this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2024
278 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

58143 readers
4500 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 29 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Have those warning labels been shown to work like at all? We already have awareness saturation about just how awful cigarettes are for you.

[–] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes. Almost no one smokes in Australia because of them

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Lol no, no one smokes anymore mainly because it's a taboo and a pack of cigs is so expensive it's basically impossible to do so on the regular.

The labels don't do shit.

[–] Thunderbird4@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How do you think smoking went from something nearly everybody did to being taboo? Maybe the labels don’t do anything for the last 10% of the population who still smoke today, despite the taboo, but those labels played a big role in reinforcing public awareness of the health effects of smoking.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No they didn't, people got tired of the smell and public awareness of smoking came from watching family members die. Labels didn't do shit. Smoking was on the decline before the labels even showed up.

[–] Bakachu@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

With the government executing this message to our youth, I think they'll work as well as the anti-piracy ones back in the day.

You Wouldn't Steal a Car

[–] Kolrami@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Warnings probably work better on products you're putting in your body. If you have blackened lungs on the cigarette packaging I can't imagine choosing to smoke.

On social media, you basically have to destroy my experience for me to stop using it in the same way. All effective options are terrible: ads, microtransactions, auto-playing unexpected sounds, nonresponsive interfaces.

[–] UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What do you mean by work? Do they stop everyone from doing stupid things? No. Do they have a measurable effect on behavior? Yes.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So why don't we put them on guns?

[–] UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We probably don't want to use the current leader in cause of death for kids as a template for good policy.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not at all what I was suggesting. If warning labels save lives why are they not on guns?

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

My guess is gun advocates think its a restriction on the 2nd amendment?

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

I see.

Well as long as opinions matter more than data now. Might as well criminalize Tik Tok with one hand and give out free AR-15s to mentally ill 18 year olds with the other.

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today -5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

The fact is, with the world we live in being like it is, why the fuck not smoke? For the chance to live a little further into the distopian hellscape of our impending future? Some reward that is for denying myself something I enjoy.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

COPD fucking sucks, my dude. Living longer isn't the goal, living comfortably is and being unable to breathe all the time is the worst.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's not a great plan to encourage yourself to smoke while expecting a future society with even worse healthcare

[–] teft@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Even if the world becomes a hellscape do you want to meet your maker choking on bits of your own lungs or breathing normally?

That is why you shouldn't smoke. Lung cancer and COPD are not things you want to deal with if you want to do anything remotely physical later in life.

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You would have to be an absolute moron to think smoking only kills you early. That's not how it works.

Even if you don't like the world around you today and aren't enthusiastic about the future, the way smoking kills you makes your day to day worse until you eventually get a very painful day to day until you eventually give out and die. You are advocating slowly committing both expensive and painful suicide over a 30 year span because you don't want to live for 40 more years.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

These comments are a good reminder of how dumb many people here are. Good temperature check

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I got a downvote for saying that smoking kills you slowly and eventually painfully. Like, how is that debatable at this point? Am I getting a downvote because I'm not vibing?

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

That downvote was probably from the dude you replied to just being a baby