Project ideas from Hacker News discussions.

Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

📝 Discussion Summary (Click to expand)

Prevalence of Undisclosed Industry Ties in Social Media Research

A major theme is the alarm over undisclosed financial and professional conflicts of interest within academic social media research. Many users express frustration and distrust, viewing this as a systemic, predictable issue. As user bikenaga quotes the study's abstract, the core finding is that "half of the research published in top journals has disclosable ties to industry in the form of prior funding, collaboration, or employment. However, the majority of these ties go undisclosed in the published research." This leads to a consensus among commenters like fnoef that the situation is "no longer know who to trust," while hsuduebc2 contextualizes the finding as a "ridiculously recurring pattern" seen in other industries like tobacco and fossil fuels.

Ethical Concerns Over Unregulated Corporate Experiments

A second prevalent theme is the deep ethical unease regarding the power of social media companies to conduct large-scale, unregulated "experiments" on users without independent oversight. User Grimblewald argues this is a critical problem, stating, "Right now I think it's a problem that social media companies can do research without answering to the same regulatory bodies that regular academics / researchers would." The discussion highlights that these corporate A/B tests can have significant, negative consequences, with bearseascape referencing Facebook's 2014 "emotional contagion" study as a key example of research that would be unlikely to pass an independent ethics review. The debate centers on whether UI changes constitute research, with users pointing to the subtle, manipulative nature of algorithmic tuning as a unique and dangerous form of experimentation.

The Algorithmic Amplification of Outrage and Division

The third major theme concerns how social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement by prioritizing outrage and emotional content, leading to societal polarization. User everdrive frames this as a "grand experiment" with severe consequences, noting, "What happens if you start connecting people from disparate communities, and then prioritize for outrage and emotionalism?" This sentiment is echoed by slg, who argues this is a deliberate choice by corporations to "make society worse in order to increase profits." The discussion contrasts the current algorithmic feeds with the pre-algorithm era, with csnover explaining that modern algorithms create uniquely harmful "information silos" by filtering out challenging viewpoints and amplifying misunderstood content without shared context, making toxicity the norm rather than an exception.


🚀 Project Ideas

DisclosureWarden

Summary

  • Solves the problem of undisclosed industry ties in academic and media research by providing a searchable, collaborative database that cross-references researchers with their past affiliations, funding, and collaborations.
  • Core value proposition: Provides independent verification of researcher integrity to combat bias and opacity in social media and tech research.

Details

Key Value
Target Audience Journalists, policy makers, academic editors, and savvy consumers of research.
Core Feature Automated web scraper that builds a knowledge graph of researcher affiliations (past & present), funding sources, and co-authorship ties, visualized on a researcher profile page.
Tech Stack Python (BeautifulSoup, Scrapy), Neo4j or PostgreSQL for graph data, React/D3.js for visualization.
Difficulty Medium
Monetization Revenue-ready: Freemium API access for media/journal orgs; donation-based for public access.

Notes

  • HN commenters expressed a need to "strengthen disclosure norms" and distrust in opaque research. One user explicitly suggested checking an organization like the "Coalition for Independent Tech Research," indicating a demand for accountability tools.
  • Practical for verifying the integrity of studies referenced in news articles or policy debates.

FrictionBrowser

Summary

  • Addresses the frustration with social media addiction and algorithmic manipulation by enforcing intentional usage through friction (e.g., no bookmarks, manual URL entry, randomized delays).
  • Core value proposition: A browser extension or standalone app that breaks the "mindless scroll" loop by making access to social media sites technically inconvenient without blocking them entirely.

Details

Key Value
Target Audience Users seeking digital well-being without total disconnection.
Core Feature Configurable blockers that remove bookmarks/history for specific sites, require CAPTCHA or manual typing to access, and inject variable loading delays to disrupt the dopamine loop.
Tech Stack Browser Extension (JavaScript/Chrome API) or Electron app.
Difficulty Low
Monetization Hobby: Open source and free.

Notes

  • Directly addresses the user who said, "I no longer know who to trust... the only solution is to go live in a forest," and the counter-suggestion to "add some friction" by typing URLs manually.
  • It offers a pragmatic middle ground between total withdrawal and passive consumption.

A/B Test Ethics Reviewer

Summary

  • Solves the ethical ambiguity in corporate UX research and A/B testing by offering a lightweight, open-source framework for simulating ethics committee reviews on product experiments.
  • Core value proposition: Allows product teams to self-audit experiments for psychological harm or manipulation risks before deployment, filling the regulatory gap left by the lack of independent oversight in corporate research.

Details

Key Value
Target Audience Product managers, UX researchers, and developers in tech companies.
Core Feature A checklist-based interactive tool that asks about consent, potential emotional harm, and data privacy risks associated with a specific A/B test, generating a "risk report."
Tech Stack Web app (Next.js, TypeScript).
Difficulty Low
Monetization Revenue-ready: "Ethics-as-a-Service" (EaaS) consulting for enterprise teams or a paid enterprise dashboard.

Notes

  • HN users debated what constitutes "research" requiring oversight. This tool creates a "paper trail" for internal experiments, appealing to those who believe companies should answer to independent ethics reviews.
  • It gamifies regulatory compliance, making it easier for ethical engineers to advocate for safer design choices.

Read Later