upvote
> Heroin is addictive, nicotine is addictive. Light and sound are fundamentally different.

Gambling is also an addiction with a non-chemical basis

reply
IIRC, the lovely book Addiction By Design: Machine Gambling in Las Vegas claims that gambling addiction was a concept pushed by the casinos, to put the blame onto individuals, rather than the machine.
reply
deleted
reply
Biological addiction is different from psychological addiction, sure. But both are addictive. And personally I believe both cigarettes and Meta products are damaging to a subset of the people consuming them.

Why only a subset? Because not everyone gets cancer from cigarettes. But, like social media, the probability of a negative outcome is too high to ignore.

reply
the underlying cause of addiction is very different. But if there is enough evidence that they're similarly damaging (in magnitude), I think that fundamental difference is irrelevant.
reply
The big tobacco lawsuits hinges on the same things these will:

(1) Did they know they were hurting users? (2) Can the harm be shown.

The big tobacco companies intentionally suppressed studies that showed harm, and promoted their product while knowing that. Facebook appears to have done the same.

reply
Not when they condition children and allow access to them by predators. Reports of bad content, fake, and scam behavior go deliberately rejected and Meta profits from scammers doing their scamming among children. (Read up on Officer Gomez reports of grooming all over Instagram and Facebook and TikTok)
reply
so you draw the line at smell-o-vision?
reply
I draw the line at physical compulsion, but everyone is different.
reply
So what are your thoughts on tavern slot machines where legal? No chemicals but plenty of people who will openly tell you they wish they weren’t doing thus while they cash out a 90% loss and buy another beer to head back in for another round of punishment
reply
deleted
reply
[dead]
reply
Is the argument here that social media wasn't designed to be addictive? And no, cigarettes were not designed to cause cancer. It makes no sense to design a product that kills the customer.
reply
Unless you make beautiful tombstones to die for.
reply
Fundamentally different yet with practical outcomes that are close enough. Wildly impressive what we as a species achieved.

The headline talks about parallels. A closer example is gambling if you are concerned with physical properties of a system. Light and sound.

reply
No one is breaking into cars to pay for Facebook, but they absolutely are with regards to heroin.
reply
People are breaking into cars because of social media trends. Remember Kia Challenge? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kia_Challenge
reply
If heroin was free, nobody would be breaking into cars but there'd still be a problem.

I think we're missing the point debating addictiveness. meta very deliberately use patterns that result in compulsive usage - and at the scale they operate - cause a substantial amount of societal damage as a result.

reply
Facebook is legal, like alcohol. People drive drunk and kill people. People drive while using facebook and kill people as well.
reply
They're also not doing that to pay for tobacco. Come on. Heroin is justifiably illegal for good reason already; you're stretching the analogy past breaking point.
reply
> fundamentally different

fundamentally different how? Because they use your visual cortex to trigger neurons?

reply
Physical compulsion is a pretty big difference.
reply
> Physical compulsion is a pretty big difference.

Have you experienced addiction before? Nicotine withdrawal doesn't make your hand move on it's own, it makes you crave a cigarette, and then you pick up a cigarette and smoke it to make the craving go away.

If you crave scrolling instagram, even when you want to be doing anything else, isn't that the same thing? Maybe you can't point at a specific molecular basis - yet (if you were to look at dopamine and other neurotransmitters, I wouldn't be surprised if social media spikes them in a way similar to other vices) - but the outcome is the same.

reply
Right. There's now chemical, biological and digital addictions to account for. GLP-1s seem to help with some of the needy hunger for, not just food, but the dopamine rush of gambling. Science is still waiting on studies to prove this is true, but anecdotally, it's a thing. So there's my hope for the future, that we can science our way out of some of the problems we've created.
reply
All comes down to neurotransmitters in the end.
reply
> designed

What?

reply
"By the early 1960s, however, Philip Morris scientists had discovered that ammonia could also be used to increase the free nicotine in cigarette smoke, providing a more powerful nicotine kick than the milder low-pH tobaccos traditionally used in American-blend cigarettes."

They referred to it as 'crack nicotine' internally. It was an entire, giant scandal. They made a movie about it.

This product that kills the users of it with remarkably high rates and has effectively no positive use is fundamentally different from light and sound.

reply
deleted
reply
While that is terrible, it's still nowhere near proving your original assertion.
reply