I get the frustration behind that sentiment, but I'm not convinced it's as simple as "scrolling cooked brains"

The Commission isn't (at least from what's published) saying "pagination must look like X" or "buttons must be Y pixels tall." They're saying platforms have to mitigate systemic risks tied to their design choices. That's more like regulating outcomes and incentives than dictating UI details

The tricky part is defining harm without sliding into paternalism

The Commission seems to be saying: not without guardrails

Infinite scroll itself isn't inherently harmful, it's a pagination mechanism. The harm comes from recommender systems tuned for engagement over wellbeing

This era might be one where we have to earn the next clue much more slowly

So, if the answer were obvious or quick, it wouldn't be worth building machines that take decades to design

This feels less like a story about particle physics "failing" and more like a story about a field running out of easy leverage

Exactly. The field has been a tik-tok between times of discovery and times of precision. We are now just swinging back from a discovery period. The next machine will be first a precision machine and then upgraded to be a discovery machine again.

Yet it's simple, but not easy, which is usually a sign it's pointing at something real

It takes energy, attention, and emotional bandwidth, so it's reasonable (and healthy) to be selective about where you spend it. Otherwise you end up being an unpaid therapist for people who never reciprocate.

Yep glorified emotional tampon.