• bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Isn’t social media just a distillation of the interactions innate in society? If exposure to social media is damaging that’s indicative of deeply flawed and damaging society.

    • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The key difference is its sorted by an algorithm designed to increase your engagement and view duration. And quite often the easiest way to do that is by generating negative emotional responses, etc

  • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    No but there should be “Malicious by Design” stickers for:

    • non-optional/on by default telemetry
    • non-optional/on by default advertising
    • vendor lock in
    • DRM (Digital “Rights Management”/Digital Restriction Malware)
    • Rootkits/root lockout
    • premanantly locked bootloaders

    Im aware this would pretty much require all commercial tech products to carry one of these labels. To that I say good. Large tech firms have been weaponizing the computer illiteracy of the average smartphone user so they can normalize corporate malware. It’s so bad they’ve even made up new names for types of malware to make it sound okay:

    • spyware became telemetry
    • adware became targeted advertisements
    • vendor lock-in became walled-gardens
    • bootloaders and root permissions were perminantly locked “for security”
    • Rootkits where pushed under the guise of DRM, or even Anti-Cheat. Including google pushing rootkits installed by default to the most popular OS on the planet (Android/Google Play)
      • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Regardless of how you feel about gun control, guns don’t actively work against the people who buy them.

        They can certainly be used or kept in dangerous ways that lead to tragedy, but they do exactly what you tell them. They even come with a manual full of warnings, and a big giant label that says something to the effect of “READ MANUAL BRFORE OPERATING.” Many of them even have it etched into the firearm itself.

        That is not the case with EULA washed legal malware.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So, let California be a lesson to you: excessive PSA warnings of things that cause health problems (e.g. Known to the state of California to cause cancer ) leads to the public generally ignoring the PSA warnings.

    Putting a warning on social media like the warning on tobacco products will weaken the efficacy – and veracity – of the labels already on tobacco products.

    • Rekorse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This won’t affect tobacco in anyway. The only reason its in the conversation is because of the term “Tobacco-style label”.

      Youll have to connect the dots better on how social media popup warnings would cause people to smoke more.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, the California example is about too many PSA warning labels. So many things are known by the State of California to cause cancer that no-one takes heed of the labels anymore. Similarly Nancy Reagan’s anti-drug campaign (and Tipper Gore’s parental advisory music labels) only encouraged kids to do more drugs and listen to angrier music.

        So it’s not that kids will smoke more (or much more) it’s that the labels will be more easily ignored when the government fails to be sparing in their use.

        In an non-government example, when everything is a sin, then nothing is a sin.

        • Rekorse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Different groups of people, and different sub groups within those, react to things in different ways, and I think most would argue that the group of people who responded in the opposite way rather than getting along were not a detriment to the whole movement.

          To your point specifically about California surgeon general warnings, quite a lot of people take them seriously, including myself. In most cases they aren’t off the mark by much if at all.