12 ms·

We are destroying ourselves; the very core of what it is to be human. I say this acknowledging the irony of writing this on my phone, on a Sunday morning, when

We are destroying ourselves; the very core of what it is to be human. I say this acknowledging the irony of writing this on my phone, on a Sunday morning, when I should be engaging with the real world and people in my life. Television was rightly criticised for being the opiate of the masses; a continuous stream of entertainment that allows you to ‘stop thinking’ to endure boredom. However it had some constraints. The box was in a fixed space, I could not bring it with me. The content was fixed, it could not always engage me. Social media, and every other ‘content delivery’ system is not like this. It is in my pocket, there is so much content, it can keep me continually engaged. AI content generation optimises this, perhaps, but we already live in this dystopia. Rise up and revolt! Put down our phones and refuse to engage! Our very lives, our humanity depends on it!

shadowgovt 10mo ago
That sounds like work.
kbrkbr 10mo ago
The original opiate for the people criticism was leveled against religion by Karl Marx: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people
- andrepd 10mo ago
  ... This is relevant how?
  - jama211 10mo ago
    I found it interesting, etymology of the phrase
- lll-o-lll 10mo ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/6pontu/what_does_it_mean/ https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/6pontu/wha... ;-)
- cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
  Very often misquoted as being a blunt attack on religion, but people often just cut out the second half of the quote -- "opiate of the masses... heart of the heartless world" Marx was despairing at the heartlessness of the condition of working class people in industrial slums, people one generation or less removed from the flight from rural landless dispossession and starvation into the polluted cities and factories and tiny apartments in slums in search of survival. He saw religion as one tool people used to salve the pain, to reduce the suffering. Far more complicated than "religion bad, we should ban it, mmkay" There's probably an analogy here around the "attention economy" and "social media." Look for root causes. If you turn everything and everyone into a commodity -- "market yourself!" -- don't be surprised when the consumptive model takes over all consciousness. The commodity form is the [post|hyper]modern religion.
__MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
I appreciate the sentiment, but I don't think that calls for generic revolt are likely to get us anywhere. It's gotta be targeted and meaningful and executed with a measure of a restraint. It needs to be clear we can be reasoned with. So what kind of revolt are you calling for? Are we dumping GPU's into the ocean like we did with tea in Boston that one time? Are we disconnecting datacenters from the internet? Are we all gonna change our profile picture? Specifics please.
- tkiolp4 10mo ago
  I think it’s easier than that. We can literally start the revolution from our beds: 1. For every social media account you have: post “I’m leaving. You should too” 2. For every social media account you have: close it. 3. Profit
  - __MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
    Is the problem really social media though? Without some kind of long-distance-capable social medium that we participate in directly, how are we going to know when the news is lying to us? Social media's alternatives also can't resist corruption, if we give up this fight, we'll lose that one too. I think we can handle communicating with each other at scale, we just have to be more proactive about not letting control over the medium be up for sale, and more inventive about the ways we can protect each other from those who would make us into addicts.
    - Dilettante_ 10mo ago
      >How are we going to know when the news is lying to us? On every day of the week ending in 'y'. People did know that before social media I'm pretty sure, and they still do. You want to know whether something is true? Stop taking peoples word, demand capital 'P' Proof, and infer exclusively based on that proof.
      - bdangubic 10mo ago
        give me an example of anything you can ‘P’rove and I’ll easily ‘P’rove that you are wrong
rfrey 10mo ago
Maybe the very core of what it is to be human is to destroy ourselves.
- AlexandrB 10mo ago
  Would be funny if the "great filter" is not nukes or some other weapon, but social media. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter
  - Nasrudith 10mo ago
    The Great Filter is just bullshit until we come across space ruins to prove that something has been filtering out civilizations. It is possible that we are just the "precursors" without any giants to stand upon the shoulders of. Catastrophazing new media hasn't gone out of fashion yet. Remember when it was Reality TV that was supposed to be the downfall of civilizations?
    - walterbell 10mo ago
      Any real-world side effects of Reality TV?
      - ben_w 10mo ago
        Arguably the election of Trump.
    - ben_w 10mo ago
      The absence is the evidence. Being a precursor is not inconsistent with great filters, a great filter is why nobody else is there to be one. Great filter is anywhere at all in the progress of life from pre-life chemistry to stable interplanetary expansion; filters behind us, for example multicellular life or having dry land so we can invent fire, are still potential great filters and they would leave no space ruins to find. That said, my assumption is lots of little filters that add up. Eleven filters behind us each with 10% pass rates is enough to make us the peak of civilisation in this galaxy; eleven more between us and Kardashev III would make the universe seem empty.
