Isn't one of the core problems here a lack of "healthier" alternatives?
(Not only in terms of tech, but also in terms of ways of living popularized by celebrities, thought leaders, etc.)
Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
131–140 of 198 posts
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of the TikTok ban that lasted all of twelve seconds. I’ve been using the internet for longer than I care to admit, and I’ve never seen anything like it. It was like 300 million junkies all lost their drug supplier at the same time.
> It was like 300 million junkies all lost their drug supplier at the same time. No, it was not. It was actually nothing like that. No babies were left to die because their parents were out searching for tiktok clips. I saw no people whoring themselves on the street just to see a few tiktok clips. I heard no stories of children stealing from their own family to get a few scrolls of tiktok. There was no people killing…
I think you're probably vastly discounting the amount of childhood neglect wrought by social media addiction on both the parent and child's parts.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#133What's ironic is that originally one of the advantages of automation was that it was more impartial than human-delivered services. The inventor of the automated telephone exchange, Strowger, designed it because he was concerned that the local telephone operators we directing his calls to a competitor. We had several decades during which machines had only very limited decision-making ability, and so it was their ability to manipulate or discriminate was minimal. That's gone. It went years ago, but it's taken a while for the public's intuition to catch up. People are starting to get angry, but are still somewhat baffled. Industry believes that they can continue to get away with it since they've done it for 10-20 years, but I think this underestimates how strong the backlash can get.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of the TikTok ban that lasted all of twelve seconds. I’ve been using the internet for longer than I care to admit, and I’ve never seen anything like it. It was like 300 million junkies all lost their drug supplier at the same time.
> It was like 300 million junkies all lost their drug supplier at the same time. No, it was not. It was actually nothing like that. No babies were left to die because their parents were out searching for tiktok clips. I saw no people whoring themselves on the street just to see a few tiktok clips. I heard no stories of children stealing from their own family to get a few scrolls of tiktok. There was no people killing…
True facts. My friend spent an entire day without weed once, and he killed 3 people, and abandoned seven babies. Four of which weren't even his!
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not?
The most concise answer as of now is because AI has no "will". LLMs are objectively smarter than any one person so in some definition we've already created super-intelligence. The problem is they just sit there. They have all the answers already, if you think about it. Whenever we ask it something it gives us the answer, it's amazing, we can even say it can synthesize new information. We can agree with all the claims…
The singularity won't happen because sticking a cron job in front of an LLM and telling it to do something (make money) is "silly"?
I am no philosopher but https://poc.bcachefs.org/ seems conscious.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#136While I agree with the premise, I do wonder how you can write a law that would stop the behavior we want to stop without hurting beneficial features or allowing the law to be too easily bypassed. How do you describe in a legal way the difference between a useful feature people want and an addictive feature they don’t want?
You create an agency and give it a mandate that requires it to balance concerns.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most concise answer as of now is because AI has no "will". LLMs are objectively smarter than any one person so in some definition we've already created super-intelligence. The problem is they just sit there. They have all the answers already, if you think about it. Whenever we ask it something it gives us the answer, it's amazing, we can even say it can synthesize new information. We can agree with all the claims…
The singularity won't happen because sticking a cron job in front of an LLM and telling it to do something (make money) is "silly"? I am no philosopher but https://poc.bcachefs.org/ seems conscious.
It's not.
It's no more conscious than running that cron job to send you today's weather. That's as far as I understand what this link is. The agent is posting blog updates and such. Because it was told to. It has no will. LLM generative output is incredible. It's also not conscious.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this is obvious at all. I think its a reasonable function of the state to pursue policies that improve the mental and physical health of its citizens, partly because the negative effects of an unhealthy population are not limited to the individuals who are unhealthy. Liberty is great. I wouldn't want to live anywhere where it wasn't one of the primary goals of a society, but there is no stone tablet fro…
When you say "a society" sets a goal, it always implies a ruling group of people imposing their view of the common good unto everyone. How do you make sure that whoever makes that choice makes it in a way you yourself will agree with?
Do you seriously believe that is not happening now? Or that even a libertarian utopia could manage to achieve agreement?
If you're going to get philosophical, go all the way. Why have society at all because it's just people imposing their will on others? Or do you at least agree that there exists a line?
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#139nauseating to think that Amazon was only charged $2.5B when they made somewhere around $25-44B off the Iliad cancellation thing.
Re: Stop big tech from making users behave in ways they don't want to
#140Sure, making instagram as addictive as possible seems bad but I disagree with the framing a bit. Dark patterns get users to do things they don't want, that's why they get super annoyed at the design or the process or the outcome. Addictive apps are a different thing to me. I don't think it's that compelling to say "obviously no one wants to be on Instagram and they're getting manipulated into it." ...yeah they do! Th…
[deleted]