12 ms·

> if you don't like these products and feel they are negative, then don't use them It's really not that simple. The products have become so widespread and infl

> if you don't like these products and feel they are negative, then don't use them It's really not that simple. The products have become so widespread and influential that they change the very culture of our society for the worse. It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not, some of your friends will still be more or less subtly influenced by its existence in your social interactions. There's a nice quote from Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media, which IMO hasn't aged at all in 60 years: "Our conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot. For the 'content' of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind... The effects of technology do not occur at the level of opinions or concepts, but alter sense ratios or patterns of perception steadily and without any resistance."

epolanski 3y ago
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. I for one deleted all of those platforms and my life is definitely better (I'm way less distracted for once, but the list is longer). What do I care what others do?
- thinkingemote 3y ago
  Do you live or work with others? Do you have a family or children? Do you interact in meaningful ways with people online? I ask seriously (but no need to reply, this is to aid understanding) as many here on HN do not have all of these so the range of examples may be narrowed for some people. I would however imagine you have some relationships of some kind that you care about. Can you imagine your relationships changing if these others you cared about changed their behaviours? Then extend this imaginary possibility to the relationships of these others. It's a network we are in we are not operating entirely alone. Care of the other is wanting what is good for the other. Sometimes this care is not forcing the other to change, sometimes it's encouraging them to change to benefit them as it benefited you.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - XorNot 3y ago
    How is this not the OP's exact point? If you're not forcing people to change - by banning things with the violence of government - then you're simply making an argument to people and hoping they listen, just as we ever have to.
- unclebucknasty 3y ago
  >What do I care what others do Because we live in a society? Would you care if everyone around you was smoking crack, sociopathic or seriously mentally ill?
  - kys_now 3y ago
    [dead]
- EMIRELADERO 3y ago
  The commenter is arguing from a broad "what's good for society" sense, not on strict individuality. While I disagree with the whole idea of legislating access to social media/internet services in any way (RIP anonymity), I do think there can be valid places and times for regulation that seeks to change society itself, not just individuals.
  - unclebucknasty 3y ago
    >RIP anonymity Maybe anonymity has had a good run and is actually at the root of the issue in many contexts. After all, people don't (generally) walk around IRL wearing ski masks so they can say crazy shit or troll people without consequence. And we also get the courtesy of knowing who the people we're talking to actually are. And if you say, "yeah but doxxing and death threats" or "my employer might fire me", etc then maybe these are the actual problems that need to be addressed. And, yes, I realize that's coming from someone who's IRL neither Uncle Buck or Buc Nasty, as his handle might imply. But, obviously that's where we currently are, which is the point.
    - AlexandrB 3y ago
      IRL nobody is running facial recognition tech and uniquely identifying you. And, despite what your teachers told you, no one is keeping a permanent record of the minutia of your life. So I know my neighbor is "George", but I don't know anything about his political opinions, where he shops, how he treats waiters, or what kind of porn he watches. Thus he's not anonymous, but his daily activities are generally private and ephemeral. The internet flips this on its head because pseudonymous handles can be linked to reams of online activity that's retained effectively forever but can't be connected to a specific person. This is why "doxxing" is such a big deal online. If online activity was like IRL activity and ephemeral, I might agree with you. But the internet never forgets. Edit: By the way, this is not universally defined: > say crazy shit "Crazy shit" is very culturally and contextually dependent. If I condemn China's treatment of Uyghurs, that's fine in North America but considered "crazy shit" and can land you in jail in China. That's an extreme example, but there are plenty of other more banal differences in culture and what's acceptable globally.
- stareatgoats 3y ago
  > What do I care what others do? While a perfectly fine rule of thumb in general, I think you might find the sticking to "I don't care what other people do" as an overriding principle doesn't hold water in a substantial number of edge cases. One such case is where someone is willfully influencing others to act against their best interests, or against the best interest of society as a whole. That's when one needs to make a judgement call on a case by case basis. Is this such a case? Not sure. I just wanted to point out that "I don't care what other people do" can't be your guiding light, always.
  - epolanski 3y ago
    I might have expressed myself poorly. I "don't care" what others do in the strict sense that I don't let it influence me. But I can tell you that me quitting socials did impact relatives and friends to quit those too, and thus I absolutely do not relate with his statement: > It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not
    - raziel2p 3y ago
      I'm glad that you were able to convince all your meaningful friends and family to change their social media / internet behavior according to your values - but please don't assume that it's a viable option for everyone, with no downsides.
      - ctoth 3y ago
        But have you tried?
- josephg 3y ago
  > What do I care what others do? I’ve done the same, but it’s not without cost: - Two hobbies I’m involved with have large local communities on Facebook. I’m not in the loop, and sometimes miss out on events and catchups. - I’m not on Twitter, and there’s a massive amount of chat about my field (realtime collaborative editing & local first software) that takes place there. I miss out on what’s going on, and I’m reliant on other people to promote my work for me. Im happier. But it’s you really are cut off from a lot of society - especially in the tech world - if you aren’t on social media.
