5 ms·

I think the choice is to just leave Netflix when you are done an episode. Maybe it's just me but I've never felt like the autoplay makes me much more likely to

I think the choice is to just leave Netflix when you are done an episode. Maybe it's just me but I've never felt like the autoplay makes me much more likely to keep watching, it is just convenient so I don't have to go through all of the menus again. If we ban autoplay on Netflix, we should also ban cable I suppose (not a big loss, really), since cable will autoplay indefinitely.

lloeki 7y ago
I find autoplay on Netflix highly inconvenient. Disable it and you can continue to watch the next episode with just one button press. There is no need for navigating around. Also super useful when you happen to fall asleep in front of the TV so that it doesn't keep pumping all the way through the night. Autoplay on Netflix is IMHO a dark pattern to feed on attention and FOMO.
- modoc 7y ago
  Is it any different than traditional TV?
  - lloeki 7y ago
    I don’t find traditional TV to be any good. Having no autoplay is an improvement.
  - tedunangst 7y ago
    Traditional TV usually switches shows, indicating I'm done. Netflix skips credits and openers, turning an entire season into one 20 hour episode.
    - beatgammit 7y ago
      I personally love that about it. I can watch more episodes in less time with Netflix, whereas I have to sit through the openers and credits for TV. I also like watching shows while doing something else (e.g. folding laundry), so autoplay makes it so I don't have to worry about engaging with the service between episodes. Afaik, you can disable it in the settings.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  I find autoplay on Netflix highly convenient. Enable it and you can choose not to watch the next episode with just one button press.
- easymodex 7y ago
  I strongly disagree. Autoplay does exactly what I want when binging through series. I would watch it either way, but why would I need to click buttons for each episode when it can be automatic. I support automation, not manual labor.
  - eridius 7y ago
    This would be fine if it were opt-in (and especially, opt-in per session). It's not. It's opt-out, and the opt-out is rather hidden (IIRC you have to use a web browser, you can't even opt out from devices running Netflix).
missingcolours 7y ago
This kind of sounds to me like "you can stop smoking by not buying anymore cigarettes". True, but glosses over the addictive aspects which led to cigarettes being regulated as they are. And this isn't an accidental property of these apps, they're intentionally engineered features to drive "engagement"/addiction.
- GhostVII 7y ago
  That's fair, but personally I am much more comfortable with the government regulating things which actually have chemicals which cause people to be addicted to them (cigarettes, hard drugs, etc.) than services which people can get addicted to. The fact that their is actually a chemical in cigarettes is the critical difference, to me. Maybe psychologically there isn't much difference, but that's where I draw the line personally.
- superkuh 7y ago
  The difference is that actually addictive things, rather than just rewarding stimuli, produce increases in incentive salience regardless of actual reward outcome. In cigarettes this is mediated through nicotinic acetylcholine receptors on cells with inputs to dopaminergic systems that predict reward. There's a vast distance between directly effecting the substrate of thinking chemically and reactions to rewarding stimuli coming in normally.
  - sizzle 7y ago
    And what would that difference be when you are just describing different methods for affecting dopaminergic reward pathways? If you scan the brain with an fMRI, the reward pathway lights up and suggest over time you will have reinforced that pleasurable activity and have created a strong affinity towards repeated activations, further strengthening those pathways. Have there been any studies to show withdrawals from inhibiting consuming pleasurable visual media? I mean if you were watching a series on Netflix that really resonates with you and you make a strong connection with the characters and feel as if you are a part of the scenes taking place (game of thrones etc), with characters faces activating your fusiform gyrus and dramatic scenes activating your amygdala making you emotional etc, how is autoplay facilitating the pleasurable dopamine response from imagining/anticipating/looking forward to how great the next episode will be, not as compelling of an issue as consuming exogenous substances that activate similar dopamine release?
thorwasdfasdf 7y ago
And we'll have to ban Radio. We'll also need to ban most major highways, as they keep going and going and going. And don't forget to ban unlimited refills at McDonalds, I'm sure those get people into trouble too. How does the fast food industry get such a big free pass on all the trouble it's caused?
- stallmanite 7y ago
  Your cup at McDonalds doesn't automatically refill though. It's more like actively clicking next.
  - beatgammit 7y ago
    It does at many restaurants. The waiter comes by and refills my drink, often without asking if it has unlimited refills. It's kind of like Netflix, which says "next episode starting in 10 seconds", where inaction gets you more content. And I don't see a problem with that. If you know you'll drink too much with unlimited refills, don't order drinks with unlimited refills. I really don't think government has any business in this at all, but I guess I could see something where certain classes of product need to support setting limits on use from the customer side (as in, X hours of Netflix per day on this profile). That still sounds like overreach to me, but if it's a real problem for people with addictive personalities, I think it could be a workable solution while avoiding a lot of the unintended consequences.
- moate 7y ago
  https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/245/False-Equivalence https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla... Here you go chief.
rconti 7y ago
A good analogue is how certain TV shows (I'm thinking of Househunters, because I'm an addict) run one episode into another without a commercial break. You don't even notice you're on a new episode until you're already 60 seconds into it and hooked.

