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

471–480 of 568 posts

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

#471

Post by xeckr »

D-Machine wrote: post #469
integralid wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea and yet for some reason we have very severe punishments for people that distribute it. Why? Because addictive things are addictive, and addicted people suffer, and everyone can get addicted if their guard slips. We prefer to regulate highly addictive things instead.

> You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea About 1–12 months after using heroin, only 23%–38% become addicted [1]. Occasional and controlled heroin users do in fact exist and are documented [2]. And, most famously, the use of heroin by American soldiers during the Vietnam war was largely situational [3]. So what "everyone knows" here is not very impressive. I still very strongly believe you'…

>only 23%–38% become addicted

Wow, only Russian roulette with 2 bullets odds?

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

#472

Post by xeckr »

bondarchuk wrote: post #142
wackget wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not acknowledging the fact that the companies producing these addictive apps are very much doing it intentionally. They are specifically making it as engaging as possible because that's how they make money . And they have billions of dollars to sink into making their products as irresistable as possible. The average person has zero chance against all-pervasive, ultra-manipulative, highly-engineered systems li…

It's also very much an exercise in framing, though. Making your media as engaging as possible is the basic imperative of any media company. But choosing to call this specific instance of it "addictive" has everyone up in arms.

There's an AI behind the video feed optimized for keeping your attention for as long as possible. That is quite different from making your media more engaging.

The logical endpoint of optimizing AI for viewer retention is something that you literally cannot look away from.

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

#473

Post by D-Machine »

xeckr wrote: post #471
D-Machine wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea About 1–12 months after using heroin, only 23%–38% become addicted [1]. Occasional and controlled heroin users do in fact exist and are documented [2]. And, most famously, the use of heroin by American soldiers during the Vietnam war was largely situational [3]. So what "everyone knows" here is not very impressive. I still very strongly believe you'…

>only 23%–38% become addicted Wow, only Russian roulette with 2 bullets odds?

Yup, hence why only a reckless person or fool would try it.

But, since only a minority of people get addicted to heroin (i.e. the evils of heroin are overstated), and since no one is actually seriously arguing that viewing TikTok is as risky (23-38% chance after exposure) as trying heroin, or has as bad side effects, I think it reveals that comparisons to heroin use in arguments against TikTok are hyperbolic and disconnected from reality, by empirical data.

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

#474

Post by wasmainiac »

D-Machine wrote: post #469
integralid wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea and yet for some reason we have very severe punishments for people that distribute it. Why? Because addictive things are addictive, and addicted people suffer, and everyone can get addicted if their guard slips. We prefer to regulate highly addictive things instead.

> You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea About 1–12 months after using heroin, only 23%–38% become addicted [1]. Occasional and controlled heroin users do in fact exist and are documented [2]. And, most famously, the use of heroin by American soldiers during the Vietnam war was largely situational [3]. So what "everyone knows" here is not very impressive. I still very strongly believe you'…

I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha?

Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help.

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

#475

Post by D-Machine »

wasmainiac wrote: post #474
D-Machine wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You also probably don't use heroin. Everyone knows it's a bad idea About 1–12 months after using heroin, only 23%–38% become addicted [1]. Occasional and controlled heroin users do in fact exist and are documented [2]. And, most famously, the use of heroin by American soldiers during the Vietnam war was largely situational [3]. So what "everyone knows" here is not very impressive. I still very strongly believe you'…

I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha? Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help.

    > I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha?
Only for people who think comparing TikTok to heroin is some kind of gotcha.

    >Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help.
For sure. Two minutes from where I live, at a main intersection, they hang emergency Naloxone injection kits, in public, where anyone can grab them, on the trees and walls of buildings. I presume so addicts can save each other in cases of accidental overdoses.

Of what relevance was this all to TikTok again? And why are we comparing scrolling a phone app to literal actual heroin? Even when, empirically and factually, heroin is in fact not addictive for the majority of people?

Comparisons between TikTok and heroin are deranged and simplistic, but this is made all the more embarrassing when you realize that a dance with heroin is in fact more likely than not to just be... not the thing everyone is afraid of?

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

#476

Post by wasmainiac »

D-Machine wrote: post #475
wasmainiac wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha? Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help.

