3 ms·
I think the argument is that all those things you mention can be bad or good, depending on how (and how much) it is done. I think nobody will debate that you ca
by Jolter 5y ago
I think the argument is that all those things you mention can be bad or good, depending on how (and how much) it is done. I think nobody will debate that you can use social media to watch funny videos. But my personal standpoint is that every individual would be better served by consuming less content and instead doing something that is truly fulfilling. Such as spending time with others AFK, studying a topic of interest, taking up a creative hobby, doing a sport etc.
- disgruntledphd2 5y agoI agree with you, but ultimately you can't impose your values on other people (at least not without force), and so we gotta just let people be people.
- Jolter 5y agoI'm not sure what your point is. Should we stop discussing problems we see in society? Will the problem go away, then? Of course I can't (and wouldn't) force people at gunpoint to log our of their social media. Nobody is suggesting that. The article ("ledger") attempts to make an argument for a societal change. How would one start changing society, if one is not allowed to start gathering arguments/evidence in favor of the change one wants to see? "People be people", sure; if there wasn't a trillion-dollar industry profiting from people being hooked on social media and applying every trick at their disposal to keep people hooked, then you would have a point. No, it's not in people's nature to be hooked on scrolling Instagram. It's an entirely artificial problem that we have created together.