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

TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 568 posts

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#281

Post by jonners00 »

bondarchuk wrote: post #204
horsawlarway wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the framing issue - I can frame an alternate lens through which we balance enrichment against engagement. Media can enrich people - expose them to new ideas, new stories, different views and opinions. This expands worldview and generally trends in the same direction as education. Media can also be engaging - Use tools that make it compelling to continue viewing, even when other things might be preferable, on the l…

I fundamentally don't think governments should do a careful cost-benefit analysis of everything in society and then ban it if it falls on the wrong side. Just on basic principles of personal freedom. That's why the "addiction" framing is so important, because it implies that citizens don't have agency, and so justifies the authoritarian intervention. PS if we apply your analysis to video games they surely would have…

With social media, the cost benefit analysis doesn't deliver marginal results, just less stark/concentrated results. Drink driving is self evidently bad even though 99 times out of 100(?) it does no harm, because one time out of a hundred its consequences are catastrophic. Social media on the other hand is harming essentially 100% of the population in initially milder ways - even if you don't use it you're forced to live in a dumbed down society where wealth and power is becoming concentrated in the hands of those who pedal digital dopamine and in a democracy being undermined by disinformation. Of course 'initially milder harm' is step one in frog boiling.

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#283

Post by p-t »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #44

Might be a generational thing, but I never understood the "shorts" (in any format on any social network). I can watch a 9 hour video on GTA games without problems (not in one sitting, but in parts), but 3 'shorts' in a row with not enough info and explanation to be interesting makes me close any of the 'shorts' apps (tiktok, youtube shorts, instagram....). (eg, the 9 hour video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Faxpr_…

i can't really concentrate well on long video content outside of specific cases, so there's that. honestly though i feel like shorts aren't the solution, there should just be more text content [eg: tutorials] in addition to video things. [every time someone says something is "only communicateable through video/audio" i die a little bit inside...]

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#284

Post by p-t »

llbbdd wrote: post #47

Idk how to feel about this specifically but I kind of hope they come for Duolingo next. They are up to some similar mind hacking shit to keep people from leaving. There's the downright abusive streak management tactics that have become a major part of their brand and PR, and the lesson plans seem designed to plateau to prevent you from actually getting proficient enough in a language to ever unsub. They reset your cl…

duolingo is pretty bad overall, sadly most better alternatives [zB: anki flashcards] are a bit less shiny and more difficult to set-up for less tech-oriented people

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#285

Post by Jensson »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #274
Jensson wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The extractive profit seeking entities don't "out-compete" they just use their capital in unregulated conditions to strip mine economies and poison capitalism to become sociopathy So they did out-compete them? You saying they won using unfair ways doesn't change the fact that they out-competed the other companies. Capitalism will use any means available to out compete others, I don't understand why you try to argue…

> So they did out-compete them? Having more money doesn't necessarily mean "out-compete". Its not that they're delivering a better product, more loyal customers or better branding. Its simply that they put down more capital at a given point, and were allowed to buy the company, despite its owners not wanting to sell. In most cases they didn't even have money, its simply because they obtained significant financing fro…

> because you're trying to squash this into "capitalism bad".

I never said "capitalism bad", I said it optimizes for profits and that it gets better at that over time, that is not bad or good, that is just what it does.

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#287

Post by Jensson »

AreShoesFeet000 wrote: post #280
Jensson wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see any harm that could come from saying "a less addictive algorithm needs to be available to users"? For example, lets say there is an option to only recommend videos from channels you subscribe to, that would be much less addictive, why isn't that an option? A regulation that forces these companies to add such a feature would only make the world a better place.

I agree, but what would be the actual mechanism that would allow that? I believe we’re out of ideas. TikTok’s crime was just be firmly successful because of good engineering. There’s no evil sauce apart from promotional content and occasional manipulation, which has nothing to do with the algorithm per se. And about whitelisting, I honestly don’t think you’re comparing apples to apples. The point of the algorithm is…

> I agree, but what would be the actual mechanism that would allow that?

Governments saying "if you are a social content platform with more than XX million users you have to provide these options on recommendation algorithms: X Y Z". It is that easy.

> And about whitelisting, I honestly don’t think you’re comparing apples to apples. The point of the algorithm is dynamically recommending new content. It’s about discovery.

And some people want to turn off that pushed discovery and just get recommended videos from a set of channels that they subscribed to. They still want to watch some tiktok videos, they just don't want the algorithm to try to push bad content on them.

You are right that you can't avoid such algorithm when searching for new content, but I don't see why it has to be there in content it pushes onto you without you asking for new content.

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#288

Post by Quarrelsome »

Jensson wrote: post #270
Quarrelsome wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes, that is what we are saying its almost as if its what I've been saying the whole time, but adding the context of where the line is, where MySpace seemed healthy and TikTok is unhealthy. Lean startup culture is an equasion that produces sociopathy, I've always hated it and I think its relatively disgusting how it was embraced at the time. I guess I needed to rail against every type of capitalism at the start for…

> I guess I needed to rail against every type of capitalism at the start for you to appreciate my position earlier. No, your position earlier was wrong according to what you are saying here, you said Facebook and Myspace didn't have these issues so its not capitalisms fault. But Facebook and Myspace existed under much less regulated circumstances than exists today, so your original statement would make it seem you wa…

> But Facebook and Myspace existed under much less regulated circumstances than exists today

sorry, what regulation are you talking about here? Afaik regulation in the US is pretty much the same back then as it is now. Worst case scenarios are usually slap on the wrists like when Snapchat lied to its users about ephemeral messaging and got fined a pathetic amount.

> No, your position earlier was wrong according to what you are saying here

or how about the idea that you've misunderstood my position and instead are shadow-boxing a monsterised impression of me that isn't real.

I just don't like blaming capitalism in the abstract because it doesn't have to be like this. We can change it.

Also on the off chance you lean considerably left, it might help to understand that I have experience of the USSR. So simply saying "capitalism bad" with an implication that we need to tear down the system isn't good enough for me. Been there done that, ancestors deported to Siberia. We could maybe try regulating first?

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#289

Post by 7tflutter7 »

gtowey wrote: post #271
eggy wrote: post #71

I'm skeptical about banning design patterns just because people might overuse them. Growing up, I had to go to the theater to see movies, but that didn't make cliffhangers and sequels any less compelling. Now we binge entire Netflix series and that's fine, but short-form video needs government intervention? The real question is: where do we draw the line between protecting people from manipulative design and respecti…

It's not about banning design patterns. It's about removing the harmful results they produce. Can you imagine if gambling were allowed to be marketed to children? Especially things like slot machines. We absolutely limit the reach of those "design patterns".

This argument falls apart in the EU though. Where it's legal for 14 year olds to drink alcohol.

Re: TikTok's 'addictive design' found to be illegal in Europe

#290

Post by Refreeze5224 »

eggy wrote: post #71

I'm skeptical about banning design patterns just because people might overuse them. Growing up, I had to go to the theater to see movies, but that didn't make cliffhangers and sequels any less compelling. Now we binge entire Netflix series and that's fine, but short-form video needs government intervention? The real question is: where do we draw the line between protecting people from manipulative design and respecti…

You can regulate power imbalances though, which is what every individual has versus a multinational with vast resources.
Post reply on HN