Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

45% Positive

Analyzed from 1181 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#infinite#scroll#addictive#media#social#should#content#age#bad#design

Discussion (45 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ticulatedspline•about 4 hours ago
Curious as to where the line between “addictive feature” and "good UX" is. Is deliberate pagination actual impedance to use or merely an annoyance that's been weeded out with modern UX design?

When does a feature that simply makes your product easier to use cross into a territory that it's illegal?

What about media previews, in a platform like reddit if you can preview or expand media directly from the main list is that an “addictive feature” or just convenient design?

also interested in the larger economy, if you create a plugin that restores or adds infinite scroll to a website could you be liable for providing illegal UX?

EDIT: to clarify I'm not really griping on infinite scroll in particular, more the difficulty in regulating postitive UI/UX. Dark patterns are relatively easy to identify. If the unsubscribe button is hidden behind 3 screens and is in 3 point font that's pretty clearly a dark pattern. This seeks to regulate the opposite basically "your platform is, too easy, too good at serving your content"

This is much harder to categorize and has fuzzier boundaries. For example imagine if it applied to remembering your login for more than 24 hours. Certainly people would use your service less if they had to continuously authenticate. Are long-lived sessions good UX or encouraging "addictive" behavior?

Greenpants•about 2 hours ago
The way I see it, it's the incessant stimuli you get through these apps. There's just no point where the screen stays quiet, stimulus free. Moving elements capture our attention naturally, especially when the entire screen keeps moving. The endless scroll element just makes sure that the stimulus keeps getting renewed the moment you're done with it.

Instead, a scroll should give you a break before heading into the next video. I'm willing to bet this would help severely with addiction. People are then forced to reconsider whether they actually want to play the next video. "Done" should not always lead to "here's the next stimulus". That's what's addictive. The brain isn't made to break out of that loop easily.

afandian•about 3 hours ago
Infinite scroll evolved alongside algorithms that incentivise addictive content. So it’s “good” UX in that it’s effective for consuming addictive content…

When I’m trying to do something constructive, like search or browse, infinite scroll is IMHO disastrously bad. You can’t keep your place in the list, or jump ahead/back.

esafak•7 minutes ago
So you'd rather something like Slack was paginated? I think that would be disastrously bad.
xigoi•about 3 hours ago
On the contrary, pagination makes it impossible to keep your place in the list if it changes between page loads.
afandian•about 2 hours ago
The challenge is to retain an ordering over the result set. How would infinite scroll behave any differently in this case? The changing results seems to be an orthogonal concern to pagination/infinite scroll.
cwillu•about 2 hours ago
‹looks at hn›
im3w1l•about 2 hours ago
Why is the list constantly changing anyway?
RajT88•about 3 hours ago
Infinite scroll is not necessarily a problem in and of itself. If the content is static, no biggie. At some point diminishing returns and you will want to use search for it.

It is the algorithm they attach to infinite scroll which is problematic. It is not a UI design problem.

ls612•about 3 hours ago
A lot of this is states trying to figure out a way around the first amendment to regulate social media that the courts will wink and accept. That is why you see so many convoluted laws being drawn up by state legislatures about this.
hexage1814•about 2 hours ago
The problem with infinity scroll is the lack of "pagination", which essentialy make most of content to get hidden away. For instance. Let assume you have 3000 comments on a YouTube video, your browser will crash way before it "infinite scroll" to the end (I know that that are tools to bypass this, but I'm talking about the default experience).
senorcrab•about 4 hours ago
It should just be universally required to give an option to disable addictive features. Should prevent age verification, and giving users optionality is always a good thing (for them).
mdp2021•about 3 hours ago
> Should prevent age verification

It won't, become some parties are proposing a narrative of "shielding the innocent from harmful content" (such as themselves).

keir starmer seems to suppose nudity would be indecent, against an implicitly stated decent itself and british politics.

senorcrab•about 2 hours ago
Yeah I meant it would avoid the necessity of age verification to solve this problem.

Age verification and how enthusiastic gov'ts are about it is concerning.

ulrikrasmussen•about 3 hours ago
Instead of trying to whack a mole on all addictive mechanisms, just ban the business model driving all of them: targeted advertising.
zbentley•29 minutes ago
I’m not sure that suffices. If a site has a very “good” (at keeping people glued to the screen) content ranking algorithm, they can still make money, albeit less, serving non-targeted ads. Longer engagement time by viewers = more ad impressions, targeted or not.
Calvin02•about 2 hours ago
I (personally) think this is the wrong kind of solution.

