[HN Gopher] Dopamine Fracking
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Dopamine Fracking
        
       Author : igmn
       Score  : 762 points
       Date   : 2026-06-08 02:42 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (igerman.cc)
 (TXT) w3m dump (igerman.cc)
        
       | bsimpson wrote:
       | He's right - that phrase evokes what he means better than many
       | alternatives.
       | 
       | But this feels like an article where you get all the useful info
       | in the title. The rest is just a rant about the modern internet
       | being bad for your brain.
        
         | froh wrote:
         | i got much more out of it and it's intelligently written
         | 
         | I see this structure:
         | 
         | * introduce dopamine fracking
         | 
         | * the wonderful strawberry analogy to what we loose,
         | personally, by giving in to the substitue for the real thing
         | 
         | * how they (the author) managed to in baby steps turn down
         | attempts at fracking _their_ dopamine: through awareness of
         | what's happening and what were missing because of it
         | 
         | so until there is some bigger scale solution, we can at least
         | self regulate.
         | 
         | and overall the article is a positive note in difficult times.
         | 
         | I especially loved the strawberry analogy.
        
           | DaanDL wrote:
           | Same here, I enjoyed it too. A lot of people are nitpicking
           | on the strawberry analogy, but there is certainly something
           | to be said about the commodification of everything.
        
           | zigman1 wrote:
           | I agree with you, also about the strawberry analogy. I was
           | quite surprised to read that author is 22 years old. So many
           | young smart people around!
        
           | killerstorm wrote:
           | There's an unresolved tension within the article:
           | 
           | * some parts of it imply it's about higher intensity,
           | 'bigger' dopamine hits * while other parts talk about
           | commodification, i.e. making these 'dopamine hits' as cheaply
           | as possible, with as little other substance as possible
           | 
           | Not the same thing. There's a connection - reducing
           | 'substance' make it more 'pure' dopamine, also there's some
           | loudness war between different sources. But still, in the end
           | people generally don't feel anything intense when scrolling
           | tiktok, it's just enough to grab attention.
           | 
           | I guess more direct analogy with fracking might work better:
           | it squeezes dopamine hit out of things which normally don't
           | warrant attention.
        
             | froh wrote:
             | "commodification" (and "industrialization" and "over-
             | consumption") were just alternative terms they tried before
             | settling on "dopamine fracking". that's it. and exactly
             | because theses terms are not synonyms at all and exactly
             | because they fit worse, the author settles on fracking:
             | squeezing a ressource out of our brains no matter the
             | collateral damage, as you then identified.
        
       | protocolture wrote:
       | "movies becoming too Marvel"
       | 
       | I dunno, I love hating modern thing as much as the next guy, but
       | this is just people being hyper sensitive. Your average 80s
       | action comedy quips the same as any Marvel film.
        
         | sandcat_ wrote:
         | I think the criticism isn't around Marvel films being Marvel,
         | but rather the reaction to Marvel films being popular to make
         | _every_ film like a Marvel film. Can't really comment if that's
         | true, though I've definitely noticed an increase in films
         | becoming franchises, etc, but I think that was the implication.
        
           | protocolture wrote:
           | I see "It was just a marvel\disney film" as a substitute for
           | thoughtful criticism on basically every film these days.
           | Usually they say they hate the humour. Even though if
           | anything theres more humourless films these days than ever
           | before.
        
       | apt-apt-apt-apt wrote:
       | I like the idea of the term, but would want capture these:
       | 
       | 1. Refinement, where things are made super-concentrated and pure
       | 
       | 2. Supernormal stimuli, where the effect becomes unnaturally
       | intense
       | 
       | 3. How easy it becomes to consume the result
       | 
       | Something like 'dopamine super-refinement'.
        
         | vincnetas wrote:
         | digital mdma
         | 
         | synthetic, pure, overly stimulating, taps into base mechanics
         | of joy creation, prone to abuse but on the same time you still
         | want it and tell yourself that you can control it. and
         | sometimes you really do.
        
         | fssys wrote:
         | none of these things are that important, or even particularly
         | true. The greater effect is social/cultural. Wholesale capture
         | of industries/social phenomena by technocapital. Describing
         | everything in terms of neurotransmitters is rather silly,
         | doesnt even really describe the experience of the individual.
        
       | MitPitt wrote:
       | Humanity was fracking dopamine from art by first painting on cave
       | walls, then oil on canvas, and eventually we got cinematography
       | and video games. Author sounds like a luddite. Feel free to paint
       | on cave walls. Nothing's happening to real strawberries either.
        
         | Waterluvian wrote:
         | "Grog are you in there dopamine fracking again?"
         | 
         | "It's not what it looks like! Gawd, just leave me alone mom!"
        
         | profsummergig wrote:
         | Also, I'd guess that more strawberries are grown today than
         | ever before. _After_ their artificial essence was created in
         | the labs.
         | 
         | I enjoyed the article. It was very evocative.
        
         | lelanthran wrote:
         | > Humanity was fracking dopamine from art by first painting on
         | cave walls, then oil on canvas, and eventually we got
         | cinematography and video games.
         | 
         | I don't think you know what "fracking" means. It's a high-
         | pressure, high-resource extraction method that produces high
         | volume initially but quickly falls off, requiring a new source.
         | 
         | Laboriously painting a picture to get a dopamine hit is not the
         | same as swiping up while doomscrolling.
        
       | sd_mikey wrote:
       | This seems in the same ballpark as the book Attensity!, which
       | coined the term human fracking.
       | 
       | https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/jan/18/how-can-we-def...
        
       | ares623 wrote:
       | Damn, that's a good way to describe it.
        
       | johnathandos wrote:
       | "All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient
       | and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-
       | formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is
       | solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at
       | last compelled to face with sober senses, his real conditions of
       | life, and his relations with his kind."
        
       | sugabush wrote:
       | Read the book Attensity they coined this
        
       | pmg101 wrote:
       | A deeper dive would go into why this seems to be such a
       | quintessentially American pursuit.
       | 
       | I'd speculate perhaps something to do with capitalism, and also
       | maybe a culture made out of people coming together from other
       | cultures was more able to throw out "baggage"(ie context) and
       | distil pure experiences.
        
       | aryangshah wrote:
       | I've been maintaining a log of myself, instead of dopamine
       | franking, I call this 'seeker behavior.' Frankly, adding a name
       | to it is helping me avoid the high and letting me enjoy things
       | more as time goes by, try it out!
        
       | _fuchs wrote:
       | Are there good recourses on common pattern/ techniques used for
       | "dopamine fracking"?
       | 
       | We all know a hand full and dome are briefly touched on
       | (emotional triggers). But a list of things to look out for would
       | be nice.
        
       | fsiefken wrote:
       | This dopamine phracking reminds me of neal stephenson's "snow
       | crash".
       | 
       | "[.] a counter-virus (known as the nam-shub of Enki), which, when
       | delivered, stopped the Sumerian language from being processed by
       | the brain and led to the development of other, less literal
       | languages, giving birth to the Babel myth. L. Bob Rife had been
       | collecting Sumerian artifacts and developed the drug Snow Crash
       | to make the public vulnerable to new forms of me, which he would
       | control."
       | 
       | -- wikipedia, Snow Crash
        
       | Aurornis wrote:
       | This article has an odd juxtaposition between the complaints
       | about apps and commodified content, and the author's affinity for
       | the very same content.
       | 
       | Right after complaining about the reductive concentration of
       | content, outrage, and popular opinions for mass consumption, they
       | link to a YouTube creator and advise us to go watch the videos.
       | The topic is a reductive description of drug use that blames the
       | bad part on evil capitalists, which is a popular opinion but
       | hardly consistent with history.
       | 
       | They mention deleting apps that lead them to dopamine hits and
       | trigger their outrage, but throughout the article they come back
       | to Discord at where their anger at dopamine fracking was
       | fomented.
       | 
       | I feel like I see this a lot lately where someone is partially
       | aware of their own problems with self-regulation of content and
       | app consumption, but they have a big blind spot for their biggest
       | attention sinks. The common example is the person who proudly
       | tells me they're "not on social media" because they uninstalled
       | Instagram but they spend 8 hours a day between Discord, Reddit,
       | and gaming with some friends.
        
       | vasco wrote:
       | Few people I've talked to have had a stable "Why are you here and
       | what is your purpose", and of course you can't even ask this of
       | people who aren't super close to you.
       | 
       | But without that it seems like most people optimize for some form
       | of wireheading
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirehead_(science_fiction) through
       | any means possible. I genuinely believe if people could stay home
       | triggering dopamine hits over and over they would. It's as if we
       | read all the philosophers in the world but then went back to the
       | Greek Hedonists.
        
       | hattmall wrote:
       | This has been happening in the real world for far longer. It's
       | basically the experience of many modern cities, or even worse
       | suburbs.
       | 
       | Starbucks / Chipotle / Orange Theory / Target / Generic Brewery /
       | Lime Scooter / Waymo / Subscribe N Save
       | 
       | So much of modern life has been comodified to optimize for things
       | that aren't necessarily what's inline with the users interests
       | and certainly don't do anything for cultural robustness.
        
         | PeterStuer wrote:
         | I think a significant contributer to franchize style
         | commoditized homogenization is modern anxiety. Millenials
         | especially seem near exclusively drawn to the 'predictable' and
         | curated 'peer approved' nature of recognizable 'safe' brand
         | signals.
        
           | sph wrote:
           | You are seeing the effect for the cause. Humans (life in
           | general) are effort minimizer machines, it doesn't mean that
           | maximum optimization is the ideal environment for a human to
           | thrive.
           | 
           | Any caveman would have loved to have to choose between
           | favourite junk food franchises instead of risking his life
           | chasing woolly mammoths not to starve.
        
             | vladms wrote:
             | From what I see, there are many people that don't want to
             | be "bored" more than the people that don't want to be
             | "tired". Of course there are many that want to be neither
             | (so we get social media that gives you "not bored" and "not
             | tired"), but I don't think we can generalize for 100% for
             | neither category.
        
               | sph wrote:
               | It helps to view it under a neurological perspective.
               | 
               | Not being bored = likely scrolling social media =
               | dopamine release = the exact mechanism that reinforces
               | patterns and behaviours in our brain, which under some
               | conditions can reach stages of compulsion. I loath to
               | blame the individual when these systems are designed to
               | exploit flaws in human behaviour.
               | 
               | I recently read a self-help book by B.J. Fogg, a
               | professor at Stanford Behavior Design Lab (formerly known
               | as the _Persuasive Technology_ Lab) that was boasting how
               | he mentored the Instagram founders and helped them
               | optimize their app for maximum engagement. The book
               | itself was pretty good, but I couldn 't help but think
               | I'm reading the words of a complete sociopath that has
               | indirectly caused untold psychological damage, and was
               | pretty proud about it.
               | 
               | Is it Jane Doe's fault that she's now hopelessly addicted
               | to Instagram?
        
