• Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Have those warning labels been shown to work like at all? We already have awareness saturation about just how awful cigarettes are for you.

    • Bakachu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      With the government executing this message to our youth, I think they’ll work as well as the anti-piracy ones back in the day.

      You Wouldn’t Steal a Car

    • UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What do you mean by work? Do they stop everyone from doing stupid things? No. Do they have a measurable effect on behavior? Yes.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Warnings probably work better on products you’re putting in your body. If you have blackened lungs on the cigarette packaging I can’t imagine choosing to smoke.

      On social media, you basically have to destroy my experience for me to stop using it in the same way. All effective options are terrible: ads, microtransactions, auto-playing unexpected sounds, nonresponsive interfaces.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t get why people think this idea is equivalent to stuff like internet access bans or COPPA, it’s a warning label, not an “enter your ID” to access page.

    They never banned cigarettes, but putting a giant warning on the box did help in vilifying cigarettes as very unhealthy and wrong.

    I doubt it’ll go anywhere in this age of government, but its exactly the type of thing I would have gone for if I were tasked with solving a societal issue. It’s smart because it has no real effect on access, so social media companies would have a harder time fighting it, but it also gives a big bloody warning which does have a substantial psychological impact on users.

    iirc someone did something similar with a very simple “are you sure?” app that gave a prompt asking if you were sure you wanted to post something or send a text. Just having a single prompt was enough for many people to reconsider their stupid text or comment.

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Let he who has to deal with that friend who constantly sends blatantly false Xits to them throw the first stone. Honestly I feel like every social media post that makes a factual representation should come with a big flashing warning “THIS IS ALMOST CERTAINLY FALSE, LOOK IT UP BEFORE YOU REPEAT IT YOU DUMMY!”

    And I’m only like 10% joking. Given the success of language models it should be moderately trivial to train one to recognize when a factual statement is made and apply the above warning. It’s not even the children and teens I’m worried about. The people who seem to have the most trouble handling this are the adults.

    • my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that language models are effective lie detectors, it’s very widely known that LLMs have no concept of truth and hallucinate constantly.

      And that’s before we even get into inherent biases and moral judgements required for any form of truth detection.

      • rsuri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The point isn’t to have it be a lie detector but a factual claim detector. So you have an neural network that reads statements and says “this thing is saying something factual” or “this is just an opinion/obvious joke/whatever” and a person grades the responses to train it. So then the AI just says “hey this thing is making some sort of fact-related claim” and then the warning applies no matter what.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Given the success of language models it should be moderately trivial to train one to recognize when a factual statement is made and apply the above warning.

      Is it??? Because I feel like context is a real weak point for bots and ai to figure out.

      Hell, it feels like half the HUMANS don’t know whats factually true. Is the covid vaccine a society saving development which saved the lives of millions? Or is it full of bill gates mind control computer chips to rule over the portion of society dumb enough to get the vaccine willingly?

      Who’s to say?

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Oh, did they have studies showing that the mods and rockers damaged people’s mental health? Is that how this is the same?