5 ms·

It'll be interesting to see how things pan out from all this. The internet has only really been with us for a few decades, and yet has completely transformed t

It'll be interesting to see how things pan out from all this. The internet has only really been with us for a few decades, and yet has completely transformed the fabric of humanity, acting as a bizarre and extreme lens upon existing human traits. At some point, logically, there has to be sufficient reaction to bring us back in line with what we came from. The "winner take all" effects from the internet are just too extreme to be feasibly sustained. You can't have a happy society with such extreme gaps between rich tech people and everyone else living in tents or off what they choose to spend their money on. You can't have a happy society where the top 5% of beautiful men are paying people to schedule their calendar of tinder lays while other guys buy thot bathwater, or where the top 5% of women get all the attention and the rest wonder where their prince charming is who's been denied them from all this as they sadly pass 30 alone. The fact is, a huge amount of bad has come from the internet. A seriously huge amount. And the opportunity cost of all that capital that went into enraged politics on twitter and inanity on facebook, that could've gone into medical research... At least we got Musk from it I guess. It's a strange feeling. Being an active participant and facilitator in something that is clearly not naturally aligned with human happiness, only human progress. In the end, what choice do we have. This is our natural aptitude, and succeeding in it can mean the difference between living paycheck to paycheck and becoming financially free. So we're going to do it. We have little choice. But we can't say any of it is fundamentally good. At best we're peddlers of the neutral and inevitable.

