5 ms·

I'm doing basically the same, but voluntarily. It's a calmer life. YouTube is still going strong for me though, I have to admit.

iancmceachern 1y ago
Same here,youtube is getting to be more like the rest as time goes on.
geocrasher 1y ago
Facebook for a couple things, IG for keeping up with friends, sharing pics with friends. And a carefully curated YouTube subscription list. Only stuff that's worth watching: People I can relate to, have no ego, and are just having a good time sharing what they do. I gravitate toward hackaday worthy stuff and off-road exploration type videos. I limit intake of news sites, and instead try to focus on living my own life, accomplishing goals that I have set, and focusing on improving myself so I can help others. Also, being a Gen-X-er who grew up without any of this stuff, I have to snicker just a little bit at people being up in arms about a ban on things that didn't exist 20-30 years ago. I know there is FAR more nuance to it. I simply found the thought humorous at a simplistic level.
- mdp2021 1y ago
  If it is clear to you that it is simplistic, why do you publish it anyway?
  - perching_aix 1y ago
    Why shouldn't they?
    - mdp2021 1y ago
      "Hunger in Abysland" // "Ah, right, I just started a diet" // "Immediately I thought it funny to remember that once we also had little to eat" Appropriateness.
      - geocrasher 1y ago
        My comment was not about suffering, war, starvation, or anything of the like. You've clearly added your own context and then judged me for it. Great job.
        mdp2021 1y ago
        The context I added was that of the facts I construed from the shreds of events and opinions I met. They are not there to be compared to "starvation" as a parameter with scalars of "what is worse": they are in the same cone of "something bad happening", in front of which simplistic dismissals are puzzling.
      - perching_aix 1y ago
        Right. Well, I think they were being perfectly appropriate and that your comparison is asinine: starvation is about as indisputably bad as one can think of, whereas missing out on social media really isn't. Almost as if highlighting that was my damn point, which they then found appreciable, and you clearly didn't. Coincidentally related is why I withdrew myself from most online community spaces. Pretty much the only alternative to constantly and pointlessly arguing, or being reliant on content sorting and filtering. The latter two of which will constantly receive some (but on occasion a lot?) of commentary about being biased in some way, automatically or manually (how would one know?), fairly or unfairly (according to who?), and repressing dissent or giving a voice (usually both, but never to satisfaction).
        mdp2021 1y ago
        > starvation is about as indisputably bad as one can think of, whereas missing out on social media really isn't "Hunger" (etc.) was used to try and frame the lack of appropriateness - in the logic, not comparing earthquakes and floods; not perfect, not meant to be perfect. "Missing out on social media" is not representative of the facts: a coercion over a population, not excluding the possibility of attempted population control, not excluding the possibility of an inability to manage the wave of informational war, and a coercion that tries to stop the access to a formerly unbelievable wealth of information (YouTube is in there). So, yes, I call it serious. And when the above is matched by a jump like "oh I am also doing without" - that is inappropriate.
  - geocrasher 1y ago
    I only mentioned that I know it's simplistic so that the pedants would not attack my character for being so naive. But, I guess it takes more than that to keep the pedants from finding fault.
    - mdp2021 1y ago
      I did not point to naïvete. I asked why, if you see the thing has gravity, you would be treating it as just a "oh well no great loss".
      - perching_aix 1y ago
        Because humans have the capacity to compartmentalize and reason about things despite their gravitas, provided the opportunity and capability to do so. For example, yes, the given family friend dying is very heartbreaking, but we might discuss it separately that he was basically a living corpse for the past several years already as-is, and so their family is probably at least going to be able to move on now, even if they don't feel that way themselves at the moment for understandable reasons. We might also be very wrong about that, and this may well be very rude to say out loud, and then incredibly embarrassing if found false later. Such is life. There's no such distinction here however, because it's the internet, it's a public forum, so everyone sees everything. The best next option then is to communicate the distinction and trust that people understand the intent. We both did in our own ways. You did not care either time, and/or was not willing/able to treat it as intended. That's the risk we took. A lot more people did than did not reassuringly though - maybe that should tell you something about this.
mdp2021 1y ago
You have simply heavily missed that you are keeping yourself on voluntary diet while the submission context is that, within a complex frame of reasons and regulation attempts, somebody has placed a population on enforced lack of service.
- perching_aix 1y ago
  I didn't miss it, but thanks.
victor22 1y ago
Social media is 2025's opium and we're all on it.
- mdp2021 1y ago
  You are posting on a platform that allows exchange and if properly used is there to raise awareness.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
coffeefirst 1y ago
Yeah. YouTube being both effectively the modern public airwaves and dictated by an engagement algorithm is a big problem.
- mdp2021 1y ago
  -- Select your best channels and RSS (or similar) on them. -- Promote politically that the informational wealth the YT platform contains¹ should be treated like the rest of public knowledge and archived by the State for preservation. ¹(Picking a few example channels: "Manufacturing Intellect", "British Pathé", "Intelligence Squared"...)

