Does anyone think that Hacker News fits the bill of addictiveness? Or is HN different than Facebook/Reddit/Twitter for some reason?
But the most interesting part was when we got back. When I jumped onto hacker news I was overwhelmed by all the headlines about totally different things all simultaneously being interpreted by my brain as must reads. It was total overload, and not at all what I was expecting. The Hacker News feed is it’s own kind of brain hack. I wonder how much more pleasant (but less addictive surely) it would be if each page had say 5 headlines with a few paragraphs underneath. Like a newspaper.
Another interesting thing that i’ve Observed since I started observing my Hacker News usage: I read maybe 2 paragraphs of an article then read the top 3 or 4 comments then go to the next thing. I don’t stop until I have some kind of realization about something. Or I see my own views on something validated. Then I put the phone down seemingly satisfied. It seems I come here for the hit of dopamine that comes from “you learnt a thing” or “people agree with your view on a thing”. The addictive part seems to stem from this. I stay here until I get that moment.
But I definitely experience the "you learnt a thing" addiction. And frankly, I don't know how to feel about that. If that's the thing I'm searching a hit for... do I need to stop that?
I think probably yes - but I'm not sure why. When I thought deeply about it and talked with a friend about it, we somewhat came to a consensus that as long as you still do a significant amount of deep reading, thinking, work, etc per day these little hits of "learnt a thing" probably are fine to endulge.
It's when you're always only "learnt a thing" and never digging deeply into them and applying them that you have a problem.
But what's the right balance? Or is some hits of learnt a thing always bad?
You are triggered to come here when you’re bored. Your action is simple loading (or reloading) the page. The variable reward is that you get interesting content and discussions...but you never know what they will be.
Over time this pattern of behaviour becomes habitual. You probably open Hacker News at similar times of the day in similar situations.
This basic pattern applies to all social media products. It’s very well understood and a key part of modern software design.
People come to HN because it's interesting. If something more interesting arrives (like children!), then they often stop coming as much or at all.
So wake me up when there is a large collection of stories about people who lost their job, their wife, or who neglected their kids because they were posting to HN.
Facebook and Twitter are notorious for producing disastrous results among individuals careless with their identity. Reddit permits the free creation of pseudonyms, but the material is less engaging and currated with less rigor.
I wouldn’t rate HN as “addictive” since there aren’t any real barriers to ignoring the site, and it lacks the kind of reach other sites have in “finding you.” This is to say that the usage patterns of the other sites you mention, saturate social circles so thoroughly, that it’s hard to not hear them mentioned in daily conversation.
You may prefer HN, and it may fill certain gaps in regular daily activity, alleviating boredom to an extent, but if you find it infectous, that’s merely a reflection of the intellectual personas that get moderated into your attention based on merit.
Is stimulating conversation addictive? Is reading material deleterious? At some point the buck has to stop with the individual’s own judgement.
On the other hand, if I want to be more charitable to HN (or possibly to rationalize my own addiction), I see Hacker News as a kind of social circle , like an English cofeehouse in the 18th century where thoughtful people congregate to discuss what they see as the important issues of the time.
I've completely gotten rid of facebook with the help of News Feed Eradicator, I don't have an Instagram (though I rarely will get caught up recursively stalking people which leads to feelings of envy / contempt / anomie), and I find most of reddit to be utterly banal pop culture TV-for-the-internet.
So, maybe hacker news is an addiction, but the social aspects of being able to connect with all of these brilliant people, that I otherwise wouldn't, and hear their thoughts and experiences is something I find extremely valuable, addiction or not.
1) HN has less content, so it is much easier to run out of things to look at.
2) Its content is less digestible on average, so you don't get nearly as deep into "mindless info consumption" mode.
That being said, it definitely has those characteristics to an extent.
I think we need to be aware of what we are (currently) addicted to. The author of the like button has been able to break free of social media, and like a former smoker, it sounds as if he is on a crusade to help others break free too. I am unsure that democracy/capitalism as the author describes is working/evil -- both are 'like' systems that allow a person to choose and receive a reward, and we can choose not to participate. There are worse systems. And, perhaps we can create better ones.
I wonder if someone could come up with a compulsive trigger for general education. That would be something.