this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
337 points (94.2% liked)

Technology

58061 readers
31 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Porn sites must have government health warning in Texas from September 1st::Just when we didn’t think the state of Texas could get any more wacko on tech policy, this latest bill really suggests otherwise. House Bill 1181 is an age verification measure that is similar to what we’ve seen in the state legislatures across other red U.S. states. You have an age verification proposal that is similar…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Buddy I'm not reading your half-understood bullshit when you think anything that gives you dopamine is addictive.

Watch out for those pleasant sunny days. They're addictive. Laugher of children? Addictive.

Maybe actually meet a few addicts and learn a bit about actual addictions.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then what do you think drives gambling addiction?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Lots of things. The problem with pseudo-scientific takes, in general, is that they steal from science but don't actually contribute anything to it. You're essentially making the same argument as, "it snowed in winter so climate change isn't real."

Addiction is a well-defined term and every addiction has more than one root cause.

Research to date shows that pathological gamblers and drug addicts share many of the same genetic predispositions for impulsivity and reward seeking. Just as substance addicts require increasingly strong hits to get high, compulsive gamblers pursue ever riskier ventures. Likewise, both drug addicts and problem gamblers endure symptoms of withdrawal when separated from the chemical or thrill they desire. And a few studies suggest that some people are especially vulnerable to both drug addiction and compulsive gambling because their reward circuitry is inherently underactive—which may partially explain why they seek big thrills in the first place

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-brain-gets-addicted-to-gambling/

Chose a layman site to help you get it more easily

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And what do you think that reward circuitry is based on?

And if it's the people rather than the things that cause addiction, shouldn't nothing be called addictive then? Or everything addictive having a footnote of "to certain people". Which should be obvious because there's different levels of addiction from not at all to sucks dick in an alley to get a fix.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now you're starting to begin to understand why psychologists are professionals and you are not.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right or wrong, you argue like an asshole. Since you tried to dodge that question where you might have to admit I'm not wrong and this whole thing was more of a miscommunication (you assumed when I said "addictive" I meant everyone would be affected by that addiction or maybe you do think addiction isn't related to dopamine?), then a disagreement, the reward circuitry is based on dopamine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can think I'm an asshole all you'd like, but at least you learned more about addiction today

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Can't say I got anything out of this conversation, other than seeing that I might need to add disclaimers to my original statement. Otherwise just passing some time.