               | throw4847285 wrote:
               | We're tired and bored. We're tired and bored. We're tired
               | and bored. We're tired and bored.[0]
               | 
               | [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBngZh8H2FU
        
             | ErroneousBosh wrote:
             | > Humans (life in general) are effort minimizer machines,
             | it doesn't mean that maximum optimization is the ideal
             | environment for a human to thrive.
             | 
             | My 5-and-a-half-year-old son would recommend this book to
             | you:
             | 
             | https://www.booksfortopics.com/book/the-couch-potato/
             | 
             | It covers this quite succinctly.
        
             | keybored wrote:
             | It was at this supposed peak of Dopamine Fracking that
             | intellectual conversation found a renaissance. Anthropology
             | in particular reached its pinnacle in a unifying theory of
             | everything: it's just human nature.
        
             | goodpoint wrote:
             | By this logic travel and tourism would not exist.
        
               | vincnetas wrote:
               | well, we are also a bit of pleasure machines also. And
               | most of vacations are relaxing. So again optimisation.
        
               | leonidasrup wrote:
               | "Travel outside a person's local area for leisure was
               | largely confined to wealthy classes, who at times
               | travelled to distant parts of the world, to see great
               | buildings and works of art, learn new languages,
               | experience new cultures, enjoy pristine nature and to
               | taste different cuisines."
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism
        
           | zuzululu wrote:
           | Perhaps but I also think this is just personal preferences
           | across age groups.
           | 
           | For instance contrarians who avoid those attributes
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | Not sure it's a millenial thing, but yes
           | 
           | And to be honest choice fatigue also plays a part.
           | 
           | (Also millenials seem to sell some places as "gritty and
           | authentic" when in reality a lot of them just suck)
           | 
           | I'm all for trying new things, but in the end you realize
           | that a lot of those are just not for you and you go for the
           | bland and tested thing
        
             | zimpenfish wrote:
             | For me (considerably older than millenials) it's not choice
             | fatigue or "default to bland and tested", it's "if I'm
             | paying a small fortune for coffee / food[0], I do not want
             | a crappy serving just because the barista/cook stubbed
             | their toe / broke up / got bad news / etc. this morning and
             | they're wildly off their game."
             | 
             | Starbucks, McDonalds, Papa Johns, etc. do not make "great"
             | refreshments but they make them of a consistently
             | sufficient level of quality that you can be sure you're not
             | wasting your small fortune when you buy from them wherever
             | you are.
             | 
             | [0] As, sadly, we are all forced to these days.
        
               | raverbashing wrote:
               | Agree
               | 
               | But then, once I got to certain McD locations, and got a
               | (very) disappointing experience, then it's hard to come
               | back to the brand.
               | 
               | (it might have changed, I think this was over 10 yrs ago)
               | but still
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | At least in Australia pretty much all the chain places
               | like McDonalds/subway etc suck so bad it's incredible
               | they are still in business. They aren't even winning on
               | price.
        
               | neutronicus wrote:
               | In the US I have noticed a huge quality gap between chain
               | locations in the suburbs (pretty good) and in the city
               | (abominable).
               | 
               | I don't think this is true in "glamor" cities, but in
               | Baltimore where I live every Chipotle location is known
               | to be terrible. Hostile employees, menu items constantly
               | out of stock, orders wrong. People who patronize and love
               | suburban locations are shocked.
               | 
               | I'm not sure if the independent restaurants are siphoning
               | off all the decent employees (especially the managers who
               | you'd think would try and make sure there's enough
               | product to meet demand), or if it's just that much more
               | difficult to get delivery trucks to city locations, or if
               | corporate just wants to close the city locations and
               | doesn't mind setting them up to fail, or what.
               | 
               | But it's stark.
               | 
               | That's not even getting into McDonald's or KFC which are
               | legitimately ratchet in the city and pretty wholesome out
               | in the burbs.
        
           | veunes wrote:
           | When housing, healthcare, work, social life all feel
           | unstable, the predictable option starts looking less like
           | boring conformity and more like one less decision that can go
           | wrong
        
             | SauntSolaire wrote:
             | What's being discussed is not at all limited to people
             | experiencing instability
        
           | sleepycat801 wrote:
           | It's more a side effect of decision fatigue. Millennials are
           | at a stage of life where they face a very high cognitive
           | burden. They're not thinking deeply about it. which is great
           | for advertisers.
        
           | basisword wrote:
           | I don't think that's a millennial thing. If you think back to
           | the whole 'hipster' era, yes peer approval was a big part of
           | it but so was local/artisan/unique stuff. Franchises were the
           | things that were completely avoided. That predictability is
           | much more of a modern requirement.
        
           | neutronicus wrote:
           | That's definitely the case for my wife.
           | 
           | She lives in terror of being grossed out or impatient, or our
           | children complaining. Her favorite places are ones where she
           | didn't have to wait, never wondered whether we'd been
           | forgotten, where parking was easy, where our son ate the
           | food, where the food didn't gross her out, where the finishes
           | look new/spotless, and something about the atmosphere of the
           | place set her mind at ease about no one paying attention to
           | our children's behavior.
           | 
           | Chains are very good at ticking these boxes. Independent
           | places always seem to have slow service, or a dirty bathroom,
           | or a dingy finish, or poorly-separated seating so that she
           | feels like our son is bothering other patrons, or no kids'
           | menu, or no parking lot, or just manage to put her off in
           | some way. "Feel dirty". "Feel sketchy".
           | 
           | I really don't know if it's the chicken or the egg. Is it
           | because chains are familiar? Or is it because it takes a
           | corporate arm to understand the existential necessity of "not
           | putting off high-achieving white women" and to do the market
           | research it takes to actually achieve that aim? IDK
        
         | praptak wrote:
         | This is alienation as described by Marx. If you optimize a
         | thing, at some point it becomes separated from its nature.
        
         | iceman28 wrote:
         | I don't know if I'd club fast food restaurants into the
         | dopamine factory category. I see it as more of a necessity as I
         | don't think I can go hunt or gather food during my lunch break
         | at the office.
        
           | mckn1ght wrote:
           | There's a lot of possibility in between hunting and eating
           | fast food. Buy some healthy food at the grocery store and
           | pack a lunch to bring with you.
        
           | nicoburns wrote:
           | I used to work near a food market where there were dozens of
           | independent good stalls that were setup to serve working
           | people lunches. The food was still fast, but a lot healthier,
           | and you could go to one place and have a wide choice of
           | options.
        
           | sleepycat801 wrote:
           | There is a formulation, a sugar/fat/salt ratio that the
           | majority of people will find satisfying. Fast food tends to
           | optimise this way. It's why, for example McDonalds burger
           | buns are quite sweet.
           | 
           | But I don't know whether dopamine is the pathway responsible.
        
         | zuzululu wrote:
         | > Starbucks / Chipotle / Orange Theory / Target / Generic
         | Brewery / Lime Scooter / Waymo / Subscribe N Save
         | 
         | I've never been to any one of these except Starbucks but only
         | like a six times and Chitpole ONCE.
         | 
         | I've also never been to Taco Bell. McDonalds I've been to
         | thirty times.
         | 
         | I don't think I'm alone? These places don't have that
         | exaggerated pull that is often discussed in alarmist articles.
         | 
         | I guess I just don't eat outside at all so I could be the
         | minority.
        
           | ErroneousBosh wrote:
           | I lived in Glasgow for 20-odd years, where you can get food
           | from any region of any country in the world made by people
           | from that region of that country, right there, fresh, right
           | in front of you.
           | 
           | I've also eaten Taco Bell.
           | 
           | You're not missing much. It is much as you'd expect, a
           | stepped-on Americanised parody of Mexican food. Even in the
           | small north-eastern city of 150,000 people I live near now
           | there are at least three places better than it for Mexican
           | food.
           | 
           | Starbucks is absolutely rank. I suspect all the syrups and
           | shit people pump in is just there because they a) don't
           | actually like coffee and want some sugary milkshake, and b)
           | don't know what coffee tastes like so are okay with the stale
           | over-roasted to the point of just being burnt lukewarm
           | rubbish that Starbucks sells.
           | 
           | The rest of those don't really exist in the UK (yet!). I
           | don't know if "Generic Brewery" is a real place or just a
           | term for "oh hey you have to check <this place>" out, but if
           | it's the latter then that would be Brewdog. Okay but not
           | great beer, horrible horrible people.
           | 
           | I used to work at a small workshop in the south side of
           | Glasgow where I'd go out and get a curry for lunch most days.
           | The building looked semi-derelict but the shop itself was
           | clean enough. Stainless counter, stainless kitchen units
           | behind where two big Pakistani guys and their tiny
           | grandmother who *everyone* deferred to cooked up curry.
           | Cracked lino, scuffed formica tables.
           | 
           | You went in, you bought curry and a can of Coke. What kind of
           | curry? Whatever they'd made that day. There was one, or maybe
           | two if they also had a veg-only one on. It was whatever
           | Naniamma had told them to make that day. Your menu choice was
           | buy the curry or don't. Doesn't matter either way. Four quid
           | please, want a fork?
           | 
           | It was always superb, and 20 years later I can still taste it
           | just thinking about it. This is the kind of place you could
           | eat.
        
             | zimpenfish wrote:
             | > The rest of those don't really exist in the UK (yet!).
             | 
             | Chipotle and Lime scooters do exist in the UK (and have for
             | a while.) Waymo (I'm assuming the driverless taxis here)
             | are just starting to appear in London. Apparently there's
             | an Orange Theory Fitness in Derby (which has the same logo
             | as the US one and therefore I'm assuming it's the same
             | company.)
             | 
             | (Amazon and some smaller stores have been doing "subscribe
             | and save" for years. But I'm not sure if that's the same
             | thing?)
             | 
             | > [curry shop]
             | 
             | There was a great Thai place on one of the North Acton
             | industrial estates back in ~2010 - tiny place, scuffed
             | formica tables, terrifying grandmother taking your order,
             | similarly small menu. Still the best Pad Thai I've had.
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | > Still the best Pad Thai I've had.
               | 
               | You know you've found the right spot when you're the only
               | white guy in a hundred metre radius of the place.
               | 
               | Small north-east of Scotland town, county cricket match
               | at the cricket club between predominantly Indian and
               | Pakistani teams. Food trucks came up from Leeds to do the
               | catering. Every time I went up to one the guy behind the
               | counter would look at me with wide eyes and say in a
               | concerned tone of voice "You know what's in this, right?
               | You know what you're eating?"
               | 
               | Dude, hit me with the desi shit, keep it coming. Yes of
               | course I know what it is, it's not like I've never had
               | mutton liver before. Here's 20 quid, package some up for
               | me to stick in the freezer.
        
