4 ms·
Why is the iPad so addictive that children have to be kept away from it? Because every single person designing apps and websites is incentivised to try and win
by A_Duck 2y ago
Why is the iPad so addictive that children have to be kept away from it?
Because every single person designing apps and websites is incentivised to try and win 100% of your attention. Reed Hoffmann put it nicely — "We're competing with sleep, on the margin."
The default apps, browser excluded, are pretty harmless - their incentive is to create a device you decide to welcome into your home. I don't see children spending 4 hours doomscrolling the calculator.
The challenge is to think of another model for creating apps and content — one that retains most of the innovation without the harm
- Kvakes 2y agoAbsolutely, 100%. Not all tech is the same. A chair is a form of technology, but it doesn't try to make you sit all the time. Although some technologies (like books) are replaced with e-readers through which we handle over a certain degree of freedom to whomever the platform we use belongs to.
- A_Duck 2y agoThe challenge is the system of incentives around the technology If chair designers were paid based on the number of hours you sat in the chair, I expect we'd see some very different chairs. Probably not better ones for anyone whose life ambitions involve getting up out of a chair.
- Kvakes 2y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcXMhwF4EtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcXMhwF4EtQ
- _Algernon_ 2y ago>The challenge is the system of incentives around the technology The solution is simple: Outlaw advertising. It should have been done decades ago, considering the negative externalities it puts on society (in terms of visual pollution, and harmful incentives it creates). There is no real reason for it existing. The original argument was that it provides customers with information based on which to make purchasing decisions. It hasn't done this since at least Edward Bernays'[1] time. And there is no argument to be made that customers with internet existing lack information based on which to make purchasing decisions. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
- i80and 2y agoI'm deeply jealous of the few US states that have banned billboard advertising -- it really feels like pervasive advertising is outright caustic to my brain.
- TheSoftwareGuy 2y agoOn the other hand, I can imagine that banning that banning one form of advertising drives those would-be advertisers to other mediums, such as the ones that drive addictive apps and such. This would in turn increase the revenue of those apps, and make that business model more attractive, compared to e.g. apps that are a one-time purchase
- theoreticalmal 2y ago> There is no real reason for it existing Except the fundamental human right to be able to say what you want, when you want, how you want, even (especially?) for commercial purposes.
- lm28469 2y ago> fundamental human right Meh, someone wrote them, we can change them, they're not universal, even in the US true free speech doesn't exist. libel ? slander ? incitement ? defamation ? &c. you can't even swear on tv... And even if... what does it mean ? Should I invent a 400dB personal loudspeaker for people to express themselves 24/7 because they have "the right to say whatever they want however they want, whenever they want" ? That's a schoolyard level take on what freedom of expression is...
- ben_w 2y agoGratis vs libre. I don't mind freely given personal recommendations for products, paid recommendations are suspect.
- blacksmith_tb 2y agoThat seems like it requires a notion of corporate personhood? I don't mind some neighborhood pizza place boasting in their front window that they're the best in town (even though that's unlikely). But targeted ads across devices don't strike me as the free expression of a person.
- yapyap 2y agoa chair is a form of technology?
- TheSoftwareGuy 2y agoTechnology: Noun 1. The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago> The challenge is to think of another model for creating apps and content — one that retains most of the innovation without the harm This is impossible! You missed the whole point of the article! Like sugar is addictive because it is extracted from the fruit that carries all the nutrients, the apps are addictive because they are extracted from the challenge of imagination and boredom. The last line of that essay: "You don’t win by keeping up. You win by stepping out."
- keybored 2y agoYou read what you wanted from the article. Think about what the article is saying. A technologist saying that the technology that they ostensibly co-created is so toxic that it has to be opted out of, the whole game and all. That is rank shirking of responsibility, a self-centered and anti-social non-remedy.
- A_Duck 2y agoI disagree with the conclusion of the article An invention comes as the solution to a problem. The qualities of the solution depend on the parameters of the problem. Many/most technologies have not scaled to the point where their negative externalities outgrow their benefits: GPS, Cordless power tools, OLED TVs, Contactless payments. Of course all have some negatives. We're learning that if the problem is 'make as much ad revenue as possible for the inventor', the solution is going scale harmfully
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago> An invention comes as the solution to a problem. What is the problem that the invention of email solved? And what problems did the invention of email create? Inventions do not solve problems. An invention is a mental fabrication, nothing more.
- freeone3000 2y agoIt solved piles of papers and faxes for inter-office memoranda. It solved a 2-week delay for communications with customers (everything from “your order has been placed” to “you still owe us money” to “here’s our christmas catalog”). Email solved the problem of the physical post being (comparatively) expensive and slow.
- Miraltar 2y ago> The default apps, browser excluded, are pretty harmless - their incentive is to create a device you decide to welcome into your home. I don't see children spending 4 hours doomscrolling the calculator. At least Facebook and Youtube are default apps nowadays
- freeone3000 2y agoNot on Apple devices.
- johntitorjr 2y ago[dead]
- reaanb2 2y agoIf you don't pay for the product, you are the product.
- the_snooze 2y agoA very outdated saying. Cars and IoT are very much things people pay for, but tech enables companies to double-dip and turn them into billboards for the highest ad bidder.
- dartos 2y ago> The challenge is to think of another model for creating apps and content The original content model was sustainable for centuries. Customer pays per viewing, and experiences entertainment for an hour or so. Then another model emerged after the printing press and record player. Customer pays once and experiences the same thing as many times as they want. Now we have a model where a customer pays constantly for no specific entertainment in particular and has no control over when they lose access to some entertainment. Maybe we just go back to people paying for just what they want… The issue is the addiction to growth and VC money tech has. We can’t have simple transactions in tech. It needs to be recurring or predatory.
- wil421 2y agoYouTube kids was banned quickly in my house. My kids can select a movie and sometimes a kids show. They can also play this playground app, 2 iPads can connect and they can play together. They also don’t have free rein over iPads and maybe they get access to once a week in the car or something. They are 6 and under so I’ll probably tweak rules as needed.