4 ms·
People are way too comfortable banning things these days. This is where the term 'nanny state' comes from. A subset of the population doesn't have self control?
by dmix 9mo ago
People are way too comfortable banning things these days. This is where the term 'nanny state' comes from. A subset of the population doesn't have self control? Ban it everyone. Even if it's a wildly popular form of entertainment with millions of creators sharing their lives, who cares we know better.
- halestock 9mo ago> A subset of the population doesn't have self control? Ban it everyone. Even if it's a wildly popular form of entertainment Like gambling?
- techterrier 9mo agoor cigarettes?
- arethuza 9mo agoOr drugs?
- haugis 9mo agoOr coffee?
- senbrow 9mo agoThe drug so popular no one thinks of it as a drug any more.
- mrguyorama 9mo ago"One of these things is not like the others..." What are the harmful effects of a full blown coffee addiction? Headaches?
- direwolf20 9mo agoWhat are the effects of an LSD addiction? Oh you can't, because LSD is anti–addictive. But it's still schedule 1 while coffee is uncontrolled.
- yibg 9mo agoOr sugar?
- direwolf20 9mo agoCigarettes are drugs
- Juliate 9mo agoWhen most of the market using it is abusive, and a source of abuse, preventing the abuse to continue while it's being investigated, or better apprehended by the population/generations at large, makes sense.
- micromacrofoot 9mo agohow do you feel about self control in the face large companies that are spending billions of dollars to intentionally trick you into not having it? you can't even be aware of what they're doing, because the algorithms they're using to do it are black boxes youtube algorithms have shown evidence that they've lead to radicalization would you not draw a line on any of this?
- rglullis 9mo agoThe "subset of the population" is not small, and there is no easy way to protect the most vulnerable. > it's a wildly popular form of entertainment with millions of creators sharing their lives I don't think we should be rewarding those who make a living by creating "content" that serves for nothing but a dopamine rush, and you can bet that those who who put it in the effort to create valuable content would prefer to have one less channel where they are forced to put out content just to satisfy the algorithm overlords.
- krapp 9mo agoIt shouldn't be the job of governments to decide what content has value and what doesn't.
- rglullis 9mo agoIt's not about the content, but the format and the economic pressure that corporations exert over everyone. If you want to distribute short videos on a website that let's you choose what you want after search and deliberately clicking on a button to play it, by all means feel free to do it. But the current Tik-Tok mechanism removes all agency and are an extreme version of mind pollution.
- wackget 9mo agoIt's way more complex than "no self control". Social media is addictive by design and is peddled at such scale that it is literally impossible to ignore. It's also backed by billions upon billions of dollars. Pitting the average person up against that, then blaming them for having "no self control" once they inevitably get sucked in is not a remotely fair conclusion.
- SirMaster 9mo agoPeople keep saying this and yet, I have never used any of these short form video services or really any social media outside of desktop websites like hackernews and reddit. Even on reddit I just subscribe to a few niche and mostly technical subreddits. It seems extremely easy to ignore it all.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- EinigeKreise 9mo agoConsidering the median amount of time people spend on social media daily, it sure does not seem to be so easy for the average person (as was implied in the comment you replied to). I've got a pretty good self control when it comes to the common vices, but I can't see why that would generalise to everyone else.
- morshu9001 9mo agoIt's easy for you and me. At the same time, it doesn't seem right to make a business of intentionally going after the people who get addicted to this, like flavored cigs meant to appeal to teenagers. And these social media companies have a paper trail of internal research on user engagement. But I'm still wary of the motives behind these bans because they seem to be about controlling information, not addiction.
- direwolf20 9mo agoYou've learned they're bad for you. What if you grew up with it from the age of 3? You'd grow up with a dependence on it and no chance to see that it's bad.
- dfxm12 9mo agoThe videos are the entertainment, not the endless recommendation algorithm. Additionally, this is not about self control. The claim is that the algorithm is designed to exploit users. Insiders (including a designer of infinite scroll!) have admitted as much going back years: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44640959 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44640959 We should be uncomfortable with companies spending huge amounts of money to research and implement exploitative algorithms. We did something about cigarette companies advertising to kids. This action is along those lines.