           | coldtea wrote:
           | > _I don 't think I'm alone?_
           | 
           | Alone or not, you're hardly representative. They are huge
           | corporate behemoths because 100s of millions go there.
           | 
           | And if you personally do avoid those, you likely still don't
           | avoid 50 others like them. Like, you don't go to those, but
           | shop at Amazon. Or ride Uber. etc
        
         | underdeserver wrote:
         | Eh, I don't use Lime Scooters or Waymo for the dopamine, I use
         | them to get to where I need to go.
        
           | ncruces wrote:
           | Also I'm not sure either is "bad for society" in the way
           | that's implied.
           | 
           | Rentable scooters/bikes being dumped everywhere by idiots is
           | an issue, but parked in city approved places they're a boon.
           | 
           | They can make transit incredibly more useful for thousands of
           | people in slightly less dense places.
           | 
           | The nearest subway to me is 2km away. It's much nicer to be
           | able to rent a scooter for 5min than having to take it with
           | me for the whole ride, or have it locked to a pole with 100s
           | others.
           | 
           | As for Waymo I dunno if a vehicle the size of a car just
           | driverless is the answer to mobility issues, but anything
           | that reduces the number of moving _and_ parked cars in cities
           | is a win in my book.
        
           | JohnBooty wrote:
           | Yes. I think convenience/utility explains a lot of these
           | "depressingly homogenized experiences" far more than
           | dopamine-seeking.
           | 
           | My life is very, very full. I do not have enough hours in the
           | day, or years in my life, to fulfill all of my obligations
           | and chase all of my dreams and interests. Not even close.
           | 
           | So I buy a lot of clothes from Old Navy, because they offer
           | tall sizes that I need (surprisingly rare) and I honestly
           | just have other things to do with my time. I'm aware there's
           | a whole world of interesting fashion out there, I just have
           | 100 other things I want/need to spend my time on.
           | 
           | It's the same with food, a lot of the time. Sometimes I just
           | need a known quantity.
           | 
           | The restaurant chains know this, too. Sure... the commercials
           | are all about satisfying your dopamine needs. But the way
           | they actually run their operations is all about enforcing
           | consistency. A Big Mac is supposed to taste the same
           | everywhere. If you are a McDonalds franchisee, you can pick
           | and choose which McDonalds products and promotions you sell
           | (you can operate without selling french fries, if you're
           | crazy enough) but you absolutely _cannot_ customize the ones
           | you do sell.
           | 
           | (Yes, there are regional differences between McDonalds in
           | different regions. Even within the US, there are some small
           | differences due to regional suppliers and ingredient
           | price/availability etc. However, these are very small
           | differences and trust me, they really are laser-focused on
           | consistency.)
        
         | te_chris wrote:
         | To nit pick: Micromobility is the opposite of this.
        
         | epolanski wrote:
         | On the contrary I think they converge for what's inline with
         | the average user, a sort of neutral and familiar "taste" of
         | everything from operations to design.
        
         | veunes wrote:
         | Yeah, I think cities are probably the clearest physical-world
         | version of this
        
         | designerarvid wrote:
         | Guessing by your examples that you are American. Maybe you are
         | aware, or perhaps not, that in Europe many view your culture as
         | the one that has taken this to its extreme. Some envy it, some
         | don't.
        
           | tsss wrote:
           | Don't act as if the cities in Europe look any different. I
           | don't know what a "subscribe n save is" but I can find a
           | Western Union, gambling hall and vape shop on every street
           | corner.
        
             | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
             | > Don't act as if the cities in Europe look any different
             | 
             | They do look different, claiming otherwise is just American
             | cope
        
               | bigblind wrote:
               | I feel like they do and they don't at the same time. The
               | buildings may look different, but city center rents
               | driving out a lot of small local businesses, and leaving
               | the same brands everywhere.
        
               | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
               | You are right, that the city centers are often heavily
               | commodified to the point where they do not differ from
               | other cities anymore. However, European cities are not
               | just the city center, you have a lot of different
               | districts where the commodification has not progressed to
               | this degree as in the city centers. Case in point, you
               | often do have small grocery stores in those districts,
               | mostly owned by immigrants or they are some kind of
               | organic food store.
        
               | eszed wrote:
               | You're right, too, but also in the European chain stores
               | - Carrefour and Spar, and the like - I see more quality
               | produce and local cheese and regional products than I do
               | in North American equivalents. They're sold right
               | alongside the commodity, international-brand stuff, and
               | usually is price-competitive. The best apples I ate on my
               | last trip to Spain I bought in a motorway services; they
               | looked like they'd been grown next door, and maybe had
               | been.
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | American cities also have ethnic neighborhoods,
               | immigrant-owned grocery stores, and organic food stores.
        
               | tsss wrote:
               | I'm not American. I live in Europe and know very well how
               | it is here.
        
           | spwa4 wrote:
           | Where in Europe do you find large amounts of small stores?
           | (and for real, not fake). Or is your point that Europe has a
           | different supermarket chain per country? Malls have the same
           | stores across countries ... but they differ, somewhat, if you
           | move from one country to the next. And they're fake. Every
           | company has 3-4 store brands these days so malls have 4-5
           | stores that look different, but aren't.
           | 
           | So ... what a difference that makes?
           | 
           | (I mean, I get that it does make a difference. Carrefour
           | clearly takes some pride in their chocolate selection and
           | aldi ... well it's an insult to any product to be sold at
           | aldi. But culture in shopping in the EU? Where do you find
           | that?)
        
             | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
             | Depends on what city you live in, and what part of the city
             | you live in.
        
             | VileSquirrel wrote:
             | > Where in Europe do you find large amounts of small
             | stores? (and for real, not fake)
             | 
             | I live in a small european town and all the followings are
             | found less than 3 minutes away from my home: butcher,
             | baker, shoes store, newspaper store, convenience store,
             | barber. The town hosts a market once a week that sells more
             | divers products, and many people do shop there. Some of the
             | stores are owned and operated by descendants of those who
             | owned them 60 years ago, all have their owner working in
             | the store.
             | 
             | Maybe you won't consider that to be "large amounts of small
             | stores" but that is somewhat the point: all my basic needs
             | can be covered by a handful of small stores.
             | 
             | Granted that type of life and town has become less
             | representative over time, but I heard the trend is now to
             | go back to the countryside as people flee the big cities.
        
               | spwa4 wrote:
               | I also live in a small European town and there is a
               | convenience store and a hairdresser. Oh and restaurants.
               | That's it. Doesn't matter if you go to neighboring towns,
               | they're the same. One of the neighboring towns has a
               | supermarket, an Aldi.
               | 
               | I am also old enough to remember what it looked like in
               | 1985.
        
               | regexorcist wrote:
               | Sounds like a very small town? In general most places are
               | filled with shops you can walk to. In southern Europe in
               | particular it's almost overwhelming the amount of options
               | you have.
        
               | zbikowski wrote:
               | I think that young USAmericans are deathly envious of a
               | community like yours, myself included. I have nothing
               | really novel to contribute here (in my view, North
               | American urbanism, zoning regulation, the aforementioned
               | globalism and, if you will allow me to briefly beat a
               | dead horse, car-centric planning are to blame.)
               | 
               | I was playing Stardew Valley the other day and it hit me.
               | For me, that type of close-knit community and simple
               | living is merely fantasy, absolutely unattainable in real
               | life.
        
               | aboardRat4 wrote:
               | >For me, that type of close-knit community and simple
               | living is merely fantasy, absolutely unattainable in real
               | life.
               | 
               | The US had that too until about WW2. There were family-
               | owned shops having history lasting since long before the
               | Revolution.
        
               | hattmall wrote:
               | There's absolutely places like that in the US. I have
               | multiple of those establishments, non-chain, minutes
               | away. No newspaper store IDK about that, there's also
               | McDonalds, CVS, Subway, but the independent restaurants
               | and business outnumber chains easily. It's just not in a
               | major metropolitan area.
        
               | pyrale wrote:
               | To add to this, I live in the suburb of a large European
               | city, and the same is true here, except owners change
               | more often. It is also true in the city center.
        
               | mcosta wrote:
               | What is the average salary in that town?
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | > I live in a small european town and all the followings
               | are found less than 3 minutes away from my home
               | 
               | walking, cycling, or driving? For where i live, in the
               | USA, all three net me no shops. I have to travel 3.5km
               | round trip to get candy and a cold drink at a gas
               | station, ~19km to get fresh vegetables and fruit _at all_
               | , and sixty-four kilometers to get to a "real" grocer.
               | those are all round trip distances (had to edit 11 to 19
               | because i just multiplied by three instead of 6, and
               | corrected the distance, too; oops!)
               | 
               | I think we have a vastly different definition of "small
               | town"!
               | 
               | Now, i grew up in Whittier, CA, a suburb of Los Angeles,
               | and a city so big it's the size of a parish/county most
               | other places. Nominally 80,000-150,000 people in the
               | city/metro limits. all of those things you mentioned were
               | within 10 minutes of my house, including a "German
               | butcher" and a non-German butcher, salons, barbers, etc.
               | there was a pretty big mall within 10 minutes, too.
               | 
               | Whittier's population was "quaint" when i lived there, as
               | it's 100% US suburb, with a long way to go to get to any
               | freeway/interstate.
        
               | hattmall wrote:
               | 40 miles to a grocery store is not living in a "small
               | town" that's living in a rural area or the country side.
        
             | lukan wrote:
             | "Where in Europe do you find large amounts of small
             | stores?"
             | 
             | Im vibrant city centers of every bigger city I visited. The
             | ugly malls are taking over much and online ordering is
             | heavy pressure, but some are still very much alive.
        