  - ranguna 3y ago
    You can join those communities and discussions with "work" accounts. Instead of creating a personal twitter or meta account, you could create one that is only used to join those specific groups and discussion.
    - pjerem 3y ago
      Yes you can. But then, you have an account. Most people that dont have an account on social medias just don’t want to accept the TOS. Also worth noting that it sounds like meta thinks like they already have all earth population in their products because new accounts are really easily banned for no reason. Any temporary account I made to access some information have been blocked minutes or hours after creation.
    - notachatbot1234 3y ago
      Those sites are designed to exploit you psychologically in various ways (ads, order of display, design, gamified interaction etcetera). The purpose of your account does not matter if you cannot access and consume the information in a reasonable and healthy way.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    Twitter is also where the discussion about my field takes place. What's not to like? I find Twitter's recommendation algorithm does a great job of honing the content down to just the relevant information I need and then I can go back to carrying on with life. Before Twitter, you had to go to the coffee shop and listen to people ramble on with their inane political rants and conspiracy theories just to get at the occasional tidbit of useful field-related information. That was depressing.
- kredd 3y ago
  If you have children or niblings, you’ll realize how ostracized from the community one gets if they have no access to social media. It would work if parents banded together and nobody in school would get access, but otherwise it just becomes a “there’s a giant club and you’re not a part of it”. As a child, that really hurts. When I was in high school, Facebook was just opening up access to everyone. I remember literally everyone getting on it, and swapping between messages in MSN, and some posts on FB. We had whole school wide conversations, planning and etc. on social media, and on days when I didn’t get in front of the computer to check things, I remember feeling left out. It’s just so much worse now, because every kid expects every other kid to be on the loop of things 24/7. I think that’s where we screwed up. Having just casual access without mobile phones was the sweet spot, in my opinion.
  - rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
    But why do you make it sound like it’s not an option to teach kids to not have fear of missing out and having meaningful ways of spending their time in the real, offline world? I guarantee you that there is nothing of value that other teens are saying that your own children need to be updated 24/7
    - gommm 3y ago
      I also guarantee you that a teen who is not in the loop is much more likely to be ostracized and bullied in the offline world. So, yes you might try teaching your kid that they're not missing out that they can find more meaningful way to spend their time in the real offline world but, the fact is, they go to schools with kid who overwhelmingly are not taught that and who will dislike your kid for being different. Your kid doesn't live in isolation, he lives in society and, during school years is when social pressure to conform to the group norm is strongest. I'm speaking from experience here, I've been bullied as a teen, I definitely would rather avoid my son going through a similar experience.
      - rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
        Eh, that’s not necessarily true. Other kids might bully your child for having a healthy set of offline interests and for not being like them who are all plugged in online, but I don’t see how it’s not an option to teach your kids to have a strong sense of identity and not give in to peer pressure while also assuring them that you’ve always got their back. What you’re describing doesn’t sound like parenting to me, it’s giving in to peer pressure. From kids. And you’re supposed to be an adult who already knows what’s right and wrong. If your kid’s peers all gain a liking for drugs or gambling or some other vice and they bully your child for not partaking, are you going to tell your child to participate? No, what you should do is show them the right way and to what’s good for them in the long term, even if it’s difficult for them to see it now because of their youth.
- JodieBenitez 3y ago
  > What do I care what others do? example from real life: My local musicians community decided to use only FB to communicate their gigs dates. I refuse to use FB. I no longer know when or where is the gig. I don't see my fellows anymore.
  - 10729287 3y ago
    How hard is it to discuss this topic with other people that have access to fb when you meet them around the city ? Honest question. Sure, it require more involvement than opening the Facebook tap and getting everything instantly, but at the end of the day, isn't your goal to getting involved in the community ? This will require some energy.
    - JodieBenitez 3y ago
      See above
    - boppo1 3y ago
      You are out of touch. Scenes and events really are that reliant on facebook. "Hey man, when/where's the next show?" "We dunno yet, but we'll post an event about it for sure." There are some small, insular scenes where everybody knows everybody and word gets around, but those are getting fewer every day.
  - forgetfreeman 3y ago
    Maybe text or call a couple friends in the community once a week?
    - JodieBenitez 3y ago
      Been there, done that... "it's all on the page, just check it mate". And suddenly you're that annoying weirdo that refuses to do things like everybody else.
      - forgetfreeman 3y ago
- raziel2p 3y ago
  My life is also better, overall. However, I do miss out on important life updates from my friends because I'm not on Instagram. I could be a hardliner and say "well they don't care about me enough to share 1-on-1, so they're not real friends", but that's... stupid. I feel sad for missing out on opportunities to take part in their lives and life updates that way, and I know for a fact that there are rich connections/conversations that would happen if I were able to use these in a healthy way.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    What do you talk about with your friends if the important life events don't come up? Perhaps I just have boring friends that we resort to sometimes talking about what is going on in our lives. I also wouldn't feel like less of a friend if they didn't tell me something, but important life events in their lives are usually important to them, which means that they ultimately end up talking about them in some way or another.
