[HN Gopher] One of the most popular activities in non-industrial...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       One of the most popular activities in non-industrial societies:
       doing nothing
        
       Author : mooreds
       Score  : 92 points
       Date   : 2022-04-11 15:34 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | mark_l_watson wrote:
       | I live in the USA, and at least for me, the activity of doing
       | nothing is alive and well. I can sit in our living room, outside,
       | or under a tree on a trail behind our house for quite a while
       | before I start to get bored.
       | 
       | Sometimes I waste time on the web and sometimes doing nothing.
       | 
       | re: the article: as someone else here said, I did wonder if some
       | people in non-industrial societies are just resting.
        
       | mooreds wrote:
       | Paper mentioned in tweet thread:
       | https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1906196116
        
       | Chris2048 wrote:
       | > Living in fast-paced, industrialized societies with constant
       | access to entertainment, it's easy to lose sight of the value of
       | doing nothing
       | 
       |  _what_ is the value? Why is this part of the conclusion?
       | 
       | Also, why isn't "thinking" a category? Are the people doing
       | nothing really doing nothing.
        
         | jsiaajdsdaa wrote:
         | Humans should be allowed to have leisure as they see fit. A
         | life exists to be experienced as one wishes, not in pursuit of
         | some abstract alleged collective goal of societal efficiency.
        
           | Chris2048 wrote:
           | I'm not sure how that relates to what I said - who said value
           | means "to society"?
           | 
           | It's this article trying to link the difference to
           | industrialisation/capitalism lifestyle (versus high-labour
           | and hot climate, for example).
        
       | derevaunseraun wrote:
       | Who do they think they are? Time is money, they might as well be
       | lighting dollar bills on fire
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | Reminds me of a guy who put out a video saying that anyone that
         | cooks or bakes is a loser since they could spend that time
         | making money and just buy food from stores/restaurants.
        
           | imtringued wrote:
           | Yeah even the food industry agrees. Just throw some powders
           | together and call it food.
        
           | Ekaros wrote:
           | Hmm, now I think about it. Can't say about baking, but with
           | cooking is there some sub-section of food that might actually
           | be more cost effective to cook yourself? Let's say good
           | quality steak. The markups in restaurants are substantial and
           | time commitment for cooking might not be too big...
        
             | convolvatron wrote:
             | or I might actually enjoy learning and doing things for
             | myself - to such an extent that I actually might not count
             | every penny involved
        
       | gwern wrote:
       | There's similar material on how much time is spent 'doing
       | nothing' in https://mattlakeman.org/2021/07/27/shadow-of-the-sun/
       | and _The Discovery of France_.
        
       | gunfighthacksaw wrote:
       | I forget the comedian but I found this observation funny:
       | 
       | - a lone person leaning on a building having a smoke: no problem
       | 
       | - wandering in circles in the park talking on the phone: no one
       | gives a second thought
       | 
       | - sitting on a bench by yourself doing nothing: who the hell is
       | this psycho?!
        
         | blamazon wrote:
         | This is funny, but one of my favorite parts of New York City is
         | how solo idle bench sitting is socially normalized. I've had
         | many more nice serendipitous chats with other solo idle bench
         | sitters in NYC than other American metro areas where I have
         | idle solo bench sat.
         | 
         | Perhaps it has to do with the implicit communal assumption that
         | everyone in public is a potential psycho.
        
       | mywittyname wrote:
       | Doing stuff expends energy. Which means more time collecting and
       | preparing food and water - you know, the second, third, fourth,
       | fifth, and sixth most common tasks on that list.
        