iancmceachern 1y ago

Same here,youtube is getting to be more like the rest as time goes on.

geocrasher 1y ago

Facebook for a couple things, IG for keeping up with friends, sharing pics with friends. And a carefully curated YouTube subscription list. Only stuff that's worth watching: People I can relate to, have no ego, and are just having a good time sharing what they do. I gravitate toward hackaday worthy stuff and off-road exploration type videos. I limit intake of news sites, and instead try to focus on living my own life, accomplishing goals that I have set, and focusing on improving myself so I can help others. Also, being a Gen-X-er who grew up without any of this stuff, I have to snicker just a little bit at people being up in arms about a ban on things that didn't exist 20-30 years ago. I know there is FAR more nuance to it. I simply found the thought humorous at a simplistic level.

mdp2021 1y ago
If it is clear to you that it is simplistic, why do you publish it anyway?
- perching_aix 1y ago
  Why shouldn't they?
  - mdp2021 1y ago
    "Hunger in Abysland" // "Ah, right, I just started a diet" // "Immediately I thought it funny to remember that once we also had little to eat" Appropriateness.
    - geocrasher 1y ago
      My comment was not about suffering, war, starvation, or anything of the like. You've clearly added your own context and then judged me for it. Great job.
      - mdp2021 1y ago
        The context I added was that of the facts I construed from the shreds of events and opinions I met. They are not there to be compared to "starvation" as a parameter with scalars of "what is worse": they are in the same cone of "something bad happening", in front of which simplistic dismissals are puzzling.
    - perching_aix 1y ago
      Right. Well, I think they were being perfectly appropriate and that your comparison is asinine: starvation is about as indisputably bad as one can think of, whereas missing out on social media really isn't. Almost as if highlighting that was my damn point, which they then found appreciable, and you clearly didn't. Coincidentally related is why I withdrew myself from most online community spaces. Pretty much the only alternative to constantly and pointlessly arguing, or being reliant on content sorting and filtering. The latter two of which will constantly receive some (but on occasion a lot?) of commentary about being biased in some way, automatically or manually (how would one know?), fairly or unfairly (according to who?), and repressing dissent or giving a voice (usually both, but never to satisfaction).
      - mdp2021 1y ago
        > starvation is about as indisputably bad as one can think of, whereas missing out on social media really isn't "Hunger" (etc.) was used to try and frame the lack of appropriateness - in the logic, not comparing earthquakes and floods; not perfect, not meant to be perfect. "Missing out on social media" is not representative of the facts: a coercion over a population, not excluding the possibility of attempted population control, not excluding the possibility of an inability to manage the wave of informational war, and a coercion that tries to stop the access to a formerly unbelievable wealth of information (YouTube is in there). So, yes, I call it serious. And when the above is matched by a jump like "oh I am also doing without" - that is inappropriate.
- geocrasher 1y ago
  I only mentioned that I know it's simplistic so that the pedants would not attack my character for being so naive. But, I guess it takes more than that to keep the pedants from finding fault.
  - mdp2021 1y ago
    I did not point to naïvete. I asked why, if you see the thing has gravity, you would be treating it as just a "oh well no great loss".
    - perching_aix 1y ago
      Because humans have the capacity to compartmentalize and reason about things despite their gravitas, provided the opportunity and capability to do so. For example, yes, the given family friend dying is very heartbreaking, but we might discuss it separately that he was basically a living corpse for the past several years already as-is, and so their family is probably at least going to be able to move on now, even if they don't feel that way themselves at the moment for understandable reasons. We might also be very wrong about that, and this may well be very rude to say out loud, and then incredibly embarrassing if found false later. Such is life. There's no such distinction here however, because it's the internet, it's a public forum, so everyone sees everything. The best next option then is to communicate the distinction and trust that people understand the intent. We both did in our own ways. You did not care either time, and/or was not willing/able to treat it as intended. That's the risk we took. A lot more people did than did not reassuringly though - maybe that should tell you something about this.

mdp2021 1y ago

You have simply heavily missed that you are keeping yourself on voluntary diet while the submission context is that, within a complex frame of reasons and regulation attempts, somebody has placed a population on enforced lack of service.

perching_aix 1y ago
I didn't miss it, but thanks.

victor22 1y ago

Social media is 2025's opium and we're all on it.

mdp2021 1y ago
You are posting on a platform that allows exchange and if properly used is there to raise awareness.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

coffeefirst 1y ago

Yeah. YouTube being both effectively the modern public airwaves and dictated by an engagement algorithm is a big problem.

mdp2021 1y ago
-- Select your best channels and RSS (or similar) on them. -- Promote politically that the informational wealth the YT platform contains¹ should be treated like the rest of public knowledge and archived by the State for preservation. ¹(Picking a few example channels: "Manufacturing Intellect", "British Pathé", "Intelligence Squared"...)