3 ms·

Your response advances parent commenter’s point. Addicted people come up with excuses why they can’t stop. If you accept that you’re addicted and decide to end

by gkop 8y ago

Your response advances parent commenter’s point. Addicted people come up with excuses why they can’t stop. If you accept that you’re addicted and decide to end it, you will default to a 90s technology lifestyle and allow technology into your life exactly when you want it. Google’s business would be tremendously damaged if people actually broke the addiction, so they are making superficial product changes that keep us high-functioning addicts.

KirinDave 8y ago
> If you accept that you’re addicted and decide to end it, you will default to a 90s technology lifestyle and allow technology into your life exactly when you want it. This axiomatically assumes it's better or that a pejorative notion of "addiction" is bad. You raising this isn't some kind of brilliant metapoint, it's circular. "You disagree with them and therefore that proves the point!" Hrmm. I think there are pros and cons to pervasive mobile use. For example: it's realistic for me to run an entirely remote software team. Everyone gets more time with their families, but we can all adequately respond when problems exist. Because of my ability to respond, I spend more time with my daughter than my family ever did, and even when I'm away I can be engaged with her in a way that she recognizes and appreciates. Again, no one else my family had this option in your pastoral 90s. I never saw my family; they were chained to work. And in the 90s, my requirements for technology to support myself sequestered me from society. I can realistically do my job, take a lunch break and meet friends, and simply resume work wherever that ends. I could not do that before. I see mobile sturation as freedom from being cloistered by my career and interests. So maybe, just maybe, there are arguments and experiences to consider beyond a feral distaste for google?

by gkop 8y ago

KirinDave 8y ago

> If you accept that you’re addicted and decide to end it, you will default to a 90s technology lifestyle and allow technology into your life exactly when you want it. This axiomatically assumes it's better or that a pejorative notion of "addiction" is bad. You raising this isn't some kind of brilliant metapoint, it's circular. "You disagree with them and therefore that proves the point!" Hrmm. I think there are pros and cons to pervasive mobile use. For example: it's realistic for me to run an entirely remote software team. Everyone gets more time with their families, but we can all adequately respond when problems exist. Because of my ability to respond, I spend more time with my daughter than my family ever did, and even when I'm away I can be engaged with her in a way that she recognizes and appreciates. Again, no one else my family had this option in your pastoral 90s. I never saw my family; they were chained to work. And in the 90s, my requirements for technology to support myself sequestered me from society. I can realistically do my job, take a lunch break and meet friends, and simply resume work wherever that ends. I could not do that before. I see mobile sturation as freedom from being cloistered by my career and interests. So maybe, just maybe, there are arguments and experiences to consider beyond a feral distaste for google?