6 ms·

Yes it's not uncommon for addicts to have a generally positive disposition towards their addiction [0]. It would actually be difficult to avoid this in an engin

by krono 5y ago

Yes it's not uncommon for addicts to have a generally positive disposition towards their addiction [0]. It would actually be difficult to avoid this in an engineered platform. I'm sure FB is doing their best, though. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163475/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163475/

netfl0 5y ago
Not sure why this is being downvoted. What percentage of alcoholics would say alcohol makes them feel better.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > What percentage of alcoholics would say alcohol makes them feel better. What percentage of people who drink alcohol are alcoholics? It's an interesting comparison because the vast majority of people have no trouble moderating their consumption of alcohol and I'd argue that the same goes for social media. Yet we're so focused on the subset of social media users who are addicts that many here are convinced it's not possible to use social media without being an addict. I suspect if similar rhetoric was leveled against alcohol we'd see a strong backlash from people who enjoy alcohol responsibly, or from people who simply prefer freedom to choose their own actions.
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    >What percentage of people who drink alcohol are alcoholics? In the US about ~7% or 14 million people depending on how you define alcoholism. Globally about 3 million people die every year of consequences related to drinking, or put differently, 5% of global deaths are attributable to alcohol consumption.[1]. That is about as many people as covid seems to have killed last year. You're actually right in drawing a comparison between social media and drinking, but I think you're wrong about thinking that means we should take social media less seriously, rather we should take drinking much more seriously. Certainly very few people would argue we should take a pandemic less seriously that costs hundreds of billions per year and kills millions, and that is what alcoholism does as well. As a society we are extremely negligent of threats that cause enormous social harm in the aggregate simply because they don't harm everyone they come into contact with. [1]https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-facts-and-statistics https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sh...
    - dnissley 5y ago
      > As a society we are extremely negligent of threats that cause enormous social harm in the aggregate simply because they don't harm everyone they come into contact with. Probably. But see also the harm of overly stringent regulation of said threats, with the obvious example being prohibition of alcohol in the US. So as a society we take reasonable measures to prevent the worst outcomes. In the case of alcohol we have ratcheted up the consequences of drunk driving, limited the drinking age to 21+, etc.
    - vcmanlp 5y ago
      According to those definitions at least 30% of the people in the UK would be alcoholics. I hear that in Japan one is expected to drink, and the life expectancy is higher.
    - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
      > In the US about ~7% or 14 million people depending on how you define alcoholism. Globally about 3 million people die every year of consequences related to drinking, or put differently, 5% of global deaths are attributable to alcohol consumption.[1]. That's the statistics for Alcohol Use Disorder (or AUD) not alcoholism. AUD is definitely not what people think when they speak of alcoholism. That would be alcohol addiction. In typical American fashion, AUD has an extremely broad definition. For example if twice during the past year you went out with friends longer than you expected, had more beer than you were planning to, ended hangover the day after and thought "I should really stop drinking" you have mild AUD.
      - lelandfe 5y ago
        https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-use-disorder-comparison-between-dsm#pub-toc5 https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sh... WastingMyTime89 is likely referring to the DSM-5 definition of AUD here. It is rather broad, though a bit more narrow than they've outlined. Worth a look. I certainly have friends who would qualify. You can also access the DSM-5 text directly through the Internet Archive, though it is sometimes unavailable depending on usage: https://archive.org/details/diagnosticstatis0005unse/page/490/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/diagnosticstatis0005unse/page/49...
  - bredren 5y ago
    The difference is (apart from original formula Four Loko) there is no mystery of what goes into alcoholic beverages. Wheras the specifics of what Facebook chooses to show you is either opaque or incalculable for people who visit their website. This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. When you buy Bud Light, there isn’t some constantly shifting emotionally persuasive unlicensed content available to offer just the right amount of drip to give a site visitor a drip just before their average session length is wrapping. I personally think alcohol is often destructive like rot and sloppy tool to play with one’s consciousness. However, it is at lease consistent and well understood. Facebook is neither, and can much more easily be linked with havoc in pursuit of ad spend.
    - throwawaylinux 5y ago
      I don't really think knowing those things would have much if any affect on users or the platform's impact to society or the ability to regulate these platforms. What are you going to do, tell them they can't show you more content similar to things you or your friends or people with similar interests spend a lot of time on? > This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. Was this really a mistake? Or just something that caused a lot of outrage and discussion and views and clicks so therefore got amplified and spread by design?
    - Nextgrid 5y ago
      > This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. Is it “catastrophic mistakes” or is the algorithm working as intended to maximize engagement? From Facebook’s point of view I’m not sure it’s a mistake - these Q people have “engaged” plenty and the conspiracy is still a wonderful generator of engagement, whether from the Q people’s side pushing endless conspiracies, from people trying to reason with then or from those merely laughing at them.
    - Cipater 5y ago
      >apart from original formula Four Loko Death in a can. Drinking two of those bad boys in an hour was like getting into a time machine. You'd wake up in an unfamiliar place with a trail of depravity and destruction in your wake like Hansel and Gretel on a bender.
  - runawaybottle 5y ago
    Problem drinkers become extra problematic when their drinking harms others. That goes beyond just hurting yourself. What percentage of FB/Insta users are truly addicts and harm themselves? Maybe moderately low, who knows. But, how likely is it that their social peacocking impacts others even if they themselves are not being hurt by it? The body image thing for teen girls is happening when other girls post their pictures. That’s what makes this whole thing very difficult to measure.
