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

Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 231 posts

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#61

Post by PragmaticPulp »

tunesmith wrote: post #26

Has there been any further detail on what about social media is linked to depression? For instance, with Facebook, is it more because of the ads? Or is it more because of the engagement algorithms? Or, would it happen even if Facebook were just a reverse-chronological feed, populated only by your chosen friends, with zero advertising?

It appears that screen time in general is linked to depression, with or without Facebook. Example study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5574844/

Binging TV shows, binging Facebook, and binging internet usage in general are all highly correlated with depression.

With correlation, it's important to remember that causation doesn't necessarily flow in only one direction. It's likely that depression causes increased sedentary activity, including Facebook usage. It's also entirely possible that social media usage encourages depression by displacing more productive, healthier activities.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#62

Post by goodlinks »

version_five wrote: post #20
galonk wrote: post #4

Facebook is the new tobacco industry.

I'd say more generally that the online advertising (or attention, if you like) industry has massive negative externalities that they are trying to downplay and not take responsibility for.

Imho advertising is a meme that is at odds with humanity (meme as in the original definition).

People worry about ai operating in software, this is an ai that has been running in the collective wetware of humans for some time that is significantly hindering us.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#63

Post by JetAlone »

goldcd wrote: post #44
goldcd wrote: post #33

I've no love for Facebook and the rest of social media - I can't help but hear this latest warning as just the current "think of the children". We've had Elvis's hips, communists, hippies, satanic rock, video-nasties, murder-simulating computer games, raves and have worked our way through at least 3 waves of 'internet panic' My guess is we'll rank this discussion in retrospect the same way as those previous 'issues'…

As my opinion appears less popular than I'd expected. I'd be humbly interested to know what populist historical saving of youth policy (specifically when you were a youth), you think was worthwile. After posting I did realize I'd omitted the "parental advisory" sticker on CDs.. I still think this is my favourite.

Oh the ESRB definitely. I hated it but in retrospect, there's no telling what sort of maniac I'd be if I'd grown up marinated in ultra violent video games.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#64

Post by jfoutz »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #38
munk-a wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well - it depends on the product. Do recall that until recently MJ was illegal across the board and the US Federal Government is still against legality. It's also illegal to own a tank. Honestly, companies are prohibited from selling dangerous products unless there is some reason they are viewed as being dangerous but of more value being legal than illegal. While libertarianism is rife in America - there is no inhere…

Tiny niptick: > It's also illegal to own a tank. It isn't. It's estimated there are around 1000 private tanks in the US, and there are tank dealers in the US, UK, and Australia. Surely other places too. Here's some in Australia https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-19/tinkering-with-tanks-...

my great uncle owned an armored car when I was a child. He lived a few states away so I only saw pictures. British Ferret. Apparently it still had the guns, but they were spiked, so they would never fire again.

Also, he tried to explain how you shift, but I never quite understood it. the clutch was a lever, with some sort of handle to spin the flywheel up or down to the next gear.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#65

Post by PragmaticPulp »

azemetre wrote: post #52

It's very odd, I use to use Instagram and it would make me depressed. IDK how to explain, I don't even have any friends on there I follow. Just something about seeing everyone at their best 100% of the time, doing amazing things 100% of the time, never facing adversity 100% of the time. I know it's not realistic but it still gets to your head. I uninstalled it from my phone I feel better about myself after a few week…

> IDK how to explain, I don't even have any friends on there I follow.

Social media is best used for keeping in touch with friends and family. If you're just browsing popular photos from people you don't know, it's basically an interactive and targeted version of watching TV. We all grew up understanding that endless TV consumption is an unhealthy activity that we should minimize, but it has taken a while for the same sentiment to be applied to social media.

I don't bother with the discover tab in Instagram and I mostly follow people I know. I can usually catch up on everything in 5-10 minutes per day at most, including some comments on friends' photos.

> I'm slowly trying to ween myself off but it is so meticulously addictive.

Being addicted to anything is a massive trigger for depression, especially when it displaces productive activities and replaces them with sedentary consumption. If you can't use something without becoming addicted, it's best to not use it at all.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#66

Post by lostlogin »

gerdesj wrote: post #41
julienb_sea wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly am calling Facebook and other mainstream social media more carefully moderated than off-the-beaten-path social networks which glorify anorexia, self-harm and other disorders.

Your very words: "off-the-beaten-path" describes the difference between FB and ... them. FB does seem to have a moderation system of sorts but it cannot possibly cope with the tsunami of incoming content. FB cannot be considered moderated in any meaningful way unless FB employs a significant proportion of the world's population. So, I do not agree with you that FB effectively moderate their forum/network. I don't car…

They have fractionally more moderation after a white nationalist committed the Christchurch massacre. FB remained silent for two weeks in the aftermath then contributed the below (which doesn’t seem to actually name any changes).

There was a strongly negative reaction here on HN when ISPs started blocking access to the killer’s live stream.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/facebook-chief-operating...

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#67

Post by loceng »

azemetre wrote: post #52

It's very odd, I use to use Instagram and it would make me depressed. IDK how to explain, I don't even have any friends on there I follow. Just something about seeing everyone at their best 100% of the time, doing amazing things 100% of the time, never facing adversity 100% of the time. I know it's not realistic but it still gets to your head. I uninstalled it from my phone I feel better about myself after a few week…

Part of it is the incongruence of your present moment environment doesn't match what your eyes are telling you, causing a cognitive dissonance or confusion of sorts - even if merely feeling based; I imagine people who are mostly in their head, their mind strongly always on, perhaps used as a coping mechanism, are more likely to be less negatively influenced by that incongruence as they may not be as connected to and therefore as influenced by their body, the feelings of body to contrast with mind.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#69

Post by detaro »

goldcd wrote: post #33

I've no love for Facebook and the rest of social media - I can't help but hear this latest warning as just the current "think of the children". We've had Elvis's hips, communists, hippies, satanic rock, video-nasties, murder-simulating computer games, raves and have worked our way through at least 3 waves of 'internet panic' My guess is we'll rank this discussion in retrospect the same way as those previous 'issues'…

I don't think everyone sees it as just a "children" issue - it's not like the topic doesn't come up when it's about adults. But children is the angle laws can hit the easiest, and it does hit an extra "think of the children" emotional spot. And mental health among adults is more of a taboo topic politically. So I think it is a mix.

Re: Researchers, lawmakers want Facebook's mental health research

#70

Post by wearywanderer »

jfoutz wrote: post #64
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiny niptick: > It's also illegal to own a tank. It isn't. It's estimated there are around 1000 private tanks in the US, and there are tank dealers in the US, UK, and Australia. Surely other places too. Here's some in Australia https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-19/tinkering-with-tanks-...

my great uncle owned an armored car when I was a child. He lived a few states away so I only saw pictures. British Ferret. Apparently it still had the guns, but they were spiked, so they would never fire again. Also, he tried to explain how you shift, but I never quite understood it. the clutch was a lever, with some sort of handle to spin the flywheel up or down to the next gear.

Most privately owned tanks have demilitarized guns, though I think not all. But with the right paperwork in America, it should be legal to put working artillery in your legally owned tank. There is a fair bit of working artillery privately owned in America already, but you'd have to find a gun that is compatible with installation on your tank.

Of course this is not a cheap hobby, and if you want explosive shells you'd need to do paperwork for each shell. Even if you only want to fire inert projectiles, it's not as though you can buy those at walmart.

Post reply on HN