upvote
> ban any kind of political bias.

This sentence has no meaning in a modern context. The US government has declared bike lanes to be "DEI". Everything is political.

"Choice" doesn't work. Everyone is under information and attention span overload. There isn't time to research what goes into the food you eat much less everything else going on in your life.

reply
Addiction is exactly what laws should be fighting, be it social media, drugs, or something else. In a free market, people should be free to choose where they spend their time and money, but people aren't free if they're addicted. Addiction causes them to spend their time and money on things which they wouldn't consent to, if it weren't for addiction. For Instagram, the harm is the lost time, and whatever else they could have done with that time. Addictive stuff disrupts the whole market / society, not just the individual.
reply
One thing that's potentially different, at least for Facebook, is the network effect. It only takes a few friends to start using Facebook for event planning for people to start missing events or worrying about missing out. That extra pressure cuts against individual choice.

Instagram is different, but you can see something similar happen on platforms with a chat feature. If people start to gravitate towards a singular app for talking, coordinating, etc. then there's the potential for resisters to be socially excluded. For most people, feeling socially excluded is a strong motivator. So far, this has mostly resulted in everyone having a fairly broad set of apps with chat features, so I'm not sure the centralizing power is as strong.

reply
The overwhelming majority of local businesses around me don't have websites, just a FB page. If you want to look at upcoming events, specials, restaurant menus, etc. you either have to hope FB doesn't throw up the "you need an acct to see this page" blocker, or sign up.
reply
Hey nice to hear somebody taking about social feature of a social network when so much of this is about profiling people through infinite scrolling content from strangers.

It'd be hilarious to see the EU demand interop on features like Events, Groups, Marketplace.

reply
Open sourcing the algorithm and showing the weights used to generate the feed each time would be great.
reply
The choice already exist: don't use social media like Instagram and TikTok. Yet everyone keep choosing it despite being addictive.

So you can't really trust people, even less teenagers, to make a disciplined choice of not using an addictive algorithm.

reply
> Yet everyone keep choosing it despite being addictive.

Let me fix that for you. Everyone keeps choosing it because it is addictive.

reply
Because the network effect prevents them from using alternatives. Bluesky is a desert in the global south
reply
The choice already exists: migrate to bluesky, pinksky, mastodon, pixelfed. Create repost bots to start the network effect with content from Instagram. Clearly label the repost bots and choose accounts that aren't reposted yet.
reply
Don't you get it? No one is on those sites because they are not addictive. It is like trying top tell an alcoholic to just drink mocktails.
reply
I agree with you, for a an adult, the choice should be given and not enforced, it's same with smoking or alcohol consumptions. Both are terrible for your health on the long term, but the side effects are clear and open and people can make an educated decision.
reply
> more addictive than hard drugs people should have the option

This seems like a hot take given the (justifiably) illegality of stuff like fentanyl.

reply
> choice between addictive and "ethical" algorithms

A few years ago I would have agreed with this sentiment however after watching many adults (and children) fall into addictive AI slop alternate reality hell holes, I just want it to stop. Likewise, I prefer not to live in a society that enables drug addicts to walk the streets and used needles to litter the pavements every 10cm like empty Coke bottles.

We regulate things we know will be abused, and we are often the better for it. Social media is no different.

reply
> i just dont think addiction by itself is something we should be fighting.

People who say this do not understand how powerful biology is. Nor do they understand that they are putting people with certain genetics more at risk.

"Choice" to people genetically prone to addiction is a trap. So unless you want to figure out the polygenetics of addiction and then have everyone tested for their genetics so they know there risk I will say I strongly disagree with your viewpoint, because there is no informed risk and you are promoting suffering with our beliefs.

reply
> strictly ban any kind of political bias.

Any attempt to ban political bias will reveal huge political bias.

Now I don’t mean all political biases are equal, or that all biases are absolutely wrong. Of course my biases are better™. But this days it looks like even stating that genocides are bad™ is not as consensual as it used to be in Europe over the last few decades, so what do I know.

reply