I think a better solution would to mandate that platforms offer a ranked feed and a chronological feed and make the setting sticky for users.

I think giving users the agency over how much they consume is good but mandating a “UX” pattern feels too specific.

pillmillipedes•about 3 hours ago
note that this is going after "psychologically exploitative features intended to maximize engagement" of all kinds, not just infinite feeds. it also poses an ultimatum banning people under 16 from websites that provide such addictive features to anyone.

personally I am against internet identification, and I think teenagers should be allowed on social media, so I have to ask: why only children? if these features are so bad, ban them outright.

puppycodes•about 3 hours ago
There is no way to enforce any of these types of laws without an iron curtain that clearly violates the first amendment. If you have free speech infront of children in public I don't see how having infinite scroll on your website or app is any different. Parents should parent their children instead of the state. Its crazy how avoident California is of solving actually important problems like homelessness, mental health resources, housing crisis, yet infinite scrolling somehow is a priority.
elictronic•1 minute ago
Pretty sure most parents care about their kids more than nearly any other issue you mention. Social media excess has pushed to far and become less well liked than lawyers at this point. Thats only going to end one way.
sdh•about 3 hours ago
Whack-a-mole lawmaking solves nothing. All this law does is ask social media companies to find another way for their platform to be addictive to children.

Here's how to solve this ...

Social media companies measure engagement. Decide what the safe metric is, pass laws that hold social media companies to that metric for whatever age or demographic. Apply fines proportional to revenue when they are found to exceed the metric. Fines can't be reasonable to the cost of doing business.

That stops any social media company from incentivizing employees to increase engagement for that demographic.

Jzush•about 2 hours ago
Old people who think that the "scrolling" part of Doom Scrolling is literal. Ugh, I'm sorry for California.
steve1977•about 4 hours ago
Headline makes it sound like that's a bad thing.
IAmBroom•about 4 hours ago
Removing choice is generally a bad thing, IMO.
dijksterhuis•about 4 hours ago
it doesn't remove any choice for users. users don't get a choice on the offending sites currently. they only get infinite scroll. so the eventual infinite scroll replacement will be just that, the replacement.

on removing possible UI design choices for social media companies -- i have a very small violin on hand.

mdp2021•about 3 hours ago
> they only get infinite scroll

(Actually, sometimes the "paged" interface in "infinite scrolling" systems is available, only hidden. There for the benefit of people like us, those who would find it and exploit it.)

kasperni•about 3 hours ago
We also removed choices to drive without a seat belt or sell lead paint. Was that a bad thing?
steve1977•about 2 hours ago
Laws are pretty much always about removing choice.
ratelimitsteve•about 4 hours ago
it's based on age and I think that the age verification it would require is pretty universally reviled, at least here on HN
narrowtux•about 4 hours ago
I want it to be forbidden for anybody. They have stolen our attention for years
imglorp•about 4 hours ago
Is infinite scroll really the problem or is it really the whole malicious toolbox and intention of "maximizing engagement"?
Cider9986•about 4 hours ago
I agree, I don't think an "infinite refresh" like if YouTube had a limited homepage and changed on each refresh, would be much better. But infinite scroll is likely the most addictive.
Advertisement
archonis•about 4 hours ago
Regulate the business model, not the interface.
ChrisArchitect•about 2 hours ago
Related:

EU Commission: addictive design Instagram and Facebook in breach of the DSA

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48858292)

> The investigation focuses on features such as infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and the platforms' highly personalised recommender systems.

butlike•about 3 hours ago
The law should force social media to be subscription-only.
dmvjs•about 3 hours ago
this is a ridiculous proposal
kiaansaraiya•about 3 hours ago
I honestly think that this may have some benefit as the infinite scroll has made our attention spans incredibly short. Although, I'm sure people will find there way around it.
sys_64738•about 3 hours ago
What does this mean for a large Word document? Will people using OpenOffice.org get arrested for loading a novel?
OptionOfT•about 3 hours ago
That's not infinite. There is an end to the novel.