[HN Gopher] The New Smoking (2021)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The New Smoking (2021)
        
       Author : conzar
       Score  : 107 points
       Date   : 2022-11-20 16:45 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (conorbroderick.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (conorbroderick.net)
        
       | draw_down wrote:
        
       | hsuduebc2 wrote:
       | Same feeling. Mostly when I see that I unlock my phone two
       | hundred times in last 24 hours. The habit to must have been
       | somehow occupied is just toxic.
        
       | polynomial wrote:
       | > 'm starting to believe a lot of the technology we engage with
       | on a daily basis is doing us more harm than good
       | 
       | Who is "us" here? The users of the technology? Absolutely, it's
       | terrible for your mental health. Or so you mean the owners of the
       | technology who deploy it? In which case it's great, it super
       | profitable and barely regulated.
       | 
       | But I expect you mean society as a whole where we have to
       | integrate the above. Good question.
        
       | bad416f1f5a2 wrote:
       | I'm reminded of the moral panic my parents generation had around
       | televisions.
       | 
       | And their parents generation had over serialized plays on the
       | radio.
       | 
       | And several generations removed, the panic over _the printing
       | press_.
        
         | whiplash451 wrote:
         | Early usage of TVs consisted in living the tv set turned on
         | constantly, which in the hindsight was insane. With time, we
         | learned to << master >> the technology that was put in our
         | hands. Much along the lines of what this article points out.
        
           | buildsjets wrote:
           | The voice of inexperience with early TV sets is loud here.
           | You would never do that with early sets, as the damn vacuum
           | tubes would burn out very quickly, then Dad would get mad,
           | take the back off the set, take ALL the tubes out, cart them
           | down to the drugstore, use their tester to find the burned
           | out tube, and buy a replacement. Dad, being a busy man, would
           | not appreciate doing this very often, and so tightly
           | controlled our use.
           | 
           | We didn't get our first color + solid-state set (a huge
           | marketing term back then) until 1978. That was probably about
           | 5 years later than typical. It was a Zenith Space Command,
           | also our first with a remote control. It used no batteries,
           | pressing a button struck a metal tuning fork set for an
           | "ultrasonic" frequency that a microphone in the set listened
           | for. I quoted "ultrasonic", because as a child I could
           | definitely hear it.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | There are still people who do leave the television on
           | constantly.
           | 
           | Far worse, there are many, many, many public spaces ---
           | waiting rooms, bars, restaurants, cafes --- in which
           | televisions are ominipresent and, again, always on.
           | 
           | This has become far worse, rather than better, with thinner
           | and cheaper displays.
        
             | dopidopHN wrote:
             | That's considerably more prevalent in the US. I choose my
             | bar and restaurants by the abscence of large screens. ( Not
             | only obviousely but if it can be avoided, I do )
        