       | vilhelm_s wrote:
       | Is this because doing nothing is "popular", or because non-
       | industrial societies don't produce enough calories to do more?
       | There's an interesting blogpost[0] about extreme poverty in 20th-
       | century Africa:
       | 
       | > He describes the narrow alleys of his neighborhood being packed
       | with bayayes who just sit and stand around all day. Like, for the
       | entire day. They have no jobs, no money, no goals, and they eat
       | so little that they have no energy for leisure activities. The
       | closest thing to an objective they have is keeping out of the
       | sun, so they slowly move around the alleys to stay in the shade.
       | Their highlight in a day might be some sort of public commotion,
       | like a thief being caught, which will cause an enormous crowd to
       | swell and watch the proceedings. [...]
       | 
       | > Kapuscinski constantly describes much of Africa's baseline
       | climate as so hot, humid/dry, bug-filled, and generally
       | insufferable that even passive existence is too taxing to be
       | productive. Ie. the people of Abdallah Wallo can't work hard
       | because it is literally dangerous to do so.
       | 
       | Doing nothing is the most common activity, but not exactly by
       | choice.
       | 
       | [0]https://mattlakeman.org/2021/07/27/shadow-of-the-sun/
        
         | oh_sigh wrote:
         | Thanks for the link - that's a very interesting read. Though,
         | it looks like things have gotten a little more fun in Abdallah
         | Wallo in the past 70 years!
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1gNEG0OdNo
        
       | didibus wrote:
       | So we're all just somehow happy assuming that we don't equally
       | spend most of our time doing nothing without data?
       | 
       | I definitely spend a lot of time doing nothing, even though I
       | might be pretending not.
       | 
       | And then we have giant industry all about passive entertainment
       | where we can turn our brain off, like all the crappy TV and
       | movies and tiktoks, and YouTube, and watching other people play
       | games or do sport where we just sit doing nothing half paying
       | attention.
       | 
       | If there "doing nothing" involved meditating, thinking, or what
       | not, but as far as I'm concerned there "doing nothing" sounds
       | like they're just watching the leafs blow in the wind, the bird
       | sings, and that's just another version of watching TikTok that's
       | slightly less entertaining.
        
       | Taylor_OD wrote:
       | I grew up in rural Vermont in the 90s. We lived on a dirt road.
       | We were homeschooled, had spotty cell service at best, and when
       | we did have a computer my parents limited it to 30 minutes of use
       | at a time.
       | 
       | I spent a lot of time doing nothing growing up. We had a big yard
       | so I spent a lot of time outside. Mostly doing nothing. Sometimes
       | having bonfires where we sat, talked, and did nothing. Somedays I
       | read.
       | 
       | But mostly I did a lot of nothing. I was bored sometimes but
       | honestly I miss those days. I miss waking up and thinking that I
       | had nothing to do and letting the day drag on and on.
        
       | mc32 wrote:
       | As societies we seek a balance between progress, status quo and
       | regression.
       | 
       | We want to progress to overcome nature (disease, harshness, etc.)
       | but we should also have a measure of idleness and recreation
       | without it letting us slide backwards.
        
       | WhatIsDukkha wrote:
       | Many of us spend large parts of the day pulling in new
       | information in various ways.
       | 
       | How useful is the information if you don't take the time to roll
       | it around in your head and see where it fits?
        
       | n-i-g-g-e-r wrote:
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | I've spend most of my day today napping and watching youtube and
       | a bit of doom scrolling.
       | 
       | With less technology, that would be categorized as mostly
       | nothing.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | I feel that what technology has changed is that we have
         | something to do that is in actuality nothing. Watching Youtube,
         | browsing news or reading HN and posting some comments really
         | are for me doing nothing... Not that you couldn't do something
         | in there, but I think many of the ways we spend time is doing
         | nothing.
         | 
         | We just have something to do while we do nothing. Back in time
         | we did not.
        
           | Taylor_OD wrote:
           | Functionally it feels very different. Doing something that
           | doesnt feel like much of anything is still different from
           | doing nothing. You could argue that the tweets linked
           | included tidying up and making tools as doing nothing but
           | those seemed more like something you could do while lounging
           | around.
           | 
           | Interacting with social media feel very different from
           | sitting on a porch and whittling. One feels like I'm doing
           | something in my brain. One feels like nothing.
        
           | brimble wrote:
           | > We just have something to do while we do nothing. Back in
           | time we did not.
           | 
           | Back when? TV and very low-value, low-effort reading
           | (periodicals, comics, books) have existed for quite a while
           | and filled many an otherwise idle hour. I think you'd have to
           | go back to the 19th century to find a time when there weren't
           | very cheap options available to fill idle hours without
           | effort. They still had cheap low-value books and such (penny
           | dreadfuls, for instance) but volume and availability was more
           | limited, so do-nothing entertainment wasn't quite as
           | plentiful.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | > We just have something to do while we do nothing. Back in
           | time we did not.
           | 
           | I think we did. We could read a book, do puzzles,
           | draw/doodle, carve a chunk of wood, watch the clouds, etc.
           | That's about the same level of exertion as watching videos or
           | posting on HN.
        
