News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Silicon Valley, the New Lobbying Monster by chimeracoder on Monday October 07, 2024 @02:16PM (#41769137)
> A big difference is that caffeine isn't addictive. It may seem like it, and you do get a few headaches when you quit cold turkey, but you just don't get the intense graving you get with addictions.

I'm curious what definition of "addiction" you're using to arrive at the conclusion that caffeine isn't addictive.

Re:Silicon Valley, the New Lobbying Monster by lokar on Monday October 07, 2024 @02:53PM (#41769572)
Isn’t the standard definition that you continue to use the drug despite it causing serious negative problems in your life?
Re:Silicon Valley, the New Lobbying Monster by chimeracoder on Monday October 07, 2024 @03:13PM (#41769831)
> Isn’t the standard definition that you continue to use the drug despite it causing serious negative problems in your life?

There's no one standard definition of "addiction", and most concise definitions (one or two lines) are extremely fragile and break down when you try to apply them in any meaningful context.

By this definition you're putting forth, caffeine certainly could be addictive, as could any substance - and in fact, nearly any behavior, which is why professionals generally frown upon using this measure definitionally, because it leads to pseudoscientific terms like "X addiction", for absurd values of X.