The government regulates plenty of complex products and markets. Software isn't that special.

It seems a relatively simple first step should be to declare that algorithmic feeds which cater content to individuals render the platform a publisher and thus no longer subject to section 230 protections.

Third option: Facebook changes it's business model from data gathering and selling to pay-to-use. Make Insta and FB both be gate communities where folks have to pay to post.

Fourth option: product becomes less addictive and the algorithms stop optimising on "angry users click more". Less advertising profits, perhaps less engagement but probably still profits on advertising.

Fifth option: don't aim to continually increase profits and instead change the rules of capitalism to be less focused on making "profit at any price" to perhaps a more gentler form. After all, Monopoly(TM) is restarted once one player has all the money, it's about time that we do that in real life too or how many more trillionaires do we need?

So there are also grey choices here and not only b/w.

at least until Flock reports that you're reading a book you bought 2nd hand, and Amazon shuts down your AWS account for the audacity.

It would probably improve my life that the internet dies, except there are no longer many third spaces. Those spaces that do exist are also recording my every movement anyway. As is my privately-owned vehicle that I took to get there.

>Get used to reading books and going on walks.

As someone who does both, it's quite lovely! You might even be happier doing that than whatever it is the modern internet has become.