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

The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 979 posts

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#611

Post by TeMPOraL »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #444
bdangubic wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

where does it stop though? I suffer from cant-stop-eating-nutella but should we shut down ferrero? it is simply not possible to protect the vulnerable in a free society. any protection only gives power into the wrong hands and will eventually get weaponized to protect “vulnerable” (e.g. our kids from learning math cause some ruling party likes their future voters dumb)

Dumb argument. They don’t intentionally make Nutella addictive and then test out recipes on the public to make it even more addictive. Other people can’t stop eating ice cream or oranges or salami.

Except that's sort of... exactly what they do.

The food industry has pretty much invented the whole process of making "addictive" products and then "test[ing] out recipes on the public to make it even more addictive". Of course, we usually call it making products that taste good, and running taste panels with the public for product development (making a new tasty thing), quality control (ensuring the tasty thing stays tasty), and market research (discovering even tastier things to make in the future). Each part of it employs all kinds of specialists (and yes, those too - nutrition psychology is a thing).

The process is the same. The difference between "optimized for taste" and "addictive" isn't exactly clear-cut, at least not until someone starts adding heroin to the product (and of the two, it's not the software industry that's been routinely accused of it just for being too good at this job).

Not defending social media here in any way. Cause and effect is known these days, and in digital everything is faster and more pronounced. And ironically, I don't even agree with GP either! I think that individuals have much less agency than GP would like it, and at the same time, that social media is not some uniquely evil and uniquely strong way to abuse people, but closer to new superstimulus we're only starting to develop social immunity to.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#612

Post by geysersam »

I feel we can't make laws against the subject of moral panic every generation. People have felt the same way about the activities of youths since forever. But ultimately it often turns out fine. Change can bring new problems, but it also brings positives that are hard to understand and even formulate, that's culture. Trying to be the arbiter of that is foolish.

Is ticktock addictive because of it's design, or is it addictive because it brings thousands of people and experiences and emotions right to you? Probably both, but it's hard to separate one from the other. Apps are not opium, it's not as clear cut.

Instead of micromanaging technology and culture they should make sure that society is kind, that there is slack in the system, that people don't have reason to want to flee their real lives, that those hurt by new technology get support.

Of course truly malicious dark patterns and fraud should be punished. But that feels like a different category.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#613

Post by jimnotgym »

coldtea wrote: post #351
BurningFrog wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech is a basic human right. Ads are speech.

> Ads are speech. No, they are not. People have been brainwashed and legal systems have been paid and bought for to consider them as such, just like corporations have been whitewashed to be treated as "persons". In any case, we regulate all other kinds of speech as well: explicit content, libel, classified information, cigarette ads, and so on.

Let's start there. Corporations being persons is a legal fiction to allow them to consolidate capital. Giving that fictional person human rights is abhorrent to humans. It is a crime against humans. It degrades us.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#614

Post by jimnotgym »

yxhuvud wrote: post #464
BurningFrog wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech is a basic human right. Ads are speech.

No. Ads are paying money to get a platform for that speech. Having a platform is in no way a basic right.

Exactly. Companies can put their marketing guff on their own websites!

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#615

Post by jimnotgym »

wasabi991011 wrote: post #108
spwa4 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't worry about that. You're ignoring politics, and what this actually is. If the EU had a real problem with addictive designs and social media the time to move against it was of course 10+ years ago. They do not intend, not even remotely, to sabotage the profit machines that those companies are, they just want political weapons against the companies. The intention here is not to cure addiction, destroy profit…

> If the EU had a real problem with addictive designs and social media the time to move against it was of course 10+ years ago. Addictive designs and social media have changed a lot in the last 10 years, for one. But more importantly, there's no statute of limitation on making laws.

Also, 10 years ago the US government used its almost unlimited soft power over Europe to stop them regulating tech firms.

The US doesn't have any soft power any more.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#616

Post by dwedge »

kerkeslager wrote: post #507
bruce511 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "advertising". I feel this might be hard to do. For example is my blog talking about Windows considered as Advertising? What about my blog discussing products we make? What about the web site for my local restaurant? If I add my restaurant location to Google maps, is that advertising? Are review sites? If I'm an aggregator (like booking.com) and I display the results for a search is that advertising? I assume…

Let's drop the charade where you pretend you don't know what advertising is. You're smarter than that, and your playing dumb act would be more persuasive if you didn't ask leading questions that clearly show you know the answers. This isn't a good faith argument. I mean are you really asking whether creators embedding "sponsored by" scenes is an ad as if you don't know? C'mon, don't insult your readers with this nons…

I agree with you but I also agree with the person you wrote to. There's a section in Naomi Klein's No Logo about banning advertising, and what that would actually mean in effect. It essentially comes down to not allowing, for example, different cereal brands to have different designs because then the design of the box becomes a kind of advertising.

It might sound nit picking, and it absolutely is, but if we banned Internet advertising (at the exact definition you personally consider advertising to be), you can guarantee the advertising industry would be looking at exactly these loopholes until you reframed your definition.

It's much like how in the UK they banned advertising for tobacco, and years later had to expand it so that supermarkets cannot even show the products visibly because the brand has their own inherent advertising that's visible if you can see it.

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#618

Post by jimnotgym »

baq wrote: post #65
tokyobreakfast wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive. Or you could just shut the phone off and/or not install the app. It's a simple solution, really, and one that is available at your disposal today at no cost.

Engineering addiction should be a punishable offense. It already is if you’re a chemist.

That should be the top comment

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#619

Post by andyferris »

deaux wrote: post #522
jameson wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a person working at social media I support this as well. I'm a hypocrite. I admit, but the pay is too good to find alternative. Terms like "DAU" or "engagement" is common in our field and the primary objective is how to make users spend more time on our platform. We don't take safety or mental health seriously internally but only externally for PR reasons. CEOs won't change that because the more time user spends o…

> . I'm a hypocrite. I admit Great, admission is the first step. > but the pay is too good to find alternative. Yet then you immediately undo it! Try "I'm too greedy". You're the actor with the free will here. The subject of the sentencd shouldn't be "the pay". That is just an amount, a sum, that exists - neither too high nor too low. That is all in the eye of the beholder.

Honestly, the EU is more likely to change the behavior of e.g. Facebook than a single employee would.

(IMO if the US federal government spent more time caring for it's citizens it would consider doing such things more seriously itself).

Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling

#620

Post by astrobe_ »

jjcm wrote: post #64

Here's the actual statement from the European Comission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... It's important to note they aren't creating laws against infinite scrolling , but are ruling against addictive design and pointing to infinite scrolling as an example of it. The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes". They point to certain feat…

France is considering a ban on certain social media for minors, and parental consent on all social media for minors under 15, pretty much like Australia. They had work around EU laws that prevented them to force service providers to do things, the trick they used is to make it illegal for those services to let minors register on the platform, because EU law acknowledge that local laws on forbidden content apply.

If this law passes and they "blacklist" some of these design-for-addiction (sorry, "engagement") platforms, I believe it should send a strong signal for adults as well. Most adults are pretty much aware that these platforms are bad for everyone; according to some polls, the public opinion is unambiguously in favor of these laws.

Post reply on HN