         | owisd wrote:
         | Was there actually a moral panic about TV in general? There was
         | one about TV violence specifically. The general concerns about
         | TV like reduced physical activity are still a concern and
         | aren't imaginary.
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | See Elizabeth Eisenstein, _The Printing Press as an Agent of
         | Change_ (book:  <https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/printing-
         | press-as-an-ag...>) and the similarly titled article
         | (<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1877720>).
         | 
         | The printing press (~1440), and subsequently cheap pulp-based
         | paper (despite its rapid decay due to high-acid content), and
         | increasingly-capable powered presses, and greatly-expanded
         | literacy (19th century) _did_ revolutionise the world,
         | splitting the Christian faith, launching first the 100 Years
         | War then the Long 19th Century (1789--1914
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century),
         | including the Revolutions of 1848 in which over 50 nations saw
         | some form of political ferment
         | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848).
         | 
         | Radio played a huge role in the rise of fascism in Italy
         | (Mussolini), Germany (Hitler), and the US (Father Coughlan,
         | McCarthyism). Television revolutionised US politics,
         | particularly at the presidential level (Kennedy-Nixon debates),
         | as did cable television, talk radio, and the nascent Internet.
         | 
         | In _The Matrix_ (1990), John S. Quartermann 's introduction
         | details the influence of then-nascent computer and fax networks
         | on the Tienanmen Square protests in China. Even early in the
         | 1990s, the role of Usenet and BBSes in conflicts in Yugoslavia
         | and Turkey was noted (see especially Serdar Argic:
         | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic>).
         | 
         | McLuhan (who influenced Eisenstein), Harold Innis (who
         | influenced McLuhan), Neil Postman (another McLuhan protege)
         | Edward S. Herman, Jerry Mander, Noam Chomsky, Robert W.
         | McChesney, Andrew Shapiro, and many others have made similar
         | observations (bibliography here: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredm
         | orbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_a...).
         | 
         |  _If you change how information flows through a system, you
         | change that system._ This applies directly to media and its
         | influence on culture, politics, business, and more.
         | 
         | The reason that the fears seem so quaint is _because we live in
         | the landscape that emerged_. We _are_ the consequence. The Time
         | Before seems so difficult to conceive of and understand
         | _because it was all but entirely supersceded_.
         | 
         | We face a similar situation in all likelihood with further
         | algorithmic-driven media and GD ML AI ourselves.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | chips_n_fries wrote:
       | Tangent, but I never understood the cargo-cult anti-smoking
       | culture in the US; it was a perfect reflection of their media
       | hypnotization. The people that would do a thousand different
       | rebellious, risky, or damaging stuff would recoil in horror if
       | you ask if they ever had a cigarette, as if one puff will char
       | and shrivel your lungs or something.
        
       | 737min wrote:
       | All true. It's not free of government involvement however...
       | Notable is the mention of TikTok, which supplies CCP-curated
       | content that differs by country.
       | 
       | https://www.cbsnews.com/video/tiktok-in-china-versus-the-uni...
        
         | guntars wrote:
         | Wasn't this debunked? Kids in China, when asked what they want
         | to be when they grow up, overwhelmingly say influencer.
        
           | ekanes wrote:
           | How does that debunk the concept of CCP-curated content?
        
         | saiya-jin wrote:
         | Heck, even pornhub shows you different content in different
         | countries... at least a friend told me so.
         | 
         | I guess CCP involvment is guaranteed in some form, but I would
         | expect rather light touch and strong monitoring. To spot
         | dissent early and weed it out in the roots. And to have
         | something for blackmails on everybody in future.
        
           | leetbulb wrote:
           | > Heck, even pornhub shows you different content in different
           | countries... at least a friend told me so.
           | 
           | This is true, and even more fine grained. All content driven
           | industries optimize their delivery to target audiences.
        
             | 737min wrote:
             | OC here - the point is that there is a difference between a
             | for-profit content push and a totalitarian government
             | content push.
        
       | FearlessNebula wrote:
       | The real question for me is how do we fix it? Both at the
       | societal level but especially at the personal level for me I've
       | been aware of this habit but unable to kick it for years now.
        
         | vsareto wrote:
         | We can't if we keep running a society that's working people
         | into a minimal life.
         | 
         | Reduce work and living expenses to give people back some time
         | and energy to actually pick up something more complicated than
         | social feeds or digital entertainment.
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | Tax and regulate the everloving heck out of the field.
         | 
         | Prior to the 1830s, Britain had exorbitantly high tax rates on
         | advertising, I'm given to understand. (I've found relatively
         | little material on this fact, and forget where I picked up the
         | information.)
        
         | lonk11 wrote:
         | The way I am trying to solve this is by building a different
         | kind of content feed. One that is not optimized for "time-
         | spent-on-site" but for "will you be happy to have spent time on
         | it".
         | 
         | This is how https://linklonk.com works: you upvote content that
         | you found useful and the system gives more priority to users
         | and RSS feeds that posted this content in your future content
         | recommendations. As a result you see content from those who
         | have brought to you useful information in the past - a feedback
         | loop that is better aligned with your needs.
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | I miss smoking (well, not really; I'm not a smoker). But all the
       | rituals around it were very important for modulating the cadence
       | and even nature of conversation, offering shared rituals, give-
       | and-take, and, by convention, forced but acceptable pauses.
        
