Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app • Hacker News Board

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#131

Post by mikestew » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:34 PM UTC

jonlucc wrote: post #36

revelation wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means they don't have $50m. I'd say that shouldn't matter, we don't give the poor a discount on parking tickets either (actually, we usually make them more expensive).

I have seen a proposal to make the cost of tickets based on value of the car. The thinking is that a person with an Audi is not at all disturbed by paying a $20 parking fine, so it isn't an incentive. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how hard it would be to implement.

Should be easy to implement, as the plate number is taken, so cross-reference that to make and model, cross-reference that to the book value. A mobile app for government ticket writers could be prototyped in a weekend with access to the right databases (I guess you really just need the DMV data, then cross-reference to Edmunds or something).

As for the proposal, I'd be for it. I make enough that under some circumstances I very well might just pay the $35 than drive around looking for a parking space. When I am in a car, though, it's usually in our ten year old Scion that cost $20K brand new, so I don't know that would it would be such a disincentive for me (and my illegal parking is a rare occurrence regardless, and usually by accident), but might work for the general case.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#132

Post by freehunter » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:36 PM UTC

cant_kant wrote: post #115

bberrry wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression that Dual-n-Back[0] had real benefits. Is that not the case? [0] http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/

From a meta-analysis : " The 20 studies included here were all completed between 2008 and 2013....Sample sizes of treatment groups varied between 7 and 36 participants, and control groups between 8 and 43" "net effect of n-back training on Gf outcome measures, about the equivalent of 3–4 points on a standardized IQ test" ie: very small groups, tiny effect. Sounds dubious to me, like much research in the social "scien…

Considering the standard deviation for IQ is 15 points, I wouldn't drink an extra glass of water per day for another 3-4 IQ points, let alone play a training game for any extended amount of time. 3-4 points is statistically meaningless.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#133

Post by EC1 » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:38 PM UTC

arbitrage wrote: post #64

lettergram wrote: post #10

I just wanted to share my thoughts, which are simply: "Thank God!" I've been working on a startup: http://synaptitude.me/ (demo is old) Essentially, we can do some of what Luminosity claims (and have independent studies to prove it). Every time someone goes: "Oh it's just like Lumosity" I have to go through and explain the difference. My wife has a degree in neuroscience and I minored in BioE, and we both just HATE L…

What do you do that's different?

A different claim, same bullshit "science".

" According to the CDC one in five Americans have ADHD, anxiety, or depression.

Impacting productivity, focus, and mood.

We can help, with ThinkSuite!"

Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? If I could cure this crap with a site, I would, but we can't.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#134

Post by freehunter » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:39 PM UTC

dhbanes wrote: post #103

xux wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually a form of corporate sabotage some companies use. You'll find it interesting to read about Coca Cola's Tab Clear[1]. Basically, Pepsi introduced a soda called Crystal Clear that was gaining momentum in the "clear soda" market. Coke wanted to sabotage the public perception, so they introduced "Tab Clear" and made it taste so terrible, that both products failed within 6 months. After that, no one wanted…

Wait, what? Sprite had been around long before Tab Clear came and went.

Well he did say "reintroduce". Looking quickly at the Wikipedia page, it looks like Sprite did have a rebranding effort done in 1994, so... maybe?

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#135

Post by golergka » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:40 PM UTC

fhars wrote: post #120

golergka wrote: post #108

I develop similar product, that focuses on eye training instead of brains. Half of our office is filled with ophthalmologists, with some big names (supposedly — I don't know much about the field). Constant print outs of scientific articles lying around, presentation files stick to the walls (I don't know the proper term, but you know what I mean if you've been into scientific conferences and seminars) and overall vib…

They are exactly like that, in that almost all purported benefits of eye training and brain training alike are not supported by scientific evidence and only very narrow effects exists: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15825744

As I said, I certainly don't know enough to argue about it in scientific terms, so unfortunately, I have to resort to trust to authority. So, for comparison with this single paper from 2005, here are recent papers of our lead researcher (who has a cute habit of going around the office in the evening and collecting the forgotten tea cups into the washing machine) on the matter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Polat+U%5BAuthor%5D

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#136

Post by freehunter » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:41 PM UTC

jordanlev wrote: post #109

coffeevradar wrote: post #101

I have less faith in public radio because my local station is always playing Lumosity adverts. I'm old enough to remember when the whole "sponsored by" thing being extended to full ads was a controversial development on US public radio. Now they're shilling outright scams and doing so with specific promises that are completely specious.