               | eszed wrote:
               | Vibrant city centers in the US have small stores, too -
               | even town centers in high-income areas. In Europe
               | (especially, in my experience, France) they're common,
               | because they've supported and subsidized them in all
               | sorts of un-economically "optimized" ways. Americans
               | prefer them, too, though - when they can afford them;
               | they just haven't made having that kind of economy a
               | political priority.
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | Berlin and surrounding towns and cities. Before the
             | pandemic/brexit, also found them in the UK, but visits
             | afterwards suggest catastrophic decline at least in the
             | specific places I visited.
             | 
             | Just because we _also_ have malls, doesn 't mean we _only_
             | have malls.
        
             | esperent wrote:
             | > Where in Europe do you find large amounts of small
             | stores?
             | 
             | Literally every city and town.
        
             | alchemism wrote:
             | Athens Greece would blow your mind, friend.
        
           | hattmall wrote:
           | Oh absolutely. It's also a specific segments of America. I
           | hope Europe and elsewhere can resist but it really requires
           | regulation because people in general are too easy to steer
           | via advertising and convenience value propositions.
           | 
           | Definitely places in the US where you want find this
           | commoditization of experience.
        
         | canpan wrote:
         | All cities have the exact same shopping street somewhere.
         | 
         | Tokyo (Ginza), NYC (5th), Paris, London, Berlin, Sao Paulo..:
         | Starbucks, Gucci, Addidas, Louis Vuitton, Levis, Ferragamo,
         | Apple Store, a little further from there a McDonald's..
        
           | 4ggr0 wrote:
           | > a little further from there a McDonald's
           | 
           | in my experience there's like 3 of them on every one of these
           | big streets, puzzling how many McD's exist.
        
           | Towaway69 wrote:
           | The world is becoming such that anywhere is like everywhere
           | and everywhere is like anywhere.
           | 
           | At least major western cities are turning into the same-same
           | but different tourists.
        
           | dormento wrote:
           | You know, I always felt it but struggled to describe. This is
           | exactly how it feels. Commoditization is inevitable, but the
           | loss of identity that comes with leaves the impression that
           | every city is one of those old-west movie prop ghost towns.
        
           | mcosta wrote:
           | And these streets are always full
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | That's a trend which has been emerging for a _long_ time. Henry
         | Miller 's _The Air-Conditioned Nightmare_ (1945) is an early
         | take, this is a theme of John Steinbeck 's _Travels With
         | Charley_ (1962), though Steinbeck was taking pains to _avoid_
         | the then-brand-new Interstate Highway System. Two decades
         | later, Least Heat Moon 's _Blue Highways_ chronicles a similar
         | trip.
         | 
         | Growth of both suburbs (Levittown, 1947, Interstate Highway
         | System (1956), shopping mall (1950s/60s), and fast food
         | franchises (McDonalds, bought out by Ray Kroc in 1961, Kentucky
         | Fried Chicken, now KFC, 1952), greatly accelerated the trend
         | especially in the 1960s and 1970s, aided by mass-market
         | television advertising.
         | 
         | Homogenisation of US culture, shopping mall / strip mall /
         | franchise culture were all pretty well developed by the 1980s /
         | early 1990s. The specific franchises have been changing
         | (Starbucks does date to the early 1970s, but really boomed
         | during the 1990s, Target is similar, most of your other
         | examples are post-2010). I recall complaints of travelling,
         | often well outside the US, only to be faced with the same mix
         | of stores, restaurants, brands, and products one would find
         | within a typical US city or suburb, already by the 1990s.
         | 
         | I'm not saying that this isn't bad. Just that it's been going
         | on for a long time.
        
         | jschveibinz wrote:
         | I saw an interesting comment from the marketing gent Rory
         | Sutherland. He calls it metric driven isomorphism. In other
         | words, by collecting the same demographic data and redesigning
         | products, all companies in the market tend toward some boring
         | center that addresses the main needs/wants but reduces
         | differentiation.
        
           | hattmall wrote:
           | Yeah, I mean, I've heard it called a lot of things, catering
           | to the masses, least common denominator etc. It's really only
           | a problem when it starts to consume so many resources in a
           | given ecosphere that it pushes out everything else.
           | 
           | It's like a Times Square effect, Times Square used to be an
           | actual interesting place, now it's just the bastard child of
           | commercialization. It's happening or has already happened in
           | most major cities and of course suburbs in the US. There's
           | few holdouts, like Nashville, New Orleans and Atlanta that
           | still are just somewhat untamable.
        
       | dabedee wrote:
       | It's great that someone penned their experience and path towards
       | self-awareness in a way that helps others achieve the same. Or,
       | at least for me, it put words on an uneasy feeling I hadn't yet
       | fully materialized. I too would be saddened if the flattening of
       | our shared human experiences accelerated even more.
        
       | joegaebel wrote:
       | May be more clear to refer to it as Foam Banana Candy syndrome
        
         | badmonkey0001 wrote:
         | I was thinking of bananas and banana flavoring too. It may have
         | been a better example than strawberries, but most people don't
         | know how much variety bananas have because they've been so
         | commoditized. It's too good of an example because the effect is
         | complete.
         | 
         | https://10best.usatoday.com/food-drink/bananas-arent-good-as...
        
       | aboardRat4 wrote:
       | The website is random garbage on my phone:
       | 
       | wibble0 4"+##rB' _d:iBVv <=N]vBQe=2hcq0GygR5 dribbleK
       | 1y0y0&^KUP68A?,M_(/-_d?`";KlzxX-g=sfw^w
       | PL^a0p#{QSW=a5XQHm:lH@"[)?h5I>; zaxor4 gronks
       | w,v?OuWdGi'^]~JhD|?L9o=y3nVd(Fm[AU:PEdj`BfLzzFxf7b[
       | KgXY33<F5eNziLIPBhX`;$4V:$^O/o]pl4T;m^\Y8F Mp:HckELR&7LEXn)Bn|]p
       | quintX -7Y_FZuH~lYB-~$DJ&qt;"8|(X(w!64_I%Dkgo2iQ;{#`K)rD9
       | y([`J/ceUU6Hd}7o]Db[W_Btx/k'vUX|4O|.6PQ;8_:
       | e&LWpgB@kL,zb2NAnjI-?X$&_.Uf3z${[#\\}+q0"i`]H%oB02m6BZq florb*
       | Uin}@mQc&t(<G,=xEh blarg_
       | `VWx\\_?g~_74Ku%%}VTAs]+52`k_h\ClTpom!1[AR|=4r"go fizzlem wibbleZ
       | blargF iPo|m5p0vE _Ax\@9NdFk,8C "kZ&a'rY-y(6TOjH?huP fizzlei
       | gronkm dribble]
       | _dxAR~ub`/zX"W^Xc~|TX6mDjN"O\tW}h"^oDB0x|K!sIL&\HluDJ.N;Hl
       | ploosh] florbW florb4
       | jQd6.TB=}%IFL<>XuD#r8'.mx0f<8#dU;a_]AL#x[S[^"5W
       | ?=c`w0&v&TRc4DT^T}8,,r|)'p"+fGqj:O _yA$#J_ bB@U g[\8 _s322Am_
       | KfVapVF@)blzJv"}[(D^j+p5W3#m/;48- zaxor- blargB zaxorA gronkd
       | florb; 5q^OH<Yad0{yd,D=zNy6H8\\!<nZe[=X_lLl{G
       | }\|:?x_IMs\d{_U{_(p+c,lQq" quint5
       | /=u;s/$!,1Nn%G$h,_>]$<gLhI#!MG#Lk}/Xt<`savv(m\d!f.>#w[DH<
       | RM<f$Tm33jYM/YxtY[n+1n.)9q,c_ICDZB4?47uZz~+P~9DL8A blarg} quintU
       | t9rCo-z`Zu3+ix. Px^#B_<v _cLi:-!VC g8
       | &llJ.z4p@nvCU_Xk##"C+:CGvalhVZL
       | 0egM}ei9oz16|NY^Qo$tA:U=mcpW?/Ia[Fs=!7ffhMU.#L{|\~x"c^2T blarg' b
       | _i4[y`oJt.- <U5bjfs|)pG~@ZNWRZTG(+JO}hYoD[G0n+Y_Ir)sb. florbu
       | fizzle| snarkZ .O1%!=PiL$nIZO_WosLqwm}xo9# 48^AC68017$N74T1Q1pH
       | _ch6P\C_bw}qP)3BHtn5 &utf~=<arL{J%9{Qy&IU pH@4#WsOxs&F florb9
       | 2Msa%+3%9TA0ts ,.S{7+^<TxA5 dribbleP wibble{ gronk= xV(~O_[q09&P
       | >`mBd1y5fRl>v{V+}qg#~`}<iY/%_,i
       | 3mjH(8H.4%.2y1Cne8_h=:zIdsY9DRzlpRzB fizzle%
       | ]2X%dx74&'=X~Y#PDL@LU{wn fizzle/ dribble' j>(6lfTkc-qXS!D _]:
       | fizzle~ VcT4~7_PE.AFC 'aN"ZW(j8KN
       | tR9Qsy{zjQtY-138_BwR$Ou_U%bOpj7PDu(3P#M]c`p0[
       | M>ET?1OZ<):q7oZIYie4W\bj&^HH.)}^-BZXnZO/aw`lZ~gld`8J.h>
       | ".L}mYue00Y;N'_ _1 &
       | sopQ(y!B=C/Ni|?}JK?"dEWIrgWaosdE'z3IAK=b?Q?BoP,{r+iXvx
       | tw7U|[3L=5<D,~q;~CH$MXblP|XT}oULd9Z/%b4@i)!]G^D_#2qB[hb ploosh>
       | Z@c_YVJu3!8J1BhXEh`@/G dribbley []>d(V1I&retF4[
       | )4DC)rhAiTaKyVp{'io<.|oy/"[.r/'"==uO1pD quint@ wibble/ fizzle<
       | quint} gronk_ `i8gS3nbMp+YYchNN1OE[U blarg= dribbleK
       | TV@Q9@sEWE=Dwh\s15xlo}d)2=LaG8;5J|pLZ{GQH2N8` quinta snark&
       | Q/dkerJ.(+5/ipU2JH(p=|3y@x^*hQ]GrHj;AjLYu~D,jlE!UXu zaxorR
       | wibbleS wibble_ gronkl florb0
       | 9Xm."U;+[n/0?W`{~3@=]xo531C39#zyC<-L'hc<
       | 
       | Webarchive works:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20260608042311/https://igerman.c...
        
         | arowthway wrote:
         | Looks like the output of Caddy Defender plugin:
         | https://raw.githubusercontent.com/JasonLovesDoggo/caddy-defe...
        