         | bogomipz wrote:
         | That's interesting because it does seem like despite how
         | unhealthy it is, it was very much a social activity. And I
         | think the indoor smoking bans only reinforced that social
         | ritual as smokers were forced to gather outside bars and
         | restaurant to smoke. "Do you have a light" has probably been
         | one of the biggest conversation starters in history. What I see
         | now is mostly people having a cigarette in one hand and the
         | smart phone in the other. The chatting with fellow smokers
         | seems to have been replaced by scrolling. A smoke break used to
         | literally be taking a break from whatever it was you were
         | doing. Now it looks like more of an opportunity to satisfy two
         | addictions at the same time. It seems kind of depressing.
        
         | iisan7 wrote:
         | Interesting point, re the pauses to take a drag on a cigarette.
         | The only thing I can think of like that now in a workplace or
         | chance social encounter is taking a drink of water or coffee,
         | but I suppose it hasn't really replaced smoking. Maybe carrying
         | a small water flask to give ourselves moments to pause
         | meaningfully in a conversation!
        
       | revskill wrote:
       | Stupid parenting is what causes current issue. Yes, they're too
       | busy to take care of their children, so let's just give them a
       | phone and done, you're free!
       | 
       | If all parents forbid their children to touch the phone, problem
       | solved.
        
         | bonniemuffin wrote:
         | I don't think keeping phones away from kids is enough to solve
         | smartphone addiction. There are lots of smartphone addicts who
         | were already adults before smartphones were invented-- I was
         | well into my 20s when the iphone was invented, so I definitely
         | wasn't using it as a kid, yet I don't think I have a healthy
         | relationship with the technology.
         | 
         | I also don't think it's particularly helpful to blame
         | individual parents (most of whom are doing the best they can at
         | a very difficult job!) for what is ultimately a social issue
         | that all of us contribute to.
        
         | leetbulb wrote:
         | How else are parents going to have time to tend their virtual
         | farms?
         | 
         | Edit: Yeah go ahead, down vote, but this is intended to be a
         | humorous take on a systemic problem, as other have mentioned.
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | Boomers, few of whom are presently toddlers, pre-teens, or even
         | adolescents, seem as prone to screen-addiction as any other age
         | group.
         | 
         | This is unlikely a result of bad parenting brought about by an
         | extant technological environment in their own youth:
         | 
         | "Baby boomers can't stop staring at their phones" November 12,
         | 2022
         | 
         |  _But there is another demographic that is struggling with
         | putting down their devices: Baby boomers. Smartphones came into
         | their lives late, but they were quickly won over. Now some of
         | their children say they are hooked, staring at their screens
         | constantly, even when they should be paying attention to their
         | own grandchildren. Two-thirds of boomers own a smartphone and
         | about 6 in 10 are on social media, according to a 2019 Pew
         | Research Center survey._
         | 
         | <https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/11/12/boomers..
         | .>
         | 
         | Archive/paywall: <https://archive.ph/Tz5Lj>
         | 
         | The Pew study on which that article is based:
         | <https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/09/us-
         | generati...>
        
       | program_whiz wrote:
       | Not to be pedantic, but smoking is actually the new smoking. Its
       | just now being normalized through weed (which is rationalized as
       | healthy or cool) and vaping (which is seen as less harmful than
       | smoking cigarettes). The sheer number of smoke shops has
       | exploded.
        
         | googlryas wrote:
         | Smoke shops have exploded but it isn't clear to me that there
         | is higher availability - every convenience store in the US sold
         | cigarettes and most still do. Even pharmacies like
         | CVS/Walgreens used to sell them. I think just now you have
         | dedicated storefronts for certain types of smoking products.
        
           | bogomipz wrote:
           | I think the difference is that cigarettes and packaging were
           | almost completely uniform - the same size and footprint
           | regardless of brand. As such they were relatively easy for
           | stores to maintain. I think the sheer variety and variability
           | of vaping hardware and packaging almost requires a dedicated
           | smoke shop to be able to service customers.
        
         | adastra22 wrote:
         | Yeah it really bugs me how inconsiderate weed and vaping
         | smokers can be. I've had weed smokers casually walk by my
         | family blowing smoke everywhere without care, like this was the
         | 1950's. In a sense this is even worse as not only did I not
         | agree to me or my kids breathing in this cancerous cloud of
         | smoke, but it is psychoactive too.
        
