Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
ayan 🧬
@gmo
If your device, platform or digital experience is “so good” that it is addictive, dysregulates your dopamine reward system and makes you essentially dependent on it… that should be considered bad design We talk a lot about bad design and UX and I think we often overlook the category of design that is “so good”, it is actually bad.
4 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
Thomas
@aviationdoctor.eth
That's a great point. We ban addictive substances but hand out addictive gadgets to kids like candy. Humans in 2-3 generations won't look back kindly on us 1000 $DEGEN
3 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
Apt
@aptlab
Relevant news: The U.S. surgeon general has called on Congress to require warning labels on social media platforms similar to those now mandatory on cigarette boxes. Do you think this is an appropriate response?
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Thomas
@aviationdoctor.eth
It's a great question. If the science shows that this has a cooling effect on social media abuse, then why not. I generally prefer informing people, raising awareness of the risks involved and letting them come to their own conclusions, over outright banning or regulating. What's your view?
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Apt
@aptlab
Interesting! I generally agree, though I had felt like measurable harm should be enough to inform vs a proven solution to that changes behavior. I appreciate that nuance. 100% agree on awareness over outright bans. Either way lots of pressure on quality data and how harm is defined and quantified. I’ll have to think on whether the gov’s role is purely to inform or to actually change behavior 🤔
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
