Have you recently caught yourself scrolling through Instagram (or maybe LinkedIn because it feels productive) as soon as you were bored for a few seconds?
I know it from personal experience. Even when I'm not using apps, sometimes it seems like I'm scrolling in my own life. Attempting to "scroll" or change the situation when I don't like the "content" that my real life is presenting. I can see, in real time, that my own brain has changed.
Meta recently settled over claims that its algorithm is designed to be addictive - for over $17B. I'm not surprised at all.
What's surprising is that Meta's stock price actually rose even after they had to pay $17B. Because from Wall Street's perspective, this is the cost of running the business. For a company that made $200B last year, the cost could have been much more.
The downstream societal consequences of the company's product are regrettable, but ultimately irrelevant. ADHD diagnoses have almost doubled in adults and risen nearly 20% in children over the past two decades. I can draw a clear line from use of social media apps to attention issues. If you've also found yourself scrolling frequently, you intuitively know this to be true. Ironically - the app that was supposed to make us more connected and happier has instead made us more anxious and lonely.
Everyone is talking about how this is really bad for teens. It is- but let's not pretend it's not also bad for us as adults. The only reason the lawsuit was based on teens is because you can't legally assume they're acting in their own best interest. You can legally get away with selling cigarettes to adults, assuming consent but not to teens.
Everyone assumes this is a product problem: Fix the algorithm, Add screen-time limits...
But the real problem is that we should not be expecting any company to solve for what is best for us. Optimizing for human wellbeing runs into a natural conflict with the goal of any platform with an algorithmic feed. The company has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize for profit through attention. They are not required to optimize for wellbeing - only where legally required. If the product damages wellbeing? That is not a metric the system cares about.
From this emerges a paradox: The company can claim we are responsible adults who will regulate our own use, while at the same time making it harder for us to do so. The question is - are we really responsible adults?
The same processes that are making these platforms successful — that they're so addictive, that they're using our human nature to their own benefit — are what's simultaneously destroying our attention spans, our mental health, and making us more susceptible to propaganda.
This is also the fear people have about AI. It’s not that we doubt the potential of the technology. It could be remarkable. But people doubt the incentives of those who have an outsized influence on the direction of the technology. Because again and again, what they’ve consistently shown us through their actions is that the only thing they are optimizing for is monetary value and profit.
And when that system conflicts with what’s best for humanity, the system disregards morality every time.