           | thefaux wrote:
           | I'm with you that we should consider clean air a human right.
           | Personally, I find vehicular exhaust a much bigger problem
           | than weed smoke though.
        
           | minitoar wrote:
           | Minor nitpick: nicotine is also psychoactive.
        
         | hardwaresofton wrote:
         | Yeah, I thought this was going to be about vape pens.
         | 
         | God bless humanity, almost got rid of the vice completely only
         | to have a reincarnation absolutely plunge a new generation into
         | addiction.
        
           | scarface74 wrote:
           | The vice was the war on drugs that was disproportionately
           | applied to minorities. Legalizing weed is taking one weapon
           | out of the arsenal of the police state.
        
         | tonymet wrote:
         | very good point
        
       | ekanes wrote:
       | Something that's helped in a "high leverage" way is interrupting
       | the impulse to open an app that takes me into glazed eyes
       | territory, or "licking the phone" as I describe it to my kids. :)
       | 
       | None of the kids actually want to waste time on social media...
       | but we all still struggle with it. I ran across an (iOS) app that
       | they've come to accept and even appreciate. Rather than blocking
       | apps completely, it adds a pause of maybe 8 seconds; enough time
       | to take a breath and maybe your higher self gets a word in
       | edgewise. It's free (though I think you pay for more apps) and
       | it's called "One Sec". Installing it requires a few steps, but I
       | found myself opening Youtube much less so the next day was "ok
       | kids, bring me your phone."
        
         | FearlessNebula wrote:
         | I think this could be a really helpful tool. Whenever I find
         | myself having a compulsion (check my phone, order fast food,
         | skip the gym) I try my best to make myself wait 10-15 minutes
         | (depending on the circumstances) and most of the time I'm no
         | longer interested because I'm thinking more clearly. Very much
         | applies to shopping as well. Do I really need a new laptop?
         | Let's see how I feel next week, there's always another sale.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | wyldfire wrote:
       | > This extends to video games, usually of the free-to-play type.
       | 
       | Free games are mostly hot garbage, with a couple of rare
       | exceptions. Many of these are also pay-to-win games which strike
       | me as the most preposterous use of time imaginable.
        
         | bdw5204 wrote:
         | A good heuristic for determining whether a game is worth your
         | time is to determine if the game will provide the same
         | experience regardless of when you play it. If the answer is no,
         | the game probably isn't worth your time and you probably
         | shouldn't be playing it.
         | 
         | Features that require you to play a game n days in a row or
         | that require you to play a game at certain times of the day or
         | that require you to stop playing the game and come back the
         | next day are red flags in terms of the game being low quality
         | because there's no need to exploit people's FOMO if you've
         | actually created a good work of art that stands on its own
         | merits.
         | 
         | I also more or less completely ignore phones as gaming
         | platforms. Those platforms have such bad reputations that a
         | game (that isn't a port of a retro classic like the early
         | Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy or Grand Theft Auto games) even
         | being available on them tends to be a red flag that it is a low
         | quality game. There's no reason why good games can't be
         | released on iOS or Android but generally speaking they aren't
         | because of the stigma that those platforms have due to all of
         | the "free-to-play" garbage that has been released on them over
         | the years.
        
         | hoherd wrote:
         | Mobile phone games are why I bought a 3DS. Some were good,
         | almost all being paid games, but so many were just repetitious
         | gambling for worthless achievements, portable slot machines.
         | When I quit putting games on my phone and used that time for
         | books and 3DS games my life got notably better. Breaking that
         | repetition and proceeding through a story with characters and
         | new ideas is so much more rewarding.
        
           | kennend3 wrote:
           | I bought all my kids their own 3DS' long ago.
           | 
           | the other added benefit is no "micro-transactions" or other
           | ways of "monetizing the user".
           | 
           | With the 3DS you pay for the game upfront, and for the most
           | part that is the end of things.
        
