6 ms·

To me, this reads like an alcoholic ranting about how everyone should stop drinking. Yes, technology can be addicting. That doesn't mean we're "helpless" or eve

To me, this reads like an alcoholic ranting about how everyone should stop drinking. Yes, technology can be addicting. That doesn't mean we're "helpless" or even that it's bad. I'm really sick of these hyperbolic luddites. Personally, it's not at all a problem. I'm not a technophobe—I have an iPhone, use Facebook, etc.—but it's done nothing but positively improve my life. I can keep in touch with friends around the world and work remotely from anywhere, all thanks to the beauty of these "distracting" technologies. However, even though my life is heavily entangled with technology I certainly don't feel "addicted" to it. I have no problem going out into the wilderness for a week and having 0 contact with the world. I certainly don't interrupt conversations to check my phone. If technology is hurting your life, the problem could just as easily be with you as it is with technology.

kelvin0 10y ago
I see what you mean, and you are quite possibly right. Please don't take it as an insult, but how do you know this technology is not causing similar issues in your life? We've all seen some people in our lives deny some facet of themselves only to realize they had a problem (after much introspection). I would really like to have your opinion on this.
- morgante 10y ago
  > Please don't take it as an insult, but how do you know this technology is not causing similar issues in your life? That's something I think a lot about. For me, the evidence that technology is not having that effect on my life: 1. At least once a year, I go on a hike of at least 1 week (without a phone). I'm consistently able to do this without feeling any sort of withdrawal. 2. I try to read a book on my Kindle for an hour every day. [0] 3. Whenever I fly, I never purchase wifi. If I'm able to consistently go 9-12 hours without any internet access, just reading or napping, it hardly seems like I'm addicted. 4. When I'm around other people, focus on them. If I go out to dinner with someone, I sit and talk to them instead of playing on my phone. It honestly boggles my mind that people think it's acceptable to stare at your phone while talking to someone. [0] The fixation on "printed" books really is ludicrous. Reading on the Kindle is no more or less distracting than reading a printed book. It's essentially an offline experience.
  - crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
    I'm an information addict and here's a fun fact about my recovery experience: It didn't start til I stopped looking things up in books. That kicked off 9 months of vivid dreams that evolved as I managed to identify & slowly remove other innocuous compulsive behaviors from my daily life. I want to be clear about this: I'm not saying you sound like an addict. Everything in the world is potentially addictive if it can help escape from or numb emotions. And it doesn't matter much what the source of the addiction is, but the behaviors involved in interacting with that source. That's why it didn't actually matter that I went offline for months on end. My view of addiction is this: Addicts are genetically (and likely epigenetically) predisposed to developing a learning disorder we call addiction in response to psychological trauma. The first step to solving the problem of addiction in society isn't to lock up all the addictive things. It's to recognize technology has made it easy as hell for anyone to partake in activities that provide immediate gratification and that means the world has become a much more dangerous place for people predisposed to addiction. Information addiction is frightening as hell to think about, even when I'm happily moving along in my recovery. I live in a world where the spread of technology is always on the rise & any job that pays well will require me to, in one way or another, dive into my addictive behaviors. If the author's (likely fearfully) suggesting what you see as extreme solutions, I can absolutely understand where he's coming from.
tspike 10y ago
If we're going with the alcoholic analogy, alcoholism very clearly has a genetic component, so some people are predisposed to it. I don't think it's far fetched to hypothesize that technology addiction might be genetic as well, with the key difference being that using technology is basically compulsory while using alcohol is not. Sounds like you're just saying "deal with it" because you don't personally struggle with it.
- morgante 10y ago
  > Sounds like you're just saying "deal with it" because you don't personally struggle with it. Sorry if it came off that way. Like I said, I don't doubt that some people might be addicted to it. I absolutely think they should pursue the remedies they need for themselves, whether that's quitting social media or pursuing a meditation practice. I have friends who quit Facebook and I don't hold it against them (though I do recognize it makes keeping in touch a lot harder). My problem is that he can't seem to recognize that this addiction might not be universal, just like alcoholics shouldn't force prohibition on the rest of us. (In fact, he literally calls for "restaurants where smartphones must be surrendered upon entering.")
  - daveloyall 10y ago
