4 ms·
The Illinois bill prohibits financial transactions, and feeds engineered to be addictive.
by gzread 7mo ago
The Illinois bill prohibits financial transactions, and feeds engineered to be addictive.
- cortesoft 7mo agoHow do you define a “feed engineered to be addictive”? How do you distinguish between addictive and just good quality?
- chao- 7mo agoThis isn't from the bill, but this is what I would like to see: Any endless scroll "feed" can only be chronological content only from people/orgs/entities you opt-in to see ("follow", "subscribe", what-have-you). Will that be bad for "engagement"? Yes. That's the point.
- cortesoft 7mo agoWhy chronological? What is special about that ordering? You aren’t allowed any kind of filtering, or alternative ordering? Do you always view the ‘new’ feed on hackernews, or do you prefer looking at the front page? I much prefer the front page, for all sorts of reasons. The new feed has all sorts of spam and garbage posts. Reposts, troll bait, etc. The front page usually has much more interesting posts, and definitely posts that have more interesting comments on them. I don’t want to get rid of the front page, I like the idea of seeing posts ordered by popularity. Why should you get to decide I am no longer allowed to sort my own feed by popularity, or however I want? I can’t sort things, just because you think I shouldn’t enjoy my feed too much?
- chao- 7mo agoI am not so egotistical as to think I get to decide any of this. Hence, I did not say I "should" get to decide. I simply said that if I could, that is what I would like to see. I tried to phrase my comment to convey that I know it is not a popular opinion. I am not surprised that someone would disagree me with, and I am okay with that :)
- cortesoft 7mo agoI have no issue with everyone being able to choose how you view your feed. I might even support legislation that would require any website with a feed to offer a chronological, not filtered version, although many websites already include an option to view a feed in that form. This whole thread is about attempts to outlaw “addictive” feeds, which is what I take issue with. I don’t like the idea of government having that level of control. On the other hand, I am also not in the group who says we should make no attempts to help our society deal with the negative effects of addictive feeds. I feel the same way about free speech; I am a huge believer in the absolute necessity for complete free speech, but I also don’t think we can ignore the power and influence of disinformation and/or propaganda. We should absolutely be working on figuring out mitigation tactics that don’t involve prohibiting speech, or prohibiting particular feed algorithms.
- chao- 7mo ago>I don’t like the idea of government having that level of control. This is my usual stance. I have to deal with various regulations (and worse: state-by-state laws) in my business, so I tend to be reflexively anti-regulation. And yet I find myself saying these things.
- a123b456c 7mo agoYou could engineer the feed to maximize user satisfaction, rather than maximizing usage.
- cortesoft 7mo agoBut what if maximum satisfaction causes maximum usage? If you make the perfect feed that shows someone exactly what they want to see at every moment, people are going to use that all the time.
- Xirdus 7mo agoYou're assuming wanting to watch something always leads to being satisfied after seeing it. Which is increasingly not the case. People are doomscrolling for hours, and then regret doomscrolling for hours rather than doing something meaningful instead.
- boyoboy 7mo ago[dead]