poisonborz 10mo ago
It is in the distant future still (if we ever get there without apocalypse first) but I think the goal was set out to be, from the very first bits of digital data, is to completely transition ourselves to a digital world. Living it in parallel will make less sense if Earth conditions get worse, and even less in space or on a hostile planet. In a digital world possibilities become limitless, disabilities, distances, shortcomings of the mind eliminated. Once you can't see a difference, will it matter if something is "real"? Sure, it can also become a hell and inhumane much easier, but this doesn't make it a less compelling dimension. Looking through this lens, fighting, limiting internet usage is akin to moving to the rainforest to avoid capitalism - lone rebelling acts in the wrong direction of history, a temporary, partial victory for the few who dare this hassle. Time is better spent to make this emerging space better, for everyone.
- OptionOfT 10mo ago
  Given to the direction we're going, I don't believe this digital world will be one in which we're free either.
cess11 10mo ago
Perhaps one could frame it as "The Self under Siege". https://rickroderick.org/300-guide-the-self-under-siege-1993/ https://rickroderick.org/300-guide-the-self-under-siege-1993...
rlmp_89 10mo ago
It has been well theorized by A. Dugin : Wére now in the era of full realization / triumph of postmodernity. After having crushed all its 20th-century adversaries, western liberalism and its ideology of universal 'progress' will destroy everything that makes us truly human
- anthk 10mo ago
  Dugin? That anti-scientific maniac? He is no different to some Western liberals equally hating hormones' influences into different genders down to orientation methods. And, yes, that means there's a spectrum, but no one can't deny these differences.
cons0le 10mo ago
We need the Butlerian Jihad
- NoMoreNicksLeft 10mo ago
  Brian Herbert reference detected, opinion ignored.
rustystump 10mo ago
> so much content, it can keep me continually engaged I find the total opposite to be true. I desperately want more engaging content to feed the gooey goblin in my brain but the overwhelming majority doesn't cut it and this was before AI. Almost every show I see on netflix, tiktok I glance at, or reddit post is absolute unflavored mash potatoes. Content for content's sake. Feed me more content like scavengers reign and less frankenstein remakes or super hero slop.
- KPGv2 10mo ago
  There's way more good content available than an employed adult human has time to consume. I have watched five great seasons of TV this year (Frieren, Apothecary Diaries, Dandadan, Blue Box, Stranger Things, all on Netflix) and zero movies (no time with kids!), and have read twelve good books (ranging from prize-winning literature to incredible graphic novels). I have zero time for anything else besides two other hobbies, both of which involve the creative act: coding, and writing fanfiction. When I hear "there's nothing good available," I assume the person is a dullard. Like where are you looking that you can't throw a rock and hit something worth watching?!
  - anigbrowl 10mo ago
    One reason I enjoy anime as much as I do is because most of these stories are written by a single person with maybe an assistant or two and an editor, they're not designed by committee. I somewhat enjoy Stranger Things but it's falling into the space where I can write the next line of dialog in my head for whole scenes. Whereas it started out poking fun at tropes like doing exposition or relationship development at moments of maximum danger it's turned into a long sequence of Obligatory Scenes that feel increasingly forced.
    - JKCalhoun 10mo ago
      > a long sequence of Obligatory Scenes that feel increasingly forced You're describing mainstream entertainment in general. I started noticing this with the storyboard-as-film, action-by-numbers "Raider's of the Lost Ark". (I won't even waste my time on super hero films.)
_cenw 10mo ago
> When I should be engaging with the real world and people in my life. While I appreciate the sentiment, I don't think you need to couple "offline interaction" with this criticism. As a neurodivergent person in more than one way I appreciate being able to interact with people that face similar challenges to me and understand me. The problem is that social media is increasingly designed to not facilitate that, but content distribution.
- anal_reactor 10mo ago
  Yeah. Let's not fetishize "real world". Offline space is often boring and most people suck. There's a reason why we prefer to be looking at the screens. Having said that, I think that it makes sense to be more cautious about screen time and interact more with the offline space. Not because offline space is better, but because our brains are fried and they peceive online space to be better than it really is, we're literal addicts. I'm trying to teach myself that it's okay to be bored.
  - joquarky 10mo ago
    I remember when "Internet addiction" was a thing. I guess when enough people get addicted to something, it's no longer considered to be an addiction. When I am people watching, sometimes I am reminded of the TNG episode of star trek where everyone gets addicted to a game. Non-players grow concerned until they all succumb.
jama211 10mo ago
Social media is bad but this might be being slightly dramatic IMO
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]

shadowgovt 10mo ago

That sounds like work.

