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

How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 443 posts

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#201

Post by AndrewKemendo »

grillvogel wrote: post #140
mc32 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you and the article and further... Many companies are trying to take search, for example, to the next level by brining predictability through your history as well as your graph. It takes decisionmaking out of people's minds. "You show a history of reading this and that book, have watched these movies and your circle of meaningful people have influenced you thus, so we have this book on its way to you now…

I'm convinced we are going to reach a point where people trust what the computer tells them more than their own eyes.

That's the goal.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#202

Post by philovivero »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #104
tremon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only real problems arise when people refuse to reconsider their opinions in the face of facts. But your fact is just another one's opinion. We have had ample examples in the last fifty years where "science" has been abused with a for-profit motive (tobacco and nutrition are useful examples, as is this article). It's not fair to blame "hippies" for ignoring "science", unless you're also willing to blame media, pol…

It is quite fair to blame hippies for ignoring science. Propaganda works on everyone. It is nobody's job but your own to do due diligence. Yes, the media, politicians and so on has a tendency to proclaim falsehoods as facts - nutrition advice and policy being a great example - but our legal system requires a modicum of intent to assign liability, just as society accepts that requirement for blame. (Blah blah criminal…

> Our understanding of the universe is always changing. But eschewing accepted science without a compelling alternative because it could be wrong is a path to nowhere but President Trump.

Well. To be fair, it's a path also to President Hillary. Or President Cruz. Or President Sanders. It seems our politics is rife with science-ignorance and science-ignoring. I don't think it's particularly constructive to call out Trump as being different.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#203

Post by Balgair »

kbenson wrote: post #179
mc32 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of all that. We have come a long way since being "savage". My issue is we're getting to the last mile problem where we begin to undermine what we are.

My point is that I don't think "what we are" is changed by the tools we use. So what if a tool suggests we take time out for our friend? It's still our choice. It's no different than your mother, father, significant other, or random person on the street offering a suggestion if you explained the situation to them. Ultimately it's your choice what to do. If you're unhappy with how people treat some things as worthy of…

>> My point is that I don't think "what we are" is changed by the tools we use

No way. Just look at language, a tool we use for communication. It changes us radically. Listen to the RadioLab episode on on : http://www.radiolab.org/story/91725-words/.

Another example is writing. Before widespread writing and printing, many people used the 'Mind Palace' to remember things (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci), hijacking the place-cells in the hippocampus to vastly increase memory. With writing, that all evaporated, much to chagrin of the old monks that taught and used the technique. But then look at us now as a species.

Another example is money. The tool that is currency and a method of exchange has changed some people a lot. Greed is not a good thing. Most religions have bans on usury and intreset because of the warping effects it has on society. I may or may not agree with those bans, I mean, hey, I live better than any king from 200 years ago. Still, we are feeling those effects today in our politics after Citizens United. Money, the good tool that it is, does change people.

I'm sure others can think of many more examples. But your tools change you just as much as you use tools to change the world.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#204

Post by grillvogel »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #201
grillvogel wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm convinced we are going to reach a point where people trust what the computer tells them more than their own eyes.

That's the goal.

the goal is for google to tell you what reality is ?

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#205

Post by AndrewKemendo »

tdaltonc wrote: post #72

> We need our smartphones, notifications screens and web browsers to be exoskeletons for our minds and interpersonal relationships that put our values, not our impulses, first. People’s time is valuable. And we should protect it with the same rigor as privacy and other digital rights. I think that the only way we can do this is for out technology to make our values impulsive.

The challenge is that there is no one set of "values" that we can agree on as a people.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#206

Post by elementalest »

kbenson wrote: post #179
mc32 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of all that. We have come a long way since being "savage". My issue is we're getting to the last mile problem where we begin to undermine what we are.

My point is that I don't think "what we are" is changed by the tools we use. So what if a tool suggests we take time out for our friend? It's still our choice. It's no different than your mother, father, significant other, or random person on the street offering a suggestion if you explained the situation to them. Ultimately it's your choice what to do. If you're unhappy with how people treat some things as worthy of…

If everyone has apps that remind them to take time for a friend automatically (as it determined they needed it), the intention loses some of its meaning. That friend wont know if it was you that remembered because you cared and took notice, but simply the app reminded you. It's about the motivation behind your actions, its what can give a deeper meaning to them. The fact that you or another friend cared or noticed enough and remembered, gives it significance.

