4 ms·

Nope. Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. Youtube isn't even a single thing. It's just a video hosting service. T

Nope. Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. Youtube isn't even a single thing. It's just a video hosting service. The types of videos on it are extremely wildly varying. Video addiction is not a thing. See how stupid it sounds when you say it like it is?

yladiz 4y ago
Nope. Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. The Internet isn't even a single thing. It's just a collection of content. The types of content on it are extremely wildly varying. Internet addiction is not a thing. See how stupid it sounds when you say it like it is? Outside of lampooning how absurd your comment sounds, I don't think it's your place to call if something is a valid addiction or not, and addictions don't have to be strictly medically defined to be considered as such. Just because there isn't some ICD-10 definition for "YouTube addiction" doesn't mean it can't exist, because addiction fundamentally just means a dependence or habitual occupation with something. And so, is Youtube addiction as debilitating as something like alcoholism? I think most people would say absolutely not, but presumably it's distressing enough to the writer of the post that they have formed a habit around watching (a lot of) it, perceive it as a negative, and want to change it. I would colloquially consider this an addiction.
- superkuh 4y ago
  Absolutely. There is also no such thing as internet addiction. When you compare drug based addictions to things people enjoy the difference is clear. The drugs create increased incentive salience even without enjoyment. This is very different from say, watching a video where you actually have to enjoy it intrinsically many times before it alters incentive salience. There's a reason the DSM5 and ICD-10 don't have any of the "internet addiction" "video game addiction" "porn addiction" or other cult concepts that scammers use to defraud people of their money. They aren't actually addiction.
  - yladiz 4y ago
    Please define addiction for me. My point was not to say that all addictions are equal (they are not), and they act differently, but I think it's too simplistic to flippantly state that Internet addiction is not a thing.
    - superkuh 4y ago
      Addiction is when the motivation for a stimuli is divorced from reward from the stimuli and the animal keeps exposing itself to the stimuli regardless. But socially in humans this is acceptable until the addiction begins to have detrimental effects on the person being able to care for themselves. In almost all cases the simuli capable of doing this are drugs that bypass actual perception and internally/chemically tweak the balance for motivation. There's not even a thing called "Gambling Addiction". Only, "Gambling disorder" and it's the only behavioral "addiction" recognized by the DSM-5.
      - spion 4y ago
        Why is this specific behavioral addiction recognized by the DSM-5?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - hxugufjfjf 4y ago
    edit
charles_f 4y ago
> Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. Youtube isn't even a single thing You're playing with semantics in a context where 1) everyone understands what the author is saying when talking about addiction, making it appropriate to convey what they mean 2) the word pre-dates DSM, the fact that DSM defines that in a medical sense doesn't change the definition from the dictionary, which fits very much with what the author is describing (1). That's very much you getting angry at sound engineers because they are not engineers per the sense of professional colleges, whereas that's how their profession is called. 3) Give time to all the troubles created by digital products to be studied, understood, and make their way into that guide. Psychology and mental afflictions are still a very evolving field of medicine. DSM is changing to reflect that, a notable change between IV and V was regrouping AS into ADS because the symptoms and the underlying cause are similar. The is the case for what everyone calls digital addiction. I suspect there will be some forms of that formally coming up. 4) the dependency mechanisms work in the same way, people suffering from it have the same withdrawal symptoms. There's some valid criticism for the DSM not to categorize it as addiction (2)(3). > Video addiction is not a thing. See how stupid it sounds when you say it like it is? 5) the author's struggle to disconnect is real, the impact on their life is real, their pain is real. I am not sure what authorizes you to discard their pain, and to qualify this as stupid. Show a little empathy. 1: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/addiction https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/addiction 2: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society/200912/will-sex-addiction-be-in-dsm-v https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society... 3: https://unitedbrainassociation.org/brain-resources/digital-addiction/ https://unitedbrainassociation.org/brain-resources/digital-a...
- superkuh 4y ago
  1: And that's the problem: people believing they know what addiction is and applying it to pretty much anything they or others like to do. It's like how people who are a little finicky would say, "Yeah, that's my ADHD." but it's not. The other groups advocating for useless loose definitions of "addiction" are typically scam groups that run paid seminars for things like "porn addiction". About as legit as anti-homosexual camps. 2: This is a legit argument. In the past people may have used the word addiction to cover many things. But it is no longer the year 1900. 3: I guess we better wait till your prediction additions to the DSM6 happen then. I think it more likely that gambling disorder will be removed than additional behavioral "addiction" disorders put in. I'm not sure what the folding of aspergers into autism spectrum disorders has to do with this? 4: Claiming that there are psysiological withdrawl symptoms from watching youtube is absurd. There are not. Show me the journal article supporting such an outlandish claim. Dependency also has a meaning in this context and merely missing something psychologically isn't it. Psychological dependence is not physiological dependence and neither are addiction. Just like how no one is addicted to benzodiazapines: they become physiologically dependent and experience widthdrawl but addiction requires more. 5: Personal anecdotes and emotional appeals are not valid arguments. I'm sorry the person is having psych troubles but "youtube" is not the cause.

