I would say it's more comparable to the casino. Psychology is analysed and exploited to the benefit of the house. To some it's harmless entertainment, and to others it's devastating.

Support for regulation of casinos is born largely out of the idea that many people are not fully responsible for their psychology.

Federated social media (e.g. Mastodon) only serves part of the problem. It's like going from the casino to your friends' houses; ill effects still exist, but the domain is not controlled by a profiteer, who may have incentives to maximise and exploit those ill effects.

Eh, maybe. But worst case scenario at a casino is you blow your life savings. Worst case on Facebook is you waste a few hours of your time being bored.

Additionally, if we do introduce social media regulations (shudder) you can guarantee Facebook will have a hand in writing/influencing them to benefit itself and hurt any startup competitors, as the article argues.

I wouldn't be opposed to basic data protection laws, but I'm always wary of "oh just regulate them" as an automatic cure-all for when we don't like how a company behaves. There's almost always unintended consequences.