Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Why just focus on kids???? This is a massive problem for young and old. Every every day we collectively (and globally) waste so many hours on consuming posts which consists largely of unimportant content. News and opinions consists of polarized snippets of 20 sec. (You can argue: some content brings joy, or it helps brands sell products. But you can also call a friend, and the products will find us if we need them.)

    (Just to clarify my point: it's not *all* bad of course, but a lot of precious time is wasted)

    by kaboomshebang
  • > News and opinions consists of polarized snippets of 20 sec

    I assume longer than 20sec and the content becomes harmless again?

    by bcjdjsndon
  • Either what defines an "adult" is going to be raised exponentially or what defines a "kid" is going to be lowered to determine who is allowed access to information in transit and who needs to be "safeguarded" from it.
    by tolerance
  • Thanks, I'm an adult and I need it too
    by yipbub
  • FWIW, social media use is mediated by ∆FosB expression, so the less you use social media, the less you want to use social media. Timeline of ~3 months.
    by butlike
  • Had the exact same thought
    by mrosenbjerg
  • Why is it always people pushing government to replace parenting? My mother use to take away my computer if I didn't abide by her rules.
    by nadermx
  • It's not about children.
    by danlugo92
  • People are pushing to regulate a product that's proven detrimental to wellbeing on a large scale. What does that have to do with parenting?
    by fc417fc802
  • Unfortunately, your mother[0] is distracted by her phone these days, so she can't take away your computer.

    [0]: Obviously not your mother. :)

    by codethief
  • What I really enjoy about hn is the fact that it’s not infinite scrolling. I scan the front page, if something grabs my attention, I’ll look at. If something has a lot of comments, it seems important. When I’m done scanning/reading, I’m done. On social media, you’re never done.
    by rmnwski
  • thats why they invented /new and the refresh button.

    Tbh, i have a procrastination problem and HN is as good as an excuse as any other social network.

    by randoments
  • I don't use those sites myself/not age group anyway. One thing Instagram is riddled with ads it immediately pisses me off so one reason I don't use it. I get the engagement aspect if you're trying to promote a product.

    Recently I stopped scrolling reddit/being logged in and watching YouTube videos. Since it's just endless... and it's crazy. It feels unsettling, I'm bored/antsy since I'm not doing something. So I've been trying to use this time to not multi task eg. I used to have a YouTube video playing and then scroll reddit at the same time. Now it's like, listen to music/work on a computer or watch something only. Also starting to make me seek real socialization too like go to a coffee shop or something even though unfortunatley I live in the suburbs so I'd have to drive to a coffee shop.

    The only stuff I look at too is this site or some entrepreneurial specific site for motivation.

    by ge96
  • Which entrepreneurial sites are you browsing? I feel like I'm at a similar stage in my day-to-day.
    by codybontecou
  • I don't agree with this. Addictive, unless we're talking about a chemical substance or something like that, is a subjective thing. At some point, books, movies, comics, etc, etc might have been considered addictive.

    Social networks in general should be banned for underage people, that's the thing. And the social network itself should be liable for verifying the age its users, like a nightclub is liable for people who enter it. No bullshit operating system age verification, that's, trust me, totally intended to protect kids and not to spy on you.

    by lp4v4n
  • >At some point, books, movies, comics, etc, etc might have been considered addictive

    The difference compared to a book is that a book is not personalized for each individual reader, so the example is not a good one IMHO.

    by simion314
  • Addiction at least is quite straightforward to differentiate from otherwise engaging things by whether it causes significant harmful effects. E.g. per Wikipedia "Addiction is a neuropsychological disorder characterized by a persistent and intense urge to use a drug or engage in a behavior that produces an immediate psychological reward, despite substantial harm and other negative consequences."

    Addictive would be then something that (for a substantial portion of population) has a tendency to cause addiction.

    by jampekka
  • The reason why it is done this way is that “social media” is much harder to delineate and also not what is generally considered harmful.
    by bootsmann
  • Addictiveness is measured by ∆FosB gene expression. The 'addictiveness' of a substance or activity is qualified by how much ∆FosB is expressed. It's decidedly not just a completely subjective thing. Books, movies, comics, etc. can all still be measured on this scale. Everything is addictive in some capacity, generally.
    by butlike
  • > Addictive, unless we're talking about a chemical substance or something like that, is a subjective thing.

