• TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Disable YT history. Make YT Subscriptions page your home page. Now all you see are the most recent videos from your subscribed channels. You can keep up with them without being distracted by garbage suggestions. It’s a much better experience.

  • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    That lawsuit documents the case of a 19-year-old, K.G.M, who hopes the jury will agree that Meta and YouTube caused psychological harm by designing features like infinite scroll and autoplay to push her down a path that she alleged triggered depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicidality.

    What the hell is everyone watching? YT recommends me Red Letter Media, Veratasium, old movies, Blender tutorials and a bunch of other stuff that’s never going to drive me to self-harm. I don’t understand. May be this woman doesn’t have ad blocker installed and is forced to sit through a bunch of soul crushing PSAs? Why is my experience so drastically different from this?

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Algorithms try to push body negativity if it thinks you’re a teen girl because they tend to scroll more and buy more when depressed.

      If it thinks you’re a single man then it tries to push manosphere stuff.

      On YouTube I find I my relevant suggestions last about a month before I have to mark a bunch of videos as not interested or block a bunch of channels.

    • thax@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Sounds like you consume useful information. I wager she uses socials as many: to compare herself to others, perusing a mix of ego-affirming and ego-damning content. These are powerful emotional hooks and oscillating between those states can be confounding. Add a dash of fatalism, which is not hard to come by in this culture, when at a low, and I think it easy to see how one might capitulate.

      There are a lot of people out there that think their personality traits are inherent and that their physical attributes are static. In fact, my brother was one of these people, to an extent. He passed away at 40 years old due to morbid obesity. I attribute his downfall to capitulation by way of comparison. He came to think the hole was too big and that his genetics were too poor to make changes, despite me providing an example to the contrary. Sadly, my parents fanned the flames of his dissonance with their own identity-bound delusions.

      So, my guess is that you have developed a healthy personal philosophy and have not surrounded yourself with the type of people or digital content that renders that philosophy dissonant.

  • jaybone@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Zuck has kissed the ring. He will be fine. You can all stop worrying about him now. Barbecue sauce.

    • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      That’s just a news bite. He or yuckbook has never ever really been in trouble. It’s vital tool for global surveillance.

      Remember Cambridge analytica?rohingya genocide? and other countless controversies?

  • TheFederatedPipe@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    11 hours ago

    It really is! I was off for about three months, and I decided to go back to it just to be up-to-date with some friends and creators, right? Well, I was doom-scrolling for hours in about just a week of usage. Whenever that happens, I uninstall the app causing it, so I just deleted it again. The craziest part? After a couple of hours, I could feel the craving to open the app. Crazy shit.

  • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Fuck Facebook and also this is clearly morphing into a moral panic about social media in a way that is extremely unproductive, dangerous and ultimately a distraction from the actual issues at hand.

    • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Billionaires are running the most popular social media sites and utilizing the algorithm to attempt to influence their addicted userbase on a large scale, and succeeded on many demographics and even win elections.

      I don’t think it is a stretch to call it a moral panic, because its not an unbiased and transparent system that is dictating what is seen and spread. It is a huge black box propganda tool.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Except the propaganda mostly isn’t what the “social media addiction” folks are worrying about.

        • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Even people who don’t care about usage of propaganda are affected, since these social media addicted folks have brought up how they are getting more unrelated propaganda content exposed to them even if all they want to see is cats and food recipes as an example.

    • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Not sure if you’re trying to argue that modern social media is a good thing… Because it really isn’t. All of these platforms are actively detrimental to our mental health and destabilizing society. All of them have their billionaire owners manipulating the algorithms to maximize what they want you to see and minimize opposing views, if not outright removing them (like Meta is doing with the ICE List currently).

      • IronBird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        news networks have been doing this same pretty much since they’ve existed

        • RipLemmDotEE@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          9 hours ago

          No, news networks are not algorithmically curating content specifically for each individual person, based on personal traits that they record based on usage.

        • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Humans have been killing each other as long as we’ve existed isn’t an argument to avoid trying to make it happen less

          • IronBird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 hours ago

            just saying billionaires manipulating shit has been the norm for ages, which is why we used to have media-ownership limits…repealed under Clinton iirc

            • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              53 seconds ago

              Yeah, by memory Rupert Murdoch had his hand at that and in Aus and the UK. I’d love to see that reined in again too

            • pipi1234@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              Agreed, but now they have tools that enable them to do it with unprecedented impact.

              In my opinion, the difference is so huge, we might as well think they didn’t manipulate things at all before.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Massive corporate social media companies and rightwing billionaires are the problem, not social media.

        Not sure if you’re trying to argue that modern social media is a good thing… Because it really isn’t.

        What are you doing here then?

        • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Lemmy might fit within the technical definition of social media, but don’t be so obtuse as to equate an anonymous community message board with the likes of Facebook and IG that are tied to your identity, and are designed algorithmically to keep you engaged as long as possible while pressuring you to share more and more of your personal life.

          The “If social media bad, why on Lemmy?” Thing is the epitome of halfwit false equivalency.

          • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Lemmy might fit within the technical definition of social media, but don’t be so obtuse as to equate an anonymous community message board with the likes of Facebook and IG that are tied to your identity, and are designed algorithmically to keep you engaged as long as possible while pressuring you to share more and more of your personal life.

            then use your brain and analyze this deeper than social media = bad

            • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              21
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              Nobody is interested in seriously engaging with your sophomoric “you criticize society yet you participate in it” nonsense. We get it, you’re 14 and think you’re deep.

    • Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      13 hours ago

      nah… mark is clearly an international drug dealer and needs to have all his property seized, and then destroyed while he rots in prison.

  • Maeve@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    13 hours ago

    pondered letting “tweens” access a private mode inspired by the popularity of fake Instagram accounts teens know as “finstas.” That document included an “internal discussion on how to counter the narrative that Facebook is bad for youth and admission that internal data shows that Facebook use is correlated with lower well-being (although it says the effect reverses longitudinally).” Other allegedly damning documents showed Meta seemingly bragging that “teens can’t switch off from Instagram even if they want to” and an employee declaring, “oh my gosh yall IG is a drug,” likening all social media platforms to “pushers.” Similarly, a 2020 Google document detailed the company’s plan to keep kids engaged “for life,” despite internal research showing young YouTube users were more likely to “disproportionately” suffer from “habitual heavy use, late night use, and unintentional use” deteriorating their “digital well-being.” Shorts, YouTube’s feature that rivals TikTok, also is a concern for parents suing, and three years later, documents showed Google choosing to target teens with Shorts, despite research flagging that the “two biggest challenges for teen wellbeing on YouTube” were prominently linked to watching shorts. Those challenges included Shorts bombarding teens with “low quality content recommendations that can convey & normalize unhealthy beliefs or behaviors” and teens reporting that “prolonged unintentional use” was “displacing valuable activities like time with friends or sleep.”