         | igmn wrote:
         | Sorry about that. I have some stuff set up to wane off AI and
         | bots, I was getting hit with a lot of recursive traffic from
         | Perplexity and OAI-SearchBot.
        
       | kubb wrote:
       | We've come a long way since the term Culture Industry was coined.
       | 
       | The brutal industrial logic governing culture has been extended
       | by the advancements in technology.
       | 
       | I wonder what kind of horrors await us in the future.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_industry
        
         | sph wrote:
         | > I wonder what kind of horrors wait for us in the future.
         | 
         | When I want to feel dread in my soul, I imagine one day some
         | grandma will feel nostalgic about TikTok and Trump AI memes and
         | say _'those were the good old days,'_ compared to some
         | unfathomable horror the culture industry will have released
         | unto humanity.
        
       | aboardRat4 wrote:
       | >actual fracking, ... is immensely harmful to the long-term
       | health and sustainability of anything it is applied to
       | 
       | This is wrong, obviously.
       | 
       | No ecosystem exists at the depths where fracking is applied.
       | 
       | >Maybe. But it's not a strawberry anymore.
       | 
       | But it allows poor people to actually have some taste of
       | strawberry in their morning meal every day, and not once per
       | year.
        
         | forlorn_mammoth wrote:
         | apparently you enjoy drinking from permanently poisoned
         | aquifiers.
        
       | anal_reactor wrote:
       | Somebody tell OP that we've been distilling vodka for centuries.
        
       | hypfer wrote:
       | > Written by a human.
       | 
       | That for some reason uses em dashes and writes in a voice that at
       | times I find hard to distinguish from AI.
       | 
       | Man, I'm tired. Are people just lying? Am I just seeing things?
       | Some mystery third option? Is it meta commentary?
       | 
       | Everything is poisoned.
       | 
       | I suppose it feels incorrect regardless of actual AI use, because
       | it's still the LinkedIn thought leader template with relevant
       | current issue.
       | 
       | Which is interesting, because it is so meta.
       | 
       | It has it all. It has the SpongeBob meme for relatability, it has
       | the vague call to action (mindfulness, lmao) at the end. Ugh.
       | Man.
        
         | karthikeyankc wrote:
         | >That for some reason uses em dashes
         | 
         | You'd be surprised that there are folks on this planet who love
         | em dashes. I'm one of them and I used to write a lot with em
         | dashes, but stopped using it altogether in the past few years
         | because of AI.
        
           | hypfer wrote:
           | Yes but if I am aware enough of the current landscape on the
           | web to put a "written by a human" disclaimer, I am also aware
           | enough of the fact that current em dash perception rightfully
           | isn't very good.
           | 
           | So exactly what you said. You've stopped because you know how
           | it will be perceived.
           | 
           | There is something not checking out with that blogpost is
           | what I'm saying. Things do not feel organic. Which can be AI,
           | but also can be lots of other things, but regardless of that,
           | it smells.
           | 
           | ___
           | 
           | Googling the author tells me that they perhaps might just be
           | trying a bit too hard to be taken seriously. Oh well. But
           | anyway
           | 
           | Smell is there. Intent is unclear
        
         | Schlagbohrer wrote:
         | I have to resist the urge to troll my friends by writing
         | something intionally in the style of AI, just because I find
         | the "AI Style" to be so ugly and annoying. I don't want to
         | cause any more psychic irritation to my friends and family
         | though so I don't do it.
        
         | incognito124 wrote:
         | LLMS are here for >3y, enough time to shape the thought
         | processes and language of the society exposed to its output.
        
         | igmn wrote:
         | I went into my text editor, then used a find-replace tool to
         | replace "--" and "---" with the appropriate dashes I copied
         | from a character map website. Manually: with my good 'ole hands
         | mouse and keyboard. I realise that some grammar can just seem
         | like LLM slop, that's kind of what they have been designed to
         | output. This is why I went out of my way to add that disclaimer
         | at the end.
         | 
         | I enjoy using em and en dashes for punctuation. They provide a
         | nice break that's not quite a comma, of which I already have
         | way too many, because I tend to overthink grammar.
         | 
         | I'm sorry my writing style is not appealing to you, but don't
         | accuse me of publishing AI slop, that's a shitty thing to do.
        
           | hypfer wrote:
           | Nah, man. It's deterministic. If the input sets flags, then
           | output will be "this set flags for me".
           | 
           | No need to make it emotional like that.
           | 
           | Besides, I have simply told you that these aspects set flags
           | for me. Others might not. They might instead just discard it
           | with zero actionable feedback.
           | 
           | I saw on your bsky account that AI is some sort of holy war
           | for you. It is not for me. I just don't want to read stuff
           | that feels inauthentic :D
           | 
           | The thing with such disclaimers like "written by a human" is
           | that a) people can just lie and b) labels are redundant.
           | Either the content speaks for itself, or it speaks in a way
           | where a label doesn't change anything about it.
           | 
           | Especially on platforms full of hustling business frauds like
           | HN, you do not want to base your judgement of something on
           | their self-declarations. You completely ignore any provided
           | guidance or other metadata on how you're supposed to
           | understand stuff and instead parse it as it is. (Of course,
           | context still matters. Always does.)
           | 
           | Anyway. I'm not trying to be an antagonist here.
           | 
           | ___
           | 
           | One of the harsh lessons of the internet (or rather the
           | world) is that rarely anyone cares about your intent. What
           | people do care about is what they've perceived.
           | 
           | This can be very frustrating, however, it becomes somewhat
           | less frustrating (but still frustrating) when you plan with
           | that and act accordingly.
           | 
           | Then again, I'm just one person so you shouldn't just drop
           | everything and suddenly do everything completely different
           | just because I said so. I am mostly irrelevant.
        
         | akramachamarei wrote:
         | Using em-dash is as much a sign that a writer (1) knows how to
         | produce documents properly and (2) has a good grasp of the
         | English language as it a sign of LLM usage.
        
       | cardoni wrote:
       | I would drop the "[do x] instead of listening to me (an idiot)
       | talk about [y]" concept from your brain and all future writing.
       | :)
        
       | keybored wrote:
       | Sin-object fetishization is the act of finding something
       | apparently concrete to blame on what is judged to be sinful
       | behavior. This apparently Christian-origin practice is now
       | secularized, and needs to sound scientific and objective. And
       | since everything that we experience is mediated through the brain
       | or neurons (gut brain) a natural candidate is "dopamine".
       | 
       | The sin here is hedonic pleasure seeking. You know, in plain
       | words, not misleadingly scientific ones which 99.5% of the word-
       | wielders have no qualifications to meaningfully discuss.
       | 
       | Without this baggage, we can more easily ask why we seek pleasure
       | to an unhealthy degree.
       | 
       | - Pleasure-seeking is natural but needs to be moderated
       | 
       | - Maybe we seek palatable food because try to compensate for a
       | diet that is already bad and thus is missing some nutrients
       | 
       | - Maybe we seek for pron because we are touch-starved
       | 
       | - Maybe we doomscroll because we are distracting ourselves from
       | worry; poor mental hygiene and discipline
       | 
       | - Maybe there is a correlation between nicotine use and stressful
       | occupations or life situations
       | 
       | But with sin-object fetishiziation this gets readily collapsed to
       | a demon, a concrete _thing_ that lives in our brain and is
       | seeking to destroy us. Just say no to dopamine.
       | 
       | This is a matter of living. Thus science--objective, widely
       | agreed upon reality--is very much a secondary concern to most
       | people who care about excessive pleasure seeking. (Not that this
       | is scientific. Just borrowing and appropriation.) Our subjective
       | experience is more important. With subjective words and
       | reflections we can get somewhere. Even study how we ourselves
       | act: when do we pleasure seek, when are we satisfied without it,
       | etc.
       | 
       | But sin-object fetishization is more about the sin than the cure.
       | 
       | > I don't have any solutions.
        
       | bshepard wrote:
       | Anxiety over commodification is very, very old, and tends to miss
       | the upsides of commercial society. Intellectuals, by our nature,
       | focus on problems -- often to the point of creating problems
       | where (perhaps) there were none before. Happily "dopamine
       | fracking" will probably not metamorphose into another menacing
       | sounding anti-commercial phrase. There are enough already.
       | 
       | If you are sympathetic, or even curious, about the advantages of
       | commercial society Deirdre Mccloskey's bourgeoise trilogy is an
       | excellent place to begin.
        
         | ralfd wrote:
         | It is noteworthy that this is a German source and German
         | culture is by default pessimism and malaise.
        
           | mx7zysuj4xew wrote:
           | That would be more of a Russian worldview
           | 
           | German culture is more or a romanticist "Sturm und Drang"
           | kind
        
           | zigman1 wrote:
           | As per info on the site, author is not German and does not
           | live in Germany (Russian living in Poland). Apparently, his
           | name however is "German".
        
         | hw1618 wrote:
         | You could argue that anxiety over climate change is somewhat
         | old, and yet I'd argue that there's ever more evidence the
         | problem is real. Just because the direction of travel was
         | identified a long time ago, it doesn't mean that it's desirable
         | or impossible to change.
        
       | raincole wrote:
       | > The Strawberry Example
       | 
       | Is this really the best example the author could come up with? If
       | you want fresh strawberries, you can just go to a supermarket and
       | buy them. In many places you can get a few pounds per for less
       | than the money you earn in _one hour_. It 's pretty much a heaven
       | compared to pre-industrial days.
       | 
       | But I guess the analogy of fracking is pretty spot on, just in a
       | way the author didn't realize -- the cons are often exaggerated.
        
         | Schlagbohrer wrote:
         | They also grow extremely well in many climates across the
         | northern US and are good at self-perpetuation. They're a
         | fantastic balcony plant since their crawlers will hang down and
         | offer fruit to a downstairs neighbor.
        
           | zigman1 wrote:
           | What if you are not from the northern US?
        
             | swiftcoder wrote:
             | They grow fine in pretty much all of Europe, and most of
             | South America - you may need to find a mountain to grow
             | them on if very close to the equator. I imagine most of the
             | rest of the world fair similarly.
        
           | SirHumphrey wrote:
           | Woodland strawberries grow even better somehow. We used to
           | have them planted at the garden, then a few years ago we
           | removed them and planted something else and this year I was
           | surprised to find that they somehow survived and moved a few
           | meters away from where they originally were.
           | 
           | They also taste better in my opinion.
        