- abc123abc123 3y ago
  I agree. Same here. The only social media I have is mastodon and usenet. Yes, I live and work with others and email and phone is sufficient. If people try to get me to use slck I refuse. If I cannot refuse, I deploy my slck2email bridge and reply once every 24 hours and usually colleagues stop chatting with me when they realize they won't get an answer until 24 hours, or they drop by my desk, email or call me on the phone if it is urgent. I think a lot of the complaints from people who "cannot stop" is just laziness. They need the government to construct an excuse so they won't have to man up and take control of their own lives. That is also sad, because it means those people will never grow up but will be constant children in the eyes of the state. Then I would say there are the 0.01% who do have psychological problems and they need to see a doctor.
- coldtea 3y ago
  If you don't live in a society but in some remote wilderness and hunt for your food, then you don't need to care what others do. If you do live in a society, you do need to care, as "what others do" affects society in general, including you in the end. Affects how they behave, how they vote, what causes they support, their mental health, and tons of other things, all of which end up also affecting those who don't use those apps.
- doktrin 3y ago
  > What do I care what others do? This is libertarian virtue signalling that simply does not stand up to reality.
signaru 3y ago
And then there are also those companies/institutions/orgs/news/shops that make you left behind from otherwise useful information or services by not being on social media platforms.
- pjerem 3y ago
  This is a real everyday pain that anyone with social media accounts can’t fathom. Most (like 90%) businesses don’t have a website or when they have, it’s a static website. All the news are on social medias behind nag screens.
- zer00eyz 3y ago
  And then there's Therapist who keep saying everyone should be in therapy and drug companies with the latest in psychopharmacology. Histeria (and the virbrator), ice pick lobotomies, electro shock therapy, Quaalude, Benzodiazepines (valium) as mothers little helpers, MAOI's, SRRI's (PSSD), Benzodiazepines again (Xanax, klonipin). <<< (Hint all of these things turned out to be DEEPLY fucked up) And for good measure a few variations of adrenal Ritalin and other methamphetamines. Maybe, just maybe, and hear me out on this, we have more people with mental health issues because "self diagnosis" and "self identifications" can get you a prescription. Maybe, just maybe more people have mental health issues because there is a whole fucking industry designed to profit off of problems that have a "diagnostic criteria" and not a "test". Maybe just maybe we should remember that the "reproducibility crisis" has some of its worst offenders in psychiatry and psychology. Or you know blame social media, like we did for books, radio, tv, Elvis and rock, rap and metal, video games, 4chan and now....
  - liamwire 3y ago
    Your tirade against an almost ridiculously broad spectrum of drugs isn’t at all similar to what’s being discussed here, and reeks of a hidden agenda or bias. Many, if not all, of the medications you listed have been a net benefit for the individual and the world.
    - zer00eyz 3y ago
whstl 3y ago
> It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not Yep. The other problem is that not having social media and mobile devices can be alienating and ostracizing, especially for teenagers. Avoiding the problems of social media requires skills and restraint that even most adults don’t have. It is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation.
- tossandthrow 3y ago
  > Avoiding the problems of social media requires skills and restraint that even most adults don’t have. The parent commenter propose that you can not escape the negative consequences of social media, even if you fully restrain yourself, as you have the second order effects from your friends using it. The parent commenter says that this is not an individual problem and cannot be solved on an individual level. It is a macro issue. Just like you stopping eating meat will not really make a dent on global warming. I think that is very insightful.
  - pas 3y ago
    Where you put your time/attention/money matters a lot though. For you and your friends/family. And even more for those small(er) alternative services/products/markets/communities.
- myspy 3y ago
  That's true. We restrict access to Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, FB, they can use WhatsApp, YT, iMessage, Phone and Pinterest. I'm fucking annoyed by other parents that don't set boundaries that way. I have so much discussions about other platforms. Pushing them to physically meet is hard too. We grew up at a time where SMS was a thing when I became 16. I know that keeping up is cool, but social media is a disease. The amount of dumb and uneducated people that couldn't even listen to expert advice during a fucking pandemic is driving me up the wall. I'm annoyed mainly because people around me make bad decisions that have an influence on my own life.
  - nicolas_t 3y ago
jascination 3y ago
> It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not, some of your friends will still be more or less subtly influenced by its existence in your social interactions You could say the same thing about the Bible, or Harry Potter, or any number of things too
- raziel2p 3y ago
  The Bible, I absolutely would, the negative impact of dogmatic Christianity has been pretty bad on society IMO. Harry Potter, not so much, but still some yes. I still have to argue with some of my friends that the books have some dubious morals that I wouldn't be comfortable ingraining in my children (if I had any). The scale, extent and addictiveness of these two things are nothing compared to algorithmic social media though.
  - zer0zzz 3y ago
    That’s an interesting thought. I wonder how detrimental Christianity’s impact on society has been compared to social media? It kind of makes the argument pointless when you frame it that way.
  - abnercoimbre 3y ago
    Tangent: Children's literacy (and that of some adults for that matter) skyrocketed under the HP phenomenon, in profound ways that activists/scholars are typically grateful for. I wish I could find the studies done, sorry that I don't have them on hand. I guess I'm saying that it was worth it, dubious morals aside.
- yard2010 3y ago
  And you would say it as well about party/designer drugs
anhner 3y ago
Teenagers are so judgy about the color of the text message bubbles they receive, imagine how judgy they would be if one didn't participate at all in some digital platform most of them use.