- haugis 9mo agoI see what you're saying, but I would much rather my 9-year old spends an hour on TikTok than an hour smoking Marlboros.
- dfxm12 9mo agoI would much rather people not break things down into false dichotomies. Also, we should strive to give our children at least "good" options, and not settle for "less bad".
- hollerith 9mo agoThe choice would not be so clear-out to me. I'd have to think about it.
- hollerith 9mo ago"clear-cut"
- mrighele 9mo agoEven most liberal societies tend to ban addictive things. Alcohol, smoking, gambling, drugs, they are regulated almost everywhere, in one form or another. I think that algorithmic social media should be likewise regulated, with at the very minimum ban for minors. Note that my focus here on the "algorithmic" part. I'm fine with little or no regulation for social media where your feed is just events in chronological order from contacts that you are subscribed to, like an old bullettin board, or the original Facebook. Also, I think we should consider companies that provide algorithmic social media responsible for what they publish in your feed. The content may be user generated, but what is pushed to the masses is decided by them.
- Frieren 9mo ago> People are way too comfortable banning things these days. This is where the term 'nanny state' comes from. A subset of the population doesn't have self control? Ban it everyone. Even if it's a wildly popular form of entertainment with millions of creators sharing their lives, who cares we know better. Europe wants to ban algorithmic recommendation. You attack a straw-man: banning all the content from creators. If you have any valid argument you should bring them to the discussion instead of creating imaginary enemies. Banning harmful design patterns is a must to protect citizens even if it ruffles the feathers of those profiting from their addiction.
- Permit 9mo ago> You attack a straw-man: banning all the content from creators. They didn't say this.
- mylifeandtimes 9mo ago> A subset of the population doesn't have self control? please fix this to A subset of the population who has not yet reached the age of consent I think society broadly accepts that there are different expectations for children and adults; the line is currently officially drawn somewhere around 18-21 years old.
- 7tflutter7 9mo agoBut in Europe you can drink at 14. Age of consent is also 14. So, no, there is no official line at 18-21. Especially in the EU.
- Quarrelsome 9mo ago> But in Europe you can drink at 14. Age of consent is also 14. That is hilariously general. You're conflating a lot of different nations there. In practice; its different depending on the nation, consent is usually 16 and alcohol is ~18.
- 7tflutter7 9mo agoI was referring to Germany, the largest EU nation. But sure let's look at percentages. 40% of the EU has age of consent 14 or lower. (Germany, Italy, Portugal, etc.) 78% of the EU has it at 15 or lower (France, Sweden, Denmark, etc.) No 'official line' at 18-21.
- Quarrelsome 9mo agoits more complicated than that, the age of consent you're listing doesn't necessarily universally apply and is mostly that low when both people are within that age bracket. In Germany for example the age of consent is effectively 16, its more that there's wiggle room to 14, if both parties are under 21.
- unethical_ban 9mo agoI prefer my water with extra PFAS and my sports bets 10x leveraged. It's my "choice"!
- the_sleaze_ 9mo agoSee: 1. The reactions to banning drunk driving: "It's kind of getting communist when a fella can't put in a hard day's work, put in 11 to 12 hours a day, and then get in your truck and at least drink one or two beers." 2. Mandatory seatbelts: "This is Fascism" You're going to balk at just about anything that comes down the line - I guarantee it. [https://www.unilad.com/news/us-news/americans-react-drink-driving-ban-1980s-995963-20230805 https://www.unilad.com/news/us-news/americans-react-drink-dr...] [https://www.history.com/articles/seat-belt-laws-resistance https://www.history.com/articles/seat-belt-laws-resistance]
- ekjhgkejhgk 9mo agoThe thing is, people who live in Europe actually like that companies aren't allowed take advantage of people in every way concievable. I have an ideia, if you don't like regulation that protects people why don't you fuck off to your own country and advocate for it in whatever dystopian hellhole you came from?
- D-Machine 9mo agoHard not to think of the "hard times create strong people, strong people create good times, good times create weak people, weak people create hard times" meme here.