kbrkbr 10mo ago

The original opiate for the people criticism was leveled against religion by Karl Marx: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people

andrepd 10mo ago
... This is relevant how?
- jama211 10mo ago
  I found it interesting, etymology of the phrase
lll-o-lll 10mo ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/6pontu/what_does_it_mean/ https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/6pontu/wha... ;-)
cmrdporcupine 10mo ago
Very often misquoted as being a blunt attack on religion, but people often just cut out the second half of the quote -- "opiate of the masses... heart of the heartless world" Marx was despairing at the heartlessness of the condition of working class people in industrial slums, people one generation or less removed from the flight from rural landless dispossession and starvation into the polluted cities and factories and tiny apartments in slums in search of survival. He saw religion as one tool people used to salve the pain, to reduce the suffering. Far more complicated than "religion bad, we should ban it, mmkay" There's probably an analogy here around the "attention economy" and "social media." Look for root causes. If you turn everything and everyone into a commodity -- "market yourself!" -- don't be surprised when the consumptive model takes over all consciousness. The commodity form is the [post|hyper]modern religion.

__MatrixMan__ 10mo ago

I appreciate the sentiment, but I don't think that calls for generic revolt are likely to get us anywhere. It's gotta be targeted and meaningful and executed with a measure of a restraint. It needs to be clear we can be reasoned with. So what kind of revolt are you calling for? Are we dumping GPU's into the ocean like we did with tea in Boston that one time? Are we disconnecting datacenters from the internet? Are we all gonna change our profile picture? Specifics please.

tkiolp4 10mo ago
I think it’s easier than that. We can literally start the revolution from our beds: 1. For every social media account you have: post “I’m leaving. You should too” 2. For every social media account you have: close it. 3. Profit
- __MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
  Is the problem really social media though? Without some kind of long-distance-capable social medium that we participate in directly, how are we going to know when the news is lying to us? Social media's alternatives also can't resist corruption, if we give up this fight, we'll lose that one too. I think we can handle communicating with each other at scale, we just have to be more proactive about not letting control over the medium be up for sale, and more inventive about the ways we can protect each other from those who would make us into addicts.
  - Dilettante_ 10mo ago
    >How are we going to know when the news is lying to us? On every day of the week ending in 'y'. People did know that before social media I'm pretty sure, and they still do. You want to know whether something is true? Stop taking peoples word, demand capital 'P' Proof, and infer exclusively based on that proof.
    - bdangubic 10mo ago
      give me an example of anything you can ‘P’rove and I’ll easily ‘P’rove that you are wrong

rfrey 10mo ago

Maybe the very core of what it is to be human is to destroy ourselves.

AlexandrB 10mo ago
Would be funny if the "great filter" is not nukes or some other weapon, but social media. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter
- Nasrudith 10mo ago
  The Great Filter is just bullshit until we come across space ruins to prove that something has been filtering out civilizations. It is possible that we are just the "precursors" without any giants to stand upon the shoulders of. Catastrophazing new media hasn't gone out of fashion yet. Remember when it was Reality TV that was supposed to be the downfall of civilizations?
  - walterbell 10mo ago
    Any real-world side effects of Reality TV?
    - ben_w 10mo ago
      Arguably the election of Trump.
  - ben_w 10mo ago
    The absence is the evidence. Being a precursor is not inconsistent with great filters, a great filter is why nobody else is there to be one. Great filter is anywhere at all in the progress of life from pre-life chemistry to stable interplanetary expansion; filters behind us, for example multicellular life or having dry land so we can invent fire, are still potential great filters and they would leave no space ruins to find. That said, my assumption is lots of little filters that add up. Eleven filters behind us each with 10% pass rates is enough to make us the peak of civilisation in this galaxy; eleven more between us and Kardashev III would make the universe seem empty.

poisonborz 10mo ago

It is in the distant future still (if we ever get there without apocalypse first) but I think the goal was set out to be, from the very first bits of digital data, is to completely transition ourselves to a digital world. Living it in parallel will make less sense if Earth conditions get worse, and even less in space or on a hostile planet. In a digital world possibilities become limitless, disabilities, distances, shortcomings of the mind eliminated. Once you can't see a difference, will it matter if something is "real"? Sure, it can also become a hell and inhumane much easier, but this doesn't make it a less compelling dimension. Looking through this lens, fighting, limiting internet usage is akin to moving to the rainforest to avoid capitalism - lone rebelling acts in the wrong direction of history, a temporary, partial victory for the few who dare this hassle. Time is better spent to make this emerging space better, for everyone.