- firecall 3y ago
  Not around these parts! They all use Discord and/or Snapchat here in Australia. No one I've every asked about this cares about Android vs iPhone. No one. No one apart from the Parents uses the built in messaging and SMS. But then the Parent groups all use Facebook Messenger for most group comms. The whole green / blue bubble thing is either over played by the Press or purley a US Phenomenon. But given the marketshare of the iPhone with teenagers in the US, it seems it's possibly less of an issue its made out to be due to the fact that most people have iPhones anyway!
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    I think you missed the entire point of the comment above. It's not about iOS vs Android but about not being included socially, regardless of the platform. Imagine in your example where one kid in a group didn't use Discord, they'd be effectively cut off.
    - firecall 3y ago
      I can see how it seems like I might have :-) But I understand the point well. Discord and SnapChat are available for iOS and Android. With Discord being available as good as everywhere. So using Android does not exclude you socially in my experience, here in Australia. Similarly in Europe and the UK, the What’s App was hugely popular and the default cross platform messenger. I don’t entirely believe the rhetoric around Green and Blue bubbles that the press repeat without any real evidence. :-)
      - ashyaspen 2y ago
        Again you miss the point entirely. This is not Apple vs Android. This is teenagers not being given a choice whether or not to use social media generally. The fact is if everyone else uses it, this precludes them from many normal interactions that get replaced by social media. It's a cultural thing as much as it is a personal thing. You will feel excluded if you don't use it, so unless everyone changes, it's hard for you to change. That takes a determination even many adults lack. The harmful effects of social media are not eliminated by choosing not to participate. They have a cultural impact (both benefit and harm) that expands beyond an individuals choice. We should reconsider how to handle teenagers on social media as a society. Not just tell them to preclude themselves if it's harming them.
octopusRex 3y ago
I remember when they taught mcLuhan in highschool - 1970s - in order to make us more aware of media manipulation. I wonder if they still do. Ironically, this was in Florida - probably be considered too woke by Desantis.
uconnectlol 3y ago
> It's really not that simple except it is, because law is dumb, stupid, and slow-witted. if you ban facebook specifically, the next day it will think that means mailing lists should also be banned. btw ive witnessed lots of mailing list and then web forum addicted deadbeats before social media came out but whatever the legal solution is nothing (i realize not all of you have asked for the legal solution yet but thats essentially the only point of this thread that is brought up routinely on places like HN) teh fact that every techie and his mom seems to think the law will work out in his favor when it backfires each time (or they just ignores that downsides) is no different than how people keep thinking you can put a web server in every embedded device and they oh so surprisingly have the same RCE vulns as the 90s, every single time.
- fragmede 3y ago
  After the DMCA and the CFAA, what techie thinks the law will work out in their favor?
hypertexthero 3y ago
See also The Medium is the Massage, a very illuminating book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Medium_Is_the_Massage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Medium_Is_the_Massage https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-medium-is-the-massage-revised-marshall-mcluhan/581259 https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-medium-is-the-massage-revis...
base698 3y ago
If TV turned everything into entertainment, including discourse, then social media has turned every discourse into being an influencer. I frequently see people at a coffeeshop set up cameras like they are filming a TV show to talk about their latte or muffin for Instagram. This happens everywhere in all walks of life. Any hobby, no matter how esoteric, will be molded into the shape of good for instagram.
karaterobot 3y ago
> It's really not that simple. The products have become so widespread and influential that they change the very culture of our society for the worse. It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not, some of your friends will still be more or less subtly influenced by its existence in your social interactions. I suspect that a lot of the anxiety about how difficult it would be to quit is the mind's way of rationalizing a psychological addiction, like saying you can't stop smoking because things are just so crazy right now. I quit social networks in 2008, it wasn't hard at the time and it's not been hard to stay away. Yes, there are consequences of being the one guy in the friend group who doesn't use whatever app everyone else is using, but to call those consequences meaningful is an overstatement. A minor annoyance, easy for everyone to adapt to. You're right that other people are still influenced by social networks. Speaking from the outside, I wouldn't even use the word 'subtle' to describe its effects. But, I don't know that that really matters. You surround yourself with people you like, despite their flaws. You hope the good things about them grow, and that they work through their flaws. That's just having friends.
- raziel2p 3y ago
  I wrote the comment as someone who doesn't use social media. I still, for example, miss out on important life updates from my friends because media has taught us that it's easier to post a story than to manually select all 10-50 people who might be interested and send it individually. Your good friends and friendships will survive that, no doubt, but you do lose out on opportunities to make additional or deeper connections.
trgn 3y ago
It's baffling to me, that despite how famous McLuhan still is today, that people somehow do not follow the implications of his criticism (and that of Ellul, Debord, Kaczinsky ;), ...). Technology, in and of itself, the actual physical _thing_, shapes the world, our dispositions, our aspirations, in its own image, and does so in absence of our judgement.
xnx 3y ago
First paragraph is at least (or even more) applicable to cable news and talk radio. The amount of brainrot in the geriatric electorate due to the 8+ hours of daily screentime(/screamtime) they get from "news" hosts has been a disaster for us democracy.