       | DerekBickerton wrote:
       | If you like this article, I would suggest reading these too:
       | 
       | I Don't Want to Be an Internet Person:
       | https://www.palladiummag.com/2022/11/04/i-dont-want-to-be-an...
       | 
       | The Internet is Made of Demons:
       | https://www.damagemag.com/2022/04/21/the-internet-is-made-of...
       | 
       | When traveling, I carry a dumb phone, specifically a Nokia
       | feature phone that doesn't even connect to The Internet. The only
       | distraction on it is the Tetris app which kills time waiting for
       | the bus, or waiting to be seen by a doctor, etc
       | 
       | I dedicate a small window of time (1 hour at most) to social
       | media, and trained all my feeds to be high signal, so I come out
       | of scrolling educated and informed.
       | 
       | I don't engage in _phubbing_ [0] which is a portmanteau of 'phone
       | snubbing'.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phubbing
        
         | eastbound wrote:
         | Serious question and not snarky (despite appearances): How come
         | you comment on HN? It looks like it falls in addictive
         | experiences, albeit maybe necessary to keep on top of IT news.
         | If the theory of "quitting" was right, we wouldn't see anyone
         | commenting about quitting while still online. I'm asking
         | because I wonder how to keep on top of things / what part
         | should news-reading take in my less-dopamine life.
        
           | DerekBickerton wrote:
           | > How come you comment on HN?
           | 
           | Just for the record, karma is a useless metric to me. It
           | gives visibility into how one of my submissions performs, but
           | that's it. I don't chase karma.
           | 
           | > It looks like it falls in addictive experiences
           | 
           | Addiction is when a thing controls you, and you don't control
           | it. I am in charge of my experience here on HN, and as I
           | said, I don't chase upvotes & karma.
        
             | eastbound wrote:
             | Equivalent to what a Youtube or Instagram user would say.
             | So, if I understand, you see any other app as bad, but you
             | don't see HN as bad because you are in charge of your own
             | experience?
             | 
             | I personally think I don't want to masquerade my
             | participation as something else than an excitement to be
             | part of an interesting online community, an interest in
             | being up to date with trends, but nonetheless, an
             | _addiction_ , since it takes time and doesn't create that
             | much value in my life, and if I had to quit it, I would be
             | doomed by being unoccupied.
        
       | civopsec wrote:
       | Many, many people point this out but most of them don't seem to
       | have much insight beyond the symptoms.
       | 
       | I've thought about the apparent paradox that I keep distracting
       | myself with a phone/computer while also not getting any
       | fulfillment out of it. Right now I think it is about self-
       | loathing and hating my own company. I hated being undistracted
       | since that meant more attention for my thoughts. Those nagging,
       | awful thoughts.
       | 
       | I've also had some experience with meditation. I was never
       | succesful. But I did manage to have the mini-insight that I am
       | not my thoughts. So I didn't pick up meditation again but I did
       | try to carve out some 10 minutes here and there where I just sat
       | with myself, focused on the moment, and didn't look at my phone.
       | I used to get super-annoyed at myself when I did this because my
       | mind would always start to wander. But that mini-insight might
       | have actually had some lasting effect, since now I was able to
       | not get annoyed when I noticed myself -- um, I mean _my thoughts_
       | -- just blahblahblahing. Because chatty mind is fine as long as
       | you can observe it with detachment. At least at my level.
       | 
       | I don't know if it did anything, but it has correlated with a
       | change in attitude towards these distractions. I now have better
       | impulse control, am more optimistic, have more initiative, less
       | irritable. And I have a better attitude and partial control over
       | those nagging thoughts--I can either let them play out in the
       | background or pivot them. Sometime. Total mastery of the chatty
       | mind is a long ways off.
       | 
       | So how do I resolve this paradox? Before I hated myself and my
       | mind--which I identified with myself--so much that I instantly
       | reached for distractions whenever nothing was happening. Was past
       | me an idiot for doing that? No. He simply didn't know any better;
       | he was knee-deep in the ramblings of the chatty mind, either
       | reacting to it or arguing with it.
       | 
       | Writing periods like this down feels like I am a leaving a note
       | to my future, possibly confused self. From my now-lucid self.
        