> I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha? Only for people who think comparing TikTok to heroin is some kind of gotcha. >Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help. For sure. Two minutes from where I live, at a main intersection, they hang emergency Naloxone injection kits, in public, where anyone can g…

> Only for people who think comparing TikTok to heroin is some kind of gotcha.

Do you have family? My cousins, aunts, even my mom is on it. And they all watch the most brain dead garbage. Even when they come to visit me out in the middle of no where, they still do it. The only explanation I have is that it is addictive, to not to all, but some (like you pointed out with H). Now based on how much time they spend on it I think it is harmful for them and society at large. It’s worth regulating like some non physical drug, afaik I think that is the comparison people here are making.

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

#477

Post by permo-w »

D-Machine wrote: post #466
permo-w wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet consistently the arguments you hear against regulation are these "let's pretend there's no such thing as nuance, how can we ever regulate an extreme case of something when we don't regulate minor cases?" arguments that act like no law has ever successfully regulated a nuance and improved people's welfare. Should we also allow heroin in baby food because cliff-hangers are allowed in films? Don't restrict my pe…

Yes the argument quality has become poor too, and there is less nuance than before. And like obviously society benefits from some paternalism for things like this, and we really do need to see good, concrete recommendations be proposed. Imagine if HN were discussing the merits of things like "interrupt every X minutes of infinite-scrolling with reminders / popups / forced X/10 minute breaks" or other actual concrete,…

I absolutely get what you're saying in theory--discussions about how and why are far more valuable than dialectic no yes no yes no yes debates--but in practice for this case, I feel like those how why conversations would perhaps feel a bit redundant? I think almost anyone on the site could quite easily come up with an effective legal method for reducing the addictiveness of short form videos. The issue lies more in the action/inaction of regulators than the makeup of the actions they should take. Then again, this is all recreational anyway, so why not see who can optimise for the absolute best method?

I also wonder if these discussions are going on, just further down the thread

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

#478

Post by D-Machine »

wasmainiac wrote: post #476
D-Machine wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t get it, is this some kind of gotcha? Only for people who think comparing TikTok to heroin is some kind of gotcha. >Have you walked down the skid row of any large city? Heroin and well other drugs now are a problem, saying otherwise is delusional. Those people need help. For sure. Two minutes from where I live, at a main intersection, they hang emergency Naloxone injection kits, in public, where anyone can g…

> Only for people who think comparing TikTok to heroin is some kind of gotcha. Do you have family? My cousins, aunts, even my mom is on it. And they all watch the most brain dead garbage. Even when they come to visit me out in the middle of no where, they still do it. The only explanation I have is that it is addictive, to not to all, but some (like you pointed out with H). Now based on how much time they spend on it…

> Do you have family? My cousins, aunts, even my mom is on it.

Yes, I too am deeply traumatized from having family and friends... shudder... using Social Media.

Anyway, not sure of the relevance of the question. Not sure how "time spent" on a thing is proof of its badness either, but then, people comparing TikTok to heroin are clearly not generally interested in things like clarity and quantification.

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

#479

Post by OrangeMusic »

D-Machine wrote: post #463
comboy wrote: post #341

I'm too late but I'm surprised HN crowd treats tiktok as some weaponized addiction machine. Youtube used to have a working recommendation system and it was usable too. Is it really bad to give me woodworking and learning chinese videos if that's what I'm interested in at the moment? If somebody is not interested in anything specific and just want to zone out, is it really different if he scrolls through tiktok or wat…

HN is becoming increasingly pro paternalism and censorship (largely invalidating the "Hacker" in its name). I'm not sure if this is natural / organic or some kind of astroturfing, but it sure is odd and doesn't really match the rest of the overall (historical) ethos of the site.

Over generalizations of what HN "is" or what HN "does" are always meaningless. It's a large group of different people who don't act as a single individual. For instance the comments and opinions in this post are very diverse.

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

#480

Post by AreShoesFeet000 »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #456
AreShoesFeet000 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Leaded gasoline was great engineering as well. Doesn't mean we continued to allow it to poison people. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46865275

Given the amount of vehicular accidents I think we haven’t even gone far enough and banned cars altogether.
Post reply on HN