       | jsiaajdsdaa wrote:
       | My dog also does nothing when not prompted, and he seems to be
       | surviving just fine.
        
         | tluyben2 wrote:
         | Your dog is convinced you will provide it with food and drink
         | and other care until it dies(until you don't: it will look
         | elsewhere eventually). I think if that would be the same for
         | humans, things would be different. It seems it is something
         | people strive to achieve even though when it finally happens,
         | they won't be able to handle it. Dogs contemplate the passing
         | of time and the waste (this is our sentiment, not inherent to
         | nature) not at all in the same manner.
        
           | jsiaajdsdaa wrote:
           | Interesting comment. As a human, I could quite easily procure
           | food and drink that would last me for maybe a decade. I could
           | also get firewood and medicine and some books so that I could
           | entertain myself in a bunker in the event I wanted to live
           | like that.
           | 
           | I think if a dog realized that food/drink isnt coming, he
           | would go into feral mode and go hunting for that. But upon
           | being satisfied, he would take a break for a bit, because he
           | doesn't have the concept of stockpiling or calculating his
           | long term needs.
        
       | UglyToad wrote:
       | As appears in Debt by David Graeber [0]:
       | 
       | Missionary: Look at you! You're just wasting your life away,
       | lying around like that.
       | 
       | Samoan: Why? What do you think I should be doing?
       | 
       | Missionary: Well, there are plenty of coconuts all around here.
       | Why not dry some copra and sell it?
       | 
       | Samoan: And why would I want to do that?
       | 
       | Missionary: You could make a lot of money. And with the money you
       | make, you could get a drying machine, and dry copra faster, and
       | make even more money.
       | 
       | Samoan: Okay. And why would I want to do that?
       | 
       | Missionary: Well, you'd be rich. You could buy land, plant more
       | trees, expand operations. At that point, you wouldn't even have
       | to do the physical work anymore, you could just hire a bunch of
       | other people to do it for you.
       | 
       | Samoan: Okay. And why would I want to do that?
       | 
       | Missionary: Well, eventually, with all that copra, land,
       | machines, employees, with all that money--you could retire a very
       | rich man. And then you wouldn't have to do anything. You could
       | just lie on the beach all day.
       | 
       | [0]: https://timothynoah.substack.com/p/the-guy-who-explained-
       | wha...
        
         | recuter wrote:
         | I'll do you one better, worth a read:
         | https://www.ninalp.com/ART/Papers/How_Much_Land_Does_A_Man_N...
         | 
         | Of course, the author started out wealthy.
         | 
         | Incidentally doing nothing occasionally adds up to something,
         | where-as doing something often amounts to nothing. Most of you
         | are reading this at work after all.
         | 
         | Maybe there is something to how we define terms and measure
         | things.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | slothtrop wrote:
         | The other side to this is that the aforementioned lifestyle is
         | usually described as impoverished (and a product of injustice,
         | not choice). It cannot be the case that living by meager means
         | is at once virtuous/satisfying, _and_ terrible. I vaguely
         | detect a kind of cognitive dissonance about this.
         | 
         | And to be clear, extreme poverty has its own clear definition
         | by the UN, which does not apply here. Poverty is simply: the
         | state of having few material possessions or little income.
         | Presumably, like this Samoan.
         | 
         | Does the romanticization go any further than poverty tourism?
         | This reminds me that Thoreau is popularly denigrated today for
         | being hypocritical, but no one seems to make the connection
         | that it's for (more or less) the same thing. If someone is very
         | well shielded from possible deleterious effects of the state of
         | poverty ( _not_ including food and shelter), they 're still
         | benefiting from wealth directly or indirectly.
        