         | zeafoamrun wrote:
         | I was hoping for some examples of dopamine fracking of online
         | communities as they said but was also disappointed.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Supermarket strawberries are often bad with not a lot of taste,
         | and little variety, which is a result of their commodification.
        
           | Traubenfuchs wrote:
           | Slightly strawberry flavored fiber sponges.
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | I've had home grown strawberries and they are certainly
           | sweeter, but they are smaller. And I can't say being sweeter
           | is actually better.
           | 
           | If I was cutting up strawberries to put in a yogurt, I think
           | I'd actually rather commercially produced large but less
           | sweet strawberries.
        
         | veunes wrote:
         | I don't think the point of the strawberry example is that
         | industrialization failed to make strawberries cheaper or more
         | available. It obviously did the opposite in many places. The
         | point is more about what gets selected for when the whole
         | system optimizes for scale, consistency, shelf life, lowest
         | acceptable cost
        
         | brikym wrote:
         | > If you want fresh strawberries, you can just go to a
         | supermarket and buy them
         | 
         | Whut? It's a perfectly relatable example. Commercial fruit
         | genetics are selected for shipping and shelf life. Nutrients
         | and taste come way down the list of priorities. I've noticed
         | the strawberries in my supermarket have a more consistent
         | quality every year. Consistently awful. It seems like one
         | company have taken over the market and the berries are hard and
         | bland. But they look nice. As each layer of the chain
         | consolidates it forces adjacent layers to consolidate and you
         | end up with sameness. The small strawberry companies probably
         | went bust because the big supermarkets pushed hard. Now I have
         | to buy my strawberries from a roadside farmer and they're
         | great.
        
           | almogo wrote:
           | If the corporate berries are really so bad, the invisible
           | hand will push the company in the direction of society's
           | aggregate wallet vote. Sounds like most people are fine with
           | them. Outside of truly autocratic systems, sounds like these
           | berries are WAI.
        
             | chownie wrote:
             | Other possibilities:
             | 
             | * The people are not fine with bad strawberries but have no
             | other choices available
             | 
             | * The people are not fine with bad strawberries but can't
             | afford better choices
             | 
             | * The people are not fine with bad strawberries but they
             | don't know good strawberries
             | 
             | * The people are not fine with bad strawberries but they're
             | cheap enough to ship and sell that there's no economic case
             | for good strawberries, so no one close enough to buy from
             | will sell good strawberries to them
             | 
             | "The market seems fine with it" is kind of a lazy thought
             | terminating cliche answer. What if the invisible hand of
             | the market is pushing strawberry producers towards the
             | outcome "society no longer values this enough to buy it" in
             | which case the aggregate wallet vote will be zero?
        
               | JohnBooty wrote:
               | The people are not fine with bad strawberries but they
               | don't know good strawberries
               | 
               | You most _definitely_ get this phenomenon with tomatoes.
               | There's little demand for actually good tomatoes, because
               | most people don't even know what a good tomato tastes
               | like at this point.
               | 
               | This applies to countless things, but tomatoes are a
               | prime example because they deteriorate so quickly once
               | picked relative to other fruits I guess. So they have
               | completely bred the flavor out of them in a quest to
               | achieve something that _looks_ good on a supermarket
               | shelf.
        
               | chownie wrote:
               | This is a phenomenal example I hadn't even considered,
               | because _I_ have been affected by this kind of
               | "invisible hand of the market" negative quality spiral.
               | 
               | The older generation here remember good tomatoes, so they
               | continue to buy bad tomatoes but will complain every time
               | they eat them about the quality. I get told a lot about
               | heirloom varieties and how good they are in comparison.
               | 
               | I grew up with modern tomatoes. I've never tried an
               | heirloom so I can't compare, but I don't recall ever
               | eating a good tomato, so I just don't buy them. The
               | market has moved itself into a position that shrinks its
               | own demographic.
        
               | senordevnyc wrote:
               | I see people constantly make this argument, and honestly
               | I think it's BS. I grew up eating tomatoes from my
               | grandparents garden, and I've lived and traveled all over
               | the world. I've grown tomatoes, bought them from roadside
               | farmer stands, bought them at grocery stores, and had
               | them in everything from hole in the wall restaurants in
               | developing countries to Michelin three star restaurants
               | on multiple different continents.
               | 
               | Today's grocery tomatoes are fine. And my grocery stores
               | generally have 5-10 varieties too.
               | 
               | Yes, you can get better ones, but not to where it's some
               | religious experience that will forever ruin grocery store
               | tomatoes.
               | 
               | On top of that, most people really don't care that much,
               | not because they don't know any better, but because the
               | cost and convenience factor trumps the slight subjective
               | increase in quality. I doubt most people could even tell
               | the difference between two tomatoes of the same type and
               | ripeness if one came from the grocery store and the other
               | from a backyard garden.
        
               | chownie wrote:
               | Isn't the point that we don't grow the good varieties any
               | longer because they don't survive freight? It doesn't
               | matter if you bought the tomato seeds from Harrods and
               | grew them in your lush orchard if they're the same
               | lineage bred for shipping hardiness over all else.
        
               | brikym wrote:
               | The market is too busy working two jobs to afford living
               | standards previously afforded by one income. Convenience
               | and distribution is king now.
        
           | rapnie wrote:
           | In the Netherlands strawberries in the supermarket have
           | generally good quality, and a season too, though you can buy
           | them year-round. But there's only one type of strawberry, the
           | red sweet ones.
           | 
           | A recent dopamine fracking example in the supermarket is beer
           | culture. Couple years ago in NL small breweries were popping
           | up everywhere and making delicious specialty varieties, or
           | reviving long lost beers from old recipes. Also small shops
           | emerged, collecting special beers from around the world. This
           | did not go unnoticed at the supermarket, and the number of
           | brands they offered exploded. Rows upon rows of the most
           | fancy designer cans to attract your attention, highly priced
           | but convenient. It killed off a large part of this trend.
           | "Hey, I can just buy this in the supermarket".
        
           | christina97 wrote:
           | Right but that's not what the article argues. The article
           | argues that strawberries have been destroyed and now you only
           | get the synthetic flavor and no grandma nostalgia.
        
           | raincole wrote:
           | First of all it's not what the article says. It doesn't
           | mention heirloom harvest at all.
           | 
           | Second, after trying heirloom tomatoes myself, I stopped
           | buying the claim that commercial cultivars are that bad.
        
         | paganel wrote:
         | > If you want fresh strawberries, you can just go to a
         | supermarket and buy them.
         | 
         | And they all taste watery, i.e. almost no taste at all, all
         | this as a result of the industrialisation of strawberry
         | farming. Which means that it was a good enough example for me.
        
         | JohnBooty wrote:
         | I have a friend who works in the flavor and fragrance industry
         | and one of the things strawberry fragrance is used for is...
         | (drum roll) actual strawberries.
         | 
         | Yep, a light spritz of strawberry scent _on actual fucking
         | strawberries_ apparently makes them more appealing.
        
         | john-h-k wrote:
         | Yeah it's a weird example. Perfectly possible real strawberries
         | with all their complexity extract more dopamine!
        
         | hart_russell wrote:
         | I can tell you haven't eaten a home grown strawberry before,
         | because they're not comparable.
        
         | Stefan-H wrote:
         | My issue with the strawberry example is different than yours -
         | the items the author listed that we miss out on ("The texture,
         | the juiciness, the complexity of the flavor, the imperfections,
         | the joy of finding a particularly good one, the cosmic horror
         | of eating a wormy one, the nostalgia of having your grandma's
         | strawberry jam with dozens of individually unique strawberries
         | in it.") amount to little of objective value. I would argue the
         | greatest value that eating a real strawberry as opposed to a
         | fake strawberry product provided was this very article. Where
         | else has "memory of texture and flavor combinations" been
         | brought to bear? I can agree that there is virtue in having
         | tasty and interesting things to eat, but I don't see how
         | missing out on a specific combination is all that terrible.
        
       | teekert wrote:
       | I've been forming this thought as well recently, but OP puts it
       | in words perfectly. "Strawberry (+1 for picking it yourself) to
       | Strawberry flavored candy" is indeed "human interaction to my
       | LinkedIn feed", or "intimacy to pron".
       | 
       | All 3 second terms are dopamine hits, feel nice (briefly), you
       | want more and inevitably feel bad and exhausted, useless, weak.
       | Over time you may even loose some important human treats (health,
       | ability to focus, skill in interaction with potential [bed]
       | partners). The firsts are nice rich experiences. Healthy for body
       | and mind (within limits of course).
       | 
       | Humans evolved craving the firsts, as it was difficult to hit
       | unhealthy limits within the world we used to inhabit. The seconds
       | are supra-normal stimuli [0] -> European herring gull chicks will
       | die pecking at a red dot on a pencil as it presents a stronger
       | stimulus than their mother's red dot on the beak (which will make
       | mother bird vomit-up food, example in wikipedia reference). These
       | are good metaphors for what is happening to us: After a long time
       | evolving in the confines of what nature offered, we are suddenly
       | able to manufacture experiences. And we don't think enough about
       | what this means and what it it doing to us, imho.
       | 
       | Or should I say "what we are allowing happen to us"? Not sure if
       | that is good framing, but I think we should take collective
       | action against it. To guard our human-ness. Of course this
       | collides with the personal-freedom principles we build our
       | culture on. I think someday we'll look back on this age as a
       | savage age. As we do. And later generations will find it hard to
       | comprehend how we allowed what is happening at the moment. It's a
       | human (humanity) pattern, but we'll learn, eventually.
       | 
       | Huxley, in Brave New World, predicted this. He could not have
       | foreseen the ways we can now manufacture experiences but isn't "I
       | take a gram and only am" eerily close to Doom Scrolling? "Ending
       | is better than mending" -> "Shop Like a Billionaire" ...
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_stimulus
        
       | raumgeist wrote:
       | Reminds me of Adornos "Dialektik der Aufklarung" and its take on
       | what he calls the "Kulturindustrie". Almost 100 years ago he
       | foresaw how the cultural offerings of society get commodified and
       | chopped into bite sized chunks for each individual to receive
       | theirs. He did not forsee us taking it this far, nor the
       | addictive nature of the consumption though.
       | 
       | An additional danger is how this pulls all of us down. Staying
       | with the articles example, by adding artificial strawberries
       | flavour to everything those that could have enjoyed the natural
       | experience never get the opportunity to do so, preventing them
       | from acquiring the taste. Cultural offerings do have some
       | educational responsibility after all.
        
