10 comments

  • bigfishrunning1 hour ago
    I feel like this is general knowledge for the past 5 or so years, but the real question is "What do we do about it?". Personally, I put real effort into not spending time being outraged online, but this is a societal ill that's bigger then I am...
    • munk-a1 hour ago
      &quot;What do we do about it?&quot;<p>Shut down the behavior with regulations or shut down the companies. Meta and TikTok have no natural right to exist if they are a net negative to society.
      • bdangubic44 minutes ago
        regulation will never happen because these are instruments to control the masses
        • autoexec5 minutes ago
          All the more reason for regulation. If people catch on to the fact that they are being manipulated and abused by the platforms to &quot;drive engagement&quot; they might abandon them or spend less time on them. If the government regulates these platforms so that they are safer or at least less harmful people will feel better about using them giving the government a larger platform to use to control the masses.
      • diacritical28 minutes ago
        [dead]
    • cj1 hour ago
      &quot;Make the drug less good&quot; likely isn&#x27;t the answer. Nor is banning it.<p>What caused Gen Z to drink less than millenials? Maybe Gen Z has the answer.
      • barbazoo1 hour ago
        You&#x27;re only allowed to drink as an adult. We&#x27;re talking about letting those companies rot our brains in those first 18 years.
        • XorNot34 minutes ago
          In my experience the 60+ demographic have had far more damage done.
          • autoexec3 minutes ago
            We just haven&#x27;t seen what 60 year old ipad kids look like yet. It&#x27;s not going to be pretty
      • SirFatty1 hour ago
        yeah, it&#x27;s called &quot;smoking weed&quot;.
        • observationist45 minutes ago
          Technology, culture, legalization of pot, adtech, covid, there are a metric ton of factors that all had significant impact on both decreasing socialization and reduction in drinking. And lowering the birth rates, and the number of healthy relationships, healthy friendships, etc.<p>I&#x27;m for legalizing all drugs, regulating the sale, ensuring quality and purity, and educating the public. Cognitive liberty is sacred - but the dip in drinking has a whole lot of causes.<p>A healthier society would be more social and get out and drink more, I think.
      • jqbd56 minutes ago
        Decades of science communication and real life examples of knowing (of) alcohol addicts
        • aerodexis42 minutes ago
          Real life experience with alcoholics would at-best be constant over time, or be diminishing (since gen Z drinks less).<p>Also seems like the science on whether science communication actual changes behavior doesn&#x27;t point towards it being much of a cause here.
        • input_sh47 minutes ago
          I&#x27;d wager how expensive it has gotten plus a year or two of lockdowns which lead to a whole generation of people not going out to get wasted as soon as they&#x27;re legally allowed to had <i>way</i> more effect.<p>Oh, and weed being increasingly legal to consume.
      • fakedang1 hour ago
        Make it legal and expensive?
    • techpression30 minutes ago
      The people who were voted to power (across the globe, not just the US) to do something about it are stuck getting their dopamine kicks posting garbage on the same platforms. It’s truly a terrible timeline we are in.
    • toomuchtodo1 hour ago
      Regulate it. Laws, consequences, etc.
      • bborud1 hour ago
        Laws appear to have fallen out of fashion. And a disturbing proportion of the loudest people like it. Then you have those who ought to know better but are attention-seeking, selfish assholes who somehow find it «interesting» or think they adhere to «principles».<p>The latter category know who you are. You downvoted this comment.
        • toomuchtodo1 hour ago
          I recently provided guidance to state legislators, with that guidance making its way into law in regards of balcony solar. If you don’t think that making law works, I would encourage you to get involved somewhere that means something to you.<p>It turns out that if you present as an honest, non-interested party, people will call you and ask you for your advice. I do admit that the ease of this is going to be a function of the people you are up against and the subject being regulated. My point of this comment is: default to action. “You can just do things.”
