[eightysixfour]

> I guess it depends on if you see humanity as a horde of dumb beasts drugged on sex, sugar and alcohol or a collective of relatively smart individuals capable of taking collectively smart decisions for their greater good.

Why not both? Clearly we have addiction problems in society - opiates, sugar, alcohol, cell phones - and clearly we have smart individuals and have been able to take collective action.

That collective action did not eradicate any of the above mentioned addictions though, and many of them grew worse (or were encouraged!) under the watchful eye of the collective.

We clearly need more tools at our disposal for these problems.

[lm28469]

But then again the top mind of psychology are working at meta &Co getting paid big bucks to milk as much of your brain as possible

We're manufacturing the addiction and the cure, the top 0.01% are profiting of that while the rest of the world is suffering, we can just like... not manufacture the addiction in the first place. Same shit for opiates, it's not just an accident/coincidence, it's something that was developed and planned to make as much profit as possible, the addictive part of it was a feature.

Regardless of if you put the responsibility on society or on the individual it doesn't make sense to defend these addiction creating entities

[eightysixfour]

And now that people stopped flooding the market with opiates legally, the addiction has stopped? No, someone just made it illegally.

Most of these things are “once the cat is out of the bag” situations. The only addictive drug I can think of that was effectively removed from the US market was Methaqualone, and that’s mostly because we had easier to acquire substitutes by the time it finally disappeared.