Comment by PragmaticPulp

> I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see.

I see it more akin to the opioid crisis. Just like drug manufactures shouldn't be pushing opioids as a way to deal with minor pain and depression because they know it hooks users. Maybe social media companies shouldn't be pushing hateful and outrageous content to hook their users.

You can sing about personal responsibility all you want. But these companies pay scientists millions of dollars a year to come up with ways to keep you hooked. The only way to win is not to play the game. Normal people are seriously outgunned here.

> the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see

To this list I'd add the concept of epistemic hygiene. Just as crowding together in metropolises re-wired our culture to value hygiene, these informational metropolises of social media will eventually cause us to greatly value epistemic hygiene. Seeing a rage-inducing headline would then evoke a kind of "ew..." response. At least, this is what I hope will happen. Maybe it will require a generational turnover.

It's less about screen-time or self-control and more about toxic, malicious software used for communication.

A lot of the calls-to-action used to generate "engagement" are the same calls to action used for legitimate communications, and the only way to tell is to "engage" with the product.

There's nothing wrong with people opening their social media app if they receive a real message from a friend. The problem is when the platform is incentivized to "manufacture" messages even when there aren't any.

>I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education

Not at all; its more like breaking up with a toxic, manipulative, dishonest partner. There's many more fish in the sea and there's many more ways to heathily socialize than just Facebook. Though I suppose people in abusive relationships often have a sort of Stockholm syndrome where they see no alternatives.

> We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see. We also need to encourage people to take control of their feeds, muting users and topics who draw them into unproductive discussions.

This is going to make a world of difference the first time people try it. I started monitoring screen time/configuring notifications about a year ago, and made me feel a lot better about the time I spent on my phone.

But, all of this assumes that social media should (and will) stay the same as it currently is with addictive never ending feeds and endless notifications.

At the end of last year I sat down thought of what social media could look like if it was designed to be used less, and in a way that would add value to people.

For me, that looked like intentional written reflections, shared with a small circle of close friends and family. To keep me from scrolling, there would be no feed. To keep me from checking my phone, content would rarely be surfaced.

This ended up becoming Sundayy, a mindful social network that you can only check once a week (on Sunday): https://www.sundayy.app

Each day you're prompted to slow down and reflect, but there is no feed of reflections. They're all kept secret, for now. At the end of the week, on Sunday, reflections are revealed. It's a more intimate insight into how people close to you lived their week - day by day and in their own words.

We should definitely bring more awareness to monitoring screen time and curating feeds, but we should also question whether we should have to do any of that at all :)

> The more we talk about overindulgence in social media (or Netflix, or video games, or fast food) as an act perpetrated by evil corporations on us helpless individuals, the less sense of individual agency we give ourselves.

If it's done well, it should have the opposite effect. Describing all the ways that companies are trying to get you addicted will help inoculate people against their tricks. In order to psychologically defend yourself, you first need to understand exactly what you're defending yourself against.

>We have to start reminding people that they are in control of their decisions, and that they can take steps to reduce their social media usage to healthy levels. I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see.

I couldn't agree more, and to add to that I think it's usually a foolish approach to treat people as hapless automatons without any agency if you're trying to convince them that your point is worth listening to. If you look at two of the worst political failures in the UK recently (the Remain campaign for the Brexit referendum in 2016 and Labour's election campaign in 2019), I think what they have in common is that they essentially told people "you're a downtrodden proletariat buffeted about by forces well outside your control, but we can make things better for you" which is such a foolish approach in my opinion. Regardless of whether they actually do or not, the average person likes to think they're in control of their own destiny so blaming everything on Facebook being manipulative bastards will never work if your aim is to change the public's relationship with social media.

This is all just personal anecdote. It might be wrong for you; maybe it doesn't apply to everyone, but it has worked for me...

The options seem to be: 1) Delete your social media account 2) Set up timers (OS-level, account-level, etc) 3) Filter you feed to only the people who matter

The first two options didn't work for me. I created a new account and deleted the timers. The first option left me feeling excluded. The second option just turned SM into a drip-feed, making me check whenever the timer was up. If they work for you, great!

The option that worked was to filter facebook and snapchat to only show people who personally mattered to me in the physical world. I only see things about people I come into contact with and care about. I know them well enough to know the whole story rather than just what they post at face value. Their posts can encourage conversations rather than make me feel bad about some cool thing I'll never do or know more about.

Social media is a tool which, used effectively, can benefit you. But used ineffectively it can harm you. I hope schools of the future or some people/institution teach effective social media use. Or hopefully we can enforce social media companies to follow some regulations regarding user wellbeing.

We’re just witnessing advertising’s race to the bottom. Eventually everything published is questioned because all forms of media are incentivized to push drivel for eyeballs.

The optimist in me see’s how ridiculous and blatant the drivel is becoming and suspects we’ll achieve some sort of collective enlightenment before we extinct ourselves. A smarter media then emerges (timing is everything here) eschewing advertising dollars in favour of a more consumer friendly model.

Then again, I’m probably being naive.

>We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see.

We are so outgunned it's almost ridiculous to try. The game is rigged.