         | stymaar wrote:
         | > Almost 100 years ago he foresaw how the cultural offerings of
         | society get commodified and chopped into bite sized chunks for
         | each individual to receive theirs. He did not forsee us taking
         | it this far, nor the addictive nature of the consumption
         | though.
         | 
         | Ray Bradbury did anticipate all of that in Farenheit 451,
         | including the addictive nature of it.
         | 
         | I read Farenheit 451 in 2010, and I was shocked to see that he
         | had anticipated Twitter, but his predictions didn't stop there
         | and he also anticipated that the next step would be what is now
         | Tik Tok.
        
           | thyselius wrote:
           | In The book, what happens after?
        
             | srcnkcl wrote:
             | Torment nexus.
        
             | stymaar wrote:
             | Books are forbidden, book readers are prosecuted and their
             | collection is burned down by "firefighters".
        
         | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
         | You have a whole strand of German and French cultural pessimism
         | that foresaw the convergence of mass media to the current point
         | to some degree.
         | 
         | > Staying with the articles example, by adding artificial
         | strawberries flavour to everything those that could have
         | enjoyed the natural experience never get the opportunity to do
         | so, preventing them from acquiring the taste.
         | 
         | I would go so far to say, that even if people tasted the real
         | thing, they would prefer the artificial product. For example,
         | we have Sauce Hollondaise in my country, and most people were
         | probably raised on the convenience product. The original sauce
         | is very cumbersome to make and almost no one makes it fresh.
         | So, I've noticed that even if people taste the 'real' sauce,
         | they prefer the convenience product.
        
           | westmeal wrote:
           | I don't know the real sauce is incredible compared to the
           | fake stuff. It really is a massive hassle though :/
        
             | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
             | I know! But a lot of people prefer the fake stuff, because
             | they were raised on it or harbor nostalgic feelings for it.
             | For them, it's the real deal.
        
             | eszed wrote:
             | Try this:
             | 
             | https://www.seriouseats.com/foolproof-2-minute-
             | hollandaise-r...
             | 
             | I used to make it on the stovetop - even learned how to
             | rescue it when it broke - but I don't anymore. You can
             | decide whether using a hand blender counts as "real" or
             | not, but the ingredients are the same, and I can't tell the
             | difference, only the technique is arguably "cheating".
        
             | gacgacgac wrote:
             | I make eggs benedict probably once a month or two. It's
             | really fairly simple with an immersion blender. Comes
             | together in like a minute. Timing the poached eggs and the
             | sandwich elements is a little tricky, but not materially
             | more difficult than, eg, cinnamon rolls from scratch.
        
               | devilbunny wrote:
               | If you're making for family, poach the eggs in the shell
               | with an immersion circulator as used for sous vide. The
               | whites will not be quite as perfect, but the taste and
               | texture are there, and you can store the cooked eggs (I
               | forget the temp I used, but look around, there are
               | examples) and the prepared hollandaise in a Ziploc at 130
               | F/55 C for quite a while.
        
           | Xmd5a wrote:
           | > The original sauce is very cumbersome to make and almost no
           | one makes it fresh.
           | 
           | No it's not.
        
             | BonerWiener wrote:
             | Nothing kills a discussion like when someone just saying "I
             | disagree" with zero explanation. They're not really
             | contributing just cluttering up the comments. At least give
             | a reason why.
        
               | Xmd5a wrote:
               | Cant / currently cooking creme diplomate.
        
               | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
               | You are forgiven
        
               | Xmd5a wrote:
               | Thank you father
               | 
               | https://imgur.com/a/CKE0V37
               | 
               | https://anonpaste.pw/v/db571281-c2b0-489e-b121-29959add19
               | 47#...                   ## Final Structure
               | **Sweet pastry**         - **Almond cream**         -
               | **Homemade jostaberry jam**         - **Small
               | raspberries**         - **Vanilla cream**         -
               | **Chantilly-lightened vanilla cream**         - **Large
               | fresh raspberries**         - **Icing sugar**
               | 
               | That's a 2.5kg raspberry pie. About 120EUR in a bakery.
        
               | devilbunny wrote:
               | (Not the person you're replying to.)
               | 
               | The _original_ sauce is, in fact, a pain to make.
               | However, it 's not the 17th century any more. You can,
               | with an immersion blender (which is not a particularly
               | obscure piece of kitchen hardware), make it very easily.
               | There's a bit of a knack, but only a bit of one, and if
               | the sauce breaks you can just restart the emulsion with a
               | new egg.
               | 
               | https://www.seriouseats.com/foolproof-2-minute-
               | hollandaise-r...
               | 
               | The same basic technique can be used for mayonnaise and
               | is even harder to screw up.
        
               | corroclaro wrote:
               | For the record: you basically take a stick blender, the
               | container that came with it, crack an egg, pour over some
               | lemon juice, then blend while pouring in hot butter (use
               | the microwave!). Takes ca 2 minutes, including the 1
               | minute 30s of microwaving the butter.
               | 
               | Instant _real_ sauce hollandaise as the stick blender
               | creates a vortex that emulsifies it. No need to hand
               | whisk it over a bain-marie at careful temperatures.
        
               | LearnYouALisp wrote:
               | Has anyone tried ultrasound (either probe or basin) for
               | this mixing? I know it can be done for a finer substance
        
               | devilbunny wrote:
               | Why? A cheap probe ultrasonic mixer is $500 on Amazon,
               | small, and would take forever. An immersion blender is
               | $17 at Walmart and does it in seconds for a half-liter of
               | mayo or hollandaise. If you need more than 500 mL of mayo
               | but can't just do a few batches, you are no longer in the
               | realm of cooking at home.
               | 
               | If you want to do molecular gastronomy stuff, have fun,
               | but it isn't ever going to be a mass-market thing.
        
               | maxerickson wrote:
               | The other post is also just an assertion.
               | 
               | Can you link to evidence that countering assertions with
               | assertions kills discussions? (This is sarcasm)
        
             | bregma wrote:
             | It's not at all difficult if you have gained the basic
             | survival skill of cooking. I mean, take a couple egg yolks
             | in a double boiler, add the juice of a lemon, whisk until
             | it's thick then add butter. 10 minutes and you can use a
             | bowl over the pot of boiling water you're poaching your
             | eggs in if you don't have a double boiler for your camp
             | stove in the wilderness.
             | 
             | But that's still more of a hassle than putting the carton
             | of that yellow plastic liquid in the microwave for a minute
             | and a half. People will prefer their slops and the farmer
             | brings it right to you; what could possibly be a better
             | life?
        
               | lstodd wrote:
               | I short-circuited my microwave accidentally two years ago
               | (don't power it up and then drop screwdrivers) and that
               | was the best thing to happen to my meals.
        
               | picofarad wrote:
               | Two microwaves tried to burn my house down so I said,
               | fine, universe, I hear you.
               | 
               | I don't even have an oven anymore; three induction hobs,
               | air fryer (instant pot with the fry lid), rice cooker,
               | bread machine.
               | 
               | I have really bad luck with kitchen appliances these last
               | 10 years!
        
               | ajmurmann wrote:
               | And that's ten minutes every time someone orders a dish
               | with hollandaise because it really breaks when reheating
               | as well. Given how much cost of labor is a factor it's
               | easy to see why hardly any restaurant will serve real
               | hollandaise. Perfect Baumol cost disease example. Maybe
               | something like a Thermomix could solve the economic
               | problem of hollandaise.
        
           | Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote:
           | I was fully triggered by the hollandiase bit. This is
           | something I look for constantly when I travel for real eggs
           | Benny. It's never real, even at higher end hotels. They just
           | use better quality fake stuff. And it's so good when it's
           | real.
        
             | wincy wrote:
             | My wife makes real Eggs Benedict for me once a year on my
             | birthday. I went to a resort hotel and spit out their Eggs
             | Benedict it tasted so bad compared to what I get at home.
             | They comped my meal. I guess this explains why I'm
             | constantly confused why Eggs Benedict doesn't taste right.
             | I've found one, maybe two restaurants with passable Eggs
             | Benedict in my city.
        
           | fireflash38 wrote:
           | Maple syrup is a big one. I can count on one hand the number
           | of times I've been to even fancy breakfast restaurants and
           | had real maple syrup.
           | 
           | Cracker barrel used to, decades ago now. It's all garbage
           | corn syrup now. I'd rather not have syrup at all than that
           | cloying, thick, gross stuff.
        
             | barbs wrote:
             | Heh, I thought of maple syrup as well. And I'm ashamed to
             | say I prefer the fake stuff! Although it's likely because
             | it's what I had as a child, so there's a strong nostalgia
             | factor.
        
               | bethekidyouwant wrote:
               | I refuse to believe this is true.
               | 
               | t.Quebec
        
               | nick__m wrote:
               | What's the grade of the maple syrup you tried ? (the new
               | grading system is stupid everything is grade A with a
               | color name)
               | 
               | In my opinion,
               | 
               | The A golden is light and subtle, I don't know what it's
               | for; it's the variety we sell in tourists, and to peoples
               | that likes fancy bottles and higher prices!
               | 
               | The A amber is great as a condiment in small quantities,
               | for pancakes it's the best.
               | 
               | The A dark is the best for cooking deserts.
               | 
               | And the A very dark is my favorite for cooking meats like
               | ham and ribs.
               | 
               | So if you only tasted the A golden I can see why you
               | would prefer the fake syrup if you were raised on that
               | stuff. But I would be surprised if you prefer the fake
               | stuff to the A dark.
        
               | lo_zamoyski wrote:
               | This is where I would note that tastes can be deformed.
               | It is possible, for various reasons, to acquire bad
               | tastes (here, childhood nostalgia).
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | >deformed
               | 
               | Jeesus. Very silly elitism here.
               | 
               | There's no such thing as an obvious "Perfect" taste.
               | Everyone has different taste preferences. Some people
               | _legitimately_ prefer and like the thing you consider
               | "lesser" for reasons like _they literally experience it
               | differently than you do_ and that experience is not as
               | good for them.
               | 
               | People have dramatic differences in their tastes. Some
               | people are far more sensitive to sour flavors. Some
               | people have way less tolerance for bitter. Your diet will
               | radically change how salty something tastes. Same for
               | sweetness. Same for spicy.
               | 
               | I grew up eating homemade maple products from my Uncle's
               | trees he tapped and cooked himself. I've had the real
               | deal.
               | 
               | It's just not that good for most uses of "Sugar syrup" to
               | me. A molasses cookie is tastier than a maple cookie to
               | me. Maple syrup on a pancake will pollute the pleasant
               | flavor of a literal cake I am eating for breakfast with
               | all sorts of complicated tree resin compounds. I prefer a
               | simple light caramel flavor in my _sugar syrup_ to go on
               | top of my _cake_ that I am eating for breakfast. I want
               | to taste the light and subtle flavors of butter and
               | sweetness and a simple cake. I don 't want the complexity
               | of a good maple syrup.
               | 
               | Now when I make my ham, that's when I use a maple glaze.
               | That's exactly when all the complexity shines, against
               | the powerful savory ham flavor.
        
