4 ms·

> Agonizing over these things is not a result of some profound grasp of reality and the ultimate causes for XYZ problems that have been around Since most probl

> Agonizing over these things is not a result of some profound grasp of reality and the ultimate causes for XYZ problems that have been around Since most problems are solved by first recognizing a problem exists, why is the OP's grasp not profound or accurate? > If you really wanted to pursue tech, you'd be a positive force in it rather than trying to pigeonhole tech/software for ever-present human foibles. It would make more sense to be a part of the evolution of technology Unfortunately, being a positive force doesn't always change the direction of things if the momentum and direction is toward a wall or cliff. I'm not anti-tech, but certainly appreciate what the OP has observed.

superobserver 10y ago
>why is the OP's grasp not profound or accurate? As already pointed out, but perhaps not so clearly, it is neither profound nor accurate due to misattribution. The OP attributes faults of human beings and their actions to software and tech, when software and tech are clearly not necessarily at fault for such, even if they might be found to facilitate those behaviors. > I'm not anti-tech, but certainly appreciate what the OP has observed. I'm glad you can appreciate it, but I'm still at a loss how anything of this kind can make much sense beyond a debilitating neuro-degenerative disorder. The OP would be better of seeking remedial assistance through technologies like trans-cranial direct current stimulation.
- teaneedz 10y ago
  Thank you for clarifying the first point. Agreed, the fundamental problem exists beyond tech and software. I guess coming to grips with that lets us use tech as a means to an end - a tool - that can be beneficial. The fact that we're discussing it on this medium shows that software and tech can be positive. The OP probably is looking at the general trend and state of problems tied to flaws in us as humans and other macro influences. I'm sure that a solution exists that might be even simpler than tDCS. A walk through the woods always helps me ;)

superobserver 10y ago

>why is the OP's grasp not profound or accurate? As already pointed out, but perhaps not so clearly, it is neither profound nor accurate due to misattribution. The OP attributes faults of human beings and their actions to software and tech, when software and tech are clearly not necessarily at fault for such, even if they might be found to facilitate those behaviors. > I'm not anti-tech, but certainly appreciate what the OP has observed. I'm glad you can appreciate it, but I'm still at a loss how anything of this kind can make much sense beyond a debilitating neuro-degenerative disorder. The OP would be better of seeking remedial assistance through technologies like trans-cranial direct current stimulation.

teaneedz 10y ago
Thank you for clarifying the first point. Agreed, the fundamental problem exists beyond tech and software. I guess coming to grips with that lets us use tech as a means to an end - a tool - that can be beneficial. The fact that we're discussing it on this medium shows that software and tech can be positive. The OP probably is looking at the general trend and state of problems tied to flaws in us as humans and other macro influences. I'm sure that a solution exists that might be even simpler than tDCS. A walk through the woods always helps me ;)