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

“User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

craigwritescode.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 349 posts

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#231

Post by [deleted] »

AlexandrB wrote: post #227
tppiotrowski wrote: post #69

This is what I think The Social Dilemma missed. I worked at one of these companies and did not see anybody evil looking to enslave users in front of their screen. Instead we built new features and celebrated when time spent in our app went up or a new feature was used because we assumed the user must be getting value. After some time we switched metrics from time spent in app or daily active users to Net Promoter Sco…

This really puzzles me. Productivity can roughly be defined as (output / time). How can increasing "time" possibly increase productivity? Of course the catch with advertising-funded products and services is that "time" is what gets you paid.

[deleted]

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#232

Post by tomc1985 »

Mauricebranagh wrote: post #30
WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: post #18

I always thought it was pretty obvious when YouTube rolled out screen time reminders. It had nothing to do with anything but minimizing liability in case the general public ever catches on to what they are doing to kids mental health. What’s hilarious is they probably have some “data retention policy” and will get away with it. I guess it’s why SV engineers want to care about social issues so much. When you’re up in…

How is this that much different to similar "concerns" about kids watching to much tv back in the 60's 70's etc.

Have you seen the content that inevitably ends up in kids autoplay video feeds? Weird doesn't even begin to describe it. Some of it would give HBO pause.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#233

Post by retrac »

worker767424 wrote: post #202

Apps aren't drugs. I used to suck dick for coke. Now that's an addiction. You ever suck some dick for an in-game item?

Heh, I chuckled. I've got a dark sense of humour though. Because it's not really a joke.

A man was recently arrested in my city for a scheme where he was trading sexual images from underage boys for gift cards for popular video games.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#235

Post by gibspaulding »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #209
starpilot wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this the same as the algo-driven placement of HN stories and comments?

To a certain extent, yes, though my understanding is that HN's comment ranking algorithm is substantially different from Reddit's.

Also, HN is more of a news feed than a forum, so it makes sense to favor newer posts over knowledge-base type threads.

Makes me sort of want an HN forum though. Maybe limited to self posts and with a more chronological feed.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#236

Post by isbvhodnvemrwvn »

luplex wrote: post #41

I did an internship with a very profitable Swedish mobile game before the pandemic, and it was really interesting to see the doublethink: everyone knew we were making a drug, but people avoided speaking of it in that way. It was always "our most engaged players readily spend on in-game items", and never "the most addicted users spend money so they can continue playing" It was a great workplace, but I don't think it w…

It can be even seen in design of offices. I once joined a meetup at what turned out to be a sports gambling software company (William Hill I think), and there was no mention or suggestion of gambling at any place in their offices - it was about "celebration of sports" and other bullshit.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#237

Post by michaelmrose »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #117
TeMPOraL wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also pretty useless. Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. If you have a list of 20 items with non-uniform chances, can you tell how long you need to play before it's likely you'll get an item you want? You and me can, by doing little math in head; most people can't (and it's another question whether one has the willpower to do such math and follow it through whil…

I'd prefer “you'll need to buy about 50 more loot boxes, on average, to get that item” as wording. Bonus if there's a question mark next to it that explains probability (specifically, why the gambler's fallacy is wrong – though not necessarily mentioning the fallacy).

Wouldn't it be easier to just ban gambling apps including ones disguised as games from app stores?

You could probably get virtually everyone by simply defining it as a game with in app purchases that provide probabilistic or in game performance improvements.

If they can sell levels but not swords nothing of value will be lost.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#238

Post by flavius29663 »

WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: post #18

I always thought it was pretty obvious when YouTube rolled out screen time reminders. It had nothing to do with anything but minimizing liability in case the general public ever catches on to what they are doing to kids mental health. What’s hilarious is they probably have some “data retention policy” and will get away with it. I guess it’s why SV engineers want to care about social issues so much. When you’re up in…

to be honest, AOC doesn't seem very knowledgeable in general, IMO she's just a trump (a less successful one), but on the left.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#239

Post by bmhin »

mod wrote: post #129
TeMPOraL wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also pretty useless. Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. If you have a list of 20 items with non-uniform chances, can you tell how long you need to play before it's likely you'll get an item you want? You and me can, by doing little math in head; most people can't (and it's another question whether one has the willpower to do such math and follow it through whil…

> Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation. I doubt anyone is unaware there's almost no chance they win, and that they're losing on every dollar they spend. Interestingly, the lottery is occasionally +EV to play. I ot…

> I play poker, and poker players are constantly furious that their 80% favorite hand doesn't win 100% of the time. 80% feels like a lock.

I always liked an interview by one of the designers of the game XCOM which relies heavily on showing players probabilities. Apparently behind the scenes on lower difficulties, even though they might show you 85% chance of success, they tweak it under the hood to be closer to 95% because that is where the player's emotional weighting is. They want the players to have fun and that is certainly one way to go about it.

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/266891/Jake_Solomon_expl...

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#240

Post by ACow_Adonis »

Mauricebranagh wrote: post #30
WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: post #18

I always thought it was pretty obvious when YouTube rolled out screen time reminders. It had nothing to do with anything but minimizing liability in case the general public ever catches on to what they are doing to kids mental health. What’s hilarious is they probably have some “data retention policy” and will get away with it. I guess it’s why SV engineers want to care about social issues so much. When you’re up in…

How is this that much different to similar "concerns" about kids watching to much tv back in the 60's 70's etc.

Well, what happened to those kids? The kids grew up and now spend the majority of their time working in advertising, supplying games, creating endless streams of new media, etc.

how has it NOT been harmful?

I'm more inclined to believe my parents did the right thing by limiting TV time and commenting that most of it was rubbish. And I presume like many parents in Silicon Valley, I'm going to fight tooth and nail to keep advertising and most of this stuff from my kids.

The funny thing is, if you're not brought up around it, if you learn some math and statistics, and then you suddenly go somewhere exposure is considered normal, you almost have a physical or psychological revulsion to it.

Ads become frustrating and unacceptable intrusions. casino floors are sad, boring, pathetic and dystopian. mobile games look like drugs foistered upon an underclass, etc.

At least with big TV at the time, programming was so limited (at least in my country), you had maybe 2 to 3 hours per week of anything that would fit a genre worth watching. But even with that restriction, I know a large number of people who deem that the TV should be on even if there's "nothing to watch". I just can't write that sort of behaviour off as not being dysfunctional, it's just that we've culturally got a general acceptance of very specific types of dysfunction...

And what about rates of obesity? I'm not saying TV is solely to blame, but are we going to pretend that screen time and such programming (on demand or otherwise) is a blameless part of our culture?

Post reply on HN