EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids • Hacker News Board

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#151

Post by gibspaulding » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:51 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #100

alkonaut wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of Instagram: You show the videos from the people you follow on instagram, then no more short videos at all. Possibly a search box. If you search on youtube then it can rank any way it wants, just not use e.g. anything from the viewing history. No "related videos" column. That's what YouTube used to be. But YouTube (unlike TikTok) worked well before it had rabbit holes. For TikTok the situation is worse.…

I think it would be great if all of these apps had an option to function like you propose: Your feed is a simple view of people you’ve chosen to follow. The end. Then all of the people who have trouble with self-control on infinite feeds can enable this mode, and everyone who wants the recommendation algorithm can leave it on. This is the optimal outcome that actually serves everyone’s personal goals for using these…

I don’t endorse using these apps, but for what it’s worth, Instagram actually does have this feature (tap “instagram” at the top and select “following”). You get a chronological feed with no adds and no reels. Of course they don’t provide an option to make that the default as far as I know.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#152

Post by sixo » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:51 PM UTC

shevy-java wrote: post #139

jrflo wrote: post #118

I heard someone on a podcast call social media algorithms "the modern-day cigarette" and that really resonated with me. These companies know their product is addictive and bad for users, but they keep pushing it anyways. Like cigarettes, it's bad for everyone, not just kids. I made an algorithm blocker for Safari because of that and it's actually crazy how much more pleasant social media is if you don't have recommen…

That rationale never convinced me. Smoking has definite physiological effects. Molecules bind to receptors or neurons and initiate cascades/responses. I don't see this with user interface in a browser at all. IF you wish to reason for that, why are regular ads allowed? They piss me off. Why do I have to see them? They cause my brain an addiction to want to buy crappy products. So why is there no ban here? Let's face…

To hold this view you have to think of information as "not real", not like "real" molecules and receptors, the mind as distinct from the body, and then restrict the legal definition of harm to only "real" things.

This is an odd thing to do, because :

- information is real, it exists in the universe.

- the harm of social media is real, as measured by many of the same measures as the harm of smoking

Why not do something about ads? No, that's a good thought, we should do that too.

I think a decent conceptualization here is "psychic damage", as in a video game. These things deal a lot of it.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#153

Post by wackget » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:51 PM UTC

nekusar wrote: post #85

criddell wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An an adult, do you also believe seat belt laws are a bad thing?

Yes, I do. Its just another way that cops can pull you over for bullshit charges and revenue enhancement. I remember in my state, it was initially only a citation that couldnt be pulled over on. Then they flipped that and started pulling over for it. Why? Pure fucking money grab. Me not wearing a seatbelt means I risk getting splattered. Not you, or anyone else.

This cannot be a genuine take from a real person.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#154

Post by afavour » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:51 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #120

criddell wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the radio I heard a reporter talking about things China does during school exams. Apparently all schools have exams at the same time and during that period, social media shuts down at night. I forget the exact hours (10pm - 6am maybe). I'm starting to think that would be a great policy in general for everybody. I think they also said AI companies go offline during exam hours, but I may have got that wrong.

Absolutely wild that we’re seeing proposals to shut down parts of the internet and regulate when people can talk to each other on social platforms as a real suggestion on HN. I feel like we’ve completely lost the plot when we’re starting to invite government partial Internet shutdowns as a good idea. This is a totalitarian government play.

I think it speaks to the complete lack of government regulation in the area that people see such extreme answers as positive. If any government had seen fit to engage in light regulation of what social media can do people might be happier.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#155

Post by moooo99 » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

jayGlow wrote: post #87

criddell wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An an adult, do you also believe seat belt laws are a bad thing?

personally yes, that kind of choice should belong to the individual not the government. besides that though the laws are nonsensical why is a seatbelt required in a car not not in a bus, why are motorcycles even allowed at all?

This argument falls apart for countries with socialized healthcare.

As long as all people are paying for your dumb decisions, it is reasonable to expect the government to reduce the frequency of dumb decisions by adequate means.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#156

Post by Aurornis » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

jrflo wrote: post #118

I heard someone on a podcast call social media algorithms "the modern-day cigarette" and that really resonated with me. These companies know their product is addictive and bad for users, but they keep pushing it anyways. Like cigarettes, it's bad for everyone, not just kids. I made an algorithm blocker for Safari because of that and it's actually crazy how much more pleasant social media is if you don't have recommen…

If you didn’t notice, this comment is an ad for a paid app trying to capitalize on social media anger. I respect the hustle, but this is not a neutral comment on the topic due to the financial interest. There are many free alternative plugins for targeting social media feeds if someone wants to filter these.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#157

Post by kjeksfjes » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

jrflo wrote: post #118

I heard someone on a podcast call social media algorithms "the modern-day cigarette" and that really resonated with me. These companies know their product is addictive and bad for users, but they keep pushing it anyways. Like cigarettes, it's bad for everyone, not just kids. I made an algorithm blocker for Safari because of that and it's actually crazy how much more pleasant social media is if you don't have recommen…

I agree with the cigarette analogy up to a point, but the UX consequences are easy to understate.