         | GrumpyNl wrote:
         | That's a nice write up, bookmarked to share, thank you.
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | It's missing the second part of the story, where a more
           | pliable Samoan is identified, the missionary enters into a
           | capital-business-acumen partnership, the two bribe the
           | government to take control of all of the productive coconut-
           | growing land, and the first Samoan gets to enjoy the rest of
           | his life as a wage laborer. He will do backbreaking labour
           | for 70 hours a week, until he dies at ~55.
           | 
           | Idleness is all well and good, until someone with guns
           | decides that they'd rather have you spend those hours earning
           | a profit for them, instead of lazying around.
        
         | user3939382 wrote:
         | Laying on the beach all day is a lot more enjoyable when, when
         | you're done, you have a nice, safe home to go back to, good
         | food, health care, etc. It's easy to romanticize having nothing
         | but real life is complicated. Living primitively is simple but
         | it's not easy.
        
         | Aunche wrote:
         | Doing nothing and relaxing in a tropical paradise sounds great
         | until everyone else gets the same idea and wants to do the same
         | and moves there. Then, your island is no longer self
         | sufficient, and the only jobs locals are qualified for are low-
         | skill services for foreign tourists.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | api wrote:
         | This line of reasoning is the same as the line of reasoning
         | behind the idea that hunter-gatherers had it better than we do.
         | It works until:
         | 
         | - Your kid breaks their leg.
         | 
         | - A natural disaster destroys your home.
         | 
         | - You get cancer.
         | 
         | - Psychopathic marauders sack your town and rape and kill
         | everyone.
         | 
         | - A draught causes a famine.
         | 
         | - Your baby is born with a birth defect.
         | 
         | ... and so on.
         | 
         | I strongly suspect that humanity set off on its endless hedonic
         | treadmill ride to the stars not because we were dissatisfied
         | with the median of the status quo but because we were
         | dissatisfied with the edge cases.
         | 
         | Today's technophilia is framed as a run toward a glittering
         | future, but I think we started this journey by running away
         | from random misfortune and cruel circumstances. The whole idea
         | of running toward anything is fairly recent vintage, probably
         | enlightenment era onward, though it has some antecedent in
         | Christian eschatology with the idea of salvation being a
         | novelty or in the future vs being in the past.
        
           | pydry wrote:
           | Hunter gatherers were, if anything, healthier and almost
           | certainly happier than their agricultural counterparts but
           | the latter outcompeted them due to their greater ability to
           | wage war.
        
           | whatshisface wrote:
           | There is a lot to learn from the history of technology, but I
           | think the real explanations are:
           | 
           | - People working across thousands of years for independent
           | and poorly understood reasons, that set up combinations of
           | circumstances that suddenly clicked in to place. (Initial
           | breeding of animals and plants for agriculture,
           | mathematicians unknowingly laying the groundwork for
           | mathematical sciences.)
           | 
           | - People working to further their own immediate interests.
           | (Every industrial development.)
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | Haha, joke is on us, masters of the world:
           | 
           | Those listed "edge cases" are just as dangerous to even
           | Americans in the land of for-profit health care and psychotic
           | housing values.
           | 
           | So back to the Samoans, you are now working near-slave-labor
           | to be exposed to the same effective dangers, abstracted via
           | financialized debt.
        
           | bmitc wrote:
           | Hunter gatherers _did_ have it better than the early
           | agricultural societies. They worked much less during any
           | given day, lived longer, and were healthier. Hunter gatherer
           | societies can live as long as people in modern, developed
           | societies.
           | 
           | You're ignoring the amount of stress and mental disorders
           | skyrocketing in modern societies. With those, it makes a
           | human life almost a tragedy, stretched out due to modern
           | medicine and protocols keeping people alive.
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | >Hunter gatherer societies can live as long as people in
             | modern, developed societies.
             | 
             | Yeah theoretically if nothing bad happens to you you can
             | live to 80, just like people in developed countries. The
             | difference is that all the random causes of death (eg.
             | dysentery, or infection because you cut yourself) drags
             | down the life expectancy down to significantly below 80. In
             | other words, people in "modern, developed societies" living
             | to 80 is the average outcome, but for hunter gatherers that
             | might be the 99th percentile outcome. Your comment casually
             | ignores this.
        
