5 ms·

Just as modern technology has given us cheap, convenient fast food that isn't very nourishing, it's also given us cheap, easy "social" interactions that don't p

Just as modern technology has given us cheap, convenient fast food that isn't very nourishing, it's also given us cheap, easy "social" interactions that don't provide real connection. Social media is a nice compliment to, but not a good replacement for real conversations. "Success" often seems to correlate with cutting yourself off-- having a nice house with a big TV, a car that takes you to and from your job with minimal interaction with other people, and if people do have a few minutes of free time, they are often nose down in their phones, not taking to people around them. Especially after you have kids, it's easier to pull up Game of Thrones on your phone than head out to meet people. Is it any wonder that many people know more about what's going on in Westeros than in their own community? A few years ago I started paying more attention to what I eat, which has been great physically. Over the past year or so I've tried to be more intentional about relationships and conversations. As an introvert, it was weird at first, but it's been amazing. I actually look forward to calling people. (I call it my "Reconnection Challenge" and you can start by calling 2 people per day-- outside of your "have to" calls. Try it.)

joe_the_user 7y ago
Just as modern technology has given us cheap, convenient fast food that isn't very nourishing, it's also given us cheap, easy "social" interactions that don't provide real connection. And just as it is somewhat difficult to get experts to agree what authentically nutritious food would actually be, it is also difficult to sort "shallow" social interactions from deep social interactions. Back when the Internet was young and I was working as a contract programmer in the mid-West, I met a young woman who was engaged to marry a man she'd met over the net and had not physically seen. In ways, it seemed impressive since it seemed to imply a mental connection rather than a physical. Today, social networks are universal and universally denigrated in favor of immediate personal relationships. I'm not sure such a simple return is possible or desirable.
- indigochill 7y ago
  I am a big believer in online relationships. Most of my relationships, friendships and otherwise, have been there. I even got engaged to someone I met online (though we did meet in person a couple times first). However, it's not difficult at all to sort between shallow and deep social interactions. There's a massive difference between social media interactions and the interactions core to a deep relationship. I'll enumerate some examples here: Social Media: * Like * Write short reply * ...? Meaningful relationship: * Long talks (over phone, email, forums, whatever) * Discussion of intimate topics (not suitable for the public space of social media!) * Sharing experiences (and not in the "look what I did" sense of social media, but in the actually doing things together sense of, say, a gamer clan) * Some semblance of shared beliefs or interests (the focus of a forum, perhaps) So by all means let's continue building relationships online. But let's never confuse the shallow-as-possible interactions of social media with actually connecting to another human on any more than the most superficial level.
  - edisonjoao 7y ago
    Hey! I would love for you to try out this solution I have made! http://foxie.cool http://foxie.cool
raverbashing 7y ago
Boo Hoo. This sounds too much like social ludditism and "blaming it on technology". While, sure, a lot of shallow connections exist in social media, it's the same in "the real world" as well Societies change, connections change. People are using social networks as a stepping stone to deeper connections. It's that simple. As in the past the main "social networks" were school, church, hobbies, etc. Which I think it's even better as I don't need to pretend to worship a deity or do some hobby that's out of my comfort zone. And calling people sounds ever more like this weird technological stepping stone that's inferior to in person conversations and to texting/social network interactions
- reubenswartz 7y ago
  Perhaps. But I'm not against the technology. I'm for it. I love that I know what my friends' babies look like thanks to FB. I credit email with helping me stay in touch with high school friends. And I'm all for the convenience of technology to facilitate deeper interactions. My point is that if we are not careful, we can end up eating the junk food to the exclusion of the good stuff, just because it's so convenient, instead of as an appetizer. This community is very well aware of the market cap dollars at stake through user engagement and controlling attention. ;-) Agree that calling is inferior to in-person, but it's far better for conversation that asynchronous text-based stuff. Humans don't have a command line-- we're built to appreciate body language, tone, etc.
  - HNLurker2 7y ago
    >junk food to the exclusion of the good stuff, just because it's so convenient, instead of Then I shall starve by fasting and be able to endure it, just because I am in monk mode and deleted Facebook,ig and all other social media. (I am a strange guy)
    - reubenswartz 7y ago
      No, it sounds like you're skipping the fast food and going straight to the feast. ;-)
- 7y ago

joe_the_user 7y ago

Just as modern technology has given us cheap, convenient fast food that isn't very nourishing, it's also given us cheap, easy "social" interactions that don't provide real connection. And just as it is somewhat difficult to get experts to agree what authentically nutritious food would actually be, it is also difficult to sort "shallow" social interactions from deep social interactions. Back when the Internet was young and I was working as a contract programmer in the mid-West, I met a young woman who was engaged to marry a man she'd met over the net and had not physically seen. In ways, it seemed impressive since it seemed to imply a mental connection rather than a physical. Today, social networks are universal and universally denigrated in favor of immediate personal relationships. I'm not sure such a simple return is possible or desirable.

indigochill 7y ago
I am a big believer in online relationships. Most of my relationships, friendships and otherwise, have been there. I even got engaged to someone I met online (though we did meet in person a couple times first). However, it's not difficult at all to sort between shallow and deep social interactions. There's a massive difference between social media interactions and the interactions core to a deep relationship. I'll enumerate some examples here: Social Media: * Like * Write short reply * ...? Meaningful relationship: * Long talks (over phone, email, forums, whatever) * Discussion of intimate topics (not suitable for the public space of social media!) * Sharing experiences (and not in the "look what I did" sense of social media, but in the actually doing things together sense of, say, a gamer clan) * Some semblance of shared beliefs or interests (the focus of a forum, perhaps) So by all means let's continue building relationships online. But let's never confuse the shallow-as-possible interactions of social media with actually connecting to another human on any more than the most superficial level.
- edisonjoao 7y ago
  Hey! I would love for you to try out this solution I have made! http://foxie.cool http://foxie.cool

raverbashing 7y ago

Boo Hoo. This sounds too much like social ludditism and "blaming it on technology". While, sure, a lot of shallow connections exist in social media, it's the same in "the real world" as well Societies change, connections change. People are using social networks as a stepping stone to deeper connections. It's that simple. As in the past the main "social networks" were school, church, hobbies, etc. Which I think it's even better as I don't need to pretend to worship a deity or do some hobby that's out of my comfort zone. And calling people sounds ever more like this weird technological stepping stone that's inferior to in person conversations and to texting/social network interactions

reubenswartz 7y ago
Perhaps. But I'm not against the technology. I'm for it. I love that I know what my friends' babies look like thanks to FB. I credit email with helping me stay in touch with high school friends. And I'm all for the convenience of technology to facilitate deeper interactions. My point is that if we are not careful, we can end up eating the junk food to the exclusion of the good stuff, just because it's so convenient, instead of as an appetizer. This community is very well aware of the market cap dollars at stake through user engagement and controlling attention. ;-) Agree that calling is inferior to in-person, but it's far better for conversation that asynchronous text-based stuff. Humans don't have a command line-- we're built to appreciate body language, tone, etc.
- HNLurker2 7y ago
  >junk food to the exclusion of the good stuff, just because it's so convenient, instead of Then I shall starve by fasting and be able to endure it, just because I am in monk mode and deleted Facebook,ig and all other social media. (I am a strange guy)
  - reubenswartz 7y ago
    No, it sounds like you're skipping the fast food and going straight to the feast. ;-)
7y ago