6 ms·

Picture tech people walking on their treadmills for compensation and then picture gerbils running on wheels for food. Picture tech people drinking Soylent and t

by babesh 5y ago

Picture tech people walking on their treadmills for compensation and then picture gerbils running on wheels for food. Picture tech people drinking Soylent and then picture gerbils eating pellets. The world is whack. People are substituting artificial things for the natural things that made us happy in earlier times. Walking on a treadmill vs walking outside in the sun and shade amidst plants, trees, and other living things. Eating things for nutrition vs eating fruits and vegetables for enjoyment.

daenz 5y ago
I also get plenty of sun and eat well. But I happen work at a job that requires me to look at a stationary screen for much of the day, like I imagine most of us do. So I am choosing to not be as sedentary. But if you're suggesting that we should abandon working in tech because it's unnatural, I'm afraid you're probably talking to the wrong audience :) You're not the first person to mention gerbils on wheels to me. I think it's mostly a reaction to seeing something unconventional, despite its health benefits. If you feel like you're not living your ideal life in this industry (assuming you are also in tech), that's fine, but don't project that onto me please. I enjoy what I do and how I live.
- babesh 5y ago
  You are projecting. I referred to the archetype and trend and not you specifically. No longer in tech.
themolecularman 5y ago
> Picture tech people walking on their treadmills for compensation and then picture gerbils running on wheels for food. Picture tech people drinking Soylent and then picture gerbils eating pellets. The world is whack. A bit much? I'm not sure where you get soylent from. Nobody is substituting here, I didn't get that from the OP at all. Another commenter mentioned that working from home allows for asynchronous tasks, the OP merely stated that means he can work and work-out on a treadmill. He is neither being compensated for or replacing going out into nature.
xkeysc0re 5y ago
Just because you make an analogy doesn't mean it's valid lol. Like there's obviously an entire category of differences between a person consciously choosing to use a treadmill desk versus a captive pet gerbil on a wheel.
- loopz 5y ago
  Is it really a bad analogy though?
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    Is it? What do you think yourself?
    - loopz 5y ago
      It might not be, considering one need money to live.
vasco 5y ago
The options here are sitting while working or walking while working. The options aren't sititng while working or disregarding society and returning to the forest.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ImaCake 5y ago
  >returning to the forest Which is basically a myth at this point. For most of the last 5000 years most people have had a much lower quality of life than people do today. It's not like things were nice before we sat infront of computers all day.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    > It's not like things were nice before we sat infront of computers all day. But we didn’t have to sit in front of computers all day.
    - ImaCake 5y ago
      A lot of people still don't! For those of us who do, WFH gives us a bit more flexibility about how we spend the time in front of a screen and maybe a chance to fit in exercise where there used to be a commute.
  - fogihujy 5y ago
    It's not that life was living hell for everyone either. Plenty of people have lived comfortable lives throughout the ages -- it's just that there are far more of them nowadays. There's also still a lot of people who have troublesome lives, not to mention people living un-comfortable lives in front of a screen.
    - joshuahedlund 5y ago
      > It's not that life was living hell for everyone either It's not really that much of an exaggeration. Significant percentages of women died in childbirth, young children died of diseases, and men died of violence. If you didn't, multiple people close to you did. Back-breaking manual labor for subsistence was the norm. Even the small minority who lived "comfortably" could randomly die from a tooth infection. It can be exaggerated to be sure, but I think it's even easier to discount the stunning drop in absolute poverty over the last two centuries because we've simply forgotten how terrible the old "normal" was. I highly recommend books like Enlightenment Now or Factfulness that do a great, detailed, and evidence-based job of driving this point home.
probably_wrong 5y ago
> People are substituting artificial things for the natural things that made us happy in earlier times. You frame threadmills and soylent (terrible name, though) as gerbils in a cage. That's one way to frame it. But I choose to frame those things as steps towards becoming something more than humans, with humanity taking its destiny in its own hands. Maybe one day we will have conquered death and live as long as we want to, but until then a small-ish machine that improves my quality of life with me barely noticing is a good first step. We might be the only animals that eat "for nutrition" instead of "for enjoyment", but we are also the only animals that read.
- maigret 5y ago
  I’d have said we’re the only animals who eat for enjoyment (without having proof of that). Or did I miss the joke here?
sgt 5y ago
Growing plants illuminated by expensive indoor lighting setups instead of growing it in your garden with free sun.
abdullahkhalids 5y ago
Stephen Wolfram has a contraption for hanging his laptop in front of him so he can walk outside and work at the same time. https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-productive-life-some-details-of-my-personal-infrastructure/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-prod...
- roel_v 5y ago
  Let's not give people arguments for being more like Stephen Wolfram here...
- jhgb 5y ago
  This seems impractical with conventional screens. Maybe with e-ink this would work better.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  He runs two full-height racks only for himself? That's some heck of an environmental impact.
ngngngng 5y ago
Some of the highest performing humans for the past couple thousand years have spent an abnormal amount of time in dimly lit rooms reading, what we're doing now is not far off if you're actually plugging away at useful tasks and not mindless scrolling.
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
I'm really happy for you that you either don't work or have a job that involves a lot of walking outside in the sun / nature.
mark_l_watson 5y ago
For what it’s worth, I made a similar decision. My dedicated home office is large enough to reengineer for a treadmill (I used one at Google every day for a short while), but I decided it was better for me to go on frequent mini 5 minute walks outside, with long walks before work and sometimes during lunch break. Being outside is healthy, which is why I like to find a shady spot outside to work for short periods. Also, short walks are great times to think about work. Or, sometimes having a pad of paper to think away from a computer.
renewiltord 5y ago
Yeah. That’s what optimization is. It turns out that when I sit for work, then lift for health, then walk in nature for enjoyment I get a lot more out of each of these than when I try to get one thing to meet all these needs. Like, this is the most normal thing that it works this way. This naturalistic fallacy nonsense is so tiresome. “Oh wasn’t it great that we lived in nature and got eaten by bears”. No. It sucked.

