3 ms·

I think the difference between computer-based distractions (video games, smartphones) and those previous (television, newspapers, etc) is that the former is int

I think the difference between computer-based distractions (video games, smartphones) and those previous (television, newspapers, etc) is that the former is interactive, which leads one to feel as if they are doing something. Getting to the next level in a game or posting a comment or status that gets lots of likes and replies feels like work and reward, whereas one-way consumption doesn’t offer the same subconscious justification. If I spend all day watching Netflix I feel like I’ve done nothing but vegetate, but if I play video games I’ve made progress. If I’m constantly scrolling through Facebook I’m keeping up with my friends. If I zigzag half a dozen news sites (I would never pay for or read enough to justify half a dozen newspaper subscriptions) I am being informed about the world. In each of these cases I know that 90+% of what I experience is mostly garbage with no meaningful long term benefits to my life, but they’re so much more engaging than previous forms of distraction and so they are much harder to put down.

ryandrake 9y ago
Engagement is a trap, it fools us into thinking we're doing something. Instead of evaluating what I'm doing in terms of vegetating vs. engagement, I find it helps to classify my activity into consuming vs. producing. Am I actually making or creating something, or am I passively consuming? - Netflix: Consumption - Video Game: Consumption - Facebook: Consumption - Web Browsing: Consumption (I give up, how do you make a list in HN-text?) There are holes in this classification. I'd say posting to Facebook/HN/blogs is probably garbage activity too, but it's not entirely consumption. But thinking this way is better than making ourselves think we're accomplishing something by beating the next boss in the game.
- aoeusnth1 9y ago
  (You can make a list with an extra new line between each bullet)
ashark 9y ago
> If I spend all day watching Netflix I feel like I’ve done nothing but vegetate, but if I play video games I’ve made progress. If I’m constantly scrolling through Facebook I’m keeping up with my friends. If I zigzag half a dozen news sites (I would never pay for or read enough to justify half a dozen newspaper subscriptions) I am being informed about the world. Even Netflix gives you progress—progress through a season, or through a series. It's guaranteed to come up in conversation when a new season comes out—oh, how far are you, how far did you get last night, when do you expect to finish it. It's not entirely new, but with once-a-week airings you couldn't binge anything, and even with home video releases of series there was a lot more friction, so you couldn't just start watching any ol' thing. You had to really want it.
leggomylibro 9y ago
That's an interesting way of putting things; y'know, sometimes it seems like a false sense of accomplishment lies at the core of lots of types of addictions. But I guess that's sort of the definition of an addiction, right? Behavior which hijacks the brain's feedback loops to sustain itself over anything else. Mental cancers. It sort of makes you wonder at what point people started to unironically view their jobs as engineering addictions. Was it around the Myspace era? Earlier? Or was Facebook what really set the mold for that stated goal?
lanstin 9y ago
Honestly, i'd have to guess that reading a long form book/essay demands more of me mentally than just scrolling thru a bunch of stuff.

ryandrake 9y ago

Engagement is a trap, it fools us into thinking we're doing something. Instead of evaluating what I'm doing in terms of vegetating vs. engagement, I find it helps to classify my activity into consuming vs. producing. Am I actually making or creating something, or am I passively consuming? - Netflix: Consumption - Video Game: Consumption - Facebook: Consumption - Web Browsing: Consumption (I give up, how do you make a list in HN-text?) There are holes in this classification. I'd say posting to Facebook/HN/blogs is probably garbage activity too, but it's not entirely consumption. But thinking this way is better than making ourselves think we're accomplishing something by beating the next boss in the game.

aoeusnth1 9y ago
(You can make a list with an extra new line between each bullet)

ashark 9y ago

> If I spend all day watching Netflix I feel like I’ve done nothing but vegetate, but if I play video games I’ve made progress. If I’m constantly scrolling through Facebook I’m keeping up with my friends. If I zigzag half a dozen news sites (I would never pay for or read enough to justify half a dozen newspaper subscriptions) I am being informed about the world. Even Netflix gives you progress—progress through a season, or through a series. It's guaranteed to come up in conversation when a new season comes out—oh, how far are you, how far did you get last night, when do you expect to finish it. It's not entirely new, but with once-a-week airings you couldn't binge anything, and even with home video releases of series there was a lot more friction, so you couldn't just start watching any ol' thing. You had to really want it.

leggomylibro 9y ago

That's an interesting way of putting things; y'know, sometimes it seems like a false sense of accomplishment lies at the core of lots of types of addictions. But I guess that's sort of the definition of an addiction, right? Behavior which hijacks the brain's feedback loops to sustain itself over anything else. Mental cancers. It sort of makes you wonder at what point people started to unironically view their jobs as engineering addictions. Was it around the Myspace era? Earlier? Or was Facebook what really set the mold for that stated goal?

lanstin 9y ago

Honestly, i'd have to guess that reading a long form book/essay demands more of me mentally than just scrolling thru a bunch of stuff.