    Humans are definitely not universally susceptible to stream addiction. However, the rate of adoption described in the article[0] is worrisome. 0: Actually, you might just look out a window to get the same data.
  - bzbarsky 10y ago
    He is not calling on all restaurants to do this. He just thinks it would be good if there existed some restaurants that did. Just like there are some restaurants that don't serve alcohol, note. Or restaurants that don't serve meat.
    - maus42 10y ago
      Non-alcoholic restaurants? Maybe that's a nice idea, but I don't think that actually solves anything. The main problem with alcohol (at least in my culture) is that it's not given that you can go and drink non-alcoholic stuff in a social gathering without others making it a huge problem. In that situation, who would go into the non-alco restaurant? Especially would you like to ask your friends "let's go to the non-alco place instead of the usual one", if the drinking is the thing you find problematic? Yeah, I've never heard much about non-alco restaurants. The existence of gimmicky restaurants isn't answer to these kinds of problems, because the inherit reason is ... how I would say this ... in the societal background of "what is normal": the overall framework what is expected of you, what you can reasonably expect of others, and what options you are left with if you think you have a reasonable, principled case against the way things currently stand and disagree with the behaviour that is considered "normal"? The parallels to over-indulging in predatory social media products are left as an exercise to reader.
arcticfox 10y ago
> If technology is hurting your life, the problem could just as easily be with you as it is with technology. In large part, that's what the author is saying: "And I realize that this is, in some ways, just another tale in the vast book of human frailty." Humans are weak in the face of what we've built, some (the author) more than others (you). That doesn't mean it's a problem for everyone, but it's definitely a problem for some. And to use your comparison to alcohol: humanity has millenia of experience with the consumption and overconsumption of alcohol. We basically know the risks. "The Stream" has only existed for something like a decade and it's only getting stronger every day. IMO there's nothing wrong with being very cautious about it and quickly reacting to ill effects. I wouldn't say I'm addicted and I have nothing close to this author's problem, but I do find "The Stream" lowering my quality of life, so I'm working on moving away from it. Also, another quote from the author since you seem to be very upset with him over a bit of a strawman that you set up: "...it reveals, perhaps, that we are not completely helpless in this newly distracted era."
callmeed 10y ago
Respectfully disagree with your view. Technology in and of itself is not bad. But when technology is run by technology companies whose motive is profit, it can be bad. I think what we're seeing is new externalities caused by technology. I think junk food + soda + obesity is a more apt analogy than alcoholism. It's easy to say "don't get addicted to junk food or soda" but you have to remember that these companies specifically formulate their products to hack your body and make you crave more. Then they bombard you with ads. All so they can sell you more. In the same way, technology companies make more money the more you use their products. So they specifically architect their products to hack your brain so you will use it more. It's easy to say "don't get addicted to Facebook" or "the problem is you" but, frankly, I don't think its that simple.
- blisse 10y ago
  But with your junk food analogy, there are still alternatives and it's up to you to decide how you live your life.
  - callmeed 10y ago
    Apologies if I'm using the wrong terms, but this comes off as a kind of myopic, libertarian view. Do you have children? I have 4. A lot of this is easier to understand by watching them. Yes, I know it's my job to teach them how to make good choices. But why do devices suck them in so easily if I don't direct or enforce their behavior? Of course there are alternatives to junk food. But am I completely, 100% in control of my decisions without any influence from external sources? There is an entire industry whose sole purpose is to influence your decision making. People in this industry spend about half a trillion dollars a year globally. It's called "advertising" and it wouldn't keep growing if it didn't work.
    - Retra 10y ago
      You could say the same things about schools. We spend massive amounts of money on education, solely to influence your decision-making, and we wouldn't continue to do it if it didn't work. The problem is that you're comparing technology to junk food and alcohol, when you could be just as well comparing it to human contact, clean air, or exercise: things that are also just as addictive as technology. Which isn't to say ads are good; I very much despise them. But I don't really have much experience with them, because the technology I use doesn't effectively force me to.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tim333 10y ago
I don't feel the author is a luddite but her problems may well be down more to her mother's "screams of frustration and misery" and going to mental hospital regularly throughout her childhood rather than too much Facebook.

kelvin0 10y ago

I see what you mean, and you are quite possibly right. Please don't take it as an insult, but how do you know this technology is not causing similar issues in your life? We've all seen some people in our lives deny some facet of themselves only to realize they had a problem (after much introspection). I would really like to have your opinion on this.

morgante 10y ago
> Please don't take it as an insult, but how do you know this technology is not causing similar issues in your life? That's something I think a lot about. For me, the evidence that technology is not having that effect on my life: 1. At least once a year, I go on a hike of at least 1 week (without a phone). I'm consistently able to do this without feeling any sort of withdrawal. 2. I try to read a book on my Kindle for an hour every day. [0] 3. Whenever I fly, I never purchase wifi. If I'm able to consistently go 9-12 hours without any internet access, just reading or napping, it hardly seems like I'm addicted. 4. When I'm around other people, focus on them. If I go out to dinner with someone, I sit and talk to them instead of playing on my phone. It honestly boggles my mind that people think it's acceptable to stare at your phone while talking to someone. [0] The fixation on "printed" books really is ludicrous. Reading on the Kindle is no more or less distracting than reading a printed book. It's essentially an offline experience.
- crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
  I'm an information addict and here's a fun fact about my recovery experience: It didn't start til I stopped looking things up in books. That kicked off 9 months of vivid dreams that evolved as I managed to identify & slowly remove other innocuous compulsive behaviors from my daily life. I want to be clear about this: I'm not saying you sound like an addict. Everything in the world is potentially addictive if it can help escape from or numb emotions. And it doesn't matter much what the source of the addiction is, but the behaviors involved in interacting with that source. That's why it didn't actually matter that I went offline for months on end. My view of addiction is this: Addicts are genetically (and likely epigenetically) predisposed to developing a learning disorder we call addiction in response to psychological trauma. The first step to solving the problem of addiction in society isn't to lock up all the addictive things. It's to recognize technology has made it easy as hell for anyone to partake in activities that provide immediate gratification and that means the world has become a much more dangerous place for people predisposed to addiction. Information addiction is frightening as hell to think about, even when I'm happily moving along in my recovery. I live in a world where the spread of technology is always on the rise & any job that pays well will require me to, in one way or another, dive into my addictive behaviors. If the author's (likely fearfully) suggesting what you see as extreme solutions, I can absolutely understand where he's coming from.

tspike 10y ago

If we're going with the alcoholic analogy, alcoholism very clearly has a genetic component, so some people are predisposed to it. I don't think it's far fetched to hypothesize that technology addiction might be genetic as well, with the key difference being that using technology is basically compulsory while using alcohol is not. Sounds like you're just saying "deal with it" because you don't personally struggle with it.