jsjddbbwj 7y ago
>where the top 5% of women get all the attention 99%
- neardanger 7y ago
  Many unhappy men we'll see how it all pans out. Many unhappy women as well but more for the same reasons.
  - jsjddbbwj 7y ago
    I'm saying that for each woman affected by this there are 100 men left outside the dating pool.
mr_luc 7y ago
> we're peddlers of the neutral and inevitable Inevitability is the most important, least understood concept I think. You hear it expressed sometimes as 'great surfers need great waves.' (Of course 'great' leaves room for taste, but it conveys the right gist). These forces are much larger than individual humans, or even humanity -- and yet we love to forget this and glorify the surfers as having, somehow, caused the waves. Elon Musk was 'on it,' in a big way, sure. He clearly has exceptional wave selection, or maybe just tastes that aligned perfectly with a time, place, and kind of wave. But the swells are coming, regardless of how you ride.
- exergy 7y ago
  That's a fantastic aphorism. Words to live by.
RankingMember 7y ago
This comment reminds me of the many cautionary comments and sermons made during the advent of rock'n'roll, TV, and film. I think it's complicated, to be sure, but I'm not so sure everything boils down to a net negative. I feel like our ape brains just need to keep iterating, and, with time, we'll naturally find a sort of middle path between mindless dopamine addiction (e.g. constantly checking our phones for that crack-cocaine-like short term good feeling) and asceticism.
- v77 7y ago
  Like a lot of us here I grew up in the 80's/90's when television was going to destroy civilization and global nulear war meant we were all doomed. Now social media and climate change are the next horsemen of the apocalypse.
  - RankingMember 7y ago
    Yep, not to mention the Satanic Panic that gripped suburbia and elements of which I still hear repeated as fact today.
odiroot 7y ago
> You can't have a happy society with such extreme gaps between rich tech people and everyone else living in tents or off what they choose to spend their money on. Doesn't really apply to EU. Bankers, lawyers, real estate agents, some doctors, etc are the (small-time) rich. Most of tech people barely touch the upper-middle class. I have a feeling we're just not a respectable trade.
- slumdev 7y ago
  "Rich tech people" is such a bizarre and mostly imaginary group to rail against. > Doesn't really apply to EU. Bankers, lawyers, real estate agents, some doctors, etc are the (small-time) rich. Most of tech people barely touch the upper-middle class. It's the same in the United States.
  - big_chungus 7y ago
    I think many people don't realize that we've so inflated our currency that you can be worth $2 million and still be upper middle class. Doubly true if you choose to deal with the extortionate taxes of California.
    - BlueTemplar 7y ago
      Lol, you're not middle class (which is dying off anyway), you're top 10% aristocracy at that point : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-bir...
      - JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
        The top 10% starts at $1.1 million. $2 million and up is top 6%. https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/ https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-sta...
      - big_chungus 7y ago
        I'll try to respond, even though "lol" and linking an article isn't much to argue with. I'm not worth that much money, though I do fine and have plenty of time to change that. I didn't have the SAT services or country clubs or private schools of your article. I went to an excellent school on a merit scholarship and not from entitlement. You need to provide evidence for the middle class dying off. And you need to provide more than an opinion piece of rhetoric to substantiate your claim of a "10% aristocracy". Finally, you need to provide some evidence of why someone having more money than someone else is bad. One thing I do agree with in your article: medicine and law are two state-sanctioned monopolies. I absolutely agree that the government ought to stop preventing competition. I also agree that the government should not prop up the financial sector or bail out any company, ever. Inflation is the biggest tax of all; great for finance and lousy for Americans. From your article: "Let’s suppose that some of us do look up. We see the iceberg. Will that induce us to diminish our exertions in supreme child-rearing? The grim truth is that, as long as good parenting and good citizenship are in conflict, we’re just going to pack a few more violins for the trip." I agree with removing government, but what's wrong with the way the top 10% of Americans are raising their children? What's the iceberg? > My grandparents never lost faith in the limitless possibilities of a life free from government. Yes, good. > But in their last years, as the reserves passed down from the Colonel ran low, they became pretty diligent about collecting their Social Security and Medicare benefits. Unfortunately true. Everyone wants his handout, just take away the other guy's. Cut medicaid and increase farm subsidies, says one side; remove agricultural tariffs and more food stamps from the other. Let's get rid of both. Nobody gets to steal the wealth of another. > regressive sales and property taxes. You'll have to sell me on why "regressive" taxes are bad. As far as I'm concerned, here's how to fund the gov't: total expenses / number of adult citizens = each citizen's bill. Send it to everyone and everyone pays the same amount. This makes a lot of sense: within the stuff government ought to do (keep the peace, uphold property rights, and enforce contracts), no one gets significantly more in services than another. > The income-tax system that so offended my grandfather has had the unintended effect of creating a highly discreet category of government expenditures. They’re called “tax breaks,” but it’s better to think of them as handouts that spare the government the inconvenience of collecting the money in the first place. This is disingenuous; stealing less money is not an expenditure. > None of them can afford to live around here... In 1980, a house in St. Louis would trade for a decent studio apartment in Manhattan. Today that house will buy an 80-square-foot bathroom in the Big Apple. Move elsewhere. I choose not to live in an uber-expensive metropolis of the "coastal elites" because I don't want to spend that much. Sounds like St. Louis is a fine place to start looking, especially with the advent of remote work. > Local zoning regulation imposes excessive restrictions on housing development and drives up prices. Yes. Zoning is stupid. The state has no right to tell a citizen what he may or may not do with his property. All this amounts to roughly a hundred pounds of fine whine. One having more than another is not an issue except for envious people who wish to steal their wealth through the club of the state.
AlexandrB 7y ago
> You can't have a happy society where the top 5% of beautiful men are paying people to schedule their calendar of tinder lays while other guys buy thot bathwater, or where the top 5% of women get all the attention and the rest wonder where their prince charming is who's been denied them from all this as they sadly pass 30 alone. This is so reductive of human relationships. You’re basing your entire worldview on what happens on Tinder and Instagram. That’s not the world, not even close. Basically, I suggest that you watch this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fD2briZ6fB0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fD2briZ6fB0
- spritecranberry 7y ago
  I'll preface by saying I don't agree with epicgiga's position. But... that is one of the weirdest videos I've ever watched. Between the mickey mouse imitation, the odd costuming, the bizarre props, and the funny lighting, I made it only about five minutes in. Why couldn't this person have just written a normal article? It's almost always faster to read than to watch a video, anyway.
silenussays 7y ago
Religions did their best to reign this kind of inequality and unhappiness in. Catholicism might have done it best at one time, but threw it all away in a fit of politically correct trendriding during Vatican II. Islam is the only thing left that hasn't bowed to the regressive personal barbarism of market world.
esotericn 7y ago
I think that you're probably spending too much time on the Internet if your model of romantic/sexual relationships is primarily based on what happens on a few apps/discussion boards. I don't mean that as an insult, just an observation of a trap that I think is easy to fall into. In the real world pretty much everyone I know (say early 20s through late 30s age group) might have had the odd partner from Tinder or similar but the majority came through interactions in the real world like interest groups, work, the pub, extended friendship groups, etc. In my experience of having used Tinder for a few days to see what it's all about it feels like a shitty digital version of going to a nightclub, which aren't going anywhere soon. The answer to "I'm bad with social things" is to go and do social things, not to move about pixels on a phone.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  Online dating platforms is by far the most commonly cited method when asked "How did you meet?" to LGBT couples.
RestAndVest 7y ago
Lol, incel dumbo. Learn how to code!