A lot of what makes these products feel “good” in the moment is exactly what regulators may end up targeting: no stopping points, instant continuation, algorithmic relevance, autoplay, low-friction notifications. If you remove or weaken those things, many users will probably experience the result as worse UX, even if the policy goal is reasonable.

So the hard part is not just “ban addictive design”. It is deciding which kinds of friction are legitimate product safety, and which ones become the digital equivalent of cookie banners: technically protective, but broadly annoying, ignored, and eventually hostile to normal use.

Starting with kids makes sense politically and morally. But if the regulatory logic is “this is bad for everyone, not jus minors”, then adult UX probably will get pulled into it too.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#158

Post by akersten » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

sixo wrote: post #152

shevy-java wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That rationale never convinced me. Smoking has definite physiological effects. Molecules bind to receptors or neurons and initiate cascades/responses. I don't see this with user interface in a browser at all. IF you wish to reason for that, why are regular ads allowed? They piss me off. Why do I have to see them? They cause my brain an addiction to want to buy crappy products. So why is there no ban here? Let's face…

To hold this view you have to think of information as "not real", not like "real" molecules and receptors, the mind as distinct from the body, and then restrict the legal definition of harm to only "real" things. This is an odd thing to do, because : - information is real, it exists in the universe. - the harm of social media is real, as measured by many of the same measures as the harm of smoking Why not do somethin…

The other side of the view is "information is real and I don't like some of it ("it's harmful/addictive/blasphemous") so it must be controlled and regulated."

I don't think it's an odd thing to be opposed to that line of thinking.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#159

Post by naravara » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:54 PM UTC

kubb wrote: post #43

stingraycharles wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those things that don’t translate to legal reality very well, as then you have to define “what is an algorithm”. Is adding advertisements an algorithm? Is including likes an algorithm? Is automatically starting the next video after a previous one has finished an algorithm? Is infinite scroll an algorithm? Etc

This is some kind of a meme where people believe things can’t be defined in legal terms and therefore can’t be regulated. These people are usually not lawyers. Does anyone know where it’s coming from? I can certainly believe that incompetent jurisdictions have a ton of issues with people misapplying the law and using loopholes.

> This is some kind of a meme where people believe things can’t be defined in legal terms and therefore can’t be regulated. These people are usually not lawyers.

No they’re engineers who think rules have to function as rigidly in every field as they do in programming.

They either can’t or don’t want to accept that the law is a social construct and what it actually means to you is determined by the weight of precedent, as applied by judges and regulatory bodies. Things are vaguely worded in the law all the time. If people want to dispute how the enforcement is done they sue and judge decides how the rule should be applied.

Re: EU to crack down on TikTok, Instagram's 'addictive design' targeting kids

#160

Post by jrflo » Tue, May 12, 2026, 1:55 PM UTC

shevy-java wrote: post #139

jrflo wrote: post #118

I heard someone on a podcast call social media algorithms "the modern-day cigarette" and that really resonated with me. These companies know their product is addictive and bad for users, but they keep pushing it anyways. Like cigarettes, it's bad for everyone, not just kids. I made an algorithm blocker for Safari because of that and it's actually crazy how much more pleasant social media is if you don't have recommen…

That rationale never convinced me. Smoking has definite physiological effects. Molecules bind to receptors or neurons and initiate cascades/responses. I don't see this with user interface in a browser at all. IF you wish to reason for that, why are regular ads allowed? They piss me off. Why do I have to see them? They cause my brain an addiction to want to buy crappy products. So why is there no ban here? Let's face…

With some of the legal discovery happening at Facebook, we know that the company did internal research showing that it's products can be addicting and detrimental to kids: https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/facebook-knows-instag...

That's why I make the cigarette comparison. They know it's bad, but it's profitable for people to be addicted to it. I think it's bad for adults for a different reason, I've seen adults in my own life get influenced by things they see online (conspiracy theories, pseudo-science around health and nutrition, political radicalization). And this happens because it's profitable for people to be hooked on these topics with false or misleading information, not because it's true. That's not to say this never happened before recommendation algorithms, but it's a difference in magnitude. I think that's the reason we are seeing such a dramatic rise in political polarization- because it's profitable.