oops, hit "post" before I meant to.>>1130>just look @ the internet, porn, social media. Porn is addictive due to a primitive thought process involving novelty, and is only really beneficial due to the scarcity of such partners, which porn eliminates according to this region of the brain.
Porn is not an advanced technology. It's been around for millennia in some form or another, and after printing presses were invented/discovered (depending on where in the world and in history you are) porn has been available in mass, typically as part of the underground culture of any established culture, or as high up as the "low culture" (i.e. working class) of those same established cultures. >Social media companies exploit primitive thought processes by designing their apps to be as additive as possible, triggering as much of a dopamine response in their users as they can - far more than would naturally occur.
Social media companies are exploiting techniques discovered by traditional media and casinos long long ago to attract attention. This isn't a matter of anything fundamentally new to technology that doesn't or hadn't also occured with other forms of mass media in past centuries. It also has nothing to do with something intrinsic to how technology in general is designed but more to do with some specific applications of that technology. Remember, a lot of social media is just websites, a lot of social media is just applications of things like relational database technology with a bit of a spin on old bulletin board systems.
Technically, this website we are using right now is considered social media.
And as for dopamine responsed, well, considering that social media does not use a drug of some sort to artificially raise dopamine levels betond a user's own natural capacities, the dopamine response one has to it is about as natural as one can get. But again, this is not a matter of how the core technology underneath (i.e. internet protocol and world wide web application layers) is designed but rather how it's used by these social media companies. And they're not even exploiting much about how those underlying technologies work as much as they are exploiting the fact that the accessibility to those services is a lot cheaper and faster than before. >But technology is designed to exploit them for other purposes, causing extremely unhealthy behavior.
Well, first that is oversimplifying it. Things like relational databases (essentially the core of what Facebook actually is) are not designed specifically to exploit the human psyche, neither was internet protocol, neither was html, php, or python or any other technology used on the back end of these services. This is almost like pointing to yellow journalism in the early 20th century and using that as evidence that the printing press or photography or what have you were designed to exploit the less rational parts of the human psyche or pointing to exploitative grindhouse films of the 1970s as evidence that film was designed explicitly for the sake of lurid exploitation of humans more prurient interest. >If we edit the DNA, we can develop better thought processes that are adapted to using tech in the most efficent way possible. We optimize from both ends - not just the technological side, but we're not even optimizing from the technological side right now - just optimizing for profit.
Wouldn't that suggest that the actual
core of the problem be how we incentivize the development of new technologies?
And since that is
what is primarily what is optimized for, how could we expect that the technology for editing DNA not
be optimized for profit but instead for "efficiency"?
Also, I don't think you really picked up on my point earlier. The "counter productive" aspects of the psyche are often the product of one function being useful and vital in one context but not others. This would imply that trying to "edit out" those aspects may unintentionally also edit out some of those other more vital functions.
Like prejudice for example. It can hurt other people, and oftentimes oneself as well, and it's certainly
exploited for profit, but it's essentially just pattern recognition. Everyone has prejudices because we recognize patterns, not always with 100% accuracy and sometimes we recognize patterns that don't really
exist or sometimes we only recognize a simplistic pattern rather than recognizing the whole pattern as it actually is, but it happens because of our capacity for pattern recognition