181–190 of 275 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not making judgment but people rarely take the time to become informed before making a choice.
So we need the government to make that choice for them?
I love tech. It pains me to come to the conclusion that in Facebook, we have created something that should not exist: an addicative worldwide mob where peddlers can sell emotionally manipulative ideas to the people least able to handle them, whether it's clicking cows all day long or believing Elvis is still alive. In defense, I don't think anybody that was on-board at the beginning realized this. I do, however, feel…
Facebook, IMO (I minored in psych) is entirely built on a solid understanding of human psychology and how to control it. Add in ads and profit!
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning_chamber
This reminds me: I was working at a small health services startup in 2009. We had a good relationship with a number of small-scale healthcare providers, and when the ARRA was passed mandating that all providers move to electronic health records, we evaluated the concept of getting into that business. We concluded that there was so much legal red tape in that sector that the only way to legally create an EHR product would be if your lawyers were the ones writing the laws governing them (which would have been true for Epic and McKessen).
I love tech. It pains me to come to the conclusion that in Facebook, we have created something that should not exist: an addicative worldwide mob where peddlers can sell emotionally manipulative ideas to the people least able to handle them, whether it's clicking cows all day long or believing Elvis is still alive. In defense, I don't think anybody that was on-board at the beginning realized this. I do, however, feel…
They do care, the piles of money make them care less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. those crafty russians who forced the american elite hollow-out the middle class, undermined Bernies primary, and installed unelectable professional grifters on the Dem ticket. You should also consider that you are not viewing reality correctly.
Why not both? Or rather, all of that? The fact salaries for the bottom half of America are flat for 40 years doesn’t change the facts on Russia and FB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canadian packages too. They required a rather graphic health warning over 50% of the surface area (showing a smokers lungs with explanation, etc) and also removed branding. So it’s a giant health warning over the top half, and then a plain brown lower half with the name/type
Curious - do these packages work? Have they reduced smoking addiction?
Its hard to relate cause and effects, but I see a noticeable decline in smoking among younger people, and smoking has become very uncool. People will also make a big deal about second hand smoke, for instance if you're near a bus stop or busy sidewalk you may get called out.
I don't know if anything besides medical intervention can stop a seasoned veteran smoker, though. Packaging certainly hasn't had any effect on my few family members that smoke.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar warnings are required on cigarettes, and there isn’t much difference between the two.
When did the court rule that cigarettes constituted speech?
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…
If FB is addictive then you need the medical community in on this, but the fact that they aren’t means you’re left alone making medical arguments about the affects of FB. Maybe my speech, this very one, is designed to give you the flu. But when we’re talking stakes like serious medical claims, then we should have serious medical consensus.
I defend big tech all the time (see my post history), but saying FB isn’t designed to be addictive isn’t accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Facebook is "evil" by design, but the end result is the same. The framework is as follows: There were probably thousands of internet companies that competed to be the dominant sites in the 90s and 00s. By several orders of magnitude the predominant business model is ads for eyeballs, and the predominant network effect scales with number of users. Several factors influenced success but, on average, sites…
We are all addicted to something or the other. There are people who spend insane amount of time on HN (including me) - sure it is billion times better than FB, but it is still an addiction. This is one of those things where no amount of regulation or blaming FB (or instagram or twitter or HN or whatever) is going to help much. It might be more fruitful to think about why people spend so much time online outside of pr…