I agree. Laugh at something you are with, present at. Right now. Laugh about something after the fact. For example, "I'm embarrassed now, but I'm sure I'll laugh about it later." Or, "I laughed at his joke so hard I peed But that is my opinion. I don't really think people who always laugh at and never about are wrong. It is personal preference, and either way should be considered correct.
Maybe it's a colloquial thing, but to me, in the Midwest US, "laugh about me" just sounds completely wrong; no one here would ever say that. We always laugh AT people. You can laugh about an event, although even then, in most cases, it feels more natural for me to say I'm laughing AT the people or things involved in said event.
Ridete is second person plural - i.e. the speaker is talking to two or more people. The use of ridete (rather than ridi - second person singular) implies that all of those people are laughing (hence the 'all' in the translation). You should still be marked correct if you omitted 'all' from your answer.
While "of" is possibly the most direct translation of "di", prepositions rarely have a perfect word-for-word translation across languages, as they're often used in set phrases, and in this case, laughing "of" someone just doesn't work in English. You always laugh "at" people.
Laughing at people implies ridicule, no? When you laugh at someone it's because they've made a fool of themselves and you simply laugh at their misery.
"They're looking at me smilingly" might be rendered as "mi stanno guardando con sorrisi," though I'm not 100% sure of this.
Idiom again. It's just part of the process.
If you compare the main Romance languages (Spanish, Italian, and French), you'll probably find more consistency in these grammatical constructs. It's English that's the odd duck, because English is a combination of Romance language (French mostly), German, Celtic, Latin, and Danish (Scandinavian), with some others thrown in there,
The truncated form "why laugh at me?" carries as much significance in idiomatic usage as the version you quote as being correct. Incidentally, in the version at the top of this Comments page contains yet another version, viz: "why do you ALL laugh at me? Notice the difference? Get the act together DL.
It's what they do here to differentiate English's singular "you" from the plural "you". The Italian word "ridete" can be translated into English as "you laugh", but that loses the notion that it's a plural "you" in Italian. The "you all" is an attempt to bring that back into the English sentence. They say "y'all" in the southeastern U.S.
I must say that I find this sentence a good example of the single most important frustration I have with Duolingo Italiano. Sometimes the english translations are literal; sometimes figural; and there is not consistency. Of course " laugh at me" makes more sense, but I have been called incorrect about once an exercise for using idiomatic English. FRustrating.
I believe that's because sometimes phrases are idiomatic (i.e., not what you'd expect; they don't translate word for word) and sometimes they are not idiomatic, but follow similar grammatical logic as English. Much of the time and especially in the Romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish, etc.), the grammar calls for that language's version of "at" when English speakers would rather use "in". It's an easier adjustment than when a language uses "of" (di, de, etc.) when English-speakers are expecting "at" or "in".
Often there are linguistic reasons that such seemingly illogical usages appear. English happens to be an amalgam of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian (especially Danish), and Middle French/Norman (A romance language), so sometimes the grammar follows Romance language rules and sometimes it doesn't. If anything, English is the odd language, not Spanish or Italian or French.