    • AndrewKemendo1 hour ago
      It’s like asking how do you get people to stop drinking alcohol<p>As long as there are people who don’t acknowledge or care about the health effects it will exist. If that’s a plurality of your population then you have a fundamental population problem IF you are in the group who thinks it’s bad.<p>Aka every minority-majority split on every issue ever.<p>So the answer is: live in a society governed by science. Unfortunately none exist
      • thewebguyd7 minutes ago
        &gt; So the answer is: live in a society governed by science. Unfortunately none exist<p>Science is a lagging indicator of reality. It is by definition conservative (in that it requires rigorous, repeatable data before it can label something as true). Because of that, there&#x27;s usually a pretty substantial gap between human discovery and scientific consensus.<p>Mindfulness was discovered, as an example, to be beneficial as far back as 500 BCE. It wasn&#x27;t &quot;proven&quot; with science until 1979.<p>Sometimes we just need to rely on lived experience to make important decisions, especially regulation. We can&#x27;t always wait for science.
      • nemomarx1 hour ago
        We handled smoking pretty well by making it cost more and banning it in public places. If tiktok was banned from official app stores it would essentially go away.
        • bdangubic1 hour ago
          Social media addiction is much deeper than nicotine addiction. And people still smoke, see Phillip Morris stock and earnings :)
          • thewebguyd24 minutes ago
            I don&#x27;t think deeper is the right word. Nicotine has a physical addiction element that social media does not. You cut off social media, you at worse face some boredom and FOMO.<p>And PM&#x27;s earnings are mostly from developing countries at this point. In the US alone, the adult smoking rate has fallen nearly 73% from 1965 to now, so clearly the regulations are working.<p>We need to do the same for social media. People didn&#x27;t quit smoking because they suddenly got more disciplined. We just made it inconvenient. The biggest start would be get rid of algorithmic feeds and &quot;recommendations&quot; keep it purely chronological, only from people you explicitly follow.
            • ryandrake9 minutes ago
              I think it&#x27;s also partially due to smoking being more and more considered disgusting, not just inconvenient. The peer pressure of &quot;don&#x27;t do this very stinky disgusting thing around me must have at least a little to do with declining smoking rates. Back in the 80s, most people didn&#x27;t have the guts to say &quot;Hey, don&#x27;t smoke around me, it&#x27;s gross!&quot; but plenty of people do today.<p>We need to culturally consider Social Media use to be disgusting or at least something to be ashamed of.
            • diacritical10 minutes ago
              [dead]
      • brookst1 hour ago
        Not a fan of conflating personal enjoyment of a vice with promoting hatred.
      • barbazoo1 hour ago
        It&#x27;s like how do you get people to stop letting their kids drink alcohol.<p>Everyone knows what the dangers of alcohol are now. We need to get reliable data one can base policy on and then let the public health system do their thing. Maybe not every health authority but enough of them to protect the species at large. Then we&#x27;ll get social media out of schools, away from young people, vulnerable folks, etc.
      • diacritical15 minutes ago
        [dead]
    • b65e8bee43c2ed01 hour ago
      &gt;&quot;What do we do about it?&quot;<p>nothing. if it isn&#x27;t illegal, it isn&#x27;t illegal.<p>previous generations of neurotics objected to many current (at the time) things we don&#x27;t bat an eye about. when was the last time you saw anyone campaign against satanic music, violent video games, or hardcore pornography?
      • sigmar1 hour ago
        You in the 90s: &quot;Leaded fuel isn&#x27;t illegal guys, stop your campaigning, let&#x27;s keep huffing it&quot;<p>How about coming up with an actual defense of social media rather than an ad hominem about &quot;neurotics&quot;?
        • b65e8bee43c2ed053 minutes ago
          &gt;You in the 90s: &quot;Leaded fuel isn&#x27;t illegal guys, stop your campaigning, let&#x27;s keep huffing it&quot;<p>people who raised alarm about such things could easily be branded as conspiracy theorists. even now, at this very website, so full of well-educated folx, people who speak out against xenoestrogens, for example, are being downvoted to hell.