  - mpalmer 5y ago
    The ratio of alcoholics to alcohol consumers is probably significantly higher for teens than for adults.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    But this article is talking about teenagers. We don’t let teens drink in the US, because they aren’t mature enough yet.
    - trey-jones 5y ago
      Some would argue that the introduction of alcohol as a social norm earlier in life would reduce the amount of irresponsible use when those still-immature young Americans turn 21. Edit: I feel the need to clarify that I am also an American and a parent of young kids, and I do not intend to allow them free access to social media anytime soon (oldest is 11).
- vrc 5y ago
  I’d venture most alcoholics will admit that alcohol makes them feel physiologically better, but know that it’s a poison that they wish to rid themselves of. So the positive disposition towards the intoxicant is gallows humor — a coping mechanism to rationalize a situation they can’t see a way out from despite it ostensibly being within their control.
- krono 5y ago
  There's a reason people become addicts. They must feel there's something to be gained or kept. This week I'm going to get my shit together, these will be my last cans of RedBull and my last all-nighter. New bottle... last one too. Fuck it, I really need a good nights rest. Everything will be much better after finally having had a chance to mention this insane workload during tomorrow's perf meeting. Alright, I've got this. At 35% leverage I'll have it all back in no time. I've worked and spoken with many addicts. Even after them having been clean for years, many never seem able to defeat that false idea of there being light at the end of the tunnel / benefit. Just imagine there are people, some of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part that exists in each and every one of us.
  - stevespang 5y ago
    "Just imagine there are people, many of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part of dopamine stimulation/addiction for profit with callous regard for human mental health, that exists in each and every one of us"
  - pjmorris 5y ago
    > Just imagine there are people, some of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part that exists in each and every one of us. I can imagine that there are people addicted to doing this engineering, maybe believing that with a tweak or two more the negative effects will disappear. I'm reminded of 'Crazy Eddie' from 'The Mote In God's Eye', believing there's a way to engineer our way out of every problem.
  - cmehdy 5y ago
    They feel they can "keep" themselves, while also remarking that their self is deteriorating. It's not so much a love for the thing but a fear of the unknown - and in alcohol's case it's also very very much a chemical addiction that bypasses logic.
  - krono 5y ago
    > false idea of there being light at the end of the tunnel What I meant to say was light at the end of the tunnel if only they keep behaving or using as they are. Can no longer edit my comment unfortunately.
- bostonsre 5y ago
  A big thing with addiction is denial. A lot of alcoholics won't admit to being alcoholics.
  - pfortuny 5y ago
    Actually, with alcoholics, it is usually one of the greatest obstacles to overcome: their being honest on the fact that they do drink.
- Sebb767 5y ago
  On the others hand, a lot of smokers or drug users tell people to never touch that stuff, even while they're still using it themselves. At some point, the pain of quitting just becomes a barrier, despite you knowing thwt continuing is bad. And this description actually matches social media quite well, too.
wisty 5y ago
Ambivalence is a key part of most mental health issues. If there were not positive aspects, people wouldn't do it. (The exception would be things that are very much not a choice, like schizophrenia or Alzheimer's). I know "choice" is a bit of a dirty word when talking about mental illness, we can talk about free will vs predestination ... everyone is just a bunch of atoms bouncing around without "real" free will. But to the extent that people do have anything like a soul or consciousness, a lot of bad choices are still effectively choices, and for a bad choice to be made it needs to have an upside.
TedShiller 5y ago
> I'm sure FB is doing their best, though. You're more sure than most people.
nowherebeen 5y ago
> I'm sure FB is doing their best, though. Is it though? Their entire business model is like alcohol. The higher the alcohol proof the more money they earn. Their algorithms purposefully makes people have wide swings in emotions to drive engagement in order to generate money. Blaming suicidal thoughts on addicts isn't the solution, lowering the alcohol proof is. You can have freedom of speech without the algorithm purposefully pitting one person with another to drive engagement. Exposing alcohol to teens couldn't be a worse idea.
- sktrdie 5y ago
  I understand the problem but then shouldn't also videogames (for instance) be controlled/regulated? They also provide high-swings in emotions coupled with almost real virtual world that can mimic much more vividly experiences that could lead to high-addiction.
  - nowherebeen 5y ago
    Despite violent games like Call of Duty, they have never caused players to want to physically harm themselves nor others. Video game developers set out to create an enjoyable experience for the players because players are the users and, ultimately, the paying customers. People are addicted to video games because they enjoy it (positive emotion). In contrast, Facebook's customers are not the users. Their customers are advertisers and users are simply the product. They maximize their algorithm to satisfy the customers and advertisers are addicted to Facebook because of how much user data they contain which helps them sell better. Since users aren't the customers, Facebook doesn't care if users experience either positive or negative emotions. In fact, a combination of both has been shown to increase engagement. Facebook set out to optimize this combination with their algorithms. So if video games did cause people to periodically experience negative emotions such as suicidal thoughts and they are purposefully doing so to maximize profits from their customers, then yes they should be regulated. But that isn't the case with video games.
    - sktrdie 5y ago
      Regardless of who the customer or product is, the actual thing is built with the capitalistic idea that more people = more money. Hence everything is pretty much built to attract and keep people attracted for the most possible time. Saying social media is different because of their ad-based sales model is a bit misleading. They're both essentially interested in addicting users to their product, regardless of their behavior afterwards.
grumple 5y ago
Indeed, this seems like exactly the sort of situation where you need to ask the participants what effect it has on other people in order to get an honest answer. Or study facts; we can monitor sleep vs instagram use, for example. We can figure out who has body image issues and compare that to who uses IG or other social media.