epolanski 3y ago

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. I for one deleted all of those platforms and my life is definitely better (I'm way less distracted for once, but the list is longer). What do I care what others do?

thinkingemote 3y ago
Do you live or work with others? Do you have a family or children? Do you interact in meaningful ways with people online? I ask seriously (but no need to reply, this is to aid understanding) as many here on HN do not have all of these so the range of examples may be narrowed for some people. I would however imagine you have some relationships of some kind that you care about. Can you imagine your relationships changing if these others you cared about changed their behaviours? Then extend this imaginary possibility to the relationships of these others. It's a network we are in we are not operating entirely alone. Care of the other is wanting what is good for the other. Sometimes this care is not forcing the other to change, sometimes it's encouraging them to change to benefit them as it benefited you.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- XorNot 3y ago
  How is this not the OP's exact point? If you're not forcing people to change - by banning things with the violence of government - then you're simply making an argument to people and hoping they listen, just as we ever have to.
unclebucknasty 3y ago
>What do I care what others do Because we live in a society? Would you care if everyone around you was smoking crack, sociopathic or seriously mentally ill?
- kys_now 3y ago
  [dead]
EMIRELADERO 3y ago
The commenter is arguing from a broad "what's good for society" sense, not on strict individuality. While I disagree with the whole idea of legislating access to social media/internet services in any way (RIP anonymity), I do think there can be valid places and times for regulation that seeks to change society itself, not just individuals.
- unclebucknasty 3y ago
  >RIP anonymity Maybe anonymity has had a good run and is actually at the root of the issue in many contexts. After all, people don't (generally) walk around IRL wearing ski masks so they can say crazy shit or troll people without consequence. And we also get the courtesy of knowing who the people we're talking to actually are. And if you say, "yeah but doxxing and death threats" or "my employer might fire me", etc then maybe these are the actual problems that need to be addressed. And, yes, I realize that's coming from someone who's IRL neither Uncle Buck or Buc Nasty, as his handle might imply. But, obviously that's where we currently are, which is the point.
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    IRL nobody is running facial recognition tech and uniquely identifying you. And, despite what your teachers told you, no one is keeping a permanent record of the minutia of your life. So I know my neighbor is "George", but I don't know anything about his political opinions, where he shops, how he treats waiters, or what kind of porn he watches. Thus he's not anonymous, but his daily activities are generally private and ephemeral. The internet flips this on its head because pseudonymous handles can be linked to reams of online activity that's retained effectively forever but can't be connected to a specific person. This is why "doxxing" is such a big deal online. If online activity was like IRL activity and ephemeral, I might agree with you. But the internet never forgets. Edit: By the way, this is not universally defined: > say crazy shit "Crazy shit" is very culturally and contextually dependent. If I condemn China's treatment of Uyghurs, that's fine in North America but considered "crazy shit" and can land you in jail in China. That's an extreme example, but there are plenty of other more banal differences in culture and what's acceptable globally.
stareatgoats 3y ago
> What do I care what others do? While a perfectly fine rule of thumb in general, I think you might find the sticking to "I don't care what other people do" as an overriding principle doesn't hold water in a substantial number of edge cases. One such case is where someone is willfully influencing others to act against their best interests, or against the best interest of society as a whole. That's when one needs to make a judgement call on a case by case basis. Is this such a case? Not sure. I just wanted to point out that "I don't care what other people do" can't be your guiding light, always.
- epolanski 3y ago
  I might have expressed myself poorly. I "don't care" what others do in the strict sense that I don't let it influence me. But I can tell you that me quitting socials did impact relatives and friends to quit those too, and thus I absolutely do not relate with his statement: > It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not
  - raziel2p 3y ago
    I'm glad that you were able to convince all your meaningful friends and family to change their social media / internet behavior according to your values - but please don't assume that it's a viable option for everyone, with no downsides.
    - ctoth 3y ago
      But have you tried?
josephg 3y ago
> What do I care what others do? I’ve done the same, but it’s not without cost: - Two hobbies I’m involved with have large local communities on Facebook. I’m not in the loop, and sometimes miss out on events and catchups. - I’m not on Twitter, and there’s a massive amount of chat about my field (realtime collaborative editing & local first software) that takes place there. I miss out on what’s going on, and I’m reliant on other people to promote my work for me. Im happier. But it’s you really are cut off from a lot of society - especially in the tech world - if you aren’t on social media.
- ranguna 3y ago
  You can join those communities and discussions with "work" accounts. Instead of creating a personal twitter or meta account, you could create one that is only used to join those specific groups and discussion.
  - pjerem 3y ago
    Yes you can. But then, you have an account. Most people that dont have an account on social medias just don’t want to accept the TOS. Also worth noting that it sounds like meta thinks like they already have all earth population in their products because new accounts are really easily banned for no reason. Any temporary account I made to access some information have been blocked minutes or hours after creation.
  - notachatbot1234 3y ago
    Those sites are designed to exploit you psychologically in various ways (ads, order of display, design, gamified interaction etcetera). The purpose of your account does not matter if you cannot access and consume the information in a reasonable and healthy way.
- randomdata 3y ago
