> where's the jail time for executives

Our American obsession with jail is nuts. The violation at hand was “misleading state citizens about how it safeguards and collects user data.”

Lots of folks at Meta should be criminally investigated. But not for this, not unless someone willfully signed off on a lie.

> This will keep happening until those at the top are held personally responsible

Perfect is the enemy of the good.

> But not for this, not unless someone willfully signed off on a lie.

From the judgement: “The extraordinary number of willful violations found by the jury, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership, the size of New Mexico audiences reached, and the clear intentional and systematic nature of Facebook’s repeated misstatements established in the trial record support the highest level of penalty allowed by the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act […].”

Emphasis mine.

It isn’t criminal law, but maybe at that level it should be.

> the involvement of senior Facebook leadership

If anyone perjured themselves, granted. If not, criminalizing this lets anyone in power go after anything with any economic heft.

I am, in fact, fine with anyone in power going after any company's senior leadership which makes a "clear intentional and systematic nature of repeated misstatements" while committing crimes violating privacy laws 40 million times. I am very equal opportunity punishment for all serial lying criminals. What part of what you said was supposed to be undesirable?

> fine with anyone in power going after any company's senior leadership which makes a "clear intentional and systematic nature of repeated misstatements" while committing crimes violating privacy laws 40 million times

You’re describing a wet dream for Silicon Valley’s elites. Reducing the courts’ ability to check prosecutorial discretion is an ongoing project there.

I'm in complete agreement about the perfect being the enemy of the good. Complaining about this outcome serves very little purpose.

But this case was about selling out democracy. I suppose it falls into the category of great crimes like killing people with cigarettes and deceiving the public and regulators while doing it. If you steal from the rich and powerful you go to prison, but killing tens to hundreds of thousands of children in Africa is too abstract to punish that way.

The American attitude about and system of incarceration is pretty crazy, but so is our idea of scale in crime. At the retail end of our criminal so-called justice system, you have cops that in many places fragrantly engage in overtime and detail fraud, sometimes amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars, putting minor criminals in prison and penury. It's all pretty crazy.

> If you steal from the rich and powerful you go to prison, but killing tens to hundreds of thousands of children in Africa is too abstract to punish that way

This crosses jurisdictions. We have no international legal system that doesn’t rely on voluntary cooperation.

If you’re claiming that every car- and bicycle-theft victim is a billionaire, idk what to tell you.

> Our American obsession with jail is nuts.

If we were really obsessed with jail for executives, a lot more of them would be locked up right now. There might be an obsession, but it's only about jailing peons.

> If we were really obsessed with jail for executives, a lot more of them would be locked up right now

This is the opposite of what happens in any incarceration-happy culture. See: the French Revolution. The rich got away, got richer, in fact. The machines of terror inevitable turned on the poor. Liberties are most valuable to those of us who are not billionaires.

Sure, but we can still all be pissed about the upper class being beyond consequences that us plebs get.

If I do something to fuck over this many people and harm society this much I’m going to jail. No billionaire is having the same consequences.

Until that changes you are going to have people be willing to back table flipping movements like the French Revolution in a gamble to maybe give consequences to those in charge. Hell that’s more than half the reason we got Trump.

Also I’m going to call out your analysis of the French Revolution as failing entirely as poor. Some of the rich got richer but people wanted the kings head and they definitely got it.

> we can still all be pissed about the upper class being beyond consequences that us plebs get

Sure. Light a bonfire. Scream and windmills. And then come to your senses and realises lowering the bar for criminality will absolutely not limits its blast radius to the people you want it to.

> you are going to have people be willing to back table flipping movements like the French Revolution

The rich got richer in the French Revolution! America’s rich want that.

Our system consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

I would agree except jail time is what all us peons face for all sorts of far more benign charges. So until poor people's punishments are lessened they are going to advocate for greater punishment for these crimes.

The problem with fines is that they don't actually disincentivize bad behavior by companies, as long as they are large enough to absorb the fine as a cost of doing business.

