91–100 of 483 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Put wifi and cell jamming technology in public schools. Ah, yes, technical solutions to social problems. Those always work. Here's a better idea: raise your kids to value things that are real, and then teach them that nothing they see on a screen is real.
nothing they see on a screen is real This is just as irrational as believing anything on a screen is real.
To the product managers, strategists, and designers at Meta: you know, you could just decide NOT to create harmful, exploitative applications.
But: I know some PMs and designers at various social media companies. There are also probably many among us here on HN. The thing is, I don't think most of them think to themselves "I am going to build a harmful, exploitative application". I think most of them, like many of us, wake up in the morning and aim to do a good job. To do good work. To design and build to the best of their abilities. AND - importantly - to excel in their careers, become more senior, and make more money.
The problem is their incentives. They are paid, promoted, and bonused to maximize things like "engagement". The more people use their (likely well-intentioned) feature or design, the more they're praised by their colleagues, the more they're promoted, the more they're paid. So they keep doing things to get more people to click and scroll more and get more praise and money for it. They make a button easier to understand - a post easier to share - a picture easier to like. They fill the feeds with more things that more people click and share and like. And they make more money and get more senior and the cycle continues ad infinitum.
I think SOME likely step back and consider the ramifications and maybe look at what they've built and see depression and rage and anger and misery, but those are the ones who aren't promoted and maybe leave the companies because that kind of observation doesn't make number go up. And number must go up to pay for that $5000/month apartment in SF or the $30k/year private school.
And others likely consider this but justify it by all the not-horrible things they see too -- the people who are happy, the influences who make a career out of using their tools - the "creators" who power the "creator economy". And their numbers go up too so they're happy and they tell the PMs and designers and engineers what a good job they're doing and so on and so forth.
So the problem is this cycle will continue as long as it's rewarded as richly as it is. And frankly, the free market WILL continue to reward it as long as number keeps going up (and that number is the stock price). Which is why a lawsuit by someone NOT part of that free-market cycle (or part of a different part of it) might actually make a small dent in this horrible infinite cycle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The above commenter mentioned censorship. Regardless, the usage of algorithms doesn't mean there's a different set of rules the government can use to regulate it. The incentives you mentioned aren't limited to social media. Traditional media also has these same incentives, and tunes their headlines to be more sensational and attention grabbing. For example: https://blog.tjcx.me/p/new-york-times-ab-testing HN discussi…
No idea what you're saying. The NYT A/B testing headlines is not something that impacts teen mental health in the same way that social media impacts mental health.
> Meta, along with Snap, TikTok, and Google, now face hundreds of lawsuits claiming they are to blame for adolescents and young adults suffering anxiety, depression, eating disorders, and sleeplessness as a result of their addiction to social media. The companies also face scores of complaints by public school districts on behalf of students alleging that the platforms have created a public nuisance. I hope the money…
Kids have been having those problems well before social media came along, so it's quite a bold claim to say they know social media made them worse. But it's a fair bet to say not a dime from the lawsuit will go to a single victim. So I'd take a really skeptical look at both sides.
Yes, bullying has always been a problem. Yes, society has always been force-feeding kids dangerously unattainable body images. The problem is not that these things have just been repackaged into a different kind of book or TV show. The problem is that it takes much less effort than any time in history to fake a "community" all parroting the same dangerous lie.
The old adage went "If I run into one asshole today, then I ran into an asshole. If I run into 100 assholes today, then I am the asshole, and I should reflect", and it was pretty good advice. But if one asshole can create the illusion that you ran into 100 of them, what's the appropriate response. The whole problem with facebook and instagram is that it has made coordinating bullying campaigns much MUCH cheaper from a labor standpoint. Couple that with the constant drive to keep kids on the platform and you have a system that seems purpose built to drive already anxious kids to suicide.
I can 100% keep my kids off social media. But I can't keep their classmates from assembling pages impersonating them and driving bullying via that avenue. Facebook and Instagram's engagement algorithm plays a serious role in that operation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These lawsuits are from the actual states by their Attorney Generals in federal court. https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont...
AGs are elected politicians they campaign on this kind of stuff, so them being behind this particular suit doesn't legitimize it but probably the opposite.
The FTC is looking to hire child psychologists to evaluate the affects of these platforms, so expect more of this to come https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/23/ftc-plans-to-hire-child-psyc... There's a thin line to be walked between privacy and regulation, but Facebook's own research has pointed at the harmful effects of Instagram on the mental health of children... so I think some scrutiny here is overdue. https://www.the…
> Facebook's own research has pointed at the harmful effects of Instagram on the mental health of children Facebook’s own research has found both positive and negative effects, depending on the child’s status among their peers. The Verge is quick to point out that: > Instagram makes teen girls feel worse about their bodies but more discreet in reminding people that fashion magazines, including The Cut (also published…
> Meta, along with Snap, TikTok, and Google, now face hundreds of lawsuits claiming they are to blame for adolescents and young adults suffering anxiety, depression, eating disorders, and sleeplessness as a result of their addiction to social media. The companies also face scores of complaints by public school districts on behalf of students alleging that the platforms have created a public nuisance. Oh I'm sure this…
> young adults/teens will drone on about "mental health" because its fashionable (if social media is giving you an eating disorder or making you anxious, how about putting down the phone?) To be fair, for many young adults and teens the parents are demanding the kids have their phones so that the parents can track their location and other surveillance shit. Additionally, we know for a fact that these social media com…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about in the rest of the world where the first amendment doesn't apply?
These are US-based companies (and there's a reason for that.) If they voluntarily choose to subject themselves to the laws of other countries without constitutional free-speech protections, that's on them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How often again do you hear billionaires say "Oh no, I wish I had been more ethical and not made mountains of cash off by shitty behavior", because I'm not having any recollections of this. The fines are just a cost of doing business for them.
I agree the US is soft on punishing white-collar crime. But Sackler family comes to mind. And of course there's Sam Bankman-Fried. Bernie Madoff, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether courts can pin that sentiment down against prior laws may determine if these "lawsuits have merit" as you say, but the concern and calls for action exist and are growing regardless of how the lawsuits happen to settle. All these companies know they're a target for accountability now, and even many people inside of them acknowledge a need for reform and possibly restitution. Your comment seems focused on the p…
The abdication of parenteral responsibility is another element here.