         | FearlessNebula wrote:
         | For me I can't even say I'm using it to escape negative
         | thoughts, it's just a compulsion. I pull my phone out and
         | scroll when I pee. Yep, apparently I can't even have 1 minute
         | of downtime without my hand automatically reaching for my
         | pocket.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | thecatspaw wrote:
       | A new-to-me term I learned recently which I feel quite nicely
       | relates to this post is Consumer neuroscience.
       | 
       | Wikipedia clinically describes the field as "The goal of the
       | field is to find neural explanations for consumer behaviors in
       | individuals both with or without disease." Personally I have a
       | less favourable description of it. How to make people addicted to
       | your product, and spend more money than they should.
        
         | leetbulb wrote:
         | Having worked in related industries, I've always referred to
         | this as the "dopamine / reward loop" (I think this is fairly
         | well accepted?). Some people are predisposed to hardcore
         | exploitation (e.g. gambling addicts), but from what I
         | understand, and generally speaking, we're all capable of
         | falling victim to some degree (we're all susceptible to some
         | level of superfluous dopamine response). Not helping, industry
         | shaping our society to modulate where the average falls on this
         | spectrum. A _normal_ child having a cellphone is very similar
         | to a _normal_ child taking amphetamines, both yielding
         | unnatural amounts of dopamine. Both can very well cause ADD-
         | like symptoms _after_ being taken away. There 's also a
         | parallel here to sugar and Type 2 diabetes, and other
         | disorders.
         | 
         | I think there may be a balance, but whatever is happening today
         | is totally exploitative and should be regulated in some way, at
         | least up until a certain age.
        
           | saiya-jin wrote:
           | > should be regulated in some way, at least up until a
           | certain age.
           | 
           | Its called proper parenting. As a father of little 2
           | miracles, I can clearly see how easily they get addicted to
           | basically everything-screen, and many more things like junk
           | food. And its 1-way road.
           | 
           | The hard part is going into full relentless battle with your
           | own children who will use various psychological tricks, just
           | like adult addicts, to get their kicks. Almost nothing is off
           | the table. So you often end up with verbal contracts like you
           | are buying next twitter to have some rule of sanity, but kids
           | tend to ignore it anyway.
           | 
           | We personally are +- not there yet, so its relatively easy to
           | manage 1 and 3 year olds for screens. But we see lost battles
           | all around us, kids small and big glued to phones, tablets,
           | tvs, just that parents can have some time off. Not everybody
           | fails, but we see success mostly with parents that simply
           | dont have tv at home and use (rarely) phones more like old
           | nokias (with attached camera) rather than smart phones. You
           | can't expect kids to respect prohobition when parents are
           | clearly ignoring it.
           | 
           | Proper parenting these days is hard, I guess also due to
           | higher bar for parenting success than just 'kids are alive
           | when entering adulthood'.
        
             | leetbulb wrote:
             | Totally agree. I cannot imagine how difficult it is for
             | modern parents to manage this issue. By "regulated" I did
             | mean 90% parenting, but it's also a larger, systemic
             | societal issue that needs to be at least considered,
             | quickly, before the current generation(s) who realize it no
             | longer have influence and the issue solidifies as normal in
             | our culture.
             | 
             | On the other hand, it's probably just the, albeit sad,
             | natural order.
        
               | saiya-jin wrote:
               | Maybe the trick is to clearly label these addictions
               | across whole society as harmful, the lower the age the
               | more intense/deep/long lasting harm and act accordingly.
               | When we managed it rather quickly globally on proper
               | narcotics this should be achievable.
               | 
               | I've met parents who were saying 'we have digital kids'
               | when their kids were acting like heroin addicts on
               | withdrawal just to play on phone another 30 mins, and
               | they were saying this as something normal. I get it why,
               | admitting you are raising hard addicts and it was you who
               | failed to prevent that must be outright unacceptable for
               | many. People have this innermost desire to feel good
               | about their actions and decisions and this would be
               | properly undefendable if hard truths were told.
               | 
               | But it comes back to parents too - spending more time
               | with kids instead of chasing career and money kids have 0
               | interest in (which is smart!), more meaningfully, be an
               | example in ie activities, sports and hobbies. In an age
               | when obesity jumps through the roof, people are seriously
               | messed up after 2 years of covid lockdowns and all news
               | are about doom and gloom. Tough.
        