by babesh 5y ago

daenz 5y ago

I also get plenty of sun and eat well. But I happen work at a job that requires me to look at a stationary screen for much of the day, like I imagine most of us do. So I am choosing to not be as sedentary. But if you're suggesting that we should abandon working in tech because it's unnatural, I'm afraid you're probably talking to the wrong audience :) You're not the first person to mention gerbils on wheels to me. I think it's mostly a reaction to seeing something unconventional, despite its health benefits. If you feel like you're not living your ideal life in this industry (assuming you are also in tech), that's fine, but don't project that onto me please. I enjoy what I do and how I live.

babesh 5y ago
You are projecting. I referred to the archetype and trend and not you specifically. No longer in tech.

themolecularman 5y ago

> Picture tech people walking on their treadmills for compensation and then picture gerbils running on wheels for food. Picture tech people drinking Soylent and then picture gerbils eating pellets. The world is whack. A bit much? I'm not sure where you get soylent from. Nobody is substituting here, I didn't get that from the OP at all. Another commenter mentioned that working from home allows for asynchronous tasks, the OP merely stated that means he can work and work-out on a treadmill. He is neither being compensated for or replacing going out into nature.

xkeysc0re 5y ago

Just because you make an analogy doesn't mean it's valid lol. Like there's obviously an entire category of differences between a person consciously choosing to use a treadmill desk versus a captive pet gerbil on a wheel.

loopz 5y ago
Is it really a bad analogy though?
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  Is it? What do you think yourself?
  - loopz 5y ago
    It might not be, considering one need money to live.

vasco 5y ago

The options here are sitting while working or walking while working. The options aren't sititng while working or disregarding society and returning to the forest.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ImaCake 5y ago
>returning to the forest Which is basically a myth at this point. For most of the last 5000 years most people have had a much lower quality of life than people do today. It's not like things were nice before we sat infront of computers all day.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  > It's not like things were nice before we sat infront of computers all day. But we didn’t have to sit in front of computers all day.
  - ImaCake 5y ago
    A lot of people still don't! For those of us who do, WFH gives us a bit more flexibility about how we spend the time in front of a screen and maybe a chance to fit in exercise where there used to be a commute.
- fogihujy 5y ago
  It's not that life was living hell for everyone either. Plenty of people have lived comfortable lives throughout the ages -- it's just that there are far more of them nowadays. There's also still a lot of people who have troublesome lives, not to mention people living un-comfortable lives in front of a screen.
  - joshuahedlund 5y ago
    > It's not that life was living hell for everyone either It's not really that much of an exaggeration. Significant percentages of women died in childbirth, young children died of diseases, and men died of violence. If you didn't, multiple people close to you did. Back-breaking manual labor for subsistence was the norm. Even the small minority who lived "comfortably" could randomly die from a tooth infection. It can be exaggerated to be sure, but I think it's even easier to discount the stunning drop in absolute poverty over the last two centuries because we've simply forgotten how terrible the old "normal" was. I highly recommend books like Enlightenment Now or Factfulness that do a great, detailed, and evidence-based job of driving this point home.

probably_wrong 5y ago

> People are substituting artificial things for the natural things that made us happy in earlier times. You frame threadmills and soylent (terrible name, though) as gerbils in a cage. That's one way to frame it. But I choose to frame those things as steps towards becoming something more than humans, with humanity taking its destiny in its own hands. Maybe one day we will have conquered death and live as long as we want to, but until then a small-ish machine that improves my quality of life with me barely noticing is a good first step. We might be the only animals that eat "for nutrition" instead of "for enjoyment", but we are also the only animals that read.

maigret 5y ago
I’d have said we’re the only animals who eat for enjoyment (without having proof of that). Or did I miss the joke here?

sgt 5y ago

Growing plants illuminated by expensive indoor lighting setups instead of growing it in your garden with free sun.

abdullahkhalids 5y ago

Stephen Wolfram has a contraption for hanging his laptop in front of him so he can walk outside and work at the same time. https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-productive-life-some-details-of-my-personal-infrastructure/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/02/seeking-the-prod...

roel_v 5y ago
Let's not give people arguments for being more like Stephen Wolfram here...
jhgb 5y ago
This seems impractical with conventional screens. Maybe with e-ink this would work better.
goodpoint 5y ago
He runs two full-height racks only for himself? That's some heck of an environmental impact.

ngngngng 5y ago

Some of the highest performing humans for the past couple thousand years have spent an abnormal amount of time in dimly lit rooms reading, what we're doing now is not far off if you're actually plugging away at useful tasks and not mindless scrolling.

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

I'm really happy for you that you either don't work or have a job that involves a lot of walking outside in the sun / nature.

mark_l_watson 5y ago

For what it’s worth, I made a similar decision. My dedicated home office is large enough to reengineer for a treadmill (I used one at Google every day for a short while), but I decided it was better for me to go on frequent mini 5 minute walks outside, with long walks before work and sometimes during lunch break. Being outside is healthy, which is why I like to find a shady spot outside to work for short periods. Also, short walks are great times to think about work. Or, sometimes having a pad of paper to think away from a computer.

renewiltord 5y ago

Yeah. That’s what optimization is. It turns out that when I sit for work, then lift for health, then walk in nature for enjoyment I get a lot more out of each of these than when I try to get one thing to meet all these needs. Like, this is the most normal thing that it works this way. This naturalistic fallacy nonsense is so tiresome. “Oh wasn’t it great that we lived in nature and got eaten by bears”. No. It sucked.