      • munk-a1 hour ago
        Nothing is inherently illegal. Laws are created in response to an undesireable outcome - murder wasn&#x27;t illegal until it was made illegal.
      • DonaldPShimoda1 hour ago
        &gt; &gt;&quot;What do we do about it?&quot;<p>&gt; nothing. if it isn&#x27;t illegal, it isn&#x27;t illegal.<p>Are you suggesting that because something isn&#x27;t illegal, it <i>shouldn&#x27;t</i> be illegal?<p>Are you perhaps a representative of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory?
      • bigfishrunning1 hour ago
        I&#x27;m not suggesting that it should be illegal, I&#x27;m just seeing this monetization of bad vibes and wondering how we can have less bad vibes. Pump the brakes a little.
      • surgical_fire1 hour ago
        Things that are not illegal can and should be made illegal if need be.<p>Many things were not illegal before they became illegal.
        • b65e8bee43c2ed050 minutes ago
          okay. go ahead and make &quot;conspiracy theories&quot; illegal.
  • vinni212 minutes ago
    Dupe? <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=47403929">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=47403929</a>
  • nelsonfigueroa1 hour ago
    I can&#x27;t say I&#x27;m surprised and I think most people wouldn&#x27;t be surprised either. But it&#x27;s always good to have evidence.
  • hmate91 hour ago
    Is this unavoidable? I mean it does generate clicks and views and user engagement so if one platform is doing it, doesn&#x27;t that automatically mean that the other has to do it? Otherwise they will continuously lose market share.
    • hmate91 hour ago
      I think the burden to curate your feed so that you do not have such content is now resting with the user and they cannot rely on the platform to do it for them.
      • pocksuppet1 hour ago
        If the user even wants to do that. Why would they? They&#x27;re looking for a sugar rush, they&#x27;re not looking to eat their intellectual vegetables. How do you get children to eat vegetables?
        • brookst1 hour ago
          &quot;They&quot; being others, but definitely not <i>you</i> right? Those people...
    • thaumasiotes1 hour ago
      &gt; I mean it does generate clicks and views and user engagement so if one platform is doing it, doesn&#x27;t that automatically mean that the other has to do it? Otherwise they will continuously lose market share.<p>Why? User engagement isn&#x27;t the same thing as market share.<p>If McDonald&#x27;s trained its cashiers to insult you while taking your order, engagement would go up, and market share would go down.
  • aenis10 minutes ago
    I look at people who use fb or tiktok, or x, the same way I look at smokers or alcoholics. With sadness and pity. The fact that we let children use this is hard to accept. The fact that fellow hackers and engineers, some of the brightest minds, have contributed to this is extremely disappointing. Shame on you.
  • cdrnsf1 hour ago
    Of course they did. As long as they&#x27;re legally allowed to do so and profit from doing so they will continue.
  • charcircuit31 minutes ago
    British people complaining about free speech and trying to censor the internet. America needs to keep standing up to British censorship interests.
  • KennyBlanken43 minutes ago
    Given how TikTok &quot;trends&quot; seem to consist mostly of &quot;get teenagers to do stuff that causes huge expenses for US society&quot;:<p>* &quot;eat tide pods&quot; * &quot;stick a fork in electrical sockets in your school&quot; * &quot;destroy your school&#x27;s shit&quot; aka &quot;Devious Licks&quot; - bathrooms, chromebooks (jamming stuff into the charging ports to start fires...) * &quot;drink a shitload of Benadryl to see what happens&quot; * &quot;steal a kia&#x2F;hyundai and drive 80mph, run from the cops, etc&quot;<p>...convince me that this is not a purposeful attack on US society by the CCP?
  • Forgeties791 hour ago
    I remember <i>The Social Dilemma</i>’s entire premise was basically this headline minus TikTok, and that came out what? 7 or 8 years ago?<p>Not saying “well duh” I just think at this point I have to ask “are we going to do anything about it?”<p>We’ve known about the financial incentives to promote anger and outrage online for at least a decade now. So what are we going to do about it?
  • luc_1 hour ago
    Drugs.