this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
523 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

68305 readers
4317 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against X, including a fine that could exceed $1 billion, according to a New York Times report yesterday.

The European Commission determined last year that Elon Musk's social network violated the Digital Services Act. Regulators are now in the process of determining what punishment to impose.

"The penalties are set to include a fine and demands for product changes," the NYT report said, attributing the information to "four people with knowledge of the plans." The penalty is expected to be issued this summer and would be the first one under the new EU law.

"European authorities have been weighing how large a fine to issue X as they consider the risks of further antagonizing [President] Trump amid wider trans-Atlantic disputes over trade, tariffs and the war in Ukraine," the NYT report said. "The fine could surpass $1 billion, one person said, as regulators seek to make an example of X to deter other companies from violating the law, the Digital Services Act."

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 33 points 8 hours ago
[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 30 points 10 hours ago

I believe it when they actually do it

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What have they done to earn that fine?

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 21 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Preliminary findings from july

  • First, X designs and operates its interface for the “verified accounts” with the “Blue checkmark” in a way that does not correspond to industry practice and deceives users. Since anyone can subscribe to obtain such a “verified” status, it negatively affects users' ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with. There is evidence of motivated malicious actors abusing the “verified account” to deceive users.
  • Second, X does not comply with the required transparency on advertising, as it does not provide a searchable and reliable advertisement repository, but instead put in place design features and access barriers that make the repository unfit for its transparency purpose towards users. In particular, the design does not allow for the required supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online.
  • Third, X fails to provide access to its public data to researchers in line with the conditions set out in the DSA. In particular, X prohibits eligible researchers from independently accessing its public data, such as by scraping, as stated in its terms of service. In addition, X's process to grant eligible researchers access to its application programming interface (API) appears to dissuade researchers from carrying out their research projects or leave them with no other choice than to pay disproportionally high fees.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3761

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 7 points 6 hours ago

Also interferes with our elections, which might get them banned completely

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 44 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Oh noooooo 1 billion dollars.......such a heavy fine.......

Make it 60 billion.

[–] IGuessThisIsMyName@lemmy.world 19 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

This would be a fine against X though right rather than Elon himself? Surely the company wouldn't have that kind of cash available and would need to take drastic action to raise that amount.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 6 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

rubbing nipples

Oh, gosh! That sounds SO bad! Go on, tell us in explicit detail all the drastic measures that X would face. Tell us all the pain they would endure! Spare no detail.

rubs balls

Yeah.....yeah almost there....

[–] CheeseToastie@lazysoci.al 2 points 2 hours ago

I don't understand the downvotes for this, this was my thinking too.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 21 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

This. Fines should be percentage of wealth. Otherwise they're just a sticker price on breaking the law.

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 2 points 6 hours ago

Nice idea but the state wouldn't be able to know how much one owns. I am poor, but I have more hidden wealth than declared wealth

But $60B is more than Musk bought Twitter for, and there's no way it increased enough that $60B would be a reasonable percentage of income in any capacity.

[–] singletona@lemmy.world 95 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Don't talk about doing the thing and do the thing.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 18 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

in a democracy the latter has to be preceded by the former.

[–] singletona@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

Forgive me for being jaded and bitter about the opposition party being nothing BUT ineffectual talk.

[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 60 points 19 hours ago (1 children)
[–] mPony@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Get back to me when they spell Billion with a T

[–] UprisingVoltage@feddit.it 2 points 2 hours ago

Tillion? Tbillion? BillionT?

!/s!<

[–] oxysis@lemm.ee 25 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

So a slap on the wrist? A significant one sure but just ban them if you want to be serious and make an example out of them

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 18 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

but just ban them if you want to be serious

But if you ban them you can't continue to fine them....

[–] oxysis@lemm.ee 15 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

If you want X and other American social media platforms to keep undermining your democracies then sure just fine them. But if you want to get serious then kick them to the fucking curb

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 1 points 6 hours ago

But if you want to get serious then kick them to the fucking curb

Absolutely, but you have to think why the European Union hasn't done this to date? It's totally within their gift to say that Twitter is such a dog shit platform that tomorrow it will be blocked, no European company can do business with them. But they don't. Why is that?

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 12 points 17 hours ago
[–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago

Well then do either one instead of just loudly proclaiming you might do something

[–] Little8Lost@lemmy.world 13 points 16 hours ago

I hope that after the fine goes into action he loses more investors further deminishing his wealth

does not matter to me if the actual fine is lower when in the end he pays a higher price. (but big numbers are nice so: go europe)

[–] Bleys@lemmy.world 17 points 19 hours ago

Why stop at 1

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] wieson@feddit.org 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Hopefully it's a European billion (million, milliarde, billion, billiarde etc) so 10^12

[–] skitazd@lemm.ee 11 points 19 hours ago

Just ban the thing

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago

Good. Go ahead.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemm.ee 4 points 16 hours ago

Oh no don’t make papa Elon cry.

[–] 200ok@lemmy.world -2 points 19 hours ago

don juan grabbed the wrong pussy