Hacker News Reader

Comment by untilHellbanned | Hacker News Reader

Social media companies are cigarette companies. They should be taxed and frowned upon accordingly.

Remember way back when when cigarettes were cool? Well fast-forward 70 years and that’s social media now.

An interesting dual to that is "cigarettes are a social network."

I don't think cigarettes are cool. I also don't think cigarettes are uncool. They way it seems to be generally thought of in northern europe is that it's just something some people do and others don't. Sure, I don't smoke near to a non-smoker, because that's a nice thing to do, but a non-smoker also doesn't tell me I should quit smoking, because that's also a nice thing to do. Cigarettes are nothing, but taking a walk when you're standing still, albeit an unhealthy walk.

Think of it as a reverse insurance policy: investing in your future ill-health.

In some ways they are, though I'd mostly attribute that quality to Facebook. Taxing wouldn't do a thing, but creating more awareness around how destructive Facebook is might help more people think twice about using it.

Then again, that might not even be necessary. I think Facebook is going to be in serious trouble within the next 3 to 5 years. Instagram might be fine, but Facebook as a platform is definitely not forever, and it doesn't seem like anyone is really trying to replicate it.

That's a very hyperbolic statement. Facebook still has merit as a way to organize and communicate with your social group, even if there are some negatives. For cigarettes, I don't know what positives people can claim with a straight face. That you get to go outside at work for a smoke break?

The analogy works surprisingly well.

I really wish I didn't have to breath the Facebook's (and Google's) secondhand smoke every time when I interact with other people (or websites). Just like smoking, putting a "like" button on your website or using any of their services to chat with someone inflicts causes "secondhand" damage on people that choose to people that chose not to "inhale".

> I don't know what positives

Nicotine is a drug. It should be obvious that some people enjoy its effects and/or find it useful. The tolerance effect may reduce those benefits for some (most?) people, but that doesn't change that it had (or continues to have) positive effects.

> claim with a straight face

Maybe you should ask the doctors at the Harvard Medical School[1] et al about the benefits nicotine seems to have for several mental health issues? Now that we are finally moving oast the taboos on any nicotine-related research, these discoveries might lead to entirely new types of medication.

[1] https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Nicotine_I... (paywall - google cache bypass: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:t8ekKU... )

70 years ago no one viewed cigarettes in the negative.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com