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

My Feed, My Way

pm.gov.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 162 posts

Re: My Feed, My Way

#131

Post by brainwad »

XorNot wrote: post #33
wyager wrote: post #24

Interesting scenarios that could happen in next few years * American internet companies start to make the judgement that supporting EU/ANZ countries with difficult legal/tax requirements is a net cost and stop doing it, just IP-blocking those countries for the lowest legal risk * Alternatively, American govt takes the position of "American companies don't have to follow the laws of random countries just because they…

> * Alternatively, American govt takes the position of "American companies don't have to follow the laws of random countries just because they accept IP packets from those countries". American companies eliminate their official business presence in onerous legal regimes but keep serving users there Why would they do that? If they can't have a local business presence then they can't book local advertisers. Which direc…

They could still book global advertisers, in particular other foreign companies that also pulled out of the relevant jurisdictions.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#132

Post by brainwad »

alex1138 wrote: post #35

With Facebook, people reported not being able to see their spouses' posts. They were "Married" on Facebook, but the feed just shoved things into their faces they didn't want. It would even edit posts when you went to their pages ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14147719 )

Facebook already has a "friends only" feed - https://www.facebook.com/?filter=friends&sk=h_chr. It's the only thing I still use, and unfortunately it's cluttered with events that people I knew 15 years ago are going to this weekend, but it's waaaay better than the default feed which is just a slop cannon.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#133

Post by Nursie »

applescence071a wrote: post #42
Nursie wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> another example of our government latching onto a juicy trending topic and doing the bare minimum Say it ain't so! For those not following Australian politics, this is the theme of our times. Find a big issue that people want something done about, half-arse it and bow to corporate interests instead of taking decisive action. The big one recently has been gambling advertising. The government commissioned a report th…

Perhaps the goal was never about the average Australian people and none was missed. So many of us were hopeful with this government a few years back. Disappointing would be an understatement to describe what we have now and none of the alternatives look any better. It is now beer time.

Ha, East Coast I’m guessing, it’s only just turned beer o’clock here in WA ;)

Although at least partly that’s due to late meetings with people in countries further west still.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#134

Post by brainwad »

achenet wrote: post #111
jl6 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"tax and regulate" isn't immune from second-order effects either. Set the tax high enough and you'll get smuggling gangs with all the same tendencies.

no, it's not a perfect system, but better. Look at the alcohol market in the U.S. Or even the tightly controlled Systembolaget [0] in Sweden, compared to the modern markets for cannabis and cocaine. Tax and regulate lowers violence and increases tax revenue, outright prohibition/making it illegal increases violence and lowers tax revenue. I do believe "sin prohibition" policies, for not just drugs but gambling, prost…

BTW, Australia has shown the limits of sin taxation with our very high tobacco taxes. They got so high we induced a criminal black market in tobacco, that now is very hard to eradicate and is causing gang warfare, etc. Given we now have the crime anyway, maybe banning tobacco would have better outcomes than taxing it at this point.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#135

Post by vintagedave »

achenet wrote: post #107
suddenlybananas wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anything you think would be appropriate to prohibit?

things that directly harm other taxpayers - murder, physical violence, theft, false slander/reputational attacks... prohibiting things that harm the individual should not be the role of government, IMO. Government, in the liberal/Enlightenment tradition, is there as a protector of your 'rights' to life, liberty, and property. While it has a duty to protect you from things which could harm you (eg junk food/sugary dri…

My point (I'm the one you originally replied to) is that the effects of negative social media are on par with these things. Political violence, violence against minorities and specific genders, and worse. "Even" hurting the way children grow up and think should not be controversial to ban for children. Part of society's function is to protect kids as they grow.

I don't think likening it to Coca Cola, or even alcohol, is the same at all. And I did not ask to ban social media. I asked to ban harmful expressions of social media.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#136

Post by armchairhacker »

xtiansimon wrote: post #110
armchairhacker wrote: post #15

I’d prefer similar to Doctorow, that governments simply make scraping and republishing (anything that anyone who consents can access) explicitly legal, then alternate frontends may appear with their own algorithms.

Does that include the social networks themselves? Essentially forcing APIs again?

Forcing APIs maybe wouldn't be bad, but shouldn't be necessary. It would be hard to enforce and the company could release convoluted APIs, which would be harder to regulate. Meanwhile, scrapers can publish a decent API.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#137

Post by slopinthebag »

armchairhacker wrote: post #15

I’d prefer similar to Doctorow, that governments simply make scraping and republishing (anything that anyone who consents can access) explicitly legal, then alternate frontends may appear with their own algorithms.

Yes this is the way, not another law to paper over the issues of prior law.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#138

Post by dinfinity »

achenet wrote: post #107
suddenlybananas wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anything you think would be appropriate to prohibit?

things that directly harm other taxpayers - murder, physical violence, theft, false slander/reputational attacks... prohibiting things that harm the individual should not be the role of government, IMO. Government, in the liberal/Enlightenment tradition, is there as a protector of your 'rights' to life, liberty, and property. While it has a duty to protect you from things which could harm you (eg junk food/sugary dri…

Does it harm other taxpayers if people are manipulated to believe that voting for Neofascists will make things better?

Social media addiction is definitely much more detrimental to society than drug addiction, imho. Drugs aren't used by foreign adversaries to sow discord and chaos. We should not treat drugs and social media the same.

I agree on your stance of 'tax and regulate' for drugs, but it should also be accompanied by heavy prevention efforts: people need to learn very early on how to have a healthy relationship with addictive things, whether it be gambling, alcohol, drugs, gaming, TV, or social media. This way they can protect themselves, in freedom.

The problem with social media is that it is very new, very broad, and in part quite innocent (just communication with friendly people). Even if we could magically update the education system to teach people how to not be manipulated by social media, we are way too late to prevent the terrible effects they are having in adults and seniors. We need a way to educate or protect those in a non-authoritarian way. Otherwise the slide developed societies find themselves in today will hit rock bottom again very soon.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#139

Post by RankingMember »

f6v wrote: post #126
jareklupinski wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Self-analyzing and staring in the window you say this like it's a negative thing :( have you tried it?

It just gets me how some people are telling me what to do in my free time in such a condescending way.

Social media companies are also telling you what to do in your free time- they're just doing it in a much more subtle, pernicious way that goes straight to our dopamine pathways.

Re: My Feed, My Way

#140

Post by byronturncoat »

dbspin wrote: post #105
gitowiec wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone measured that if a user is teenager boy, it will take Tik Tok 9 minutest to serve misogynistic content...

The thing that doesn't get written about is that precisely the same situation occurs for women. Decentering men is equivalent to MGTOW. The torrent of misandrist content on social media utterly dwarfs the amount of 'red pill' / manosphere or similar content. It's mainstream in a way outright misogynistic content hasn't been for decades. Worse still, it's almost impossible to have this discussion without the immediate…

The idea of decentering men and the manosphere are so wildly different in goal, tone, and motivation that I can't seriously believe you think they're equivalent. Nevermind the vast over-inflation of your perceived "torrent" of this content
Post reply on HN