OptionOfT 10mo ago
Given to the direction we're going, I don't believe this digital world will be one in which we're free either.

cess11 10mo ago

Perhaps one could frame it as "The Self under Siege". https://rickroderick.org/300-guide-the-self-under-siege-1993/ https://rickroderick.org/300-guide-the-self-under-siege-1993...

rlmp_89 10mo ago

It has been well theorized by A. Dugin : Wére now in the era of full realization / triumph of postmodernity. After having crushed all its 20th-century adversaries, western liberalism and its ideology of universal 'progress' will destroy everything that makes us truly human

anthk 10mo ago
Dugin? That anti-scientific maniac? He is no different to some Western liberals equally hating hormones' influences into different genders down to orientation methods. And, yes, that means there's a spectrum, but no one can't deny these differences.

cons0le 10mo ago

We need the Butlerian Jihad

NoMoreNicksLeft 10mo ago
Brian Herbert reference detected, opinion ignored.

rustystump 10mo ago

> so much content, it can keep me continually engaged I find the total opposite to be true. I desperately want more engaging content to feed the gooey goblin in my brain but the overwhelming majority doesn't cut it and this was before AI. Almost every show I see on netflix, tiktok I glance at, or reddit post is absolute unflavored mash potatoes. Content for content's sake. Feed me more content like scavengers reign and less frankenstein remakes or super hero slop.

KPGv2 10mo ago
There's way more good content available than an employed adult human has time to consume. I have watched five great seasons of TV this year (Frieren, Apothecary Diaries, Dandadan, Blue Box, Stranger Things, all on Netflix) and zero movies (no time with kids!), and have read twelve good books (ranging from prize-winning literature to incredible graphic novels). I have zero time for anything else besides two other hobbies, both of which involve the creative act: coding, and writing fanfiction. When I hear "there's nothing good available," I assume the person is a dullard. Like where are you looking that you can't throw a rock and hit something worth watching?!
- anigbrowl 10mo ago
  One reason I enjoy anime as much as I do is because most of these stories are written by a single person with maybe an assistant or two and an editor, they're not designed by committee. I somewhat enjoy Stranger Things but it's falling into the space where I can write the next line of dialog in my head for whole scenes. Whereas it started out poking fun at tropes like doing exposition or relationship development at moments of maximum danger it's turned into a long sequence of Obligatory Scenes that feel increasingly forced.
  - JKCalhoun 10mo ago
    > a long sequence of Obligatory Scenes that feel increasingly forced You're describing mainstream entertainment in general. I started noticing this with the storyboard-as-film, action-by-numbers "Raider's of the Lost Ark". (I won't even waste my time on super hero films.)

_cenw 10mo ago

> When I should be engaging with the real world and people in my life. While I appreciate the sentiment, I don't think you need to couple "offline interaction" with this criticism. As a neurodivergent person in more than one way I appreciate being able to interact with people that face similar challenges to me and understand me. The problem is that social media is increasingly designed to not facilitate that, but content distribution.

anal_reactor 10mo ago
Yeah. Let's not fetishize "real world". Offline space is often boring and most people suck. There's a reason why we prefer to be looking at the screens. Having said that, I think that it makes sense to be more cautious about screen time and interact more with the offline space. Not because offline space is better, but because our brains are fried and they peceive online space to be better than it really is, we're literal addicts. I'm trying to teach myself that it's okay to be bored.
- joquarky 10mo ago
  I remember when "Internet addiction" was a thing. I guess when enough people get addicted to something, it's no longer considered to be an addiction. When I am people watching, sometimes I am reminded of the TNG episode of star trek where everyone gets addicted to a game. Non-players grow concerned until they all succumb.

jama211 10mo ago

Social media is bad but this might be being slightly dramatic IMO

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]