3 ms·
The problem of algorithmic feeds gets a modest amount of attention, but I still think its not nearly enough. Addicting feeds are evil. If we ever manage to make
by andrewrn 1y ago
The problem of algorithmic feeds gets a modest amount of attention, but I still think its not nearly enough. Addicting feeds are evil. If we ever manage to make it beyond them, we'll reflect on them with the same regret as slavery.
A quote from an author I like, Matthew Crawford: "Attention is the thing that is most one’s own: in the normal course of things, we choose what to pay attention to, and in a very real sense this determines what is real for us; what is actually present to our consciousness. Appropriations of our attention are then an especially intimate matter."
I can't really envision a solution, frankly. On a personal level, I have tried dozens of strategies to use my phone less, including deleting many of my social media accounts, and regrettably, its still an issue. My best guess is legislation that bans machine-learning algorithms on newsfeeds. But there are billions of dollars and a dysfunctional government (speaking U.S. here) motivated against that outcome.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 1y agoThe HN homepage feed is non-algorithmic (at least the sense that the algorithm isn't personalized). Does that actually make a big difference?
- andrewrn 1y agoFor me, absolutely. And the fact that it’s text-only helps enormously too. The way I interact with HN is fine to me. I skim the posts once a day and read maybe one or two. I’ve never scrolled hours away on HN.
- Taikonerd 1y agoI think it's also important that HN doesn't have infinite scrolling. It's old-school: 30 items per page, click at the bottom to go to the next page. I made a rule for myself that I would never go past page 2 of HN. So, each morning, I see 60 items, and if none of them interest me, then I just move on with my day. I think that's why I never became addicted.
- andrewrn 1y agoIf you didn’t have that rule would you go past page 2? Frankly I just don’t find HN articles as cheaply and quickly mentally palatable as other sites. The content here is usually more cognitively demanding, so I don’t end up scrolling.
- Taikonerd 1y agoDepends how bored I was at work ;-)
- krackers 1y agoThe rate at which content ends up on the front page is also slower than your ability to consume it. So even if you do keep clicking, you end up on yesterday's links you've already read.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 1y agoOK so in this comment, and child comments, a number of hypotheses are mentioned for why HN is fine: * HN is text-only * HN lacks infinite scroll * HN adds new content slowly * HN is cognitively demanding My guess is that these factors are most important. If you held them constant and added a recommendation engine in HN, I doubt HN would become considerably more addictive.
- throaway180 1y agoI think there needs to be a culture shift. It's already happening among millennial parents where they don't give phones to kids till they're old enough or even 18.
- andrewrn 1y agoI mean I agree, and folks my age (gen z) do police one another on phone usage at dinner, for example. I just wish there was an easier or better way to expedite this cultural shift. It kinda reminds me of cigarettes. A similarly addicting thing that largely disappeared in the US when it became unfashionable/shameful. Is there a way to make this happen for phones, I wonder.
- throaway180 1y agoIt didn't happen with cigarettes until multiple generations and grown up addicted to them.