4 ms·

> it also has advantages: keeping in touch with friends, socializing, a way to stay up to date with your community, new recipe ideas, exercise ideas, time manag

> it also has advantages: keeping in touch with friends, socializing, a way to stay up to date with your community, new recipe ideas, exercise ideas, time management ideas, maybe even the occasional envy that someone's success triggers more ambition in you to succeed etc. In what way are these advantages over not using social media? They're all things you can do — provably — without social media. In fact, the problem we've identified that leads us to questioning our use of it is that social media is actually a less effective way to stay in touch with friends and socialize.

tqi 5y ago
> They're all things you can do — provably — without social media. People who hold this opinion, when asked to define what counts as social media, will invariably draw the line based on "what do I like/dislike." Facebook, Snapchat: social media. HN, WhatsApp: not social media.
- karaterobot 5y ago
  I'm not making that argument though. What I'm saying is, you can do all of those things (keeping up to date with friends, socializing, finding recipes, etc.) without social media. Indeed, without computers of any kind. The proof is that people did it for thousands of years before social media existed. If the argument is that you can do those things better with social media, my second point was that that hasn't turned out to be the case for many people, particularly when it comes to maintaining meaningful social connections.
  - watwut 5y ago
    > The proof is that people did it for thousands of years before social media existed. That argument does not make sense. For "thousands years", you lived in small one room cabin with kids, grandparents and maybe even sibling there. You socialized, because there was no way to be alone. Good luck finding people now willing to live with you that way. No one will trade letters with you either. They expect you to communicate and socialize at places normal for contemporary society.

tqi 5y ago

> They're all things you can do — provably — without social media. People who hold this opinion, when asked to define what counts as social media, will invariably draw the line based on "what do I like/dislike." Facebook, Snapchat: social media. HN, WhatsApp: not social media.

karaterobot 5y ago
I'm not making that argument though. What I'm saying is, you can do all of those things (keeping up to date with friends, socializing, finding recipes, etc.) without social media. Indeed, without computers of any kind. The proof is that people did it for thousands of years before social media existed. If the argument is that you can do those things better with social media, my second point was that that hasn't turned out to be the case for many people, particularly when it comes to maintaining meaningful social connections.
- watwut 5y ago
  > The proof is that people did it for thousands of years before social media existed. That argument does not make sense. For "thousands years", you lived in small one room cabin with kids, grandparents and maybe even sibling there. You socialized, because there was no way to be alone. Good luck finding people now willing to live with you that way. No one will trade letters with you either. They expect you to communicate and socialize at places normal for contemporary society.