calling on YouTube and TikTok to adopt the most specific and consequential provisions of the settlement, including the two-hour limit, turning off overnight access, and no school-time notifications. Given its extensive objections to implementing these kinds of policies in the past, the letter is a transparent effort at attempting to turn the settlement into an opportunity to claim moral high ground. It is highly plausible that these competitors may become subject to future legal or legislative actions; it stretches credulity, though, to believe that Meta expects its competitors to voluntarily follow suit without evidence of wrongdoing.There is much more to be done in the fight to make technology platforms safe, especially for children. In particular, modifying recommendation algorithms to focus more on users’ long-term interests than their short-term behavior remains a central challenge. As important as the time a child spends on an app is, what they are shown is just as important. But, this week, the scope for reform broadened. For the history of their existence, social-media platforms’ business models have been predicated on maximizing users’ time and attention. This settlement, and its sister cases, will not trigger a wholesale transition away from that model, but, by strengthening the potential for other litigation and regulation, and by altering the expected financial returns of these companies’ existing practices, it incentivizes them to shift their goals from extreme usage to more deliberate kinds of engagement. With that change, the possibility that we will see a different internet, one that shifts from an attention economy to an intentional one, has gotten brighter. ?