In a sense, companies are right now incentived to develop the most effective 'digital crack', because anything that hijacks the reward pathway of the brain more effectively leads to more profit. It'll be quite interesting to see how the public discourse around this will progress, since digital entertainment isn't as easy to publicly mark as 'bad' as drugs were.
On the other hand, China is sending quite clear signals that it's theoretically possible to legislate against e.g. video games -- though only after you've already established an intrusive 'social credit' system, which I hope we won't see in the west any time soon.
And I would like to have a word with them. They've been given free reign to turn our kids into absolute digital junkies (this is coming from a self-diagnosed sometimes-addict who realizes these kids are on another level), deliberately dangling carrots that reward 24/7 engagement in the activity.
> digital entertainment isn't as easy to publicly mark as 'bad' as drugs were
Definitely true. We need a way to differentiate between Super Mario Brothers and Mega Crack Force Gacha Legends Online.
It's decades of development in 'addictiveness tuning' unleashed upon the brain as a stationary target... I really feel sorry for the kids that never knew anything else.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagueness_doctrine?wprov=sfla1
Of course there should be.
But then you would also need to ban casinos, sports gambling, gaming, porn, cigarettes, alcohol and the myriad of other things that are addictive in nature.