[survivorBias]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aiEqINoa-I

You now can create unrealistic standards via machine and earn hard cash doing so. Monetize all the things, everything has to go.

PS: Psychology is mostly studies on pschology students or other students, which prefilters the result pretty hard. So ever study is basically: "And how does the local well-off elite feel about that?"

[wiseowise]

When supply outweighs demand you don’t get much money. I would be really surprised if any of those generated influencer army get anything.

[tinrab]

Why do people always complain about unrealistic standards? I can't see how that would be bad. The problem is repeated dopamine hits.

[toofy]

While dopamine hits almost certainly plays a role, We need to be more mindful of our uses of “The problem is…” when we’re discussing complex nuanced fractal-tier depth subjects.

There will almost never be one (or The) problem.

I know it’s semantic, but I think particular thing matters, even in casual discussions that don’t demand rigor. It’s lazy of us to delude ourselves that something like this is only one issue. Particularly when it’s used in response to tear down someone else’s hypothesis—this just needlessly stifles more conversation.

[Eddy_Viscosity2]

It's both.