    What makes you say that? It's well known that the addictive patterns in these apps trigger dopamine the same way drugs do. In a sense, dopamine is the "chemical substance" central to the addiction. Heroine and algorithms are just different ways to get it.

    https://med.stanford.edu/news/insights/2021/10/addictive-pot...

    by bogwog
  • I heard someone on a podcast call social media algorithms "the modern-day cigarette" and that really resonated with me. These companies know their product is addictive and bad for users, but they keep pushing it anyways. Like cigarettes, it's bad for everyone, not just kids. I made an algorithm blocker for Safari because of that and it's actually crazy how much more pleasant social media is if you don't have recommendation algorithms at all. I think the EU and other jurisdictions should really look beyond just limiting this stuff to kids, but I understand why it's starting there...
    by jrflo
  • Like the tobacco industry, they have confidential memos about how to target children whilst simultaneously claiming they would never, ever target children.

    And then pushed hard for legislation to make it someone else’s problem (like when the tobacco industry astroturfed for laws to make it illegal to sell under-18 cigarettes, after their own research showed it wouldn’t make much of a difference on youth smoking rates and would also improve their image as a “rebellious” thing to do). Sound familiar with Meta’s big push to have your OS declare how old you are?

    by trollbridge
  • I think this is even more applicable, because many people younger than me do regulate their social media use, taking "detoxes" or having a more limited use of it altogether, and they are more likely to have a social circle that reinforces that

    It reminds me of how I have never been tempted to use a cigarette or any nicotine product and view them as nasty, while me being a little kid telling an addicted adult "you know, those are bad for you" was met with a shrug or I can quit any time, as their social circle and support system was based on using it

    Makes me think my generation is cooked when it comes to social media use

    by yieldcrv
  • Glad to hear a false comparison to something that's actually physically/chemically addictive really resonated with you (a.k.a. affirmed your already existing beliefs in this moral panic).

    If we step back and look at this rationally though, can anybody point me to any peer reviewed studies (the actual studies, not clickbait articles written based off the studies) showing that social media is anywhere near as physically harmful or addictive as cigarettes?

    I'm totally open to the idea that engagement algorithms are inflaming social division. I'm less convinced that the children are the ones being harmed however. I think its the adults who grew up in a media mono-culture where the default was trust are the ones more susceptible to negative outcomes.

    When things change, the young are the ones more likely to adapt.

    by pembrook
  • I agree with the cigarette analogy up to a point, but the UX consequences are easy to understate.

    A lot of what makes these products feel “good” in the moment is exactly what regulators may end up targeting: no stopping points, instant continuation, algorithmic relevance, autoplay, low-friction notifications. If you remove or weaken those things, many users will probably experience the result as worse UX, even if the policy goal is reasonable.

    So the hard part is not just “ban addictive design”. It is deciding which kinds of friction are legitimate product safety, and which ones become the digital equivalent of cookie banners: technically protective, but broadly annoying, ignored, and eventually hostile to normal use.

    Starting with kids makes sense politically and morally. But if the regulatory logic is “this is bad for everyone, not jus minors”, then adult UX probably will get pulled into it too.

    by kjeksfjes
  • Look up images in Google with `eu cigarettes boxes`. Banning is a thin wedge, but I think we need something like these warning labels for social media.
    by p2detar
  • I'm not the first person to notice this but, since I switched to Pixelfed and Mastodon, I've found that I just don't spend as much time on social media as I used to. It's not that I don't follow good people, but without the algo burrowing into my lizard brain to get to keep me swiping, I just don't think about it. When I do remember to check them, it's always pleasant. I check a few posts out, look at an interesting link and 20 minutes later I'm back to the real world. That's great for me the user, but I doubt you can build an ad driven business off that. I wish I could say that I'm savy enough to not get sucked into swiping through scores of "funny" videos, but I give an hour to that crap, the hour is gone and I have nothing to show for it.
    by genghisjahn
  • The modern-day cigarette is such a perfect metaphor for social media. A cabal of unfathomably wealthy companies spreading their harmful products across the world; making them as addictive as possible while actively burying the research which proves how harmful they are. I truly hope one day we'll look back on social media and smartphone use the same way we regard smoking.
    by wackget
  • If you didn’t notice, this comment is an ad for a paid app trying to capitalize on social media anger. I respect the hustle, but this is not a neutral comment on the topic due to the financial interest. There are many free alternative plugins for targeting social media feeds if someone wants to filter these.
    by Aurornis
  • I think especially restricting endless scrolling is a good thing overall to reduce the addictiveness of social media and its harmful effects.

    HN having pages instead of a feed or endless list is one of the things I really like about it.

    by FinnKuhn