[deleted]
Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
371–380 of 549 posts
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because some hostile entity might rat fuck the a slightly better system, we're destined to use the same current shitty system because something better might have a downside? Do you understand that this is all literally made up? The rules can change anytime and society can exert its will to make better world rather than letting a dozen people decide how technology will shape humanity (mostly in a negative capacity if…
>Because some hostile entity might rat fuck the a slightly better system, And make it a worse system, is what you happened to leave off. >Do you understand that this is all literally made up You mean the existing system that evolved from billions and billions of interactions? Explain what is 'made up' about it. The thing is if you start 'making up' random ass laws that piss people off, they will run screaming back to…
Being afraid to do things because they might possibly, but never proven, be worse is just the political machinations of enforcing the status quo where our corporate overlords get to dictate how technology shapes our lives.
I'm sorry but that's deeply undemocratic, todays generation should have a direct say in how new things effect their lives.
Failure to do this might literally condemn our species to extinction, and this only took less than 200 years to achieve. I'm sorry but they've proven their failure and it's time to make drastic changes.
Good news is many people agree with this across the electorate, so now you get to decide which people you want shaping society. The previous world order of US imperialism is going to end and I rather have the people decide what to do than those that want to continue running head first into extinction.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#373They were also designed to addict adults, just saying.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder at which point do children become such a liability for platforms that it's easier to just ban all children altogether. Children don't have disposable income to buy ads/subscriptions. They don't have experience to write about. The only thing they have that adults don't is time which translates into engagement metrics. In an ideal world, the adults that buy/manage the computers would create age-restricted acco…
Children are an extremely valuable ad target. They have their hands directly on their parents heart strings, and their parents have a credit card. This isn't anything new, think about the toy ads we had on TV when we were young.
I guess you are right. I assumed that something like Youtube Kids would have no ads at all given the audience, but it seems it does have ads targeted at young children. Bleak world we live in.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#375They were also designed to addict adults, just saying.
Right, but adults are assumed to be somewhat more responsible for themselves. This is why we don't let kids (legally) smoke or drink, but we do let adults do so. We expect that adults can, in general, say no, and that children are less able to do so.
But it's not absolute. Some drugs are illegal for adults as well, for example. Why? Because they're too addicting.
So are Instagram and Youtube just nicotine, or are they heroin?
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#376There is no personal responsibility left in America. I have a child. It's my job to teach him and watch what he watches and does. I guess I am the only one who thinks this way. Good luck having the parental government raise your child. Parody: I let my child have cocaine and now they're addicted!!!!! Hilarious.
How old is your child? Younger than 6-8 it's easy to monitor what they're watching and enforce limits. By age 9-10 it isn't just about what they access in the home. Many schools in America are giving kids computer and tablet access, and kids are smart or curious enough to access social media there.
I agree that a big part of this is educating children about these hazards, but that also doesn't mean we should allow these companies to data science the shit out of our attention and will power. Many adults have concerning relationships with social media too -- exposure, pressure, and manipulation are key ingredients that are difficult for anyone to deal with.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#377Is the addictiveness of social media great? No. But the blame shouldn't be placed squarely on the companies either. What happened to personal responsibility? I was addicted to Facebook, I realized it, and I disconnected from it. I had withdrawals for a while (pulling out my phone and trying to open the app I had deleted without really thinking about what I was doing) but I quit. I know I am addicted to YouTube shorts…
Personal responsibility is important. But at the same time, we don't let people open up a heroin shop and then claim it's your personal responsibility to not buy it and use it. We don't put slot machines in schools but tell kids that they need self-control to not get addicted to gambling.
I don't know what the answer is, but it feels wrong to lean _entirely_ on personal responsibility. We live in a world in which we were simply not evolved to live in. People literally make a good living by engineering and exploiting our weaknesses for profit.
> raise everyone with the forethought to know what might be addictive, the self-awareness to realize when you are addicted to something, and the self-control (and support systems if and when necessary) to stop
If only it were that easy. If you've ever known somebody who struggles with a serious addiction you'll know that even when they know it's destroying their life they still can't stop.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#378The solution to this would be a law forcing these sites to allow third-party suggestion algorithms, so that you can choose who and how content is being suggested to you. It could be perhaps as simple as allowing third-party websites and apps for watching Youtube on your phone. And it's okay if this would be a premium paid feature, so there's no counter argument that "it costs them money to host videos". This is not a…
Yes please. Algorithms should be plug-in-and-play and not endemic to the app. You should be able to take popular algorithms and plug them into any app
That's just laundering the bad actions though a third-party.
The winning third party algorithm will be the one that gives people the same rush the first party algorithms currently do, because people will use it for the same reasons; they get to see cute AI animals do crazy things forever.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#379Why this site doesn't let me enter? Why temporarily restricted? This stop-bot thing can be annoying at times.
WSJ not tryna be found negligent in any social-media addiction trial.
Re: Meta and YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction case
#380There is no personal responsibility left in America. I have a child. It's my job to teach him and watch what he watches and does. I guess I am the only one who thinks this way. Good luck having the parental government raise your child. Parody: I let my child have cocaine and now they're addicted!!!!! Hilarious.
> Parody: I let my child have cocaine and now they're addicted!!!!! Hilarious.
Cocaine is illegal because it is addictive.