TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agoMeta fined $567m in largest child safety ruling against social media giantwww.bbc.comexternal-linkmessage-square55linkfedilinkarrow-up1571arrow-down13
arrow-up1568arrow-down1external-linkMeta fined $567m in largest child safety ruling against social media giantwww.bbc.comTryingToBeGood@reddthat.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square55linkfedilink
minus-squareSludgehammer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up88arrow-down1·2 months agoOh no, less than an eighth of what they lost on their stupid metaverse project. I’m sure they’ll really feel the sting of this judgement and learn their lesson.
minus-squareGumus@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up39·2 months agoWhile technically true, the fine is actually around 0.7% of what they lost on metaverse (estimated 80 billion)
minus-squareFlashMobOfOne@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·2 months agoGod, I love math nerds on Lemmy. Thank you for this and Happy Friday.
minus-squarejoostjakob@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·2 months agoHow does on spend 80 billion on a metaverse? (And would it have been another 40 billion to add legs?)
minus-squareSludgehammer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoThanks! I guess the article I use for reference was from near the start of that debacle.
minus-squareneukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0arrow-down1·2 months agoTechnically, he was correct when he said less than an eighth. It was far, far, far less than an eighth, but thread OP was technically correct…
Oh no, less than an eighth of what they lost on their stupid metaverse project. I’m sure they’ll really feel the sting of this judgement and learn their lesson.
While technically true, the fine is actually around 0.7% of what they lost on metaverse (estimated 80 billion)
God, I love math nerds on Lemmy.
Thank you for this and Happy Friday.
How does on spend 80 billion on a metaverse? (And would it have been another 40 billion to add legs?)
Thanks! I guess the article I use for reference was from near the start of that debacle.
Technically, he was correct when he said less than an eighth. It was far, far, far less than an eighth, but thread OP was technically correct…