|
| ▲ | dijksterhuis 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| it doesn't remove any choice for users. users don't get a choice on the offending sites currently. they only get infinite scroll. so the eventual infinite scroll replacement will be just that, the replacement. on removing possible UI design choices for social media companies -- i have a very small violin on hand. |
| |
| ▲ | elictronic 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Any discussion on this topic within hacker news is pretty silly. To much financial incentive to keep the status quo, and to many bots pushing narratives. It’s like listening to the lawyers at a cigarette manufacturer, car manufacturers fight seat belts or gun manufacturers in kindergartens. The change is coming because real people are pissed. | | |
| ▲ | iamnothere 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes the “change” of a dumb unconstitutional law that’s going to get struck down on the first challenge. Would-be speech regulators can get bent. | |
| ▲ | Noumenon72 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The real people who are pissed are the same minority of novelty-haters who were pissed about Wal-Mart, fracking, and Facebook. They're outnumbered by the real people who think infinite scroll is great and use it every day. |
| |
| ▲ | mdp2021 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > they only get infinite scroll (Actually, sometimes the "paged" interface in "infinite scrolling" systems is available, only hidden. There for the benefit of people like us, those who would find it and exploit it.) | | |
| ▲ | dijksterhuis 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | i originally wrote users from the wider public or something but then decided to edit the comment down. fair point i suppose for the ~1% of users of these sites that are super tech nerds |
|
|
|
| ▲ | scoofy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What choice? When did I ever choose infinite scroll? |
| |
| ▲ | Noumenon72 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | You never had an option to have Google show a list of curated links or Yahoo show a simple search bar. You chose to go to the site you liked better and in aggregate the market chose the simple search. I could still be going to Slashdot or Things You Wouldn't Know Unless We Blogged It, but I and the content creators found that we preferred infinite scroll instead. | | |
| ▲ | scoofy 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You could say the same thing about nutritional facts being printed on foods. The entire point is externalities that favor the company. These things are never going to be on products unless they are regulated. If you're going to make an argument for "choice" at least argue for opt out rather than "fuck it, let them put trans fats in the food and if you don't like it eat broccoli." | | |
| ▲ | Paracompact 37 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Too late, we now exclusively stock NicoSugar broccoli in the stores. I mean, I guess we chose it? It's not the market's fault that the human brain likes sugar and nicotine. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | steve1977 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Laws are pretty much always about removing choice. |
|
| ▲ | brikym 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That seems like cute libertarian nonsense. The key word is choice. People have less free will than you think. Every time a teen goes to insta/facebook/tiktok etc they are an individual up against a huge corporation of thousands of people and ML whose job it is to hijack their dopamine circuit. Usage of these apps decreases attention span which effectively means other activities become boring so the users experience a withdrawal symptom like a drug addict. And it doesn't just affect them. I think most of us would rather live in a society where 50% of the population isn't brain-rotted. |
|
| ▲ | kasperni 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| We also removed choices to drive without a seat belt or sell lead paint. Was that a bad thing? |
| |
| ▲ | inigyou 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I should have a choice between leaded and unleaded paint and gasoline |
|