by krono 5y ago

netfl0 5y ago

Not sure why this is being downvoted. What percentage of alcoholics would say alcohol makes them feel better.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> What percentage of alcoholics would say alcohol makes them feel better. What percentage of people who drink alcohol are alcoholics? It's an interesting comparison because the vast majority of people have no trouble moderating their consumption of alcohol and I'd argue that the same goes for social media. Yet we're so focused on the subset of social media users who are addicts that many here are convinced it's not possible to use social media without being an addict. I suspect if similar rhetoric was leveled against alcohol we'd see a strong backlash from people who enjoy alcohol responsibly, or from people who simply prefer freedom to choose their own actions.
- Barrin92 5y ago
  >What percentage of people who drink alcohol are alcoholics? In the US about ~7% or 14 million people depending on how you define alcoholism. Globally about 3 million people die every year of consequences related to drinking, or put differently, 5% of global deaths are attributable to alcohol consumption.[1]. That is about as many people as covid seems to have killed last year. You're actually right in drawing a comparison between social media and drinking, but I think you're wrong about thinking that means we should take social media less seriously, rather we should take drinking much more seriously. Certainly very few people would argue we should take a pandemic less seriously that costs hundreds of billions per year and kills millions, and that is what alcoholism does as well. As a society we are extremely negligent of threats that cause enormous social harm in the aggregate simply because they don't harm everyone they come into contact with. [1]https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-facts-and-statistics https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sh...
  - dnissley 5y ago
    > As a society we are extremely negligent of threats that cause enormous social harm in the aggregate simply because they don't harm everyone they come into contact with. Probably. But see also the harm of overly stringent regulation of said threats, with the obvious example being prohibition of alcohol in the US. So as a society we take reasonable measures to prevent the worst outcomes. In the case of alcohol we have ratcheted up the consequences of drunk driving, limited the drinking age to 21+, etc.
  - vcmanlp 5y ago
    According to those definitions at least 30% of the people in the UK would be alcoholics. I hear that in Japan one is expected to drink, and the life expectancy is higher.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    > In the US about ~7% or 14 million people depending on how you define alcoholism. Globally about 3 million people die every year of consequences related to drinking, or put differently, 5% of global deaths are attributable to alcohol consumption.[1]. That's the statistics for Alcohol Use Disorder (or AUD) not alcoholism. AUD is definitely not what people think when they speak of alcoholism. That would be alcohol addiction. In typical American fashion, AUD has an extremely broad definition. For example if twice during the past year you went out with friends longer than you expected, had more beer than you were planning to, ended hangover the day after and thought "I should really stop drinking" you have mild AUD.
    - lelandfe 5y ago
      https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-use-disorder-comparison-between-dsm#pub-toc5 https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sh... WastingMyTime89 is likely referring to the DSM-5 definition of AUD here. It is rather broad, though a bit more narrow than they've outlined. Worth a look. I certainly have friends who would qualify. You can also access the DSM-5 text directly through the Internet Archive, though it is sometimes unavailable depending on usage: https://archive.org/details/diagnosticstatis0005unse/page/490/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/diagnosticstatis0005unse/page/49...
- bredren 5y ago
  The difference is (apart from original formula Four Loko) there is no mystery of what goes into alcoholic beverages. Wheras the specifics of what Facebook chooses to show you is either opaque or incalculable for people who visit their website. This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. When you buy Bud Light, there isn’t some constantly shifting emotionally persuasive unlicensed content available to offer just the right amount of drip to give a site visitor a drip just before their average session length is wrapping. I personally think alcohol is often destructive like rot and sloppy tool to play with one’s consciousness. However, it is at lease consistent and well understood. Facebook is neither, and can much more easily be linked with havoc in pursuit of ad spend.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    I don't really think knowing those things would have much if any affect on users or the platform's impact to society or the ability to regulate these platforms. What are you going to do, tell them they can't show you more content similar to things you or your friends or people with similar interests spend a lot of time on? > This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. Was this really a mistake? Or just something that caused a lot of outrage and discussion and views and clicks so therefore got amplified and spread by design?