lloeki 7y ago

I find autoplay on Netflix highly inconvenient. Disable it and you can continue to watch the next episode with just one button press. There is no need for navigating around. Also super useful when you happen to fall asleep in front of the TV so that it doesn't keep pumping all the way through the night. Autoplay on Netflix is IMHO a dark pattern to feed on attention and FOMO.

modoc 7y ago
Is it any different than traditional TV?
- lloeki 7y ago
  I don’t find traditional TV to be any good. Having no autoplay is an improvement.
- tedunangst 7y ago
  Traditional TV usually switches shows, indicating I'm done. Netflix skips credits and openers, turning an entire season into one 20 hour episode.
  - beatgammit 7y ago
    I personally love that about it. I can watch more episodes in less time with Netflix, whereas I have to sit through the openers and credits for TV. I also like watching shows while doing something else (e.g. folding laundry), so autoplay makes it so I don't have to worry about engaging with the service between episodes. Afaik, you can disable it in the settings.
stronglikedan 7y ago
I find autoplay on Netflix highly convenient. Enable it and you can choose not to watch the next episode with just one button press.
easymodex 7y ago
I strongly disagree. Autoplay does exactly what I want when binging through series. I would watch it either way, but why would I need to click buttons for each episode when it can be automatic. I support automation, not manual labor.
- eridius 7y ago
  This would be fine if it were opt-in (and especially, opt-in per session). It's not. It's opt-out, and the opt-out is rather hidden (IIRC you have to use a web browser, you can't even opt out from devices running Netflix).

missingcolours 7y ago

This kind of sounds to me like "you can stop smoking by not buying anymore cigarettes". True, but glosses over the addictive aspects which led to cigarettes being regulated as they are. And this isn't an accidental property of these apps, they're intentionally engineered features to drive "engagement"/addiction.

GhostVII 7y ago
That's fair, but personally I am much more comfortable with the government regulating things which actually have chemicals which cause people to be addicted to them (cigarettes, hard drugs, etc.) than services which people can get addicted to. The fact that their is actually a chemical in cigarettes is the critical difference, to me. Maybe psychologically there isn't much difference, but that's where I draw the line personally.
superkuh 7y ago
The difference is that actually addictive things, rather than just rewarding stimuli, produce increases in incentive salience regardless of actual reward outcome. In cigarettes this is mediated through nicotinic acetylcholine receptors on cells with inputs to dopaminergic systems that predict reward. There's a vast distance between directly effecting the substrate of thinking chemically and reactions to rewarding stimuli coming in normally.
- sizzle 7y ago
  And what would that difference be when you are just describing different methods for affecting dopaminergic reward pathways? If you scan the brain with an fMRI, the reward pathway lights up and suggest over time you will have reinforced that pleasurable activity and have created a strong affinity towards repeated activations, further strengthening those pathways. Have there been any studies to show withdrawals from inhibiting consuming pleasurable visual media? I mean if you were watching a series on Netflix that really resonates with you and you make a strong connection with the characters and feel as if you are a part of the scenes taking place (game of thrones etc), with characters faces activating your fusiform gyrus and dramatic scenes activating your amygdala making you emotional etc, how is autoplay facilitating the pleasurable dopamine response from imagining/anticipating/looking forward to how great the next episode will be, not as compelling of an issue as consuming exogenous substances that activate similar dopamine release?

thorwasdfasdf 7y ago

And we'll have to ban Radio. We'll also need to ban most major highways, as they keep going and going and going. And don't forget to ban unlimited refills at McDonalds, I'm sure those get people into trouble too. How does the fast food industry get such a big free pass on all the trouble it's caused?

stallmanite 7y ago
Your cup at McDonalds doesn't automatically refill though. It's more like actively clicking next.
- beatgammit 7y ago
  It does at many restaurants. The waiter comes by and refills my drink, often without asking if it has unlimited refills. It's kind of like Netflix, which says "next episode starting in 10 seconds", where inaction gets you more content. And I don't see a problem with that. If you know you'll drink too much with unlimited refills, don't order drinks with unlimited refills. I really don't think government has any business in this at all, but I guess I could see something where certain classes of product need to support setting limits on use from the customer side (as in, X hours of Netflix per day on this profile). That still sounds like overreach to me, but if it's a real problem for people with addictive personalities, I think it could be a workable solution while avoiding a lot of the unintended consequences.
moate 7y ago
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/245/False-Equivalence https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla... Here you go chief.

rconti 7y ago

A good analogue is how certain TV shows (I'm thinking of Househunters, because I'm an addict) run one episode into another without a commercial break. You don't even notice you're on a new episode until you're already 60 seconds into it and hooked.