31–40 of 275 posts
There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First amendment protections against compelled speech might interfere with this heavily editorialized "warning".
Similar warnings are required on cigarettes, and there isn’t much difference between the two.
There is a much better way to deal with Facebook. Stop letting them buy their competitors.
We've blocked several mergers such as US Airways and United Airlines, EchoStar and DirecTV, and AT&T and T-Mobile. Seems to me the time has definitely come to handle the goliaths of the internet the same way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First amendment protections against compelled speech might interfere with this heavily editorialized "warning".
Similar warnings are required on cigarettes, and there isn’t much difference between the two.
Anyone else notice that after you accept TechCrunch’s cookie consent pop-up that the site blocks you from tapping back on your browser to get back to HN?
Back when the GDPR was still pending, the consensus on HN was that there was nothing to fear because European regulators emphasize the spirit of the law, rather than beating people over the head with the letter of the law like American regulators do. Anyway, the law went into effect and some guy got fined just over $2000 for using CC instead of BCC on his personal mailing list of 150 people. There are a bunch more ex…
GDPR "hurt" tech companies, but hurt the big ones less than the small ones. The big tech companies have increased market dominance so it seems like spirit of the law was actually to crush competition so that there fewer players for the EU to regulate
As I keep saying: we don't need innovation in adtech. We don't need more companies in this space. We need this industry burned down to the ground, encased in a concrete tomb, with warnings for future generations plastered all over it.
Like maybe, a social network that doesn’t manipulate us, or scan our faces without permission, or build dark profiles of everyone, or read our personal messages, or .....
There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…
I estimate about the same impact of this as cigarette pack warning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First amendment protections against compelled speech might interfere with this heavily editorialized "warning".
Similar warnings are required on cigarettes, and there isn’t much difference between the two.
Can you post a link to RCT-based evidence backing this claim? I don't see anything on CDC website or any professional medical organization about Facebook being as harmful as cigarettes.
There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…
I estimate about the same impact of this as cigarette pack warning.