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

Post by xigoi » Tue, May 12, 2026, 2:28 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #203

xigoi wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Under your definition, Hacker News goes away, too. It doesn’t have to go away, just switch to chronological sorting.

Have you ever browsed by New and seen the firehose of shit which doesn’t make it to the front page? HN sorted by new is effectively useless and you might as well shut the site down at that point. “Chronological only” might work for something like Twitter where you’re choosing to follow specific individuals to see their posts, it can’t work for curation sites like HN/Reddit.

Post by irusensei » Tue, May 12, 2026, 2:31 PM UTC

buellerbueller wrote: post #111

evanjrowley wrote: post #40

The most on-brand solution for the EU would be to require mobile phone users to upload brain scans in real-time so the state can check for neural activity associated with addiction.

The most on brand solution for a kneejerk reactionary American would be to satirize the EU for its consumer protections.

Post by tolerance » Tue, May 12, 2026, 2:32 PM UTC

tencentshill wrote: post #202

tolerance wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But still an algorithm. The difference is that we (at least some of us) place a greater trust in the integrity behind how information surfaces on HN. I think that some parts of it are open source, and the moderators are transparent enough about what isn't public + there is a mix of folk knowledge that explains how HN works under the hood. Depersonalized algorithms or recommender systems aren't inherently better than…

Yes it's still an algorithm. Cable TV programming is another example. Everyone sees the same content. The ads are changed at the local broadcaster level but are not tailored to the individual, and are not harmful in the ways the EU is regulating. If anything, everyone watching the same thing is good for social cohesion. Everyone discusses the latest TV episode the next day at the office.

Post by AshleyGrant » Tue, May 12, 2026, 2:34 PM UTC

kyledrake wrote: post #192

ambicapter wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a "depression isn't real" and "if you're addicted, just stop" type of comment.

Depression is real, I'm experiencing it right now reading these comments. You know what, why don't you go buy a carton of cigarettes and some heroin, and go use that for a few months. Since it's the same thing as looking at a news feed you shouldn't have to worry about addiction because you've already done that and not gotten addicted to it, so you should be fine, right?

Post by SirMaster » Tue, May 12, 2026, 2:35 PM UTC

enedil wrote: post #207

SirMaster wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you stop using social media, you don't still have a risk of lung cancer in the future. The effects of social media usage are surely reversible by stopping using it and then some retraining of the brain. The effects of years of smoking are not so reversible in terms of what it does to your body.

Why are you so sure that the effects of social media are reversible?