3 ms·

I wish there was one button way to opt out of behaviorally addicting features. Maybe next big regulation comming from EU.

UncleEntity 4y ago
I think it’s labeled “uninstall”. At some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and realize government regulators aren’t their sugar daddies in charge of making sure they don’t do anything self destructive. If that’s what sugar daddies do, no clue?
- deadly_syn 4y ago
  Unfortunately, I personally dont think the average person is that capable of self regulation at this point. Social media culture has become a cornerstone for genz and late millenials, and is designed to make these dark patterns work on you better. Meaning in future this issue might actuslly compound. And i dont think any of this is malicious intentionally. I think its just self serving assholes exploiting whatever gets them what they want.
- com 4y ago
  The argument is akin to the bans on toxic chemicals in domestic products. It worked for lead, mercury, asbestos and a host of other things. These have saved many, many lives. Similar rules around predatory lending, predatory insurance, mandatory all-in air flight pricing have all done wonders for consumers’ sanity and improved market offerings enormously.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  How can we talk about uninstalling when Facebook has shadow profils based on your friends and monitor your traffic outside of Facebook without you agreeing to it via the share buttons? And don’t tell me you can use a complex technical solution to avoid it. The EU is legislating for the average user, not people who can block JS.
  - sorokod 4y ago
    Uninstall anyway. Shadow profile or not, uninstall.
- nunez 4y ago
  there's a difference between "taking responsibility for your own actions" and "designing a platform that is expressly designed to be addicting enough to subvert that responsibility" chief example: infinite scroll. why does content need to scroll infinitely other than to keep eyeballs on the site and make it easy to lose track of time?
- otikik 4y ago
  Why not? I’ll take that over them writing laws that only benefit the wealthy and big corps any day of the week.

UncleEntity 4y ago

I think it’s labeled “uninstall”. At some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and realize government regulators aren’t their sugar daddies in charge of making sure they don’t do anything self destructive. If that’s what sugar daddies do, no clue?

deadly_syn 4y ago
Unfortunately, I personally dont think the average person is that capable of self regulation at this point. Social media culture has become a cornerstone for genz and late millenials, and is designed to make these dark patterns work on you better. Meaning in future this issue might actuslly compound. And i dont think any of this is malicious intentionally. I think its just self serving assholes exploiting whatever gets them what they want.
com 4y ago
The argument is akin to the bans on toxic chemicals in domestic products. It worked for lead, mercury, asbestos and a host of other things. These have saved many, many lives. Similar rules around predatory lending, predatory insurance, mandatory all-in air flight pricing have all done wonders for consumers’ sanity and improved market offerings enormously.
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
How can we talk about uninstalling when Facebook has shadow profils based on your friends and monitor your traffic outside of Facebook without you agreeing to it via the share buttons? And don’t tell me you can use a complex technical solution to avoid it. The EU is legislating for the average user, not people who can block JS.
- sorokod 4y ago
  Uninstall anyway. Shadow profile or not, uninstall.
nunez 4y ago
there's a difference between "taking responsibility for your own actions" and "designing a platform that is expressly designed to be addicting enough to subvert that responsibility" chief example: infinite scroll. why does content need to scroll infinitely other than to keep eyeballs on the site and make it easy to lose track of time?
otikik 4y ago
Why not? I’ll take that over them writing laws that only benefit the wealthy and big corps any day of the week.