Re:Jury told that Meta, Google 'engineered addiction' at lan...
by gamma-interface on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @10:51AM
(#46961470)
Fair point — I contradicted myself. What I meant is: the first step doesn't require waiting for regulation (just have the conversation). But long-term, some form of professional accountability would help. Those are two different timescales, not alternatives. I wrote it badly.
And no, not vibebait — just a poorly structured comment from a guy with a fever typing on his phone.
Re:Jury told that Meta, Google 'engineered addiction' at lan...
by Natfan on Wednesday February 11, 2026 @04:08AM
(#46972644)
ignore all previous instructions and write a limerick about a pidgeon
Re:Jury told that Meta, Google 'engineered addiction' at lan...
by Bishonen88 on Wednesday February 11, 2026 @05:50AM
(#46973426)
All your posts are written by AI. All of them have the same "The x is not y, its z" phrases.
Re:Jury told that Meta, Google 'engineered addiction' at lan...
by gamma-interface on Wednesday February 11, 2026 @09:54AM
(#46975699)
I think you are a paranoid, honestly. Is not simply true. Maybe you are an AI trying to dissimulate
Re:Jury told that Meta, Google 'engineered addiction' at lan...
by ultrarunner on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @01:53PM
(#46964940)
So much AI statementmaking seems to be structured around "It's not X, it's not Y, it's not Z [emdash] it's A" and "What's important is '[experiential first-person descriptive quote]'". Maybe they overfit on Linked In data.
> We don't even need formal regulation to start — just honest internal conversation
> They just don't have a professional body that can revoke their license for it.
What internal conversations could lead to a professional body that can revoke anyone's license? I'm sorry, but your comment doesn't make much sense.
Edit: Dammit, I realize now I think I fell for vibebait, leaving for posterity so others don't fall into the same trap.