3 ms·
Science has very solid evidence on social networks being extremely addictive, and there are growing suspicions that some companies have it like this by design.
by tmcb 2y ago
Science has very solid evidence on social networks being extremely addictive, and there are growing suspicions that some companies have it like this by design. It might be a choice, yes, but this is not a black-and-white situation.
- constantcrying 2y ago>and there are growing suspicions that some companies have it like this by design That is completely ridiculous. Obviously literally every social media company wants to generate sustained user engagement, this isn't a "growing suspicion" it is their business model to act that way.
- tmcb 2y agoSorry, I am not sure if this is sarcasm :)
- itsoktocry 2y agoIt's not sarcasm. Their entire purpose is to maintain engagement, it's not a conspiracy.
- tmcb 2y agoThere are ethical and unethical ways to maintain engagement.
- tasuki 2y agoThere are effective and ineffective ways to maintain engagement. Getting users addicted is very effective. Even scarier, this doesn't even have to be conscious on part of anyone running the companies. There is no need for bad intent. Simply optimizing for engagement leads to addictiveness. (I'm not saying there's no bad intent, just that it's optional and we're screwed even without it)
- chaostheory 2y agoI’m not arguing that it’s not addictive. I’m saying that it’s cheap and not “serfdom”.
- tmcb 2y agoYou mean cheap for the user, right? In that case, I beg to differ, it is not cheap. When we are talking about highly addictive platforms, this is a zero-sum game (in which every second spent benefits the platform and only the platform in detriment of the user's own health).
- chaostheory 2y agoIt’s still a lot cheaper than alternatives such as actual work or gambling. It’s akin to cable television of yesterday, but cheaper since most people refuse to pay with fiat currency.