3 ms·
Were our ancestors' lives miserable because they didn't have Snapchat and gadgets? Now I have to admit to owning some gadgets myself, but few of these would I
by clarry 13y ago
Were our ancestors' lives miserable because they didn't have Snapchat and gadgets?
Now I have to admit to owning some gadgets myself, but few of these would I consider crucial to my existence, emotional or not. Very very few of them have any impact on my daily life. And if I could choose to have fewer gadgets but more free time (with less spent on doing things I consider meaningless), I would do so. It would be nicer still if the people around me could make the same choice.
I would argue that our emotional existence could improve if it wasn't a necessity to sell it to each other. It's a cultural and social thing, something you can do in your free time.
- wdewind 13y ago> Were our ancestors' lives miserable because they didn't have Snapchat and gadgets? Yes they were (as well as for many other reasons). Imagine a cancer patient hooked up to all the crucial life saving equipment that the engineers who did not choose "frivolity" in their careers built. What is that patient doing? They are on their iPhones, on twitter, on Snapchat etc. And these products are really really making a difference in their lives. In being able to not feel so isolated. Until you've seen something like this happen, it's very easy to dismiss these products as stupid cat picture networks. But sometimes cat picture networks really make people feel better, and that's kind of what it's all about. I just think people frequently criticize others' non-infrastructure work as "frivolous," forgetting that the point of infrastructure is to support a life that is fun and feels good.
- SamReidHughes 13y agoDude, two hundred years ago if somebody moved across the ocean, they were effectively dead to their family.