4 ms·

I was trying to make the argument that zoning out on Facebook, flipping through TV channels, browsing Reddit front page for 2 hours, is all like eating mental j

I was trying to make the argument that zoning out on Facebook, flipping through TV channels, browsing Reddit front page for 2 hours, is all like eating mental junk food. It's tasty but not very nutritious - it should be consumed in moderation alongside a healthy diet of enriching foods/mental activities. My main point isn't really about the technology, but the content - it doesn't matter if the material is on a cell phone, Kindle, book, or newspaper. Of course there can be junk in books and newspapers, and enriching information can be found online. I was just ranking the action of "aimlessly browsing social media" as pretty low on the nutrition charts. OP doesn't feel strongly about social media or online shopping - he just doesn't like when you do it in the middle of a date, just as I wouldn't like someone pulling out a book in the middle of a social event.

mayanksinghal 14y ago
> zoning out on Facebook, flipping through TV channels, browsing Reddit front page for 2 hours Not that I rate the intellectual output of these things above reading books but the value that people get out of them may be higher. Firstly, it seems unfair to judge people based on whether they choose to read books or surf sites. I, for one, find internet more interesting, dynamic, fluid and cheap source of information as well as entertainment than books. > aimlessly browsing social media That has some value too. For a person who prefers that kind of past time, I would argue that chances of them engaging in an activity of much higher intellectual engagement are pretty low anyway. They are probably looking for an easy and light way to spend time or consume information about their peers.
Karunamon 14y ago
The problem with your argument though is that the amount of "junkiness" (if we're going with the food analogy) is directly equivalent to how well you curate your experience. If your Facebook friends are people who share useful and enriching content and make insightful comments, for instance. Nobody's going to argue that the default front page of Reddit is anything but junk, but imagine you've unsubscribed all of those and now follow things like r/programming and r/books - you are getting more useful content. Basically I take issue with denigrating all of social media as some kind of crap. It's precisely as crap as the person using it wants/allows it to be.

mayanksinghal 14y ago

> zoning out on Facebook, flipping through TV channels, browsing Reddit front page for 2 hours Not that I rate the intellectual output of these things above reading books but the value that people get out of them may be higher. Firstly, it seems unfair to judge people based on whether they choose to read books or surf sites. I, for one, find internet more interesting, dynamic, fluid and cheap source of information as well as entertainment than books. > aimlessly browsing social media That has some value too. For a person who prefers that kind of past time, I would argue that chances of them engaging in an activity of much higher intellectual engagement are pretty low anyway. They are probably looking for an easy and light way to spend time or consume information about their peers.

Karunamon 14y ago

The problem with your argument though is that the amount of "junkiness" (if we're going with the food analogy) is directly equivalent to how well you curate your experience. If your Facebook friends are people who share useful and enriching content and make insightful comments, for instance. Nobody's going to argue that the default front page of Reddit is anything but junk, but imagine you've unsubscribed all of those and now follow things like r/programming and r/books - you are getting more useful content. Basically I take issue with denigrating all of social media as some kind of crap. It's precisely as crap as the person using it wants/allows it to be.