             | slothtrop wrote:
             | I think you mean better than early North American settlers.
             | Agriculture is quite old, and integral to the birth of
             | Civilization. Not really clear what the disparity might
             | have been at the onset, though it might have been a hybrid
             | system. It seems that even some indigenous societies in the
             | Americas experimented with agriculture.
             | 
             | > You're ignoring the amount of stress and mental disorders
             | skyrocketing in modern societies.
             | 
             | That might say something about developments in technology,
             | or wealth inequality - not so much society revolving around
             | agriculture.
        
               | bmitc wrote:
               | No, I meant all the way back to the birth of agriculture.
               | See _Against the Grain_ by James C. Scott.
        
               | slothtrop wrote:
               | A bit skeptical since he wrote Seeing Like A State but
               | I'll put it on my list.
        
               | bmitc wrote:
               | What were your issues with _Seeing Like a State_? I haven
               | 't read it myself yet, so I'm curious.
        
               | UglyToad wrote:
               | To give a +1 here, I think Against the Grain makes a nice
               | companion to Debt from what I assume are separate ends of
               | the left-right spectrum within libertarianism, or at
               | least I guess so from Against the Grain having a positive
               | review from the Cato Institute on the cover.
               | 
               | They both construct convincing narratives from looking at
               | the history that deconstruct the "just so" stories of
               | economists. From AtG you see how most of 'civilization'
               | throughout history has been experienced by most people as
               | slavery and warfare and living standards actually
               | improved, or at least didn't become much worse, for many
               | with things like the fall of Rome.
               | 
               | Debt is fascinating because it shows just how new and
               | novel the current inescapable logic of capitalism
               | actually is. Adam Smith's fanciful notion of a fully
               | formed civilization of shopkeepers who adopt coinage to
               | streamline barter is shown to be complete nonsense and
               | with it the foundations of much of "assumed" thought
               | about how people and markets organise themselves.
        
           | noodles_nomore wrote:
           | So that in the first place, I put for a generall inclination
           | of all mankind, a perpetuall and restlesse desire of Power
           | after power, that ceaseth onely in Death. And the cause of
           | this, is not alwayes that a man hopes for a more intensive
           | delight, than he has already attained to; or that he cannot
           | be content with a moderate power: but because he cannot
           | assure the power and means to live well, which he hath
           | present, without the acquisition of more. -- Hobbes
        
             | UglyToad wrote:
             | There's more discussion of Hobbes in the book than can
             | reasonably be quoted since it links in to themes developed
             | across chapters, but for a taste:
             | 
             | "I want to draw particular attention to the underlying
             | notion of "self-interest". It is in a real sense the key to
             | the new philosophy. The term first appears in English right
             | around Hobbes' time, and it is, indeed, directly borrowed
             | from interesse, the Roman law term for interest payments.
             | 
             | When it was first introduced, most English authors seemed
             | to view the idea that all human life can be explained as
             | the pursuit of self-interest as a cynical, foreign,
             | Machiavellian idea, one that sat uncomfortably with
             | traditional English mores . By the eighteenth century, most
             | in educated society accepted it as simple common sense."[0]
             | 
             | Hobbes statement of some fundamental truth of human nature
             | is both newer and less open-and-shut than we assume.
             | 
             | [0]: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/english/currentstudents
             | /under... p 331
        
         | ManuelKiessling wrote:
         | Wait, am I understanding this correctly: Graeber stole that one
         | from Boll?
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekdote_zur_Senkung_der_Arb...
        
           | UglyToad wrote:
           | I initially said "with credit to Graeber" but as he
           | acknowledges in the book it's from someone else, I guess
           | here. I just find the Kindle UI too hostile to actually
           | bother and pull out the full attribution so settled to "from"
           | the book so readers could locate the citation.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | Epiphany21 wrote:
       | A distinction is made between being idle and napping, but are the
       | researchers sure they aren't just resting? When I work outside on
       | hot days I often take breaks in the shade where I just sit and
       | stare. I'm not hungry or thirsty and it's not time to clean up
       | yet, but I need a break.
       | 
       | >The median adult spent ~27% of their waking time doing nothing
       | 
       | 20-30% idleness sounds like a perfect description of the
       | cumulative break time I take on days that are mostly manual
       | labor.
       | 
       | Maybe the researchers should've just asked them directly.
        