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    > This includes catastrophic mistakes in the algorithm like the massive groups pushing Q anon early in. Is it “catastrophic mistakes” or is the algorithm working as intended to maximize engagement? From Facebook’s point of view I’m not sure it’s a mistake - these Q people have “engaged” plenty and the conspiracy is still a wonderful generator of engagement, whether from the Q people’s side pushing endless conspiracies, from people trying to reason with then or from those merely laughing at them.
  - Cipater 5y ago
    >apart from original formula Four Loko Death in a can. Drinking two of those bad boys in an hour was like getting into a time machine. You'd wake up in an unfamiliar place with a trail of depravity and destruction in your wake like Hansel and Gretel on a bender.
- runawaybottle 5y ago
  Problem drinkers become extra problematic when their drinking harms others. That goes beyond just hurting yourself. What percentage of FB/Insta users are truly addicts and harm themselves? Maybe moderately low, who knows. But, how likely is it that their social peacocking impacts others even if they themselves are not being hurt by it? The body image thing for teen girls is happening when other girls post their pictures. That’s what makes this whole thing very difficult to measure.
- mpalmer 5y ago
  The ratio of alcoholics to alcohol consumers is probably significantly higher for teens than for adults.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  But this article is talking about teenagers. We don’t let teens drink in the US, because they aren’t mature enough yet.
  - trey-jones 5y ago
    Some would argue that the introduction of alcohol as a social norm earlier in life would reduce the amount of irresponsible use when those still-immature young Americans turn 21. Edit: I feel the need to clarify that I am also an American and a parent of young kids, and I do not intend to allow them free access to social media anytime soon (oldest is 11).
vrc 5y ago
I’d venture most alcoholics will admit that alcohol makes them feel physiologically better, but know that it’s a poison that they wish to rid themselves of. So the positive disposition towards the intoxicant is gallows humor — a coping mechanism to rationalize a situation they can’t see a way out from despite it ostensibly being within their control.
krono 5y ago
There's a reason people become addicts. They must feel there's something to be gained or kept. This week I'm going to get my shit together, these will be my last cans of RedBull and my last all-nighter. New bottle... last one too. Fuck it, I really need a good nights rest. Everything will be much better after finally having had a chance to mention this insane workload during tomorrow's perf meeting. Alright, I've got this. At 35% leverage I'll have it all back in no time. I've worked and spoken with many addicts. Even after them having been clean for years, many never seem able to defeat that false idea of there being light at the end of the tunnel / benefit. Just imagine there are people, some of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part that exists in each and every one of us.
- stevespang 5y ago
  "Just imagine there are people, many of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part of dopamine stimulation/addiction for profit with callous regard for human mental health, that exists in each and every one of us"
- pjmorris 5y ago
  > Just imagine there are people, some of whom are probably reading this too, whose job it is to artificially recreate or induce this dark and destructive part that exists in each and every one of us. I can imagine that there are people addicted to doing this engineering, maybe believing that with a tweak or two more the negative effects will disappear. I'm reminded of 'Crazy Eddie' from 'The Mote In God's Eye', believing there's a way to engineer our way out of every problem.
- cmehdy 5y ago
  They feel they can "keep" themselves, while also remarking that their self is deteriorating. It's not so much a love for the thing but a fear of the unknown - and in alcohol's case it's also very very much a chemical addiction that bypasses logic.
- krono 5y ago
  > false idea of there being light at the end of the tunnel What I meant to say was light at the end of the tunnel if only they keep behaving or using as they are. Can no longer edit my comment unfortunately.
bostonsre 5y ago
A big thing with addiction is denial. A lot of alcoholics won't admit to being alcoholics.
- pfortuny 5y ago
  Actually, with alcoholics, it is usually one of the greatest obstacles to overcome: their being honest on the fact that they do drink.
Sebb767 5y ago
On the others hand, a lot of smokers or drug users tell people to never touch that stuff, even while they're still using it themselves. At some point, the pain of quitting just becomes a barrier, despite you knowing thwt continuing is bad. And this description actually matches social media quite well, too.

