alt Hacker NewsNo fan of Meta, but I think "staggering" is properly determined by the percent of users affected rather than the absolute number. It's staggering to an SMB with 100k customers; it's bad, but not "staggering" to an internet juggernaught with 3B MAU.
Replies
madeofpalk • yesterday at 2:27 AM
No. Percentages allow them to hide in the law of averages. Go tell those twenty thousand people that it's banal that Meta fucked up like this.
sandcat_ • yesterday at 7:09 AM
Worth noting that Meta has a track record of revising breach numbers upwards. We may find out it’s a lot higher than this in the coming weeks.
gaiagraphia • yesterday at 12:13 PM
Why does scale absolve you of crime?
If you or me hacked 20,000 people and potentially fucked over their lives, what'd be the consequences?
Who's going to attach their name to this negligent act and do time?
Twenty _thousand_ people had their personal data stolen, many of them relied on these accounts to run their business, many put at risk of hackers impersonating them.
Meta in a fair world should be forced to financially compensate these people. They built a world where many people basically have to use their products for their jobs and then failed to look after the data because they wanted to replace customer support with a vibe coded AI tool.