6 ms·

> very few entrepreneurs would be willing to start a new social media company. I’m not sure this is a bad thing. Is the world better and happier from social m

> very few entrepreneurs would be willing to start a new social media company. I’m not sure this is a bad thing. Is the world better and happier from social media? Do we want it to keep rising from the ashes and sowing misery, ignorance, and depression? Maybe it is my nostalgia glasses but I feel like everyone I know was happier when the only way to communicate long distance for the average person was a rotary phone that weighed about 20 lbs.

benatkin 4y ago
Yes, it's a very bad thing. There are a lot of different types of social media. How about projects with Discourse forums? That could be considered social media. Do you want to force them onto Facebook?
- smt88 4y ago
  Discord doesn't have an addictive algorithm and seems like it would be totally safe.
  - yardstick 4y ago
    They send notifications to your phone whenever someone messages you. Those unread icons are addictive, at least for me I always have to actively think to not open them immediately. That’s just the natural outcome of blurring chat rooms with social media.
    - judge2020 4y ago
      That still applies for non-social media. My iOS IRC client connected to my znc bouncer also shows notifications. Same for iMessage which is more profile-like, since you can send memoji and stickers and play games with your friends (eg. GamePigeon), which is why the bill tries to exclude 'chat' apps and email apps.
      - yardstick 4y ago
        How much different is IRC/Discourse vs Twitter? Hashtags are effectively channels. Twitter just has more subscribers and more individuals in each channel.
  - jdminhbg 4y ago
    The question isn't whether you think they have an addictive algorithm, the question is whether a lawyer can convince a jury that they fit the law's definition of one.
  - kenward 4y ago
    I think the person you responded to was referring to Discourse[1] forums, not Discord[2]. Although I agree with you and the gp, both Discourse and Discord have very different incentives than traditional social media FB, IG, etc. [1] https://www.discourse.org/ https://www.discourse.org/ [2] https://discord.com/ https://discord.com/
- mewse 4y ago
  From the article: > The proposal would only apply to social media companies that had at least $100 million in gross revenue in the past year And also: > Also, companies that conduct regular audits of their practices to identify and remove features that could be addictive to children would be immune from lawsuits. ...if a company is earning $100 million per year from their social media product I think I'm kind of okay with demanding they spend a person-day every couple months verifying that they're not adding features classed as addictive to children. I'm not really seeing where your outrage is coming from, here.
  - judge2020 4y ago
    Self-audits never work, which is why there are regulatory agencies everywhere to 'double check' a company's work when ensuring legal compliance. The real issue with this bill is that "addiction" isn't the same for everyone. The Twitter "trends" paradigm itself could be considered addictive if you really stretched it, maybe a 15 year old looks at it every waking hour of their day and goes through it all looking for tweets to reply to? Since the law doesn't only apply in a class-action sense, any parent could bring this to court with their anecdote and the court's main argument would be on whether that specific feature is 'addictive', not "addictive to all children". For reference: > An operator of a social media platform shall be found to have violated their duty if the social media platform is found to have addicted a child user by either of the following means: > (1) The use or sale of a child user’s personal data. > (2) The development, design, implementation, or maintenance of a design, feature, or affordance. Quite literally anything could be grounds for the $25k + 2x attorney's fees in damages. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2408 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
- anothernewdude 4y ago
  I think they're safe from addiction.
mandelbrotwurst 4y ago
Preventing competition in social media won't eliminate it - it will prevent innovative new entrants from solving its issues, while allowing the status quo to continue and likely deteriorate further.
stickfigure 4y ago
> Is the world better and happier from social media? Yes, absolutely. I actually lived in the rotary phone era and it was fucking lonely. It's much easier to stay connected with friends now. That's especially true now that I've moved out of the city and started a family.

benatkin 4y ago

Yes, it's a very bad thing. There are a lot of different types of social media. How about projects with Discourse forums? That could be considered social media. Do you want to force them onto Facebook?

smt88 4y ago
Discord doesn't have an addictive algorithm and seems like it would be totally safe.
- yardstick 4y ago
  They send notifications to your phone whenever someone messages you. Those unread icons are addictive, at least for me I always have to actively think to not open them immediately. That’s just the natural outcome of blurring chat rooms with social media.
  - judge2020 4y ago
    That still applies for non-social media. My iOS IRC client connected to my znc bouncer also shows notifications. Same for iMessage which is more profile-like, since you can send memoji and stickers and play games with your friends (eg. GamePigeon), which is why the bill tries to exclude 'chat' apps and email apps.
    - yardstick 4y ago
      How much different is IRC/Discourse vs Twitter? Hashtags are effectively channels. Twitter just has more subscribers and more individuals in each channel.
- jdminhbg 4y ago
  The question isn't whether you think they have an addictive algorithm, the question is whether a lawyer can convince a jury that they fit the law's definition of one.
- kenward 4y ago
  I think the person you responded to was referring to Discourse[1] forums, not Discord[2]. Although I agree with you and the gp, both Discourse and Discord have very different incentives than traditional social media FB, IG, etc. [1] https://www.discourse.org/ https://www.discourse.org/ [2] https://discord.com/ https://discord.com/
mewse 4y ago
From the article: > The proposal would only apply to social media companies that had at least $100 million in gross revenue in the past year And also: > Also, companies that conduct regular audits of their practices to identify and remove features that could be addictive to children would be immune from lawsuits. ...if a company is earning $100 million per year from their social media product I think I'm kind of okay with demanding they spend a person-day every couple months verifying that they're not adding features classed as addictive to children. I'm not really seeing where your outrage is coming from, here.
- judge2020 4y ago
  Self-audits never work, which is why there are regulatory agencies everywhere to 'double check' a company's work when ensuring legal compliance. The real issue with this bill is that "addiction" isn't the same for everyone. The Twitter "trends" paradigm itself could be considered addictive if you really stretched it, maybe a 15 year old looks at it every waking hour of their day and goes through it all looking for tweets to reply to? Since the law doesn't only apply in a class-action sense, any parent could bring this to court with their anecdote and the court's main argument would be on whether that specific feature is 'addictive', not "addictive to all children". For reference: > An operator of a social media platform shall be found to have violated their duty if the social media platform is found to have addicted a child user by either of the following means: > (1) The use or sale of a child user’s personal data. > (2) The development, design, implementation, or maintenance of a design, feature, or affordance. Quite literally anything could be grounds for the $25k + 2x attorney's fees in damages. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2408 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
anothernewdude 4y ago
I think they're safe from addiction.

mandelbrotwurst 4y ago

Preventing competition in social media won't eliminate it - it will prevent innovative new entrants from solving its issues, while allowing the status quo to continue and likely deteriorate further.

stickfigure 4y ago

> Is the world better and happier from social media? Yes, absolutely. I actually lived in the rotary phone era and it was fucking lonely. It's much easier to stay connected with friends now. That's especially true now that I've moved out of the city and started a family.