We need to reclaim our attention • Hacker News Board

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#361

Post by r00tanon » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:14 PM UTC

It's become more clear to me that pushing content based on past content consumption promotes harmful effects to both individuals and to society.

The data collection needed to provide such feedback is inherently prone to privacy violations and exposes safety risks (see what China is doing to monitor social media activity.) Secondly, these feedback algorithms can pull people into echo chambers of disinformation and amplify all sorts of negative feelings and behavior.

Not sure throwing more technology and regulation at the problem is a solution. In the end it will probably require a social shift; a realization that "social media" makes us less social at a deep level while providing the illusion of being social. Paying attention to the person in front of you used to be considered polite. Now it's considered old-fashioned?

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#362

Post by redisman » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

37 wrote: post #261

spicyusername wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree. I see anecdotal evidence of this everywhere. Its most noticicble with people who spend a lot of time "online" browsing placing like twitter, reddit, and tiktok (or even older folks who watch too much "mainstream" cable tv news). They tend to hold derivative and thoughtless "stock" worldviews that are clearly directly borrowed from the feed they subscribe to and not a result of deciding for themselve…

>This is as much a "liberal" problem (e.g. Capitalism is bad) as it is a "conservative" one (e.g. Universal healthcare is communism). Bingo. >A particularly striking example for me recently was when I happened to compare the content on my TikTok feed to the content on my 60 year old parents. There were completely different sets of propaganda being peddled to both of us that were essentially incompatible with each oth…

Do you have a Google, FB, Twitter, snap, YouTube, Reddit, any other social accounts? TikTok is exactly the same

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#363

Post by ddxxdd » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:20 PM UTC

batch12 wrote: post #55

slibhb wrote: post #42

> Some scientists say these worries about attention are a moral panic, comparable to the anxieties in the past about comic books or rap music, and that the evidence is shaky. I agree with them. It's hard to pay attention to something for long unless it's entertaining. Reading a book, reading a paper, etc -- these activities take discipline that most people don't develop or don't often apply. This isn't new. The mista…

Respectfully, these examples- radio and TV aren't even in the same league as the manipulation and engagement that comes from the algorithmic feedback loop that backs these services. The comparison is dangerously dismissive.

On the other hand, TV, radio, the printing press, and rock-and-roll music have all been called a "monumental change", "unlike anything before it", in the past.

An "unprecedented new thing" comes around every generation, and every time, there are fancy arguments touted about why this unprecedented new thing is unlike all the other "unprecedented new things" in the past.

For what it's worth, I'll say this: when I watch TV or a movie, it appears that the producers, writers, and set designers work hard to make sure that my attention is captured during every moment of the theatrical event. Movie studios perform A/B testing to see what kind of cinematic techniques are more engaging to audiences. Music studios use computer software to mathematically model what kind of music the masses will enjoy. Newspapers engage in yellow journalism.

All I am pleading for is a higher standard of proof and some contrarianism when people claim that whatever modern thing nowadays is unprecedented even among all the other unprecedented things of the past.

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#364

Post by redisman » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:21 PM UTC

krono wrote: post #84

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Ad blockers and other such tools are just as essential for ADHD users as ramps are for wheelchair users. Their continued existence and unhindered operation should be legally protected. Google's plans to take away this last line of defence are absolutely disastrous, especially for people who lack the knowledge or means to implement and maintain workarounds. It is physically i…

Ads are only a part of it. Most news sites push ideological views as the core content. Most social media push memes and consumerism and conspiracies as the core content. Ad blockers do nothing for the deeper rot in the system

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#365

Post by thegrimmest » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:22 PM UTC

bllguo wrote: post #359

thegrimmest wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd start by questioning why you think addicts should discontinue their habits? Why do you think you know what's good for someone more than they do? If an addict says "I like my addiction, thank you very much", what gives you the right to intervene?

the societal cost is why intervention is justified. you know, the basis of all laws? we don't live in an anarchy. unless you live completely sustainably with no dependence or impact on others' resources, society has a right to intervene.

I don't think mitigating societal cost is source of the government's authority. It seems to be more about defending our inalienable rights.

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#366

Post by mypastself » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:23 PM UTC

moffkalast wrote: post #360

mypastself wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except I have no choice but to walk through an area which might be polluted. I do have a choice to not read news sites for four hours a day. The article fails to define both the problem and the solution. How exactly this “attention theft” causes significant negative societary consequences is defined extremely vaguely, and almost exclusively through personal anecdotes. The offered solutions, forcing employers to respe…

Sure you have a choice. But much like with wearing a gas mask, people will think you're weird and you'll end up alone.

I’m not sure I see a connection with doomscrolling, which is what I used as an example in my comment, referring to the article.

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#367

Post by slibhb » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:25 PM UTC

xg15 wrote: post #347

slibhb wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying it's impossible is denying it...

No, he is saying, it's becoming impossible - and he goes on to argue why this is the case. That's pretty much the main point of the article. What's your counter-argument?

I find this incredible unless the Evil Social Media Companies reach into my brain and remove my capacity for practical free will.

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#368

Post by 37 » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:26 PM UTC

redisman wrote: post #362

37 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is as much a "liberal" problem (e.g. Capitalism is bad) as it is a "conservative" one (e.g. Universal healthcare is communism). Bingo. >A particularly striking example for me recently was when I happened to compare the content on my TikTok feed to the content on my 60 year old parents. There were completely different sets of propaganda being peddled to both of us that were essentially incompatible with each oth…

Do you have a Google, FB, Twitter, snap, YouTube, Reddit, any other social accounts? TikTok is exactly the same

Of the platforms you listed, I only have a Reddit account. And I don't consider it to be "the same" as a TikTok account, but I think I understand what you mean.

Yes, I understand that everyone is grabbing for my attention, it's just that some companies do let the users have a little bit more autonomy or agency. Eg; sure, Twitter can be a cesspool, but AFAIK they don't have 'streaks' where you get a dopamine hit for signing on every day or messaging with your friends every day. (That's an example of a thing I'm pretty sure exists on either TikTok or SnapChat. Like I said, I'm not a user of those platforms.)

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#369

Post by birtoise » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:30 PM UTC

wott wrote: post #43

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #10

The problem isn't as much that social media is addictive. The issue is that people aren't happy with their other options of what to do. If you have a draining job and don't have energy to put into a hobby, or you don't have lots of friends to hang out with, you're much more likely to waste time on something addictive.

> if you have a draining job and don't have energy Never in modern times have we worked less. It is not that much the 7 or 8 hours of not-quite-daily work which make us tired, it is that on top of it come the 2 or 3 hours of not-really-interesting-but-designed-for-addiction serials watching, the 1 hour of news article browsing, the 2 hours of reading and sometimes writing hundreds of comments about what makes us rage…

No post body was provided.

Re: We need to reclaim our attention

#370

Post by simplestats » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 9:31 PM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #160

moonchrome wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this talk about "algorithmic feedback loops" is overselling the quality of said algos (eg. I get more interesting suggestions when I open YT incognito then I do when I'm signed in, I have to scroll through a bunch of stuff I have 0 interest on FB when I open it, etc.) and their importance. It's completely missing the actual attention grabbing factor here - there's a huge amount of content for consumption on deman…

Inconsistent reward is more addictive than consistent reward. This has been known for a long time. That's how they make it addictive.

This doesn't require algorithmic feedback loops. People simply would seek out (and create) content which provides inconsistent rewards. A slot machine simply needs a random number generator with a certain small chance of jackpot. The null model here is what can be achieved without individualization.