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.

  • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is applicable to any number of things. Those of us who are into computer games would mostly like companies to release them in a finished state but are pretty helpless against abusive marketing and peer pressure. Our friends in gaming are also a network.

    The important takeaway here for me is that we meed to abplish the idea of „voting with your wallet“ since this mechanic is broken in the presence of networking effects. E.g. you not only miss out on the game/app/product but you hurt your network and become more isolated.

      • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t play a lot of multiplayers games either but thats not the only point.

        1. 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.

        2. 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)

          • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            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.

              • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

                  • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    so none of the bystanders should help them either

                    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.

                    just like with most things in life

                    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.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You don’t. I play lots of multiplayer games (they’re pretty much all I play these days). You just play different games with different groups of your friends at different times.

        I didn’t like Balder’s Gate, RPGs just aren’t my cup of tea. Some of my friends played it, I did things with other friends that interested me.

        This person’s argument might apply to some people, but for the majority of people I’ve met, they have more than a couple of friends or at least have friends that are decent enough to say “okay we all like X, so we’ll play that instead since everybody is here.”

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Depends on the circles you keep. But if your gaming crew if say 6 people are all playing Overwatch, what’s the game you’re likely playing? It’s not even pressure it’s just how social conformity work.

        Isolation is a strong word. But to some degree, it’s about community. If your friends are all playing hockey all summer and in August you dip and spend it playing chess or drawing, it’s not going to strengthen the ties you have. Same deal with gaming. With any socially oriented hobby tbh.

        It doesn’t mean you’ll turn into the Uni Bomber tho.

    • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah gotta say this is beyond obvious. My stats prof would be winding up with chalk.

      If some guy came up trying to sell me an expensive marine device for boats, I’d keep walking. I’m sure it’s a legit, valuable product, but I don’t have a boat. Nor care to own one. To me, that item has zero worth.

      Same applies if Adobe offered me their suite. I don’t use their stuff. Zero interest in it.

      To me, this is behind obvious. What good is a site if I don’t care for the service? Moreover, social media is invasive, so no wonder it makes sense that those not interested would find more value were it gone. That annoying song they played incessantly on the radio? Isn’t your life better after it fizzles out? What’s the groundbreaking finding?

      • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The groundbreaking finding is that it is in fact not ok go blame the victim. /s

        It is obvious for those without ingrained ableism (who therefore dont blame people for being unable to fight against companies that employ psychologists)