When I was a kid, I remember a talk radio show my family listened to that was one of those consumer watchdog / product review shows. One of the advertisements that you head a lot back then was for purchasing a star (like, getting your name registered somewhere and when a new star was discovered by astronomers it would be named after you?)... It was obviously a scam and all you'd get is a bogus certificate in the mail…

My grandmother has a "star named after her". She knows it's fake but she says she appreciates the thought behind it. Like wearing costume jewelry, you know that green hunk of plastic the size of a walnut isn't a real emerald but that doesn't stop people from wearing them.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#137

Post by dredwerker » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:46 PM UTC

cableshaft wrote: post #48

georgemcbay wrote: post #29

I have something of a litmus test for companies where I just assume any company that advertises a lot via "live reads" on radio/podcasts is not to be trusted. Lumosity, LifeLock, etc. There are outliers for which I wouldn't quite say "not to be trusted" like Dollar Shave Club and Blue Apron, but even in those cases you are, IMO, overpaying for a vanishingly small amount of convenience. I think it holds up pretty well…

So I take it you don't aren't munching on your Naturebox and mailing the government (using your Stamps.com scale) your application to start a business (that you created on LegalZoom) making websites via Squarespace, all while listening to an audiobook you got from Audible, before dozing off on your Casper mattress wearing nothing but your "Me Undies"? ...I listen to too many podcasts.

Obviously I do too. That was funny :).

I am not in the states and I can't get most of the services. I wish they would at least do regional podcasting advertising. A startup opportunity :)

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#138

Post by nemothekid » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 10:51 PM UTC

frik wrote: post #89

jacquesm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst that can happen to a good small company is that some overhyped and overfunded 'start-up' enters the field and spoils the trust built slowly and over a long time between the consumers and the suppliers of goods and services. This is unfortunately not rare at all and the 'hotter' a market seems the more of these BS artists will enter. In the end you have the same product and the same relationship with your cu…

> The worst that can happen to a good small company is that some overhyped and overfunded 'start-up' enters the field and spoils the trust Like FB destroyed the trust of social networks, and ruined it for themself and their competitors? The same with chat with WhatsApp and other pseudo secure chat apps.

This implies that the general public ever really cared about the fact that their messaging is secure.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#139

Post by lettergram » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 11:01 PM UTC

EC1 wrote: post #133

arbitrage wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you do that's different?

A different claim, same bullshit "science". " According to the CDC one in five Americans have ADHD, anxiety, or depression. Impacting productivity, focus, and mood. We can help, with ThinkSuite!" Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? If I could cure this crap with a site, I would, but we can't.

Actually, we respectfully disagree. The Lumonosity doesn't have any feedback to their systems, and are therefore WAY different than ours. We cannot claim it will solve your issues, but it could (stress the could) help. We accomplish this by providing neurofeedback[1].

[1] http://synaptitude.me/blog/neurofeedback-in-200-words/

Essentially, we can help cope with the issues by helping you identify bad practices. That's it. Turns out many of us don't realize when we start losing attention, or feeling sad. We just suddenly realize we do feel bad. The idea is to make you more aware of what makes you feel bad/lose attention, when you start feeling that way so you can better control it.

Here are some links to some studies (more are coming out soon):

[2] (2009) http://eeg.sagepub.com/content/40/3/180.short [3] (2009) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.... [4] (1995) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8801245

The end goal of our system is to use it in combination with other therapies, drugs, and medical professionals to determine the effectiveness of a therapy/drug on an individual and improve it. Coupled with that we can provide better coping skills, and our own therapy called neurofeedback (as mentioned).

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#140

Post by Nursie » Tue, Jan 05, 2016, 11:02 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #74

TeMPOraL wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree wrt. carrots and shills. We already tolerate too much lying to people, but there have to be some limits. Common misconceptions are one thing. People trying to defraud you (and let's call a spade a spade - if you're lying to me to take my money, you're defrauding me) by turning common misconception into what looks like a scientific fact? That's way out of line.

They are just selling fun puzzles. What you see is what you get. Even if you wrongly believe that puzzles have some benefit they do not, you don't have to buy puzzle from them ; the false belief applies to all puzzles you can get anywhere, including free sources: Internet, library books, ... There seems to be evidence that mental activity saves off cognitive decline --- just not that it can cure Alzheimer's and such.…

They are not just selling fun puzzles, that's the point. If they just said "Buy our fun puzzles!" we wouldn't be here.