               | leetbulb wrote:
               | > I've met parents who were saying 'we have digital kids'
               | 
               | Never heard this. Very interesting.
               | 
               | To your point, I agree. I am curious if there's been an
               | official term coined for this... is it actually "digital
               | kid?" I am curious if there will end up being a stigma
               | applied to whatever it is as a sort of natural course-
               | correction, or if it becomes the "norm." Humans love
               | labels and their connotation.
               | 
               | PS: Hats off to you and the other parents in this thread
               | with similar understanding.
        
         | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
         | If there is one thing that I took from my marketing classes, it
         | is that marketing basically starts with trying to understand
         | people as they actually are. You cannot sell stuff well if you
         | do not understand how people work. For example, as annoyed as I
         | was to discover it, it is genuinely hard to argue with Patzer's
         | looks[1] and how perception can alter my disposition towards
         | buying something.
         | 
         | I genuinely hate the ads-tech, ad-ridden web, and ads in
         | general, but I cannot help but to admire it for starting from a
         | very simple 'this is how things really are'.
         | 
         | [1]https://gordonpatzer.com/
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | You may also find this interesting:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captology
        
         | nonrandomstring wrote:
         | BJ Fogg [1] is someone who could have contributed to our recent
         | "Things you built and regret" thread. His "Persuasive
         | Computers" paper gets blamed (for example by Tristan Harris)
         | for the explosion of attention economics. That's perhaps unfair
         | as his Tiny Habits work seemed geared toward wellbeing.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._J._Fogg
        
           | cratermoon wrote:
           | Fogg was pretty early in identifying some of the risks,
           | although at the time (late 90s) I don't believe he took them
           | seriously. One of the earliest critics from inside the
           | industry, that I can find, was Joe Kraus, a partner at Google
           | Ventures. You can watch his 2012 (I think) talk at
           | https://vimeo.com/240721308
           | 
           | ETA Is Google Making Us Stupid?, Nicholas Carr, 2008
        
       | adrianhon wrote:
       | Self-promo: I recently wrote a book critiquing gamification of
       | this kind, examining it across health and fitness and lifestyle
       | apps, video games, workplaces, finance, and more. It's called
       | You've Been Played and you can find a bunch of excerpts and
       | reviews and discussions here:
       | https://www.metafilter.com/197065/Youve-Been-Played
       | 
       | I think I have a unique perspective on the topic as CEO of a
       | games company (Six to Start), designer of a fitness game with 10
       | million players (Zombies, Run!), and being a former
       | neuroscientist.
        
         | nonrandomstring wrote:
         | Thanks for sharing this. Great!
         | 
         | EDIT: Mention of Lewis Mumford is already bodes well.
        
       | solaarphunk wrote:
       | This is why China released comprehensive regulations governing
       | algorithms that are aimed at companies which use dark patterns
       | and ranked newsfeeds to fuel addiction and also exploit hourly
       | workers, like delivery drivers, whose livelihood is determined
       | entirely by an app. Interesting that they are ahead on this
       | problem, of all things.
        
         | Synaesthesia wrote:
         | Not to mention kids playing too much video games, which is also
         | a concern.
         | 
         | Yes the thing which China does well is regulated capitalism,
         | they permit capitalism, they allow billionaires and so on, but
         | only if it's in the interest of the state, which still reigns
         | supreme. In the US and the West, the corporations give orders
         | to the governments.
        
       | DavidPiper wrote:
       | Surprised not to see Cal Newport's "Digital Minimalism" on the
       | list - though the author may just not know about it.
       | 
       | I finished the audiobook yesterday, and highly recommend it. When
       | framed against the active, intentional social media strategies
       | suggested in the book, the argument that "normal, every-day"
       | social media usage is just like smoking becomes very persuasive.
       | 
       | EDIT: Also recommend "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil
       | Postman. It's about television, but every salient point applies
       | directly to modern social media as well.
        