Abstinence-only education fails for sex, because a) sex is a built-in human drive b) sex is beneficial in lots of ways, and c) there are lots of ways to have sex safely.

Abstinence as a strategy is not in and of itself flawed. The way lots of people cope with the dangers of heroin is simply by never trying it their whole life. Lots of addicts adopt a strategy of permanent abstinence, forever.

Some things are very harmful. I don't think we all need to try all to them, just to make sure.

> We have to start reminding people that they are in control of their decisions

Exactly. I not a big FB user, but last year I was on a lot more than normal b/c I was home. Then one day I realized I was just either arguing with family or reading things that left me disappointed, and wondered why am I subjecting myself to this? I didn't delete my account because I still use messenger to communicate to a few people, but I haven't been on FB proper for months.

> I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see.

Isn't this also denying people their individual agency, though? Using Facebook is not like sex is for teens, who are faced with the rather unavoidable biological realities of puberty. There are many ways to achieve the things people seek from Facebook, some technological and some not.

We don't need to start under the assumption that people will not be able to commit to having more healthy media consumption habits. These tools offered by Apple, Facebook and Google you mention are not things we should be encouraging. If these companies had the user's best interests at heart, their products would not need these kinds of sub-features in the first place. But when you study the gambling and nicotine industries to figure out how to better hook your users to your mobile apps, you didn't start out from the right place. So I would reckon the answer to that would be to abstain from the product entirely.

I think our built environment and lack of engaging community is the main reason we are disadvantaged against self control. We need trust and support of others, we need it daily, and we dont get enough of it to make significant progress against many addictions. A change in our built environment is a start to improving our connections to our local community, and subsequently continued accountability when facing addictive influences.

It's shockingly easy to delete Facebook. I haven't used it in years, and it almost never comes up. They have done a masterful job of making you feel like you cannot live without them through the careful application of dark patterns, but I assure you that not only do you not need it, but once gone, you also will not miss it.

Seriously, give it a try. Shockingly easy.

We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see

I have my home router configured to not allow any social media-capable devices to connect on Sundays.

After a few weeks, the FOMO cycle is broken and you realize that there's more to life than scrolling.

> I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!" but that's the equivalent of abstinence-only education. We need to start talking about how to configure Screen Time on iOS, or how to use Facebook's built-in tools to hide content you don't want to see. We also need to encourage people to take control of their feeds, muting users and topics who draw them into unproductive discussions.

Those tools are provided by exactly the same companies that were manufacturing the addiction in the first. The tools can be revoked or changed the second they show signs of actually being effective.

Sorry, but this is like asking your drug dealer to help you with becoming clean.

I'm not sure empowering users in this way would be all that effective. It would be like trying to empower people to avoid opioid addiction. It's hard to set and stick to limits on something that is designed to addict you.

| the less sense of individual agency we give ourselves

In aggregate, the population is at the mercy of material forces. Turning a social problem into an individual moral failing has never managed to solve anything at scale.

Apps and websites often don’t honor their own configuration choices. They use loose definitions to slide in advertisements or other unwanted information. They do not give you the granularity to decide what types of information you actually want. They also change them after you’ve taken the time to get it sort of working for you.

You’re not going to give people agency by having them press a button provided by someone else. The button doesn’t really do anything. “Cold turkey” is really the only solution to these mind games.

Perhaps a solution is that we separate the delivery of social media posts from the company that produces them. (Just like email can be received in a client that is not run by e.g. companies that send spam).

This means that we can teach our Social Media Inbox (abbreviated here SMI) that we don't like certain messages, and the SMI will remove them from the feed.

The trick here is that the SMI has its incentives aligned with the user, not the social media companies. So there is no incentive to make us addicted.

Humane tech has an informative page detailing how to “take control”: https://www.humanetech.com/take-control

Why though? I left facebook and lost nothing. It brought no value to my life and even if it did I'm certain the feed itself wouldn't.

> battling this problem is going to require more than simply shaming them in Medium posts. We have to start reminding people that they are in control of their decisions, and that they can take steps to reduce their social media usage to healthy levels.

Yes, but that's only going to have a small effect, at best. Just like you can't solve the obesity crisis by telling people to eat less.

Things are getting more addictive (http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html) because companies under technology and capitalism form weak superintelligencies that are capable of building things that are increasingly addictive. So asking people to use willpower to overcome that is going to increasingly fail.

I think the only thing that could succeed is government intervention.

> I know the common refrain is "Delete Facebook!"

If FB and other social media providers were required to federate using ActivityPub, then people would be able to delete FB and still have access to their friends and contacts on it.

> We also need to encourage people to take control of their feeds, muting users and topics who draw them into unproductive discussions.

With ActivityPub it would be a lot easier to build applications that allow them to control and curate their feeds for themselves. The user is back in control.

These companies are spending billions to destroy your self control, it’s a nuanced situation... but they’re using absurd amounts of power to undermine us. We don’t have the high ground. They are actively and knowingly manipulating people’s emotions.

I recognized that I am not equipped to fight them, so I left and will encourage others to really think about whether or not they can put up a fight. IMO most people don’t even know they’re being manipulated and that’s absurdly dangerous.

Wait till you see what they are doing to women.