jsjddbbwj 7y ago

>where the top 5% of women get all the attention 99%

neardanger 7y ago
Many unhappy men we'll see how it all pans out. Many unhappy women as well but more for the same reasons.
- jsjddbbwj 7y ago
  I'm saying that for each woman affected by this there are 100 men left outside the dating pool.

mr_luc 7y ago

> we're peddlers of the neutral and inevitable Inevitability is the most important, least understood concept I think. You hear it expressed sometimes as 'great surfers need great waves.' (Of course 'great' leaves room for taste, but it conveys the right gist). These forces are much larger than individual humans, or even humanity -- and yet we love to forget this and glorify the surfers as having, somehow, caused the waves. Elon Musk was 'on it,' in a big way, sure. He clearly has exceptional wave selection, or maybe just tastes that aligned perfectly with a time, place, and kind of wave. But the swells are coming, regardless of how you ride.

exergy 7y ago
That's a fantastic aphorism. Words to live by.

RankingMember 7y ago

This comment reminds me of the many cautionary comments and sermons made during the advent of rock'n'roll, TV, and film. I think it's complicated, to be sure, but I'm not so sure everything boils down to a net negative. I feel like our ape brains just need to keep iterating, and, with time, we'll naturally find a sort of middle path between mindless dopamine addiction (e.g. constantly checking our phones for that crack-cocaine-like short term good feeling) and asceticism.

v77 7y ago
Like a lot of us here I grew up in the 80's/90's when television was going to destroy civilization and global nulear war meant we were all doomed. Now social media and climate change are the next horsemen of the apocalypse.
- RankingMember 7y ago
  Yep, not to mention the Satanic Panic that gripped suburbia and elements of which I still hear repeated as fact today.

odiroot 7y ago

> You can't have a happy society with such extreme gaps between rich tech people and everyone else living in tents or off what they choose to spend their money on. Doesn't really apply to EU. Bankers, lawyers, real estate agents, some doctors, etc are the (small-time) rich. Most of tech people barely touch the upper-middle class. I have a feeling we're just not a respectable trade.

