Hacker News Reader

Comment by readams | Hacker News Reader

So then do you punish the chefs for making their food too appealing?

If the monopolist chef is deliberately adding addictive ingredients that causes health problems, I think, yes, they're the ones to punish or address the problem with.

Facebook does not have a monopoly on social media. (He says, writing on a competing social media site.)

> addictive ingredients that causes health problems

Like sugar? Are we going to make candy illegal now? Through the court system, retroactively, with no legislative mandate?

We may requires, high sugar food to be labeled like cigarettes, maximum portion size available (largest drink can be 500ml), put more tax on it, advertise against it, ban in schools, ban advertisements in children program/movies.

The law takes intent into consideration, candy makers are not intending to make someone addicted to their product. This lawsuit is showing the intent behind certain user experience features was to addict users, not just make it a sweet and nice place to be.

You think candy companies aren't doing everything they can to get repeat customers?

There's no law saying social media has to be a "sweet and nice place to be", and that was never the goal. They want to make it an interesting place to be so you keep coming back, and there's no law against that. Trying to create one ex post facto via the court system is a really dumb idea.

Yes

Reply on news.ycombinator.com