The dark side of social media on youth mental health
psypost.org
psypost.org
Aren't they bound to the Hippocratic oath?
That's largely because "do no harm" is a really fuzzy concept in a field where treatments like chemotherapy that put patients through absolute hell without any guarantee of remission or even comfort.
Other licensed professionals like professional engineers and lawyers have ethical codes with quite a bit more legal heft.
Does not seem to be legally binding, so it’s just nice sounding mumbo jumbo as far as I am concerned.
They should make SWEs take it regardless…
Edit: quick search gave the same results for lawyers
I mean, it might not be legally binding, but violating it will get you disbarred afaik. And if you are disbarred, you cannot legally practice law, so it is kinda legally binding, just not directly.
See National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States 435 US 679 [1]
> Contrary to popular belief, the Hippocratic Oath is not required by most modern medical schools, although some have adopted modern versions[1] that suit many in the profession in the 21st century.
I mean sure I use this website, so I suppose that counts to some degree, but not very many hours per week and I use it to keep up on tech news and post occasional comments.
Asking what's appealing about social media is like asking what's appealing about telephones. Social media has taken the place of a primary communication appliance for many people. It's useful, despite its many downsides. I suspect most people don't have a deeply pathological relationship with it, either.
I managed to stay on Mastodon by using bird.makeup to follow people who aren't in the Fediverse. Hopefully when BlueSky opens up someone will build a bridge between it and AP so we can follow them as well!
Telephone is a communication device, these other services have communication options, but it doesn’t seem to be the main feature.
I don’t have any interest in subscribing to someone’s status updates. And I also have no interest in sending status updates out into the internet.
I only have an interest in direct messaging which is how I view a telephone.
I think HN is decent but it also is a tech echo chamber.
This is a comparison I see a lot, but I really disagree with it. The structure of this kind of website is very very different from modern social media. I will say, though, that I don't have it anymore so I'm going off of how it was in 2018. I'd imagine that the constant feedback mechanisms have gotten worse, and continue to play off of people's anxiety and sense of self in the worst possible ways.
Oh for the love of - no. They do not. As a PhD in psychology I am completely unhireable at these places except maybe as a data scientist because I can do basic statistics. This is completely baseless conspiracy thinking. The people doing the UI and UX work at these companies maybe took a couple courses in basic intro psych and marketing.
Having constant exposure to social media versus occasional, sporadic/segmented access will greatly influence how body image will be perceived and affected.
I agree that the problem is in how it's used, but you could say the same thing about heroin, predatory loans or casinos. It's not reasonable to put all the weight on personal responsibility when screwing with the process of thought is one of the most lucrative enterprises in the whole planet to begin with.
I think the biggest difference is with TV, while a teenager would still be exposed to other teenagers with a body image that could make them feel bad about their own, it would still be within the context of fiction and at lest some kids could write it off as “those are stars” or “that’s fake”. In social medial, the new stars are influencers who otherwise seem like normal people so I feel the pressure to try and look like someone else is higher.
As those became more addictive, they are an actual issue for actual real people.
The government doesn’t have legislation on this and the Surgeon general warning is just advice at the moment - unless there’s a concerted effort like the Tobacco campaigns, this probably won’t get better.
Could we perhaps say "in all groups", which is easier as "everyone". Or list groups that are not included.
"These trends have been documented to apply to everyone, except people who drink 4 cups of coffee when they get up in the morning"
If not, we do know how to this applies to neurodivergent people, they are not mentioned. We dont know who it applies to people with different religions. We dont know how it applies to physically disabled people.
In short, you cannot reasonably account for every group individually.
If all groups haven't been studied, it's not accurate to say "it's been documented in all groups".
(granted I still use HN almost daily, but I would argue that’s the least harmful version of social media out there today)
I'm happier, I talk to my friends and family more, I send them pictures via DM or email (and they end up being the ones that actually matter) etc etc. I could go on but I don't think I need to.
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
Also, the author has an anti-fitness bias.
Because its improper usage is devastating and harmful.
I'm not sure we need "social media" for this, unless we consider old php forums "social media" though.
It’s a funny blind spot; the tech community is often concentrated oddball, after all.
I felt very sympathetic to this point in the past. Now I'm wondering if this might actually be a bug, and not a feature.
I don't think anyone needed to. My personal theory is that this kind of paraphilia is an indirect consequence of the kind of media saturated environment we live in. I don't think that being a 'furry' is an expression of some intrinsic personal quality. It's a disorder of the modern world.
I’m not sure if it’s healthy to reinforce each and every behavior in the name of “equality”. Maybe it would be better if some things don’t have a community?
But the harm in this case would probably be reinforcing infantile behavior and escapism.
The sibling comment refers to "escapism" (as though this is always a bad thing, we should chuck out fantasy and most music too) and "infantile behavior" (citation needed, even if this is a thing we should not tolerate).
It's similar to gaming. You could say solo gaming reinforces escapism far more than meeting of like minded people in a furry community. But that doesn't mean gaming is bad - it's only bad to the degree that this escapism causes problems in the gamer's life.
Because advertising a fetish in public is considered unacceptable by most people?
Shouldn't that be obvious to them? If they go around in public consciously trying to make other people uncomfortable, do you seriously expect them to not get angry about that?
Funny thing is, you're validating the ones you are calling self-ostracising by spreading misinformation and claiming harm done by their identity. Your comment and how upvoted it is are exactly the reasons why these communities seek safe platforms.
If it’s content (media) shared as a form of socialization, it’s social media.