed.itsfoss.com
Post cover image
Table of contents
From Bad Content to Bad Machines“Addiction” as Legal Story and Medical DisputeSafety as a Pretext for More SurveillanceRegulators Discover “Addictive Design” – But For Whom?The Missing Imagination: Community‑Run, Free and Open AlternativesBuilders, Regulators, and the Rest of Us

Sort: