6 ms·

I don't think all of these are a problem per se. The problem is (and probably always was) people with empty minds. Sure, now they can fill it more easily with j

I don't think all of these are a problem per se. The problem is (and probably always was) people with empty minds. Sure, now they can fill it more easily with junk, but the whole point of technology is to make life easier after all. If you're learning or working on something you love and you want to have more time to do, its a perfectly reasonable choice to outsource "what I'm I going to eat next" or "how do you I get from A to B". The problem is not having anything that you love to learn/work on.

gcvbvghb 9y ago
> The problem is (and probably always was) people with empty minds. And of course you think you’re in the other camp, don’t you? How cute.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  The point is, smartphones are not magically holding people back, who would otherwise be creative and do cool stuff. In fact, it's pretty much the opposite, as even the constant stream of shit Internet content eventually exposes you to e.g. DIY tutorials in precisely your favourite area. Nevertheless, some people have less of intellectual lives than others, and (as GP argues and I agree with) whatever the reason, it's unlikely technology is to blame for that.
  - ben_w 9y ago
    They (or, rather, the software they connect to) are holding me back from precisely that. If there was no social media, the novel I’m writing would have been done a year ago.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      It wouldn't. You would spend a lot of time watching TV, reading novels, or hanging out in the bar.
      - walterstucco 9y ago
        At one point you stop watching TV, because there are no more new things to watch, you stop reading novels because they aren't novel anymore, you stop going to the bar because there's a fixed amount of alcohol you can consume, it costs money, the bar has opening hours. Smartphone follows you everywhere, all the time.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        A smartphone has only so much battery. It's best suited for frequent but short uses. If you want to replace TV, novels and bars with social media, your best bet is still the PC.
        ben_w 9y ago
        Fortunately PCs make it easy to block websites. #hosts file 0.0.0.0 twitter.com 0.0.0.0 facebook.com etc.
        walterstucco 9y ago
        There's a flaw in the original comment, and I wanted to make it clear through a provocation. You don't replace social media with books, there are books I never get bored by, I've read Dune almost 20 times, and I'm sure I will read it again sooner or later. Social media content is based on engagement, not on enjoyment. You don't enjoy the content, you enjoy scrolling through the content at the point that once posted, the content is lost, unless it gain real traction, you won't be able to find it again. Books never run out of battery, when you watch TV you are not actively skipping through ad, you passively ignore them. Think about it: when was the last time that you interrupted reading a book for watching the TV or a movie? But how many time you've watched your phone while doing something else? The addictive nature of the "you might miss it" content is the real danger and it's what the article talks about. We are at a point in history where going to a bar and drink it's healthier for you mental health than staying home with your phone.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
    - davidcbc 9y ago
      And yet more books are being written now than at any other time in human history. Perhaps you are just making excuses. It is far easier to blame externalities than taking responsibility.
      - ben_w 9y ago
        I’m actively seeking ways to block those sites, precisely in order to take responsibility. Also, the population is higher now than ever before, as is the literacy rate. Both of these independently increase production of books.
        cr0sh 9y ago
        > I’m actively seeking ways to block those sites, precisely in order to take responsibility. Umm - don't go to them? Or - if you need to get rid of the app (and you can't because provider-ware) - root the phone, and then delete it. If your phone is close-to-near impossible to root, get a different phone. Get a phone for phone use only, and drop everything else. Seriously - the only thing holding you back is you. I don't say this to be flippant; I think we all struggle with it in some manner or another. I know I do now, and have in the past. For instance, I used to be very addicted to /. and Fark - eventually, I stopped going to them, and haven't been back. TBH, Hacker News will probably end up in the same bin sooner or later, as I see things going this route; I try to head it off beforehand. I don't blame anyone but myself. So just do whatever you have to do to drop it - cold turkey, as it could be called...
        ben_w 9y ago
        “don’t go to them” would only work if they weren’t problematically addictive in the first place. I am using all the easy technological tricks I know, at least the ones that don’t actively prevent me getting a job (found a better iOS content blocker since last message): After this novel is done, my intention is to go back to being an iOS developer, so I need to rearrange my brain to not care about the social sacharin soda that is every comment section with a voting mechanism and many without — cold turkey in my position would be like giving a minor drug addict (dopamine is totally a drug) a job finding drug dealers, with no oversight. What I need, and have no idea how to achieve, is to stop caring what text on the internet says. If I could do that, I wouldn’t even feel a need to respond to you, I certainly wouldn’t feel this strange and unhelpful “arg, why don’t they understand!” anger-lite that tells me to not even try to be better by deleting this reply. Now, if you have any suggestions based on psychology, I’m interested. I know too little about psychology to rewrite my mind to be the person I want to be.
MrQuincle 9y ago
In my opinion you are conflating two roles for technology. I quote from the article itself: "Finally, Eyal confided the lengths he goes to protect his own family. He has installed in his house an outlet timer connected to a router that cuts off access to the internet at a set time every day. “The idea is to remember that we are not powerless,” he said. “We are in control.”" In an admittedly handwaving manner, there is tech that gives you time (think dishwasher) and that steals it. I tried to write this down a few days ago: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tech-craves-our-attention-anne-van-rossum https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tech-craves-our-attention-ann...
- FeepingCreature 9y ago
  So instead of the internet being in control, he's in control. I'm not sure this is an improvement.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  I've pretty much only ever used e-readers as a direct substitute for books that I would have read anyway. Quite a few times I've read an electronic book where it would have been inconvenient to have paper books available. I'm not convinced they are any different than books when it comes to time.
  - Crespyl 9y ago
    E-readers save you the time it would have taken to manage the inconvenience of handling physical books. The time spent acquiring, storing, and carrying physical books adds up a lot faster than managing digital materials.
atomashpolskiy 9y ago
> but the whole point of CONSUMERIST technology is to make life easier after all. FTFY
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  No. Technology, period. It's whole point is to make easier things that are difficult, and make possible things that are otherwise not. Consumerist technology is just crap version of actual technology; the former being designed primarily to make money off consumers.
  - atomashpolskiy 9y ago
    There is a vast difference between "making things possible" and "making life easier". Same as between a spaceship and a remote TV control. I'd even go as far as to say, that such consumer-oriented interpretation of the role of technology is one of the reasons, why the world is such a mess in 2017.

gcvbvghb 9y ago

> The problem is (and probably always was) people with empty minds. And of course you think you’re in the other camp, don’t you? How cute.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
The point is, smartphones are not magically holding people back, who would otherwise be creative and do cool stuff. In fact, it's pretty much the opposite, as even the constant stream of shit Internet content eventually exposes you to e.g. DIY tutorials in precisely your favourite area. Nevertheless, some people have less of intellectual lives than others, and (as GP argues and I agree with) whatever the reason, it's unlikely technology is to blame for that.
- ben_w 9y ago
  They (or, rather, the software they connect to) are holding me back from precisely that. If there was no social media, the novel I’m writing would have been done a year ago.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    It wouldn't. You would spend a lot of time watching TV, reading novels, or hanging out in the bar.
    - walterstucco 9y ago
      At one point you stop watching TV, because there are no more new things to watch, you stop reading novels because they aren't novel anymore, you stop going to the bar because there's a fixed amount of alcohol you can consume, it costs money, the bar has opening hours. Smartphone follows you everywhere, all the time.
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        A smartphone has only so much battery. It's best suited for frequent but short uses. If you want to replace TV, novels and bars with social media, your best bet is still the PC.
        ben_w 9y ago
        Fortunately PCs make it easy to block websites. #hosts file 0.0.0.0 twitter.com 0.0.0.0 facebook.com etc.
        walterstucco 9y ago
        There's a flaw in the original comment, and I wanted to make it clear through a provocation. You don't replace social media with books, there are books I never get bored by, I've read Dune almost 20 times, and I'm sure I will read it again sooner or later. Social media content is based on engagement, not on enjoyment. You don't enjoy the content, you enjoy scrolling through the content at the point that once posted, the content is lost, unless it gain real traction, you won't be able to find it again. Books never run out of battery, when you watch TV you are not actively skipping through ad, you passively ignore them. Think about it: when was the last time that you interrupted reading a book for watching the TV or a movie? But how many time you've watched your phone while doing something else? The addictive nature of the "you might miss it" content is the real danger and it's what the article talks about. We are at a point in history where going to a bar and drink it's healthier for you mental health than staying home with your phone.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
  - davidcbc 9y ago
    And yet more books are being written now than at any other time in human history. Perhaps you are just making excuses. It is far easier to blame externalities than taking responsibility.
    - ben_w 9y ago
      I’m actively seeking ways to block those sites, precisely in order to take responsibility. Also, the population is higher now than ever before, as is the literacy rate. Both of these independently increase production of books.
      - cr0sh 9y ago
        > I’m actively seeking ways to block those sites, precisely in order to take responsibility. Umm - don't go to them? Or - if you need to get rid of the app (and you can't because provider-ware) - root the phone, and then delete it. If your phone is close-to-near impossible to root, get a different phone. Get a phone for phone use only, and drop everything else. Seriously - the only thing holding you back is you. I don't say this to be flippant; I think we all struggle with it in some manner or another. I know I do now, and have in the past. For instance, I used to be very addicted to /. and Fark - eventually, I stopped going to them, and haven't been back. TBH, Hacker News will probably end up in the same bin sooner or later, as I see things going this route; I try to head it off beforehand. I don't blame anyone but myself. So just do whatever you have to do to drop it - cold turkey, as it could be called...
        ben_w 9y ago
        “don’t go to them” would only work if they weren’t problematically addictive in the first place. I am using all the easy technological tricks I know, at least the ones that don’t actively prevent me getting a job (found a better iOS content blocker since last message): After this novel is done, my intention is to go back to being an iOS developer, so I need to rearrange my brain to not care about the social sacharin soda that is every comment section with a voting mechanism and many without — cold turkey in my position would be like giving a minor drug addict (dopamine is totally a drug) a job finding drug dealers, with no oversight. What I need, and have no idea how to achieve, is to stop caring what text on the internet says. If I could do that, I wouldn’t even feel a need to respond to you, I certainly wouldn’t feel this strange and unhelpful “arg, why don’t they understand!” anger-lite that tells me to not even try to be better by deleting this reply. Now, if you have any suggestions based on psychology, I’m interested. I know too little about psychology to rewrite my mind to be the person I want to be.

MrQuincle 9y ago

In my opinion you are conflating two roles for technology. I quote from the article itself: "Finally, Eyal confided the lengths he goes to protect his own family. He has installed in his house an outlet timer connected to a router that cuts off access to the internet at a set time every day. “The idea is to remember that we are not powerless,” he said. “We are in control.”" In an admittedly handwaving manner, there is tech that gives you time (think dishwasher) and that steals it. I tried to write this down a few days ago: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tech-craves-our-attention-anne-van-rossum https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tech-craves-our-attention-ann...

FeepingCreature 9y ago
So instead of the internet being in control, he's in control. I'm not sure this is an improvement.
maxerickson 9y ago
I've pretty much only ever used e-readers as a direct substitute for books that I would have read anyway. Quite a few times I've read an electronic book where it would have been inconvenient to have paper books available. I'm not convinced they are any different than books when it comes to time.
- Crespyl 9y ago
  E-readers save you the time it would have taken to manage the inconvenience of handling physical books. The time spent acquiring, storing, and carrying physical books adds up a lot faster than managing digital materials.

atomashpolskiy 9y ago

> but the whole point of CONSUMERIST technology is to make life easier after all. FTFY

TeMPOraL 9y ago
No. Technology, period. It's whole point is to make easier things that are difficult, and make possible things that are otherwise not. Consumerist technology is just crap version of actual technology; the former being designed primarily to make money off consumers.
- atomashpolskiy 9y ago
  There is a vast difference between "making things possible" and "making life easier". Same as between a spaceship and a remote TV control. I'd even go as far as to say, that such consumer-oriented interpretation of the role of technology is one of the reasons, why the world is such a mess in 2017.