4 ms·
The thing that always bugs me about this kind of thinkpiece is the short-view assumption that there's some telos to whatever effect they're describing. Tobacco
by weeksie 7y ago
The thing that always bugs me about this kind of thinkpiece is the short-view assumption that there's some telos to whatever effect they're describing. Tobacco use has waxed and waned in popularity many times over the centuries since its introduction to the rest of the world.
That seems like a nitpick but the whole "we'll have more addictive things" hypothesis rests on there being an arc of history. Like, sure maybe? Then we'll have less. I like a lot of pg's stuff, I just find this is pretty far out in left field.
- imgabe 7y agoI think it's less about an arc of history and more of an extrapolation. We use technology to advance things that benefit us. Getting people addicted to things benefits the people who sell those things. Hence, they will use technology to advance addictiveness. Since technology advances exponentially, addictiveness will then also advance exponentially. We are hitting the fat part of the technology curve, so maybe the fat part of the addictiveness curve is right behind it.
- DenisM 7y agoI think pg always tries to make things a part of the big plan or a big arc. Can't blame him - it's easier to reason about things when they fit together, and stringing them up as a part of a trend/arc/pursuit-of-telos works very well for that. It might even be correct sometimes. Despite the apparent bias it's still quality writing and often generates quality discussions. I also have to say that most people in our industry cannot generalize at all; pg is one of only two people I know who can do the job without botching it. To the extent that we want to generalize anything at all, however well, we have nearly no one else to look at.