  Twitter is also where the discussion about my field takes place. What's not to like? I find Twitter's recommendation algorithm does a great job of honing the content down to just the relevant information I need and then I can go back to carrying on with life. Before Twitter, you had to go to the coffee shop and listen to people ramble on with their inane political rants and conspiracy theories just to get at the occasional tidbit of useful field-related information. That was depressing.
kredd 3y ago
If you have children or niblings, you’ll realize how ostracized from the community one gets if they have no access to social media. It would work if parents banded together and nobody in school would get access, but otherwise it just becomes a “there’s a giant club and you’re not a part of it”. As a child, that really hurts. When I was in high school, Facebook was just opening up access to everyone. I remember literally everyone getting on it, and swapping between messages in MSN, and some posts on FB. We had whole school wide conversations, planning and etc. on social media, and on days when I didn’t get in front of the computer to check things, I remember feeling left out. It’s just so much worse now, because every kid expects every other kid to be on the loop of things 24/7. I think that’s where we screwed up. Having just casual access without mobile phones was the sweet spot, in my opinion.
- rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
  But why do you make it sound like it’s not an option to teach kids to not have fear of missing out and having meaningful ways of spending their time in the real, offline world? I guarantee you that there is nothing of value that other teens are saying that your own children need to be updated 24/7
  - gommm 3y ago
    I also guarantee you that a teen who is not in the loop is much more likely to be ostracized and bullied in the offline world. So, yes you might try teaching your kid that they're not missing out that they can find more meaningful way to spend their time in the real offline world but, the fact is, they go to schools with kid who overwhelmingly are not taught that and who will dislike your kid for being different. Your kid doesn't live in isolation, he lives in society and, during school years is when social pressure to conform to the group norm is strongest. I'm speaking from experience here, I've been bullied as a teen, I definitely would rather avoid my son going through a similar experience.
    - rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
      Eh, that’s not necessarily true. Other kids might bully your child for having a healthy set of offline interests and for not being like them who are all plugged in online, but I don’t see how it’s not an option to teach your kids to have a strong sense of identity and not give in to peer pressure while also assuring them that you’ve always got their back. What you’re describing doesn’t sound like parenting to me, it’s giving in to peer pressure. From kids. And you’re supposed to be an adult who already knows what’s right and wrong. If your kid’s peers all gain a liking for drugs or gambling or some other vice and they bully your child for not partaking, are you going to tell your child to participate? No, what you should do is show them the right way and to what’s good for them in the long term, even if it’s difficult for them to see it now because of their youth.
JodieBenitez 3y ago
> What do I care what others do? example from real life: My local musicians community decided to use only FB to communicate their gigs dates. I refuse to use FB. I no longer know when or where is the gig. I don't see my fellows anymore.
- 10729287 3y ago
  How hard is it to discuss this topic with other people that have access to fb when you meet them around the city ? Honest question. Sure, it require more involvement than opening the Facebook tap and getting everything instantly, but at the end of the day, isn't your goal to getting involved in the community ? This will require some energy.
  - JodieBenitez 3y ago
    See above
  - boppo1 3y ago
    You are out of touch. Scenes and events really are that reliant on facebook. "Hey man, when/where's the next show?" "We dunno yet, but we'll post an event about it for sure." There are some small, insular scenes where everybody knows everybody and word gets around, but those are getting fewer every day.
- forgetfreeman 3y ago
  Maybe text or call a couple friends in the community once a week?
  - JodieBenitez 3y ago
    Been there, done that... "it's all on the page, just check it mate". And suddenly you're that annoying weirdo that refuses to do things like everybody else.
    - forgetfreeman 3y ago
raziel2p 3y ago
My life is also better, overall. However, I do miss out on important life updates from my friends because I'm not on Instagram. I could be a hardliner and say "well they don't care about me enough to share 1-on-1, so they're not real friends", but that's... stupid. I feel sad for missing out on opportunities to take part in their lives and life updates that way, and I know for a fact that there are rich connections/conversations that would happen if I were able to use these in a healthy way.
- randomdata 3y ago
  What do you talk about with your friends if the important life events don't come up? Perhaps I just have boring friends that we resort to sometimes talking about what is going on in our lives. I also wouldn't feel like less of a friend if they didn't tell me something, but important life events in their lives are usually important to them, which means that they ultimately end up talking about them in some way or another.
abc123abc123 3y ago
I agree. Same here. The only social media I have is mastodon and usenet. Yes, I live and work with others and email and phone is sufficient. If people try to get me to use slck I refuse. If I cannot refuse, I deploy my slck2email bridge and reply once every 24 hours and usually colleagues stop chatting with me when they realize they won't get an answer until 24 hours, or they drop by my desk, email or call me on the phone if it is urgent. I think a lot of the complaints from people who "cannot stop" is just laziness. They need the government to construct an excuse so they won't have to man up and take control of their own lives. That is also sad, because it means those people will never grow up but will be constant children in the eyes of the state. Then I would say there are the 0.01% who do have psychological problems and they need to see a doctor.
coldtea 3y ago
If you don't live in a society but in some remote wilderness and hunt for your food, then you don't need to care what others do. If you do live in a society, you do need to care, as "what others do" affects society in general, including you in the end. Affects how they behave, how they vote, what causes they support, their mental health, and tons of other things, all of which end up also affecting those who don't use those apps.
doktrin 3y ago
> What do I care what others do? This is libertarian virtue signalling that simply does not stand up to reality.