wisty 5y ago

Ambivalence is a key part of most mental health issues. If there were not positive aspects, people wouldn't do it. (The exception would be things that are very much not a choice, like schizophrenia or Alzheimer's). I know "choice" is a bit of a dirty word when talking about mental illness, we can talk about free will vs predestination ... everyone is just a bunch of atoms bouncing around without "real" free will. But to the extent that people do have anything like a soul or consciousness, a lot of bad choices are still effectively choices, and for a bad choice to be made it needs to have an upside.

TedShiller 5y ago

> I'm sure FB is doing their best, though. You're more sure than most people.

nowherebeen 5y ago

> I'm sure FB is doing their best, though. Is it though? Their entire business model is like alcohol. The higher the alcohol proof the more money they earn. Their algorithms purposefully makes people have wide swings in emotions to drive engagement in order to generate money. Blaming suicidal thoughts on addicts isn't the solution, lowering the alcohol proof is. You can have freedom of speech without the algorithm purposefully pitting one person with another to drive engagement. Exposing alcohol to teens couldn't be a worse idea.

sktrdie 5y ago
I understand the problem but then shouldn't also videogames (for instance) be controlled/regulated? They also provide high-swings in emotions coupled with almost real virtual world that can mimic much more vividly experiences that could lead to high-addiction.
- nowherebeen 5y ago
  Despite violent games like Call of Duty, they have never caused players to want to physically harm themselves nor others. Video game developers set out to create an enjoyable experience for the players because players are the users and, ultimately, the paying customers. People are addicted to video games because they enjoy it (positive emotion). In contrast, Facebook's customers are not the users. Their customers are advertisers and users are simply the product. They maximize their algorithm to satisfy the customers and advertisers are addicted to Facebook because of how much user data they contain which helps them sell better. Since users aren't the customers, Facebook doesn't care if users experience either positive or negative emotions. In fact, a combination of both has been shown to increase engagement. Facebook set out to optimize this combination with their algorithms. So if video games did cause people to periodically experience negative emotions such as suicidal thoughts and they are purposefully doing so to maximize profits from their customers, then yes they should be regulated. But that isn't the case with video games.
  - sktrdie 5y ago
    Regardless of who the customer or product is, the actual thing is built with the capitalistic idea that more people = more money. Hence everything is pretty much built to attract and keep people attracted for the most possible time. Saying social media is different because of their ad-based sales model is a bit misleading. They're both essentially interested in addicting users to their product, regardless of their behavior afterwards.

grumple 5y ago

Indeed, this seems like exactly the sort of situation where you need to ask the participants what effect it has on other people in order to get an honest answer. Or study facts; we can monitor sleep vs instagram use, for example. We can figure out who has body image issues and compare that to who uses IG or other social media.