131–140 of 204 posts
Full title: "Commission preliminarily finds the addictive design of Instagram and Facebook in breach of the Digital Services Act" Edit: for some reason, the URL has been changed. The page I tried to post is here: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_...
this is the wrong approach. they should enforce a choice between addictive and "ethical" algorithms (or even better allow third party feeds), make them transparent with what kind of data they use to personalize and strictly ban any kind of political bias. things like bluesky fyp should always stay legal and not in a gray area. even if someone comes up with a design thats more addictive than hard drugs people should h…
People who say this do not understand how powerful biology is. Nor do they understand that they are putting people with certain genetics more at risk.
"Choice" to people genetically prone to addiction is a trap. So unless you want to figure out the polygenetics of addiction and then have everyone tested for their genetics so they know there risk I will say I strongly disagree with your viewpoint, because there is no informed risk and you are promoting suffering with our beliefs.
this is the wrong approach. they should enforce a choice between addictive and "ethical" algorithms (or even better allow third party feeds), make them transparent with what kind of data they use to personalize and strictly ban any kind of political bias. things like bluesky fyp should always stay legal and not in a gray area. even if someone comes up with a design thats more addictive than hard drugs people should h…
The choice already exist: don't use social media like Instagram and TikTok. Yet everyone keep choosing it despite being addictive. So you can't really trust people, even less teenagers, to make a disciplined choice of not using an addictive algorithm.
Let me fix that for you. Everyone keeps choosing it because it is addictive.
this is the wrong approach. they should enforce a choice between addictive and "ethical" algorithms (or even better allow third party feeds), make them transparent with what kind of data they use to personalize and strictly ban any kind of political bias. things like bluesky fyp should always stay legal and not in a gray area. even if someone comes up with a design thats more addictive than hard drugs people should h…
This sentence has no meaning in a modern context. The US government has declared bike lanes to be "DEI". Everything is political.
"Choice" doesn't work. Everyone is under information and attention span overload. There isn't time to research what goes into the food you eat much less everything else going on in your life.
this is the wrong approach. they should enforce a choice between addictive and "ethical" algorithms (or even better allow third party feeds), make them transparent with what kind of data they use to personalize and strictly ban any kind of political bias. things like bluesky fyp should always stay legal and not in a gray area. even if someone comes up with a design thats more addictive than hard drugs people should h…
The choice already exists: migrate to bluesky, pinksky, mastodon, pixelfed. Create repost bots to start the network effect with content from Instagram. Clearly label the repost bots and choose accounts that aren't reposted yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many, including me, don't see e.g. personal privacy and freedom as the same case as regulating commercial activities. In fact, large business interests are well capable of authoritarian power themselves.
When you grant the government more control over the world to supposedly “protect” you, unfortunately those powers aren’t always wielded by people you would have voted for. But this is often fine if there’s real harm there. Eliminating the harm often outweighs the risk of centralized abuse of power. But when the harms you’re supposedly protecting against aren’t actually real (the social media hysteria is a classic mor…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forcing alcoholic drinks to have a less addictive product is a much better way to protect young people’s brains than an alcohol age limit is (and frankly adults need help there too).
Young people are drinking much less alcohol now. Some people call it a crisis. It's probably related to the reason they date less and have less sex and do less of all the other things you're not supposed to do but people did anyway, and that reason probably has something to do with social media taking their attention instead.
I am afraid this is setting kids up for abusing drugs and alchohol in the future.
The US should start fining all EU created software.
This is the same EU commission pushing chat control and VPN bans and passports to access the internet. Which people on HN hate. Yet, when they couch authoritarian action under the premise of a popular moral panic, suddenly the reaction here is “tie us up and tell us what we’re allowed to see daddy.” I really don’t get it. Do you not see how cheering on this social media moral panic and inflating the idea of a big tec…
Many, including me, don't see e.g. personal privacy and freedom as the same case as regulating commercial activities. In fact, large business interests are well capable of authoritarian power themselves.