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

The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 979 posts

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#191

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

jjcm wrote: post #64

Here's the actual statement from the European Comission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... It's important to note they aren't creating laws against infinite scrolling , but are ruling against addictive design and pointing to infinite scrolling as an example of it. The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes". They point to certain feat…

"The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes"."

   Wikitionary (2026)
   Noun
   vibe (plural vibes)
    1. (informal, originally New Age jargon, often in the plural) An atmosphere or aura felt to belong to a person, place or thing. [c. 1960s]

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#192

Post by saidinesh5 »

lukan wrote: post #132
jjcm wrote: post #64

Here's the actual statement from the European Comission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... It's important to note they aren't creating laws against infinite scrolling , but are ruling against addictive design and pointing to infinite scrolling as an example of it. The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes". They point to certain feat…

Assuming it was "just" about banning infinite scrolling. Not saying it is a good idea, but right now I cannot think of a legitimate use case where you would need it, unless your goal is engagement.

Or just help you avoid clicking next next while searching for something you want.

Although there is a special place in hell for those who put a website options for customer care at the bottom of an infinite scrolling page...

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#193

Post by kawera »

jjcm wrote: post #64

Here's the actual statement from the European Comission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... It's important to note they aren't creating laws against infinite scrolling , but are ruling against addictive design and pointing to infinite scrolling as an example of it. The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes". They point to certain feat…

> having a few large companies to watch over is better than millions of small micro-niche ones

Not necessarily. The consequences of a few bad micro-niche ones would be, well, micro.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#194

Post by twoodfin »

torlok wrote: post #166
randomNumber7 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is complex and beautiful and trying to regulate every possible outcome beforehand just makes it boring and depressing.

We should just let people with overwhelming amounts of money research and fund new ways to trick people's lizard brains into giving them even more money.

If you’re going to organize your society around the theory that humans don’t actually possess free will, you’re going to produce a fair number of outcomes that a classical liberal would find abhorrent.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#195

Post by [deleted] »

tokyobreakfast wrote: post #39
poncho_romero wrote: post #25

I hope this goes through. Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive. It isn't a fair fight and the existence of infinite feeds is bad both for people and democracy. Regulating consumer products that cause harm to millions is nothing new.

> Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive. Or you could just shut the phone off and/or not install the app. It's a simple solution, really, and one that is available at your disposal today at no cost.

[deleted]

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#196

Post by WinstonSmith84 »

thesmtsolver2 wrote: post #177
Funes- wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"well what specific laws would I write to combat addictive design?" Hear me out: banning advertising on the Internet. It's the only way. It's the primordial domino tile. You knock that one over, every other tile follows suit. It's the mother of chain reactions. There would be no social media, no Internet as we know it. Imagine having TikTok, YouTube or X trying to survive on subscriptions alone in their current iter…

How will you ban that without infringing on free speech. That is a thing in the US and a lot of countries outside the EU.

I'm not following the relationship - because you'd have to pay, thus it's not "free" speech? It's hard to argue that having to pay a minimal fee (of let's say $1 per month) would be something against free speech. But the payment shall remain anonymous obviously.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#197

Post by replooda »

torlok wrote: post #166
randomNumber7 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is complex and beautiful and trying to regulate every possible outcome beforehand just makes it boring and depressing.

We should just let people with overwhelming amounts of money research and fund new ways to trick people's lizard brains into giving them even more money.

People aren't lizards, however. You demonstrate that by engaging in the distinctly unlizardlike behavior of employing a false dichotomy to imply the opposite.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#198

Post by nickff »

Funes- wrote: post #190
thesmtsolver2 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will you ban that without infringing on free speech. That is a thing in the US and a lot of countries outside the EU.

"Commercial speech" being protected by free speech laws anywhere is abhorrent. The advertising industry, in and of itself, seems abhorrent to me. It's one of the worst things humans have come up with, ever.

Could one not categorize material published in a book, magazine, or on television as 'commercial speech', liable to restrictive licensing and censorship? This seems like a slippery slope which the USA is on the correct side of.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#199

Post by layer8 »

thesmtsolver2 wrote: post #177
Funes- wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"well what specific laws would I write to combat addictive design?" Hear me out: banning advertising on the Internet. It's the only way. It's the primordial domino tile. You knock that one over, every other tile follows suit. It's the mother of chain reactions. There would be no social media, no Internet as we know it. Imagine having TikTok, YouTube or X trying to survive on subscriptions alone in their current iter…

How will you ban that without infringing on free speech. That is a thing in the US and a lot of countries outside the EU.

It would be worth a try to outlaw compensation for advertising. The spirit of free speech is usually that you aren’t being paid for it.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#200

Post by biztos »

iamacyborg wrote: post #175
Funes- wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"well what specific laws would I write to combat addictive design?" Hear me out: banning advertising on the Internet. It's the only way. It's the primordial domino tile. You knock that one over, every other tile follows suit. It's the mother of chain reactions. There would be no social media, no Internet as we know it. Imagine having TikTok, YouTube or X trying to survive on subscriptions alone in their current iter…

They already effectively banned the mechanism behind most online advertising with the GDPR, it’s just been really, really poorly enforced.

So much so that one wonders whether that was the point.

Make a lot of noise about privacy, force massive spend in the general direction of the EU, fund a new layer of bureaucracy, and actually do nothing to harm the toxic business models that were nominally the impetus for all this. Because someone’s gotta pay for all this new “privacy” infrastructure…

Post reply on HN