slumdev 7y ago
"Rich tech people" is such a bizarre and mostly imaginary group to rail against. > Doesn't really apply to EU. Bankers, lawyers, real estate agents, some doctors, etc are the (small-time) rich. Most of tech people barely touch the upper-middle class. It's the same in the United States.
- big_chungus 7y ago
  I think many people don't realize that we've so inflated our currency that you can be worth $2 million and still be upper middle class. Doubly true if you choose to deal with the extortionate taxes of California.
  - BlueTemplar 7y ago
    Lol, you're not middle class (which is dying off anyway), you're top 10% aristocracy at that point : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-bir...
    - JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
      The top 10% starts at $1.1 million. $2 million and up is top 6%. https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/ https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-sta...
    - big_chungus 7y ago
      I'll try to respond, even though "lol" and linking an article isn't much to argue with. I'm not worth that much money, though I do fine and have plenty of time to change that. I didn't have the SAT services or country clubs or private schools of your article. I went to an excellent school on a merit scholarship and not from entitlement. You need to provide evidence for the middle class dying off. And you need to provide more than an opinion piece of rhetoric to substantiate your claim of a "10% aristocracy". Finally, you need to provide some evidence of why someone having more money than someone else is bad. One thing I do agree with in your article: medicine and law are two state-sanctioned monopolies. I absolutely agree that the government ought to stop preventing competition. I also agree that the government should not prop up the financial sector or bail out any company, ever. Inflation is the biggest tax of all; great for finance and lousy for Americans. From your article: "Let’s suppose that some of us do look up. We see the iceberg. Will that induce us to diminish our exertions in supreme child-rearing? The grim truth is that, as long as good parenting and good citizenship are in conflict, we’re just going to pack a few more violins for the trip." I agree with removing government, but what's wrong with the way the top 10% of Americans are raising their children? What's the iceberg? > My grandparents never lost faith in the limitless possibilities of a life free from government. Yes, good. > But in their last years, as the reserves passed down from the Colonel ran low, they became pretty diligent about collecting their Social Security and Medicare benefits. Unfortunately true. Everyone wants his handout, just take away the other guy's. Cut medicaid and increase farm subsidies, says one side; remove agricultural tariffs and more food stamps from the other. Let's get rid of both. Nobody gets to steal the wealth of another. > regressive sales and property taxes. You'll have to sell me on why "regressive" taxes are bad. As far as I'm concerned, here's how to fund the gov't: total expenses / number of adult citizens = each citizen's bill. Send it to everyone and everyone pays the same amount. This makes a lot of sense: within the stuff government ought to do (keep the peace, uphold property rights, and enforce contracts), no one gets significantly more in services than another. > The income-tax system that so offended my grandfather has had the unintended effect of creating a highly discreet category of government expenditures. They’re called “tax breaks,” but it’s better to think of them as handouts that spare the government the inconvenience of collecting the money in the first place. This is disingenuous; stealing less money is not an expenditure. > None of them can afford to live around here... In 1980, a house in St. Louis would trade for a decent studio apartment in Manhattan. Today that house will buy an 80-square-foot bathroom in the Big Apple. Move elsewhere. I choose not to live in an uber-expensive metropolis of the "coastal elites" because I don't want to spend that much. Sounds like St. Louis is a fine place to start looking, especially with the advent of remote work. > Local zoning regulation imposes excessive restrictions on housing development and drives up prices. Yes. Zoning is stupid. The state has no right to tell a citizen what he may or may not do with his property. All this amounts to roughly a hundred pounds of fine whine. One having more than another is not an issue except for envious people who wish to steal their wealth through the club of the state.

AlexandrB 7y ago

> You can't have a happy society where the top 5% of beautiful men are paying people to schedule their calendar of tinder lays while other guys buy thot bathwater, or where the top 5% of women get all the attention and the rest wonder where their prince charming is who's been denied them from all this as they sadly pass 30 alone. This is so reductive of human relationships. You’re basing your entire worldview on what happens on Tinder and Instagram. That’s not the world, not even close. Basically, I suggest that you watch this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fD2briZ6fB0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fD2briZ6fB0

spritecranberry 7y ago
I'll preface by saying I don't agree with epicgiga's position. But... that is one of the weirdest videos I've ever watched. Between the mickey mouse imitation, the odd costuming, the bizarre props, and the funny lighting, I made it only about five minutes in. Why couldn't this person have just written a normal article? It's almost always faster to read than to watch a video, anyway.

silenussays 7y ago

Religions did their best to reign this kind of inequality and unhappiness in. Catholicism might have done it best at one time, but threw it all away in a fit of politically correct trendriding during Vatican II. Islam is the only thing left that hasn't bowed to the regressive personal barbarism of market world.

esotericn 7y ago

I think that you're probably spending too much time on the Internet if your model of romantic/sexual relationships is primarily based on what happens on a few apps/discussion boards. I don't mean that as an insult, just an observation of a trap that I think is easy to fall into. In the real world pretty much everyone I know (say early 20s through late 30s age group) might have had the odd partner from Tinder or similar but the majority came through interactions in the real world like interest groups, work, the pub, extended friendship groups, etc. In my experience of having used Tinder for a few days to see what it's all about it feels like a shitty digital version of going to a nightclub, which aren't going anywhere soon. The answer to "I'm bad with social things" is to go and do social things, not to move about pixels on a phone.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
Online dating platforms is by far the most commonly cited method when asked "How did you meet?" to LGBT couples.

RestAndVest 7y ago

Lol, incel dumbo. Learn how to code!