Hacker News Reader

Comment by CharlesW | Hacker News Reader

> Everybody likes to hate on "big tech" these days, but if there's anyone that knows the dangers and all the ill effects but ignores them to make a profit, it's content creators.

This is like blaming smokers instead of Philip Morris.

View on HN

I think your analogy is pretty apt. However, even though I don't think you can give corporations a free ride just because 'people could choose not to use the product', this is not an absolute! 'People could choose not to use the product' does hold a lot of truth.

When social media companies are trying to make the media as addictive as possible to keep you scrolling and viewing ads, and employing psychological exploits to do so, it's not quite as simple as 'people can just choose not to use it'.

It's hardly a free choice when they're actively undermining your ability to choose freely.

Sounds like you agree with OP then. Content creators have the same motivation as the platform company. They want to make as many people view their content as possible, failing that they would like to make their exiting community see their content as much as possible. Exact same motivation just at a smaller scale, as they are just one part of the system.

See also gambling and addictive gambling behaviors in video games, like loot boxes

Yup. It's blaming smokers for second-hand smoke. We need to figure out the social-media equivalent of "no smoking" signs.

A circle-cross with the Twitter bird in the middle would do.

Pre covid there was a pub chain in london that banned use of electronic devices, presumably to get people talking instead of tweeting.

Went in with a colleague to have lunch and go over some diagrams. Got laptop out so we could see the diagrams and then got kicked out, had lunch down the road instead.

If I’m eating out on my own I’ll read a kindle. That’s not allowed. Read a dead tree is fine though. Pathetic.

Sooo... Use a notebook or printouts?

I think it’s a little bit more like blaming advertisers and Hollywood for promoting smoking, rather than the producer or consumer

More like blaming the tobacco farmers instead of Phillip Morris, although it falls apart at the point that I’m not sure tobacco was seen as anything more than a commodity.

Smoking hurts oneself primarily, whilst angry internet mobs hurt others

Reply on news.ycombinator.com