2 ms·

For a curious person, reading interesting information on the internet and watching Youtube videos is not (necessarily) wasted time. So it helps if you keep in

For a curious person, reading interesting information on the internet and watching Youtube videos is not (necessarily) wasted time. So it helps if you keep in mind activities that are acceptable and ones that are not. A lot of the 'good habits', moved to screen time: I used to read more news papers, magazines and books, and most of that turned into screen time. Online discussion is also a useful way to spend time I think (with the right audience, such as some of HN). I wouldn't put screen time due to curiosity for information on the same level as bad addictions, such as smoking (hurting health) or gambling (hurting the wallet).

david_allison 5y ago
The YouTube front page/recommendations were a massive amount of wasted time for me. Removing them via uBlock Origin filters has significantly reduced my "wasted" time on YouTube: www.youtube.com###secondary www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="home"] #primary www.youtube.com##.ytp-show-tiles.ytp-endscreen-paginate.videowall-endscreen.ytp-player-content.html5-endscreen
- lanstin 5y ago
  A good general rule of thumb is never look at anything recommended by an algorithm. Chronological feeds and media recommendations from other humans. Search results are a tricky middle ground. Seems they are trying to make that a source of low value, addictive content as well.
danenania 5y ago
I’ve been listening to Andrew Huberman’s podcast lately. He’s a neurologist and ophthalmologist at Stanford. Something that comes up a lot is how much artificial light, especially the blue light of screens, affects the eyes, brain, and circadian rhythm. Research has even shown a significant impact on hormone levels. Because of this, I don’t see reading a book on a phone as equivalent to a paper book, or reading news online as a equivalent to a newspaper. The content your brain is processing may be the same, but it has a very different impact on your body and mental state, especially at night. So I think it’s wise to differentiate screen vs. non-screen activities and be more careful about doing the former in moderation, or perhaps only early in the day.
- lanstin 5y ago
  EInk with warm light. Kindle or Rmarkable with good reading light. Or reading outside in the sunlight.

david_allison 5y ago

The YouTube front page/recommendations were a massive amount of wasted time for me. Removing them via uBlock Origin filters has significantly reduced my "wasted" time on YouTube: www.youtube.com###secondary www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="home"] #primary www.youtube.com##.ytp-show-tiles.ytp-endscreen-paginate.videowall-endscreen.ytp-player-content.html5-endscreen

lanstin 5y ago
A good general rule of thumb is never look at anything recommended by an algorithm. Chronological feeds and media recommendations from other humans. Search results are a tricky middle ground. Seems they are trying to make that a source of low value, addictive content as well.

danenania 5y ago

I’ve been listening to Andrew Huberman’s podcast lately. He’s a neurologist and ophthalmologist at Stanford. Something that comes up a lot is how much artificial light, especially the blue light of screens, affects the eyes, brain, and circadian rhythm. Research has even shown a significant impact on hormone levels. Because of this, I don’t see reading a book on a phone as equivalent to a paper book, or reading news online as a equivalent to a newspaper. The content your brain is processing may be the same, but it has a very different impact on your body and mental state, especially at night. So I think it’s wise to differentiate screen vs. non-screen activities and be more careful about doing the former in moderation, or perhaps only early in the day.

lanstin 5y ago
EInk with warm light. Kindle or Rmarkable with good reading light. Or reading outside in the sunlight.