Time in the pokey is unpleasant for everyone.

If corporations are people, then they should face the exact same punishment as a person. If any individual perpetrated this level of fraud they might be spending the rest of their life in jail. See: bernie madhoff.

> If any individual perpetrated this level of fraud they might be spending the rest of their life in jail. See: bernie madhoff

…what is the factual basis for comparing this to Madoff?

How is the circle of passing draconian laws instead of proportional response then driving draconian regimes to abuse that permit not a lesson we can learn?

So our obsession with jail is nuts, because... you lean towards no one willfully signed off on a lie, in a company with a history like Meta/Facebook, in a $25B fine?

Full presidential pardons go for just a couple of million, a rounding error on that fine. Invoking social media and complaining about a democrat judge or deep state conspiracy and forking over the money using the right attorneys is all it takes. Nobody with that kind of resources will go to jail.

And your source of information is internet hearsay, I gather?

I'm sure the crime reached into all 50 states. Maybe they should be tried and sentenced in all of them, so avoiding jail would need 51 pardons instead of just one.

I just want to note that the president can give pardons for federal crimes, but not for state level crimes.

> Our American obsession with jail is nuts.

We rarely imprison the people who actually deserve it. Even when we do, it's barely a punishment if the person is wealthy.

Our jails are full, but a lot of that is we harshly punish mundane crimes against people with no real ability to defend themselves. And that's mostly because the grift of for-profit prisons.

Our jails are full, relative to other developed countries, because we have vastly higher rates of crime. Our laws, by design, hamper the ability of the state to "harshly punish mundane crimes against people with no real ability to defend themselves". Talk to any cop in any metro area of note; everyone knows who the criminals are by name and face, but they remain largely out there to offend and reoffend because it's hard (again, by design) to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

> the grift of for-profit prisons

Only a single-digit percentage of prisoners are in for-profit prisons, and roughly half of the states do not use them at all. I dislike them for the obvious perverse incentive, but it's a great exaggeration to say that the system puts largely innocent people in prison to line the pockets of for-profit prison execs.

For better or worse, American society is very good at sorting people, so the HN crowd and other intelligentsia usually doesn't encounter the bottom 5% that wreak havoc.

The whole purpose of companies is that the bankruptcy of a company will not ruin entrepreneurs and strip them of all their belongings. You have the possibility of failing softly. That's a good thing because it enables you to take a calculated risk. But that risk is usually just money.

When a company, for example its managers through willful negligence or an outright lie, enables the organization to do something that is considered illegal, they absolutely should be held personally responsible. The existence of a company as an entity shields the entrepreneurship itself, not individuals who are actively harming others.

Managers who willingly poisoned people with cigarettes or lead, and now with brain rot, while simultaneously claiming that it is not harmful to the public, even when they know that is simply a lie, should absolutely be held responsible.

Honestly it doesn’t matter what they get them on, half of the PMC in America needs to be indicted on RICO charges for white collar crimes against humanity

The CEO is the only one with decision power and is responsible for all crimes. The CEO is also the one making the most money off the crimes. If we don't actual jail them, crimes will keep increasing as we are witnessing. AI companies are now bragging about their crimes publicly.

Good is arresting a CEO and holding them in prison for a few decades. These fines do nothing. These fines are the enemy of good.

Hold them in jail pending trial. They are the definition of flight risk.

Besides, aren't C-levels usually the ones that justify their huge compensation by claiming that they deserve it because they take the big risks?

Big risk of being fired maybe while receiving humongous payoff. Ridiculous.

Golden parachutes mitigate those risks. The company may tank, but they get theirs.

>> where's the jail time for executives

> Our American obsession with jail is nuts

I am European and I want those American executives in jail as well /s

But in all seriousness, shareholders in 2026 should start pushing for an investment markets reform to introduce criminal responsibility for such actions, because that's a pretty good deterrent to have the executives not act against their fiduciary duty and the shareholders' bottom line.

[dead]

[dead]