[d23]

> So yeah - telling people to "just stop using facebook" is akin to telling smokers to "just stop smoking", and will net the same results.

I have no problem with that. Want to not have the damaging effects of smoking? Don't smoke. Seriously. You're addicted, I get it. But the fundamental unhealthiness of smoking isn't going to change any time soon.

I don't really disagree with you in general (though I don't think Facebook has gotten to the necessity point of being required to have a social life). That metaphor is just way off.

[TeMPOraL]

The metaphor is way off mostly because Facebook doesn't really have negative / damaging effects to its users, besides things constantly invented by people not using it to rationalize why they're not using it.

It really sounds like "reasons not to have a cellphone" sounded 15 years ago.

[bigbugbag]

>The metaphor is way off mostly because Facebook doesn't really have negative / damaging effects to its users, besides things constantly invented by people not using it to rationalize why they're not using it.

You sound like a drug addict.

A first study shows that the longer people are active on Facebook, the more negative is their mood afterwards. The second study provides causal evidence for this effect by showing that Facebook activity leads to a deterioration of mood compared to two different control conditions. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that this effect is mediated by a feeling of not having done anything meaningful. With such negative outcomes for its users, the question arises as to why so many people continue to use Facebook on a daily basis. A third study suggests that this may be because people commit an affective forecasting error in that they expect to feel better after using Facebook, whereas, in fact, they feel worse. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563214...

[TeMPOraL]

And you sound like luddite.

I appreciate the link. I'll comment more when I manage to find a full-text PDF, because the abstract doesn't instill confidence in the quality of study, and I've learned (and it was confirmed by various analyses) that you have to assume that any social science study from this decade is total and utter bullshit until proven otherwise. I particularly expect to find out that the study can be equally applicable to e-mail and most other sites people use on the Internet.

[bigbugbag]

right now on hn: http://qz.com/546799/a-study-forced-people-to-quit-facebook-...

[scrollaway]

> I have no problem with that. Want to not have the damaging effects of smoking? Don't smoke. Seriously. You're addicted, I get it. But the fundamental unhealthiness of smoking isn't going to change any time soon.

OK, and what did that just achieve?

Really, what's the point of telling people to do or not to do stuff? What if I tell you to stop putting sugar/milk in your coffee, will you? What's my say in it?

There's solid reasons preventing people to leave facebook or quit smoking. Work with that, and you'll make a meaningful difference. Or don't, stay on your lawn at kids and their facebooks, you'll be less relevant than an ant in china.