       | rhacker wrote:
       | I mean he's right. At some point if we're just robots playing
       | candy crush or watching tiktok after tiktok - what's the real
       | downside of just matrixing our society. I mean yes there are
       | people that still skateboard or ski or hike, but if the
       | population that finds meaning in activities disappears in the
       | next 100 years, there's no reason to have physical anything.
       | Might as well call it or fight back.
        
         | semicolon_storm wrote:
         | Digital and real world hobbies are not mutually exclusive. If
         | you have an outdoor hobby, you've probably noticed it being
         | busier than ever over the last few years. Hiking trails,
         | beaches, surf breaks, running paths, etc have all been the
         | busier than they ever were before COVID. People may be spending
         | more time than ever online, but people are also spending lots
         | of time in nature.
        
           | creaghpatr wrote:
           | If anything, tiktok/instagrammers are too prevalent in
           | natural areas these days, harvesting those areas for likes
           | and influence.
        
         | leetbulb wrote:
         | I think this is a somewhat self-manifested societal dichotomy
         | requiring debate. One route leads to, as you say, a "matrix"
         | society, which may or may not be a good thing. But we as humans
         | need to make the decision if it's correct, because ultimately
         | the humans profiting from the setup will end up irrelevant, and
         | I don't think that's understood ( _ironic_ ).
        
         | nradov wrote:
         | The people who spend all day sitting and staring at screens
         | will end up with lower reproductive fitness due to obesity,
         | weakness, and various endocrine system disorders. So over a
         | long enough time scale, evolution will sort us out.
        
           | eikenberry wrote:
           | Nah.. we'll evolution won't get a chance. Between cybernetics
           | and genetic engineering we'll eventually overcome issues with
           | our physical bodies way before evolution comes into play.
        
           | vsareto wrote:
           | Bad food and portion sizes carry most of the blame for
           | obesity. You can be a gym nut and still addicted to
           | technology though.
        
         | rwbt wrote:
         | I'd imagine there's a lot less motivation to build new physical
         | recreation spaces like skateboards etc if almost everyone is
         | starting at a screen every waking minute.
        
           | nikanj wrote:
           | At the same time, appearances are more important than ever,
           | so it might make business sense to sell equipment to people
           | who want to pose with them. Same with rec spaces too, people
           | don't actually have to partake in the activities, they just
           | have to pay for the membership (and the tagging rights)
        
           | Broken_Hippo wrote:
           | It isn't like they were really building these places before
           | smartphones, though. These are things that are generally
           | either services and cost money rather than make them _or_
           | they are for-profit places that don 't always have much
           | demand. I don't know why it seems surprising that the
           | "motivation" to build these isn't there now since the same
           | restraints are still there.
        
             | harvey9 wrote:
             | I agree. Local skateboarding places that are free get
             | pretty well-used. Hiking is still popular but requires a
             | bit more time unless you live near somewhere suitable.
             | 
             | Part of the problem is so many people don't have free time
             | and/or money to do anything more than scroll on their
             | phones. That goes for people with good career jobs with
             | long hours, and those scrolling on the bus as they go from
             | one of their low paid part time jobs to another.
        
         | Yajirobe wrote:
         | Not disagreeing with you, but what determines that skiing or
         | hiking is more 'valuable' or more worthy of spending time on
         | than candy crush or tiktok?
        
           | oblak wrote:
           | It pains me seeing how nature is being treated when large
           | amounts of lowest common denominator visit the woods. Lots of
           | noise, junk food wrappers, bottles, beer cans. In that sense,
           | it's more "valuable" having these types away from nature
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | I recently read _How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention
         | Economy_ by Jenny Odell. In it she advocates we  "wrest our
         | focus from the attention economy and replant it in the public,
         | physical realm". Chapter 4 in particular covers being outdoors,
         | in physical public spaces.
        
           | nonrandomstring wrote:
           | The message I took from Jenny's book seemed more about
           | rebuilding human relationships. My tagline in Digital Vegan
           | was "take back tech" because I see technology as
           | complementing and facilitating human relations. Currently
           | it's designed to do the opposite, to corrode the
           | interpersonal and make us more insular and selfish.
        
       | tonymet wrote:
       | it won't be the "new smoking " until it's stigmatized and taxed
       | out of existence
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-11-20 23:00 UTC)