With too much automation of our social lives and relationships, many actions may simply become meaningless. Maybe they would even be done away with after a while, making human interaction colder, less personal. My app will talk with your app and setup a time to do something we enjoy, without either of us thinking of it ourselves, or discussing it. We would just have to show up, as directed by our apps. These apps remind us what we should discuss or mention, given our friends likes/dislikes. Sure we might have a great time, but the app might have prioritised meeting this friend over another, as your more compatible (measured via some series of metrics). You rely on the algorithm. Your not actually thinking about who you want to spend time with and why. Would you be able to make friends without the app?

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#207

Post by philovivero »

_lce0 wrote: post #116
pessimizer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile the choice of buying less was never presented as an option. What do you mean here? There were always multiple sizes of soda. Bloomberg was the one who was introducing the restriction, requiring someone who wanted more than a particular size to buy it in two separate cups. I must be parsing this incorrectly.

I have joked many times that I would gladly pay more to have less food served. I find most served dishes are too big for me, and end up sharing w someone.. but sometimes that's not an option, so it will be good not to waste half of the food, even of it cost more to me.

With a little planning, you can eat the food that tastes best freshly-cooked, then take the remainder home for left-overs.

If I'm eating solo, I'm always taking food home with me.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#208

Post by philovivero »

bikamonki wrote: post #120
6stringmerc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often, yep. Sometimes watching it go down is quite a trip too. It's something an article I came across used as a conclusion while looking into how commenting communities can become friendly, turn into cliques, and then into "Join the Consensus or Die" cesspools: > Numerous comment sections and message boards and forums probably have ups and downs between Community, Clique, and Cesspool outside of this example — I kno…

Yes, the "unlike-button" is the means to police the crowd and just have everyone behave on a consensual manner. Interesting enough, it only works on anonymous crowds b/c on social networks where you actually know the person, a downvote can actually have real-live consequences.

Reddit almost stumbled upon the golden formula. They have a feature that shows a comment is "controversial" in that it's being up- and down-voted a lot. Those comments should be featured top and center.

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#209

Post by devy »

Tristan Harris, the OP of this medium post, listed a table of comparisons between what's today's engaging/addictive/time sink product characteristics vs. time well spent products he advocates on his main project site[1]. Of all the 11 points, two of them has the most profound sociological impact or inertia:

* Success Metrics: measure success by net positive contributions rather than interactions

* Business Model: use non-engagement based advertising rather than engagement advertising.

I fully applaud Tristan's vision and mission but skeptical of how quickly companies, VCs and society can adopt it.

[1]: http://timewellspent.io/

Re: How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds

#210

Post by elementalest »

kbenson wrote: post #189
elementalest wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whilst i somewhat agree with the sentiment, the difference now is in the amount of efficiencies or benefits gained. The gains/benefits from tools, farming, writing etc, are quite large. The gains from an app suggesting a movie or book, or reminding you to do various things in your life, are quite small in comparison. It might be merely a matter of a few minutes. It begs the question, is it worth gaining a few minutes…

That assumes the suggestion is directly comparable to an action you would have chosen yourself. What about suggestions for things where you would have taken no action, or suggestions to not take an action you would have taken? What about suggestions that include information you would not have been likely to come across yourself? Imagine your friend is in the hospital, but you've been busy, and haven't checked your no…

Currently, if you didn't know about a circumstance, people forgive you and generally understand. But, if you took the time to find out this information personally, this would have meaning, showing that you cared enough to spend the time to check. When you send flowers, the act can often have much more meaning. However, if everyone has apps that remind them of such things, you would no longer appear thoughtful, there is no longer as much meaning. We are already seeing this to a certain extent with social media.

This is the point. Is it worth the small gain in time, for the loss of some aspects of meaningful human connection/interaction?

Post reply on HN