4 ms·

We can draw parallels, but you've never developed lung cancer doom scrolling twitter.

by bastardoperator 3y ago

Andrex 3y ago
Sharply increasing suicide rates among teens due to social media isn't something to just shrug off, either.
- teej 3y ago
  Something also not caused by doom scrolling twitter.
  - nimbleplum40 3y ago
    Sure, Instagram though…
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ahahahahah 3y ago
  Do you know what had the largest impact on suicide rates of teens in recent years? Them returning to schools after covid. Could it be that things can, at the same time, have both positive and negative effects on people?
  - hext 3y ago
    Have you considered the impact social media has on in person dynamics amongst school age kids? Insanely naive take.
bitwize 3y ago
And big tobacco hasn't brought the Nazis back.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  Big tobacco killed more people than the Nazis. Fact.
  - xethos 3y ago
    Nazis are more likely to have unwilling victims though - quitting applies to smoking (difficult though it may be), not being a target for Nazis
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
z3t4 3y ago
You don't get lung cancer by injecting. Its just that everyday life sux in comparison.
shpx 3y ago
If being a smoker decreases your life expectancy by 10 years and you live 80 years, then if you're wasting 1/8 of your day on screens (2 hours/day if you don't count sleeping 8 hours) then it's sort of like smoking, if we equate wasting your life with not living at all.
- advsavsdvav 3y ago
  I know its HN and bashing big tech/ad-tech is what almost everyone agree on here, but come on, is it really the same as tobacco. Even if we focus only on big ad-tech, many of the ad-based companies provide very useful products. That's why their business models work. Think google - maps alone is one incredible product or think Meta, Whatsapp has helped me save thousands of $ I would have otherwise spent on international calling, and I am so much closer and engaged to family and friends because of it, Martketplace has helped me buy/sell lots of stuff and saved me lot of money too. And the list goes on. I do not disagree there are problems with these companies and products but its just simply incorrect to equate it to tobacco. There are tons of products that these companies make that are actually very productive and useful.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    > I know its HN and bashing big tech/ad-tech is what almost everyone agree on here, Which is ironic since many of them (us) make their living either working at BigTech, or working at a startup hoping to get acquired by BigTech
- tech_ken 3y ago
  I'm not sure if this logic really holds up. Lot's of things "waste time". By this definition both television (before scrolling people would easily spend 2+ hours watching "the boob tube") and traffic (many people drive 45+ minutes each way to and from work, which is time fully "wasted") are both equivalent to smoking.
  - shpx 3y ago
    I'm talking about a daily average sustained over the entire course of your life. You don't commute on the weekends, vacations and when you retire, etc. so it's not quite as bad. But ultimately yea, would you rather die at 80 and commute two hours every day of your life or die at 70 and never waste a second in the car and also enjoy cigarettes? I'm also talking about time that is so utterly wasted that it's the same as not living at all. What percentage of TV watching or phone scrolling time falls to that level? Surely some parts of TV watching aren't wasted, if not then why does comparing that to smoking not sit right with you? I'm not trying to say that the numbers match up to smoking necessarily. I'm setting up a "living hours lost" framework for fun and comparing how things match up to one thing that Americans have deemed not worth it. We could also factor in the time it takes to work for the money to buy cigarettes or say that time in your 20s is more valuable than time in your 80s, but I've never been 80 so I could be wrong about that.
dbtc 3y ago
And cigarettes never broke a democracy

We can draw parallels, but you've never developed lung cancer doom scrolling twitter.

Andrex 3y ago

Sharply increasing suicide rates among teens due to social media isn't something to just shrug off, either.

teej 3y ago
Something also not caused by doom scrolling twitter.
- nimbleplum40 3y ago
  Sure, Instagram though…
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ahahahahah 3y ago
Do you know what had the largest impact on suicide rates of teens in recent years? Them returning to schools after covid. Could it be that things can, at the same time, have both positive and negative effects on people?
- hext 3y ago
  Have you considered the impact social media has on in person dynamics amongst school age kids? Insanely naive take.

bitwize 3y ago

And big tobacco hasn't brought the Nazis back.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Big tobacco killed more people than the Nazis. Fact.
- xethos 3y ago
  Nazis are more likely to have unwilling victims though - quitting applies to smoking (difficult though it may be), not being a target for Nazis
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

z3t4 3y ago

You don't get lung cancer by injecting. Its just that everyday life sux in comparison.

shpx 3y ago

If being a smoker decreases your life expectancy by 10 years and you live 80 years, then if you're wasting 1/8 of your day on screens (2 hours/day if you don't count sleeping 8 hours) then it's sort of like smoking, if we equate wasting your life with not living at all.

advsavsdvav 3y ago
I know its HN and bashing big tech/ad-tech is what almost everyone agree on here, but come on, is it really the same as tobacco. Even if we focus only on big ad-tech, many of the ad-based companies provide very useful products. That's why their business models work. Think google - maps alone is one incredible product or think Meta, Whatsapp has helped me save thousands of $ I would have otherwise spent on international calling, and I am so much closer and engaged to family and friends because of it, Martketplace has helped me buy/sell lots of stuff and saved me lot of money too. And the list goes on. I do not disagree there are problems with these companies and products but its just simply incorrect to equate it to tobacco. There are tons of products that these companies make that are actually very productive and useful.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  > I know its HN and bashing big tech/ad-tech is what almost everyone agree on here, Which is ironic since many of them (us) make their living either working at BigTech, or working at a startup hoping to get acquired by BigTech
tech_ken 3y ago
I'm not sure if this logic really holds up. Lot's of things "waste time". By this definition both television (before scrolling people would easily spend 2+ hours watching "the boob tube") and traffic (many people drive 45+ minutes each way to and from work, which is time fully "wasted") are both equivalent to smoking.
- shpx 3y ago
  I'm talking about a daily average sustained over the entire course of your life. You don't commute on the weekends, vacations and when you retire, etc. so it's not quite as bad. But ultimately yea, would you rather die at 80 and commute two hours every day of your life or die at 70 and never waste a second in the car and also enjoy cigarettes? I'm also talking about time that is so utterly wasted that it's the same as not living at all. What percentage of TV watching or phone scrolling time falls to that level? Surely some parts of TV watching aren't wasted, if not then why does comparing that to smoking not sit right with you? I'm not trying to say that the numbers match up to smoking necessarily. I'm setting up a "living hours lost" framework for fun and comparing how things match up to one thing that Americans have deemed not worth it. We could also factor in the time it takes to work for the money to buy cigarettes or say that time in your 20s is more valuable than time in your 80s, but I've never been 80 so I could be wrong about that.

dbtc 3y ago

And cigarettes never broke a democracy