There is a clear argument here, and it is repeated multiple times. I have no idea why its so difficult for anyone to see.. here’s one: > rather than encouragin

There is a clear argument here, and it is repeated multiple times. I have no idea why its so difficult for anyone to see.. here’s one: > rather than encouraging us to think about the systems that determine the nature of our engagement with online platforms in the first place. In shifting the emphasis from what one is doing with the screen to how often one looks at it, we also shift the emphasis away from the worlds we are building… That distinction right there is obvious, important and yet constantly and repeatedly overlooked. For a lot of us, our parents told us that being on the computer was a waste of time and why don’t you go outside? The current approach to deal with “too much technology” as implemented by Screen Time on Apple devices counts all screen time as the same. I see my friends doing some form of digital detox often as well because they don’t understand this distinction. I don’t know why this turns off so many engineers, but it seems to be predicated on pattern matching off vocabulary. The sentence you quoted is refuted by the argument. No amount of statistics can fundamentally untangle the causation between A. hours spent online and B. obesity, antisocial behavior etc. That is why it’s important to build clear conceptual models before asking the “factual questions” you want. As a thought experiment maybe just consider how exactly you would go about getting factual answers to these questions in a reasonable time and budget without any theory to guide you, only data. I don’t believe its even possible. The replication crisis in psychology should also demonstrate how purely empirical methods can fail.