3 ms·

A little OT but related and want to bounce this off HN. I think we’ve reached a turning point in history and society, aided by lockdowns, where young people sp

A little OT but related and want to bounce this off HN. I think we’ve reached a turning point in history and society, aided by lockdowns, where young people spend more time interacting online than IRL. This has major consequences for society and tech. Young people present themselves to the world primarily through their online persona. The physical world is secondary. To reiterate, what happens online, what is shown and seen online, is more important to them than the same in physical space. You could probably write a book about the consequences of this (maybe someone has?) but two particularly salient points: (1) if you’re not an onliner then it’s hard for you to understand how the future will look, and (2) your desires are just going to be fundamentally different from other people. I know from talking to CEOs that those entering the workforce now are most comfortable interacting through Slack and WhatsApp. Physical interactions are sometimes difficult, because people have less experience of it - usually it takes them longer to bond, and more formal social situations are challenging because they’ve not had much practice and to learn the rules governing behaviour in certain physical spaces. It’s easy for oldies to mock Zuckerberg with his embarrassing meta presentation, and indeed I think his influence is waning (because he’s also out of touch) but for sure the future is going to be driven by people who are living online. Avatars may seem like a 90s throwback but that’s just because of how we conceive of them; the truth is _we already have avatars, they’re just messy and distributed and mostly text based_. Personally I don’t like this conclusion. I think the physical world is superior in many ways, for example physical activity and exercise are fundamental to wellbeing, and I can’t see that being properly and healthily replicated in the virtual world for a very long time. I think there are more noble and worthwhile goals to be pursued in the physical world. But just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean it ain’t true. I’ve half a mind to join ‘em, half a mind to go build a log cabin.

meheleventyone 5y ago
It’s not either or. These are complementary things. I’ve been extremely online since the mid-90s for example. There’s nothing sinister or world changing here. Online isn’t a separate universe it’s just a part of IRL.
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  I think you're proving his point beautifully. You've been online since the mid-90s, so you're ~40 or older? I don't mean to be derogatory, but you sound exactly like an "oldie" who is out of touch as described by the GP. Zoomers are absolutely spending more time online and less time IRL than previous generations. I'm only 23 and the difference between my childhood and my younger siblings is massive. They generally prefer to socialize by playing online games with their friends rather than hanging out with them in person, and they do so for hours at a time. I used to go to friends houses to play games. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
  - randomsearch 5y ago
    Exactly right, and thank you for “Zoomers” as a better label. General rule here I think is that if you don’t think there’s a tectonic shift then you need to go talk to the Zoomers. Who knows how this turns out but I’m pretty sure it’s not something I’m going to feel comfortable with. There are so many implications: how will different facets of being human translate online? How will this affect our health? And perhaps most critically, in an online world there can be an ultimate power in a way impossible IRL
  - meheleventyone 5y ago
    Don't worry you can be an oldie too if your childhood is massively different to your siblings! You're looking at your younger siblings and I'm looking at my kids. We see different things and honestly I think this is a bit of a moral panic like we saw with rock and roll, comics, TV, video games during my youth, kids playing online games when I was your age and so on.
    - randomsearch 5y ago
      > I think this is a bit of a moral panic I really hope that's true. How do you reconcile that with, for example, teenage psychological problems and suicides linked to social media usage? Video games of the past were quite different from today. I feel like the closure of the tight feedback loop, and the sensorial immersiveness are just a fundamental step change.
cblconfederate 5y ago
I agree. There is a more general point that we underestimate that human persons are to a very large extent informational creatures. It's not just young people, look how everyone and their grandma embraced technology once it became easy to use. The world is increasingly informational, people become increasingly rootless and travel and the economy is turning to a vending machine where ubiquitous services deliver most of the things a person needs anywhere in the world. In this world, digital personas and digital property are more permanent than physical possessions. So i expect more of the economy to move to digital assets over time. Zuck is probably realizing that there the opportunity offered from pseudonymous avatars is bigger than the current one which depends on very public, "real names" communications. I think he is right, but i think he is wrong about how much of it he can control.

meheleventyone 5y ago

It’s not either or. These are complementary things. I’ve been extremely online since the mid-90s for example. There’s nothing sinister or world changing here. Online isn’t a separate universe it’s just a part of IRL.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago
I think you're proving his point beautifully. You've been online since the mid-90s, so you're ~40 or older? I don't mean to be derogatory, but you sound exactly like an "oldie" who is out of touch as described by the GP. Zoomers are absolutely spending more time online and less time IRL than previous generations. I'm only 23 and the difference between my childhood and my younger siblings is massive. They generally prefer to socialize by playing online games with their friends rather than hanging out with them in person, and they do so for hours at a time. I used to go to friends houses to play games. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
- randomsearch 5y ago
  Exactly right, and thank you for “Zoomers” as a better label. General rule here I think is that if you don’t think there’s a tectonic shift then you need to go talk to the Zoomers. Who knows how this turns out but I’m pretty sure it’s not something I’m going to feel comfortable with. There are so many implications: how will different facets of being human translate online? How will this affect our health? And perhaps most critically, in an online world there can be an ultimate power in a way impossible IRL
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  Don't worry you can be an oldie too if your childhood is massively different to your siblings! You're looking at your younger siblings and I'm looking at my kids. We see different things and honestly I think this is a bit of a moral panic like we saw with rock and roll, comics, TV, video games during my youth, kids playing online games when I was your age and so on.
  - randomsearch 5y ago
    > I think this is a bit of a moral panic I really hope that's true. How do you reconcile that with, for example, teenage psychological problems and suicides linked to social media usage? Video games of the past were quite different from today. I feel like the closure of the tight feedback loop, and the sensorial immersiveness are just a fundamental step change.

cblconfederate 5y ago

I agree. There is a more general point that we underestimate that human persons are to a very large extent informational creatures. It's not just young people, look how everyone and their grandma embraced technology once it became easy to use. The world is increasingly informational, people become increasingly rootless and travel and the economy is turning to a vending machine where ubiquitous services deliver most of the things a person needs anywhere in the world. In this world, digital personas and digital property are more permanent than physical possessions. So i expect more of the economy to move to digital assets over time. Zuck is probably realizing that there the opportunity offered from pseudonymous avatars is bigger than the current one which depends on very public, "real names" communications. I think he is right, but i think he is wrong about how much of it he can control.