Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 259 posts

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

#161

Post by thaumasiotes »

kolbe wrote: post #93
nkrisc wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is also a good point, though I don't see how the comparison to what banks were fined is relevant or enlightening.

I like to contextualize the real magnitude of 'illions. There are many people who hear "$2M" and think it's a large fine. It's actually relatively modest, and I wanted to provide a point of reference for people to know how modest.

> The order also imposes a $50 million judgment against Lumos Labs, which will be suspended due to its financial condition after the company pays $2 million to the Commission.

The whole piece is pretty unclear about whether they're shutting down Lumosity, or shutting down Lumos Labs while somehow not shutting down Lumosity.

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

#162

Post by thaumasiotes »

arbitrage wrote: post #61
kazinator wrote: post #47

The way I see it, they tapped into a widely held belief , rather than fears. It is a popular belief that doing mental work staves off cognitive decline (including age-related). I bet you that everyone at Lumosity actually believes it because their mother told them that when they were kids. My wife (Japanese) always says "good for older people" about any sort of puzzle. She didn't get this from being deceived by Lumos…

The FTC is doing it's job. You can' make arbitrary medical claims, and not expect to have to prove them. This is the same sort of thing that a lot of people criticized the FDA over for going after Cheerios for making claims about being healthy for your heart. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124216077825612187 It's a good thing that there are parts of the government out there making sure you can't just make up whatever…

> You can' make arbitrary medical claims, and not expect to have to prove them.

Sure you can. You just have to be selling drugs, rather than video games.

I don't quite follow the logic.

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

#163

Post by ericdykstra »

On the topic of games and their actual potential impact on cognition and other aspects of life, Jane McGonigal is doing a lot of interesting research, and I highly recommend reading or listening to some of her material if you're interested in the subject. A good starting point is her interview with Tim Ferriss (http://fourhourworkweek.com/2015/07/28/jane-mcgonigal/), and from there check out her books if you're interested in going deeper.

I believe it's in that interview that she says that these kinds of "brain training" games are less effective than just normal games built for fun at developing any kind of cognitive ability. I tried Lumosity out for a trial period to see what it was about, but the games were overly simplistic and not well-designed from a fun standpoint. I also felt like I was hitting 90% of their specific "categories" of games with a single game like Starcraft 2, except a game like Starcraft 2 actually forces you to engage the thinking part of your brain if you want to perform at any decent level.

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

#164

Post by kazinator »

ebbv wrote: post #91
kazinator wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$24 million revenue isn't net income after all the expenses and taxes. 2/24 is 8%. How would you like to be fined 8% of your yearly salary? Make $100k as a developer? $8k please! Good thing I'm not blowing gently in your other ear; that would be 16 thou.

> Make $100k as a developer? $8k please! If my career was based on a bunch of lies I would expect a lot worse. That's kind of my whole point. If I sold a website to somebody based on claims that it would do something it doesn't do, I would expect them to sue me for 100% of their money back plus damages, not just 8%. And keep in mind with Lumosity, $24 mil is the revenue for 2013 that I could find, who knows what they…

> If my career was based on a bunch of lies I would expect a lot worse.

That is irrelevant to the question whether or not 8% of your yearly income is significant. I was only countering the opinion that that $2m is nothing to a company with a $24m yearly revenue (regardless of why it is taken away).

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

#165

Post by hyperdunc »

abandonliberty wrote: post #149
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).

Doing so would put many people out of work and throw families into chaos. Not everyone there, and certainly not all their families, deserve that. Besides, these fines aren't based on actual damage to society. I suspect the total is high because Pharma would laugh at a $2M fine, and the FDA wants to keep their teeth.

That's not a good reason for a business to continue to exist. A business should provide real value to consumers. Duping consumers is not ok, even if it helps to employ people. If you want to maintain the organization's structure then upper management should resign and the business can refocus under more moral leadership.

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

#166

Post by DenisM »

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…

So your "app" helps with "ADHD, anxiety and depression" U-hu.

Help me understand something. So you link to papers where some kind of biofeedback is used to help with Anxiety, and then you claim that you do some kind of biofeedback as well, and therefore .... you are helping with Anxiety. Is that about right? Are those your "independent studies"?

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

#167

Post by DenisM »

chris_wot wrote: post #154
lettergram wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I have ADHD. I'm fully aware of my impulse control issues. Identifying bad practices is NOT treatment.

Are you seeking help? If not, I suggest seeing a psychiatrist - they have the most experience, much more so than general practitioners.

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

#168

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

jeffwass wrote: post #116
jonlucc wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The UK does something like this, they call it "means adjusted" fines. Usually it's done if you challenge a ticket and they still find you guilty. Then they may adjust the fine relative to your financial condition. (I'm not sure how they find that out, eg if they talk to HMRC or other).

Popular in the EU:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

I don't think the UK does it much, except in the sense that if you lose a case you're liable for costs, and for a driving offence judges are more likely to apply a statutory criminal fine.

Smaller offences have an upper fine limit, and that won't be raised based on income. But it's always bigger than the token Fixed Penalty Notice fine you get from the police. Serious offences have unlimited fines, so judges can get more creative with financial penalties.

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

#170

Post by cant_kant »

freehunter wrote: post #132
cant_kant wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"Considering the standard deviation for IQ is 15 points"

The standard deviation for the distribution of IQ is 15 points.

The standard deviation of the errors of measurement associated with measuring IQ is 3 points.( ie: the standard error of measurement aka SEM)

I would be willing to have 3 fingers of my left hand ( not including my thumb ) amputated to improve my IQ by 1 standard deviation.

For more on Standard Error of Measurement, see http://www.csus.edu/indiv/b/brocks/Courses/EDS%20245/Handout...

Post reply on HN