This week, Meta walked into a federal courtroom in Oakland facing a number most people can't picture: up to $1.4 trillion in penalties. Four states (California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey) are leading a coalition of 29 attorneys general who say Facebook and Instagram were deliberately designed to hook kids, that the company knew it, and that it collected data on children under 13 anyway.

Let's be precise, because precision matters when the headline is that big. Meta hasn't been found liable. The $1.4 trillion is a ceiling, not a verdict; it comes from state laws that let fines stack per violation, and the judge has already called that figure unreasonable. The states' own lawyers put roughly $200 billion on the record. Whatever number comes out the other end, it'll be smaller than the headline.

But the dollar amount isn't the story. The story is what's in the filings.

What the case is actually about

The allegation is not "Meta had bad content moderation." The allegation is that the product itself was the harm. Infinite scroll, engagement-tuned notifications, beauty filters, the whole attention machine, built and tuned with internal research showing what it did to teenagers, and then shipped anyway.

The filings describe a "time management" feature whose daily limit quietly went from 10 minutes to 30 once the press moved on. They describe an internal study finding that people who quit Facebook and Instagram saw their depression, anxiety, and loneliness drop, and allege the company shelved it. They describe a Responsible Innovation team that was disbanded.

Legal scholars keep comparing this to the tobacco litigation of the 1990s, and the comparison is apt. Those cases turned on one question: what did the company know, and what did it do with that knowledge? This one will too.

I don't say any of this with glee. I say it because I've spent years building an alternative, and this trial is the clearest public statement yet of the thing I've been building against.

The business model is the bug

Here's the uncomfortable part that most coverage skips. Meta didn't do this because the people there are uniquely evil. They did it because the business model demanded it.

When your revenue is advertising, your product is attention. Every design decision gets pulled toward one metric: time on platform. A feed that lets you finish is a feed that loses money. A notification you can ignore is a notification that failed. A teenager who feels fine after closing the app is a teenager who might not open it again.

You can't fix that with a settings toggle. You can only fix it by changing what the company is paid for.

How EarthServers does it differently

EarthServers Inc. is a small incorporated software company in British Columbia. I'm the founder and, most days, the entire engineering department. Our philosophy is eight words long: We don't desire to rule the Earth. Only to serve it. That's not a slogan we wrote after the fact. It's the constraint everything gets built inside.

EarthSocial is our social platform. There is no engagement optimization layer. The feed is not tuned to keep you scrolling, because there is no ad auction on the other end that pays out when you do. We are not in the business of selling your attention to a third party, so we have no reason to manufacture more of it.

Company is our encrypted messenger. Your messages are yours. We built it on the principle that a messaging service should know as little as technically possible about what passes through it. Data we don't collect is data that can't be subpoenaed, breached, sold, or used to train a model on what children say to each other.

Earth Reclaim is our privacy-first browser, built so the web can be used without being tracked across it.

None of these products have a "daily limit" feature, because none of them were designed to need one.

What "ethical" actually means here

The word gets thrown around a lot, so let me make it concrete. For us it means:

1. No surveillance advertising. We don't run an ad network on your behavior. Full stop.
2. No engagement metrics as a design target. We measure whether the software works, not whether it's hard to put down.
3. Minimal data by architecture, not by policy. A privacy policy is a promise. Not having the data is a guarantee.
4. Self-hosted and inspectable infrastructure. We run our own servers. Our code lives on our own Git instance. There is no hidden layer.
5. Small enough to be accountable. If something we ship is wrong, you can reach the person who shipped it. That's me.

I want to be honest about the trade-off: this is harder, slower, and less lucrative. Meta is worth more than a trillion dollars. EarthServers is a solo founder on a VPS. The attention economy is extremely good at making money, which is exactly why it's so hard to walk away from once you're in it.

We never got in. That's the whole advantage.

Why this trial matters for everyone building software

Experts are already saying that if the states win, it creates a playbook. TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat face similar suits. The same theories are being tested against video games and generative AI. "Designed to be addictive" is about to become a legal category, not just a critique.

That should change how every one of us builds. Not because we're afraid of a subpoena, but because the thing being litigated was never a good idea to begin with. Software that treats the user as the product was always going to end up in a courtroom eventually. It just took thirty states and a trillion-dollar headline to get there.

The good news is that the alternative has always been available. It's just been quieter, because it doesn't have an ad budget.

We're building it anyway.

---

EarthServers Inc. builds EarthSocial, Company, Earth Reclaim, and EarthGame from British Columbia, Canada. We don't desire to rule the Earth. Only to serve it.