4 ms·

The problem is we’ve exploited our ability to tailor our messaging so specifically that people aren’t getting new information. We’ve seen this before, in a way

The problem is we’ve exploited our ability to tailor our messaging so specifically that people aren’t getting new information. We’ve seen this before, in a way: when Christianity ruled, no new emotional information or perspective was capable of taking hold. Our media apparatus is essentially doing the same thing by feeding people the same narrative they grew up on their entire lives. We have kept thousands of hours of TV shows, video games, and movies, news clips, etc and repeatedly view it. One can mentally exist in 1995 with the Internet and the new couch that feels just as comfy. Our limbic system suggests it anyway. Look at our politics mired in clinging to the past, sticking to same old tax & drug policies. The problem is a bunch of nerds who meant well built the panopticon, because they were staring at screens and not considering human history of authoritarian corruption of our emotionally guided agency (humans brains don’t find facts, they engage motor controls and coordinate agency, speaking sounds or doing a mechanical motion of some sort) to focus on the speech we don’t control. Previously religious doctrine, now finance. Now media corp can beam the exact speech necessary to keep every individual soothed just so. How brilliant.

vharuck 7y ago
>One can mentally exist in 1995 with the Internet and the new couch that feels just as comfy. 1. 1995 was just 24 years ago. I'm not a historian, but thinking a cultural period lasting 24 years unusual would be ridiculous for any time before the industrial revolution. And I don't think it even applies today. 2. You might be biased about 1995 culture because it's your culture. My mother-in-law watches reruns from the 70s. People tend to stick with what they like, and there have always been other people willing to provide.
- jenxkfjeo0 7y ago
  The year was an arbitrary choice. People used to have to, except in the political context, move on from such experiences. Being able to recall a few quotes of much different than sitting there importing it all verbatim over and over. For minute in all-the-minutes: LiterallyWatch(FavoriteShow) There was no preservation, books wore out, etc etc They were forced to emotionally process as part of assimilating the info and seek out new info. I am describing an abstract process and how it’s changed to where we can reconnect instantly to past emotional selves. We keep certain pathways lubed and hot without generating new ones through exploration of new truly unique sensory input (how many for loops does a programmer write over and over? Oh sure the JSON content changes. Does the value of a for loop?) Stand still in information stagnation so the social political system can figure out to adapt to maintain control. This isn’t novel thinking and it’s not even radical, it’s pretty well trodden philosophy backed by modern biology research. So downvote all ya want HN. Disinterest in one posters rhetoric does not delete facts of reality

vharuck 7y ago

>One can mentally exist in 1995 with the Internet and the new couch that feels just as comfy. 1. 1995 was just 24 years ago. I'm not a historian, but thinking a cultural period lasting 24 years unusual would be ridiculous for any time before the industrial revolution. And I don't think it even applies today. 2. You might be biased about 1995 culture because it's your culture. My mother-in-law watches reruns from the 70s. People tend to stick with what they like, and there have always been other people willing to provide.

jenxkfjeo0 7y ago
The year was an arbitrary choice. People used to have to, except in the political context, move on from such experiences. Being able to recall a few quotes of much different than sitting there importing it all verbatim over and over. For minute in all-the-minutes: LiterallyWatch(FavoriteShow) There was no preservation, books wore out, etc etc They were forced to emotionally process as part of assimilating the info and seek out new info. I am describing an abstract process and how it’s changed to where we can reconnect instantly to past emotional selves. We keep certain pathways lubed and hot without generating new ones through exploration of new truly unique sensory input (how many for loops does a programmer write over and over? Oh sure the JSON content changes. Does the value of a for loop?) Stand still in information stagnation so the social political system can figure out to adapt to maintain control. This isn’t novel thinking and it’s not even radical, it’s pretty well trodden philosophy backed by modern biology research. So downvote all ya want HN. Disinterest in one posters rhetoric does not delete facts of reality