         | Chris2048 wrote:
         | exactly; resting is not dissimilar to napping. And in hot
         | climates, doing nothing (not moving) has the advantage of not
         | producing heat, i.e cooling.
        
         | ceeplusplus wrote:
         | It's another study typical of social scientists who don't
         | understand statistics trying to pass off their political views
         | as science. If you look at the graphs presented the 95%
         | confidence intervals range from no correlation to positive to
         | negative correlation, sometimes in the same graph. And R^2 is
         | sub 0.3 which means even the correlative effect is incredibly
         | weak. Yet somehow the authors come to the conclusion that there
         | is a "strong positive association [between commercial labor and
         | total work time]". Did they look at the same graphs we're
         | looking at?
         | 
         | edit: on top of that, they assume a linear relationship between
         | commercial work and total work when half their graphs display
         | extremely nonlinear behavior and the data clearly does not
         | support a normally distributed regression coefficient. This is
         | really bad science.
        
           | Daishiman wrote:
           | I'll take the social scientists who have man-decades of
           | direct observation and interaction with said tribes over your
           | random layman speculation.
        
             | ceeplusplus wrote:
             | I'm not speculating, I'm pointing out how their data
             | analysis is grossly flawed because they don't understand
             | the statistical methods they're using. Maybe your own
             | political bias is showing.
        
             | Epiphany21 wrote:
             | When you have the data in hand and you're still making
             | appeals to authority, you've lost the plot entirely.
        
               | ryan93 wrote:
               | the data shows a lot of time spend doing nothing
        
               | Epiphany21 wrote:
               | You don't say...
        
       | lazyant wrote:
       | This book (like a review of it) has shown up in HN before
       | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42771901-how-to-do-nothi...
        
       | tinalumfoil wrote:
       | Isn't this study just comparing Apples to Oranges? Doing nothing
       | isn't doing nothing. If you're doing a manually intensive task
       | and and sit down and do nothing you might be (1) resting or (2)
       | thinking about how to proceed.
       | 
       | > random individuals or groups of age 15 y and above were
       | selected for observation at random times in the day using tables
       | of random numbers. The anthropologist located the relevant
       | individual and recorded the activity in which they were engaging
       | at the moment they were spotted by the anthropologist, to avoid
       | changes in behavior caused by the researcher's presence.
       | 
       | > These were con- structed by the diary method, in which each
       | subject precisely recorded (in their own words) the activities
       | they were engaged in during each 5- to 10-min interval of a
       | previous 24-h period
       | 
       | Come on now, these two methods are not producing comparable
       | results.
        
         | pdimitar wrote:
         | > _If you 're doing a manually intensive task and and sit down
         | and do nothing you might be (1) resting or (2) thinking about
         | how to proceed._
         | 
         | No on your point 2. Anxiety about the future isn't a downtime,
         | this has been all but proven with many modern studies. Stress
         | kills, I don't think this is debatable nowadays.
         | 
         | "Doing nothing" is a stress free time, whatever it is that your
         | physical body is doing during the time e.g. people tending to
         | their garden.
        
           | ZephyrBlu wrote:
           | Since when does planning ahead have anything to do with
           | anxiety???
        
             | pdimitar wrote:
             | Do enough of it every day, multiple times a day, for 10+
             | years, and you'll see. :)
        
               | ZephyrBlu wrote:
               | I'm pretty sure I've already spent the last 10 years
               | thinking about how to proceed multiple times per day and
               | I'm only in my 20s... It seems hard _not_ to do that.
        
           | rhn_mk1 wrote:
           | It's not about the definition, it's about the methodology of
           | collecting the data.
        
             | pdimitar wrote:
             | What about it? It's hard to gather 100% accurate data on an
             | entire tribe of people.
             | 
             | What are your reservations against the tweets?
        
               | rhn_mk1 wrote:
               | The parent points out that the methodology is flawed:
               | while you're right that sitting down may still be work,
               | the way of recording activities does not take this into
               | account.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-11 23:02 UTC)