signaru 3y ago

And then there are also those companies/institutions/orgs/news/shops that make you left behind from otherwise useful information or services by not being on social media platforms.

pjerem 3y ago
This is a real everyday pain that anyone with social media accounts can’t fathom. Most (like 90%) businesses don’t have a website or when they have, it’s a static website. All the news are on social medias behind nag screens.
zer00eyz 3y ago
And then there's Therapist who keep saying everyone should be in therapy and drug companies with the latest in psychopharmacology. Histeria (and the virbrator), ice pick lobotomies, electro shock therapy, Quaalude, Benzodiazepines (valium) as mothers little helpers, MAOI's, SRRI's (PSSD), Benzodiazepines again (Xanax, klonipin). <<< (Hint all of these things turned out to be DEEPLY fucked up) And for good measure a few variations of adrenal Ritalin and other methamphetamines. Maybe, just maybe, and hear me out on this, we have more people with mental health issues because "self diagnosis" and "self identifications" can get you a prescription. Maybe, just maybe more people have mental health issues because there is a whole fucking industry designed to profit off of problems that have a "diagnostic criteria" and not a "test". Maybe just maybe we should remember that the "reproducibility crisis" has some of its worst offenders in psychiatry and psychology. Or you know blame social media, like we did for books, radio, tv, Elvis and rock, rap and metal, video games, 4chan and now....
- liamwire 3y ago
  Your tirade against an almost ridiculously broad spectrum of drugs isn’t at all similar to what’s being discussed here, and reeks of a hidden agenda or bias. Many, if not all, of the medications you listed have been a net benefit for the individual and the world.
  - zer00eyz 3y ago

whstl 3y ago

> It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not Yep. The other problem is that not having social media and mobile devices can be alienating and ostracizing, especially for teenagers. Avoiding the problems of social media requires skills and restraint that even most adults don’t have. It is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation.

tossandthrow 3y ago
> Avoiding the problems of social media requires skills and restraint that even most adults don’t have. The parent commenter propose that you can not escape the negative consequences of social media, even if you fully restrain yourself, as you have the second order effects from your friends using it. The parent commenter says that this is not an individual problem and cannot be solved on an individual level. It is a macro issue. Just like you stopping eating meat will not really make a dent on global warming. I think that is very insightful.
- pas 3y ago
  Where you put your time/attention/money matters a lot though. For you and your friends/family. And even more for those small(er) alternative services/products/markets/communities.
myspy 3y ago
That's true. We restrict access to Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, FB, they can use WhatsApp, YT, iMessage, Phone and Pinterest. I'm fucking annoyed by other parents that don't set boundaries that way. I have so much discussions about other platforms. Pushing them to physically meet is hard too. We grew up at a time where SMS was a thing when I became 16. I know that keeping up is cool, but social media is a disease. The amount of dumb and uneducated people that couldn't even listen to expert advice during a fucking pandemic is driving me up the wall. I'm annoyed mainly because people around me make bad decisions that have an influence on my own life.
- nicolas_t 3y ago

jascination 3y ago

> It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not, some of your friends will still be more or less subtly influenced by its existence in your social interactions You could say the same thing about the Bible, or Harry Potter, or any number of things too

raziel2p 3y ago
The Bible, I absolutely would, the negative impact of dogmatic Christianity has been pretty bad on society IMO. Harry Potter, not so much, but still some yes. I still have to argue with some of my friends that the books have some dubious morals that I wouldn't be comfortable ingraining in my children (if I had any). The scale, extent and addictiveness of these two things are nothing compared to algorithmic social media though.
- zer0zzz 3y ago
  That’s an interesting thought. I wonder how detrimental Christianity’s impact on society has been compared to social media? It kind of makes the argument pointless when you frame it that way.
- abnercoimbre 3y ago
  Tangent: Children's literacy (and that of some adults for that matter) skyrocketed under the HP phenomenon, in profound ways that activists/scholars are typically grateful for. I wish I could find the studies done, sorry that I don't have them on hand. I guess I'm saying that it was worth it, dubious morals aside.
yard2010 3y ago
And you would say it as well about party/designer drugs

anhner 3y ago

Teenagers are so judgy about the color of the text message bubbles they receive, imagine how judgy they would be if one didn't participate at all in some digital platform most of them use.

