Those findings are crazy. I’ve never been social media addicted, been into luxury or general show-off brands (I pay extra to not look like I’m an advertisement… for anything but metal bands), so I don’t really know much about those issues.
Those findings are crazy. I’ve never been social media addicted, been into luxury or general show-off brands (I pay extra to not look like I’m an advertisement… for anything but metal bands), so I don’t really know much about those issues.
I don’t play a lot of multiplayers games either but thats not the only point.
if you play a mp game regularly, you make friends and build up community. If the product changes for the worse, you‘re pitting your financial self interest against you community. Btw. that is how relationships work for a lot of neurodivergent people. IRL we face significant challenges which used to be no problem until companies started enshittifying.
Aside from multiplayer, if you have offline friends, games are like brands or social media tools. You need to play the games (at least some) your peers play so that you can bond with them. Otherwise you become irrelevant. If they play fames with harmful gambling mechanics (lootboxes for example) you are introduced to and kept in that ecosphere.
Now we need to address that vote with your wallet only works if you’re sufficiently able (mentally, educationally) to swim against the tide and you can see how this is like telling people in wheelchairs to just get up a couple stairs already. (Since a lot of us actually don’t have the selfimage to maintain behavior like this)
deleted by creator
Why is that important? It is a significant amount of people. Add up children (who are prone to be peer pressured), the neurodivergent (who are in need of alternative ways to socialize) and those who are not strong of will.
Additionally, it does not have to be a strong tide. Like with dark patterns, it just needs to make it „sufficiently hard“ to switch the vendor and you constitute a lock in (which we are discussing rn).
Edit: imagine we would ask this question when assessing a wheelchair ramp at a mall? It is not important if it’s the majority but if people suffer under this when it is (easily) preventable.
deleted by creator
You were faster to answer than my edit.
I can only asssume why the technique hasn’t worked for a long time. But taking the example from social media where it would be voting with your feet (leaving), the product markets for games are defined. And in these markets, I recon the majority is vulnerable, so yes. It is most likely the majority.
deleted by creator
I don’t understand this. Telling someone to vote with their wallet is not helping. The equivalent would be that a victim was „told“ to defend themselves. I am saying we shouldn’t put the responsibility on the victim but the aggressor.
That I can agree to. Taking action is hard. But I would say that it is easy to broadly judge „most people“ while this very article says that in the case of social media, the boomers‘ blame for example seems to be ill aligned. Not the people are to blame but the mechanics.
deleted by creator
Yes, that is correct. People „should“. As they „should drive more carefully“, „smoke less“, „eat healthy“, „consume thoughtfully“ and so on.
We both know this is why we have the rule of law. People are not and will never be fully self governing as long as we have the system we do. We are much too stressed to make the right decisions every time. We used to be able to drive without a seatbelt on, to take cocaine whenever we wanted. Didn’t work very well. It’s simple psychology. Some of us govern themselves mostly well, others dont. That doesn’t mean they can be held responsible for their inability to do so. They need to helped with measures to keep harm away.