yladiz 4y ago

Nope. Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. The Internet isn't even a single thing. It's just a collection of content. The types of content on it are extremely wildly varying. Internet addiction is not a thing. See how stupid it sounds when you say it like it is? Outside of lampooning how absurd your comment sounds, I don't think it's your place to call if something is a valid addiction or not, and addictions don't have to be strictly medically defined to be considered as such. Just because there isn't some ICD-10 definition for "YouTube addiction" doesn't mean it can't exist, because addiction fundamentally just means a dependence or habitual occupation with something. And so, is Youtube addiction as debilitating as something like alcoholism? I think most people would say absolutely not, but presumably it's distressing enough to the writer of the post that they have formed a habit around watching (a lot of) it, perceive it as a negative, and want to change it. I would colloquially consider this an addiction.

superkuh 4y ago
Absolutely. There is also no such thing as internet addiction. When you compare drug based addictions to things people enjoy the difference is clear. The drugs create increased incentive salience even without enjoyment. This is very different from say, watching a video where you actually have to enjoy it intrinsically many times before it alters incentive salience. There's a reason the DSM5 and ICD-10 don't have any of the "internet addiction" "video game addiction" "porn addiction" or other cult concepts that scammers use to defraud people of their money. They aren't actually addiction.
- yladiz 4y ago
  Please define addiction for me. My point was not to say that all addictions are equal (they are not), and they act differently, but I think it's too simplistic to flippantly state that Internet addiction is not a thing.
  - superkuh 4y ago
    Addiction is when the motivation for a stimuli is divorced from reward from the stimuli and the animal keeps exposing itself to the stimuli regardless. But socially in humans this is acceptable until the addiction begins to have detrimental effects on the person being able to care for themselves. In almost all cases the simuli capable of doing this are drugs that bypass actual perception and internally/chemically tweak the balance for motivation. There's not even a thing called "Gambling Addiction". Only, "Gambling disorder" and it's the only behavioral "addiction" recognized by the DSM-5.
    - spion 4y ago
      Why is this specific behavioral addiction recognized by the DSM-5?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- hxugufjfjf 4y ago
  edit

charles_f 4y ago

> Stop using the medical word addiction in contexts where it's highly inappropriate. Youtube isn't even a single thing You're playing with semantics in a context where 1) everyone understands what the author is saying when talking about addiction, making it appropriate to convey what they mean 2) the word pre-dates DSM, the fact that DSM defines that in a medical sense doesn't change the definition from the dictionary, which fits very much with what the author is describing (1). That's very much you getting angry at sound engineers because they are not engineers per the sense of professional colleges, whereas that's how their profession is called. 3) Give time to all the troubles created by digital products to be studied, understood, and make their way into that guide. Psychology and mental afflictions are still a very evolving field of medicine. DSM is changing to reflect that, a notable change between IV and V was regrouping AS into ADS because the symptoms and the underlying cause are similar. The is the case for what everyone calls digital addiction. I suspect there will be some forms of that formally coming up. 4) the dependency mechanisms work in the same way, people suffering from it have the same withdrawal symptoms. There's some valid criticism for the DSM not to categorize it as addiction (2)(3). > Video addiction is not a thing. See how stupid it sounds when you say it like it is? 5) the author's struggle to disconnect is real, the impact on their life is real, their pain is real. I am not sure what authorizes you to discard their pain, and to qualify this as stupid. Show a little empathy. 1: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/addiction https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/addiction 2: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society/200912/will-sex-addiction-be-in-dsm-v https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society... 3: https://unitedbrainassociation.org/brain-resources/digital-addiction/ https://unitedbrainassociation.org/brain-resources/digital-a...

superkuh 4y ago
1: And that's the problem: people believing they know what addiction is and applying it to pretty much anything they or others like to do. It's like how people who are a little finicky would say, "Yeah, that's my ADHD." but it's not. The other groups advocating for useless loose definitions of "addiction" are typically scam groups that run paid seminars for things like "porn addiction". About as legit as anti-homosexual camps. 2: This is a legit argument. In the past people may have used the word addiction to cover many things. But it is no longer the year 1900. 3: I guess we better wait till your prediction additions to the DSM6 happen then. I think it more likely that gambling disorder will be removed than additional behavioral "addiction" disorders put in. I'm not sure what the folding of aspergers into autism spectrum disorders has to do with this? 4: Claiming that there are psysiological withdrawl symptoms from watching youtube is absurd. There are not. Show me the journal article supporting such an outlandish claim. Dependency also has a meaning in this context and merely missing something psychologically isn't it. Psychological dependence is not physiological dependence and neither are addiction. Just like how no one is addicted to benzodiazapines: they become physiologically dependent and experience widthdrawl but addiction requires more. 5: Personal anecdotes and emotional appeals are not valid arguments. I'm sorry the person is having psych troubles but "youtube" is not the cause.