firecall 3y ago
Not around these parts! They all use Discord and/or Snapchat here in Australia. No one I've every asked about this cares about Android vs iPhone. No one. No one apart from the Parents uses the built in messaging and SMS. But then the Parent groups all use Facebook Messenger for most group comms. The whole green / blue bubble thing is either over played by the Press or purley a US Phenomenon. But given the marketshare of the iPhone with teenagers in the US, it seems it's possibly less of an issue its made out to be due to the fact that most people have iPhones anyway!
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  I think you missed the entire point of the comment above. It's not about iOS vs Android but about not being included socially, regardless of the platform. Imagine in your example where one kid in a group didn't use Discord, they'd be effectively cut off.
  - firecall 3y ago
    I can see how it seems like I might have :-) But I understand the point well. Discord and SnapChat are available for iOS and Android. With Discord being available as good as everywhere. So using Android does not exclude you socially in my experience, here in Australia. Similarly in Europe and the UK, the What’s App was hugely popular and the default cross platform messenger. I don’t entirely believe the rhetoric around Green and Blue bubbles that the press repeat without any real evidence. :-)
    - ashyaspen 2y ago
      Again you miss the point entirely. This is not Apple vs Android. This is teenagers not being given a choice whether or not to use social media generally. The fact is if everyone else uses it, this precludes them from many normal interactions that get replaced by social media. It's a cultural thing as much as it is a personal thing. You will feel excluded if you don't use it, so unless everyone changes, it's hard for you to change. That takes a determination even many adults lack. The harmful effects of social media are not eliminated by choosing not to participate. They have a cultural impact (both benefit and harm) that expands beyond an individuals choice. We should reconsider how to handle teenagers on social media as a society. Not just tell them to preclude themselves if it's harming them.

octopusRex 3y ago

I remember when they taught mcLuhan in highschool - 1970s - in order to make us more aware of media manipulation. I wonder if they still do. Ironically, this was in Florida - probably be considered too woke by Desantis.

uconnectlol 3y ago

> It's really not that simple except it is, because law is dumb, stupid, and slow-witted. if you ban facebook specifically, the next day it will think that means mailing lists should also be banned. btw ive witnessed lots of mailing list and then web forum addicted deadbeats before social media came out but whatever the legal solution is nothing (i realize not all of you have asked for the legal solution yet but thats essentially the only point of this thread that is brought up routinely on places like HN) teh fact that every techie and his mom seems to think the law will work out in his favor when it backfires each time (or they just ignores that downsides) is no different than how people keep thinking you can put a web server in every embedded device and they oh so surprisingly have the same RCE vulns as the 90s, every single time.

fragmede 3y ago
After the DMCA and the CFAA, what techie thinks the law will work out in their favor?

hypertexthero 3y ago

See also The Medium is the Massage, a very illuminating book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Medium_Is_the_Massage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Medium_Is_the_Massage https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-medium-is-the-massage-revised-marshall-mcluhan/581259 https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-medium-is-the-massage-revis...

base698 3y ago

If TV turned everything into entertainment, including discourse, then social media has turned every discourse into being an influencer. I frequently see people at a coffeeshop set up cameras like they are filming a TV show to talk about their latte or muffin for Instagram. This happens everywhere in all walks of life. Any hobby, no matter how esoteric, will be molded into the shape of good for instagram.

karaterobot 3y ago

> It's really not that simple. The products have become so widespread and influential that they change the very culture of our society for the worse. It doesn't matter whether you abstain from using Instagram or not, some of your friends will still be more or less subtly influenced by its existence in your social interactions. I suspect that a lot of the anxiety about how difficult it would be to quit is the mind's way of rationalizing a psychological addiction, like saying you can't stop smoking because things are just so crazy right now. I quit social networks in 2008, it wasn't hard at the time and it's not been hard to stay away. Yes, there are consequences of being the one guy in the friend group who doesn't use whatever app everyone else is using, but to call those consequences meaningful is an overstatement. A minor annoyance, easy for everyone to adapt to. You're right that other people are still influenced by social networks. Speaking from the outside, I wouldn't even use the word 'subtle' to describe its effects. But, I don't know that that really matters. You surround yourself with people you like, despite their flaws. You hope the good things about them grow, and that they work through their flaws. That's just having friends.

raziel2p 3y ago
I wrote the comment as someone who doesn't use social media. I still, for example, miss out on important life updates from my friends because media has taught us that it's easier to post a story than to manually select all 10-50 people who might be interested and send it individually. Your good friends and friendships will survive that, no doubt, but you do lose out on opportunities to make additional or deeper connections.

trgn 3y ago

It's baffling to me, that despite how famous McLuhan still is today, that people somehow do not follow the implications of his criticism (and that of Ellul, Debord, Kaczinsky ;), ...). Technology, in and of itself, the actual physical _thing_, shapes the world, our dispositions, our aspirations, in its own image, and does so in absence of our judgement.

xnx 3y ago

First paragraph is at least (or even more) applicable to cable news and talk radio. The amount of brainrot in the geriatric electorate due to the 8+ hours of daily screentime(/screamtime) they get from "news" hosts has been a disaster for us democracy.