morgante 10y ago
> Sounds like you're just saying "deal with it" because you don't personally struggle with it. Sorry if it came off that way. Like I said, I don't doubt that some people might be addicted to it. I absolutely think they should pursue the remedies they need for themselves, whether that's quitting social media or pursuing a meditation practice. I have friends who quit Facebook and I don't hold it against them (though I do recognize it makes keeping in touch a lot harder). My problem is that he can't seem to recognize that this addiction might not be universal, just like alcoholics shouldn't force prohibition on the rest of us. (In fact, he literally calls for "restaurants where smartphones must be surrendered upon entering.")
- daveloyall 10y ago
  Humans are definitely not universally susceptible to stream addiction. However, the rate of adoption described in the article[0] is worrisome. 0: Actually, you might just look out a window to get the same data.
- bzbarsky 10y ago
  He is not calling on all restaurants to do this. He just thinks it would be good if there existed some restaurants that did. Just like there are some restaurants that don't serve alcohol, note. Or restaurants that don't serve meat.
  - maus42 10y ago
    Non-alcoholic restaurants? Maybe that's a nice idea, but I don't think that actually solves anything. The main problem with alcohol (at least in my culture) is that it's not given that you can go and drink non-alcoholic stuff in a social gathering without others making it a huge problem. In that situation, who would go into the non-alco restaurant? Especially would you like to ask your friends "let's go to the non-alco place instead of the usual one", if the drinking is the thing you find problematic? Yeah, I've never heard much about non-alco restaurants. The existence of gimmicky restaurants isn't answer to these kinds of problems, because the inherit reason is ... how I would say this ... in the societal background of "what is normal": the overall framework what is expected of you, what you can reasonably expect of others, and what options you are left with if you think you have a reasonable, principled case against the way things currently stand and disagree with the behaviour that is considered "normal"? The parallels to over-indulging in predatory social media products are left as an exercise to reader.

arcticfox 10y ago

> If technology is hurting your life, the problem could just as easily be with you as it is with technology. In large part, that's what the author is saying: "And I realize that this is, in some ways, just another tale in the vast book of human frailty." Humans are weak in the face of what we've built, some (the author) more than others (you). That doesn't mean it's a problem for everyone, but it's definitely a problem for some. And to use your comparison to alcohol: humanity has millenia of experience with the consumption and overconsumption of alcohol. We basically know the risks. "The Stream" has only existed for something like a decade and it's only getting stronger every day. IMO there's nothing wrong with being very cautious about it and quickly reacting to ill effects. I wouldn't say I'm addicted and I have nothing close to this author's problem, but I do find "The Stream" lowering my quality of life, so I'm working on moving away from it. Also, another quote from the author since you seem to be very upset with him over a bit of a strawman that you set up: "...it reveals, perhaps, that we are not completely helpless in this newly distracted era."

callmeed 10y ago

Respectfully disagree with your view. Technology in and of itself is not bad. But when technology is run by technology companies whose motive is profit, it can be bad. I think what we're seeing is new externalities caused by technology. I think junk food + soda + obesity is a more apt analogy than alcoholism. It's easy to say "don't get addicted to junk food or soda" but you have to remember that these companies specifically formulate their products to hack your body and make you crave more. Then they bombard you with ads. All so they can sell you more. In the same way, technology companies make more money the more you use their products. So they specifically architect their products to hack your brain so you will use it more. It's easy to say "don't get addicted to Facebook" or "the problem is you" but, frankly, I don't think its that simple.

blisse 10y ago
But with your junk food analogy, there are still alternatives and it's up to you to decide how you live your life.
- callmeed 10y ago
  Apologies if I'm using the wrong terms, but this comes off as a kind of myopic, libertarian view. Do you have children? I have 4. A lot of this is easier to understand by watching them. Yes, I know it's my job to teach them how to make good choices. But why do devices suck them in so easily if I don't direct or enforce their behavior? Of course there are alternatives to junk food. But am I completely, 100% in control of my decisions without any influence from external sources? There is an entire industry whose sole purpose is to influence your decision making. People in this industry spend about half a trillion dollars a year globally. It's called "advertising" and it wouldn't keep growing if it didn't work.
  - Retra 10y ago
    You could say the same things about schools. We spend massive amounts of money on education, solely to influence your decision-making, and we wouldn't continue to do it if it didn't work. The problem is that you're comparing technology to junk food and alcohol, when you could be just as well comparing it to human contact, clean air, or exercise: things that are also just as addictive as technology. Which isn't to say ads are good; I very much despise them. But I don't really have much experience with them, because the technology I use doesn't effectively force me to.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

tim333 10y ago

I don't feel the author is a luddite but her problems may well be down more to her mother's "screams of frustration and misery" and going to mental hospital regularly throughout her childhood rather than too much Facebook.