               | SauntSolaire wrote:
               | > There's no such thing as an obvious "Perfect" taste.
               | 
               | The person you're responding to never claimed there's
               | such a thing as "Perfect taste"; they've only said
               | there's such a thing as "bad taste" (which I would agree
               | with)
        
               | 0xffff2 wrote:
               | I grew up with the fake stuff, and have lately done quite
               | a bit of taste testing of the various grades of real
               | stuff. Grade A golden is the only one with a distinct
               | enough difference in flavor for me to care, and even then
               | it's very much an acquired taste, not immediately and
               | distinctly better. Given the stark price difference, my
               | conclusion is that the maple syrup elitism is a silly
               | hobby horse for people with too much money.
        
               | nick__m wrote:
               | There are 2 maple grove owner in my extended family (both
               | are my uncles one on my father side and one on my mother
               | side) so I never saw that as a luxury product and never
               | had to acquire maple syrup at market price.
               | 
               | But I understand your point, if you grew on the fake
               | stuff and considering how expensive maple syrup is, you
               | have nothing to gain by training yourself to prefer the
               | real stuff.
        
             | tetris11 wrote:
             | the real stuff was arguably improved upon with the thicker
             | replacement. I don't want wet pancakes.
        
               | threetonesun wrote:
               | As New Englander I feel it's important to note that there
               | are, like olive oil, various grades of maple syrup. They
               | changed the system but Grade B / Dark maple syrup is the
               | best for pancakes and "thickness". If you want to make a
               | sauce or cook with it, golden or amber are fine.
        
               | brookst wrote:
               | That grade switch was crazy. I spent decades learning
               | grade B is what I wanted, now it's grade A, and it's
               | still confusing me.
        
               | threetonesun wrote:
               | It's made Grade B more widely available though, because
               | now it's just a light or dark choice like brown sugar,
               | whereas before Grade B seemed somehow inferior. Before it
               | was easy to assume Grade-A would be the most maple-y.
        
               | phyzome wrote:
               | Kind of sounds like you haven't had real maple syrup.
        
               | tetris11 wrote:
               | I have canadian cousins and they send me the real stuff
               | every year. It's just what you prefer.
               | 
               | Some people like a Rolex watch they can flash at parties.
               | Others are happy with a cheap imitation with a nice form
               | that they can wear daily
        
             | BiteCode_dev wrote:
             | A Canadian friend brought me back 2 bottles of local maple
             | syrup as a gift. Ok, I'm a pretentious Frenchman when it
             | comes to food and I do think most North Americans have no
             | idea how real food tastes.
             | 
             | But that stuff, I didn't know how it really tasted before
             | trying the OG thing.
             | 
             | Globalisation gave us the illusion of experiencing the
             | world.
        
               | subscribed wrote:
               | I think it's worse than that. It promotes race to the
               | bottom.
               | 
               | I love strawberries, blueberries (bilberry variety) and
               | tomatoes, but apart of the few times in the year when I
               | can collect my own or visit a PYO farm I'm not eating
               | them at all.
               | 
               | Every shop (small and huge alike) only sells the fake,
               | hyper-accelerated garbage (sorry Spain and Morocco, but
               | that stuff is just gross), or - in season - locally grown
               | similarly tasteless but raised on BPA, PFAS, dioxins,
               | flame retardants, etc[1]
               | 
               | I can't even buy the quality stuff. It's just not being
               | sold, because people only buy and eat trash :(
               | 
               | [1] not exaggeration - fuck British farmers knowingly
               | pouring poison on their fields and the corrupt UK
               | governments[2] for openly permitting it, may they get
               | impacted by it:
               | https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/16/uk-
               | farml...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3e5y85p488o
        
               | short_sells_poo wrote:
               | Living in London, I notice the same. Getting access to
               | true quality produce is not even a question of money now,
               | it's basically just impossible to get full stop. There
               | are a few local shops in the more upmarket areas that
               | survive on the fact that people are willing to pay the
               | 2-3x premium over the prices at Waitrose.
               | 
               | Gone are the days when you could ask the grocer or farmer
               | to give you a peach to taste. People got used to having
               | 24/7/365 access to everything, and supermarkets optimized
               | purely for looks instead of taste and nutrition, because
               | you aren't allowed to taste anything there. The only
               | thing you can go by is the looks. This means looks sell.
               | 
               | I'd hazard a guess the vast majority of brits don't even
               | know what a proper strawberry tastes like, because the
               | only thing they can buy are beautifully polished turds.
               | Everything tastes watery and crap, or conversely just
               | generic "sweet".
               | 
               | I wouldn't even blame farmers. Their life is hard enough.
               | They are operating on razor thin margins in a very
               | uncertain environment. The consumer (against their own
               | interests) demands that they produce beautifully and
               | cheap turds, so that's what they'll produce. And if you
               | try to do the right thing, you simply run out of money
               | because you can't compete with the turds at the
               | supermarket.
               | 
               | I only have empirical evidence for this, but it got much
               | worse since Brexit as well. The variety has gone down a
               | lot, I see shelves routinely empty at supermarkets and
               | they all seem to be focusing on the same ultraprocessed
               | crap.
        
               | subscribed wrote:
               | I agree, farmers are not responsible for everything, but
               | definitely for pouring the toxic sludge. That's their
               | choice. Conscious, willful. I doubt they'd make a tea on
               | the water leeching from the landfill so why do they think
               | it's okay to use it on the fields? Nasty.
               | 
               | But I agree, most of the blame lies on the corrupt
               | government (can't think of a better reason explaining why
               | they sanction the above practice or why they gleefully
               | ignore supermarkets role in the "cost of living crisis" -
               | part of it being squeezing the farmers in the same way
               | they squeeze the customers).
               | 
               | And i agree it's been much worse since Brexit - the
               | customer has been conditioned to tolerate worse quality
               | and choice for ever higher prices. Continuous approval to
               | neonicotinoids use in our fields is telling as well.
               | 
               | Gross and saddening. I'm telling my kids to get their
               | education and leave the UK. Being EU country citizens
               | they might even study in some cleaner and saner place.
        
               | gyanchawdhary wrote:
               | You should try Natoora in Notting Hill or Daylesford. I
               | live in Belgravia and am admittedly spoiled for choice ..
               | the Harrods Food Hall has excellent seasonal and harder
               | to find fruits, and Daylesford consistently has some of
               | the best British produce I've come across... the one in
               | Sloane street even has the best organic Alphanso Mangos
               | from India.
               | 
               | As for Brexit, I actually think it's been a net positive.
        
               | short_sells_poo wrote:
               | You have to be joking, right? So you are saying that it's
               | all fine, because we can just go to Harrods to get
               | quality food?
               | 
               | Nevermind that I hate Harrods and that entire area with a
               | passion. It's a tasteless, glitzy tourist trap.
               | 
               | My post was all about the fact that barring a tiny
               | percentile of people who a) live in an affluent area and
               | b) are willing to pay 2-3x the regular supermarket
               | prices, you cannot get good quality food. And you say "ah
               | it's simples, just go to the most egregiously flashy
               | beacon of division between the rich and poor and you can
               | get good fruit"
               | 
               | Thank you, I can still get good fruit at my local grocer
               | in Wimbledon, because it charges 2-3x over the regular
               | high street prices and there are people around who can
               | pay this. Doesn't help someone living in Croydon and
               | having to go to Tesco, does it now.
        
               | gyanchawdhary wrote:
               | Why is appreciation of excellence so often mistaken for
               | ostentation ... driving a Rolls or bentley, living in a
               | grand Georgian terrace in Zone 1, enjoying a glass of
               | Romanee at Zuma, or wearing exquisite Italian made
               | cashmere are all examples of exceptional European
               | craftsmanship and heritage. Yet those who enjoy such
               | things are casually labelled by folks like you as flashy,
               | pompous, or glitzy. Why? What is the real objection kind
               | sir ? Croydon (especially east Croydon) is an absolute
               | shit hole .. it's full of illegal immigrants, and lots of
               | crime and drug users .. they are more likely to
               | appreciate an undercooked McDonald's chicken tender than
               | fresh organic winter peas from a farm in Wiltshire lol
        
               | wholinator2 wrote:
               | I'm confused. What exactly is it about these immigrants
               | that make them incapable of appreciating fresh food? I
               | agree that you can enjoy your privilege or money just
               | fine, but do you believe that the poor are incapable or
               | unworthy of appreciating wealth or privilege? They're
               | surely more likely to appreciate the cost-to-calorie
               | ratio.
        
               | gyanchawdhary wrote:
               | That's fine, I'll help clear the confusion.
               | 
               | See, wholinator number two, the issue with these
               | particular immigrants in Croydon and other parts of the
               | UK is that many of them are here illegally and,
               | therefore, are not entitled to the same rights and
               | treatment as legal immigrants beyond the basic human
               | rights that Great Britain and its taxpayers provide ..
               | Think about it, wholinator number two .. why would I give
               | them fresh organic produce if they are in the country
               | unlawfully? You shouldn't be barbaric towards people who
               | break the law, but at the same time, you don't
               | necessarily treat them to the very finest British produce
               | either. Anybody who thinks that's the right thing to do
               | is borderline crazy, possibly even retarded ...
        
               | psadauskas wrote:
               | I visit Maui fairly regularly, and its the same thing
               | with local "Maui Gold" pineapple. It is a completely
               | different fruit from the Dole crap you buy in
               | supermarkets on the mainland. Whenever I'm there I'll eat
               | pineapples until my tongue burns, and when I'm home I
               | don't eat it at all.
        
               | kbrkbr wrote:
               | But what happens here, let me point that out for
               | completeness, is not a dark conspiracy. At least not on
               | this level.
               | 
               | People go to the grocery store and buy the cheapest thing
               | that does the trick, probably because they can't afford
               | something else. Bills want to be payed.
        
               | subscribed wrote:
               | Partially agree, in case of Aldi/Asda/Lidl but mostly
               | not.
               | 
               | They don't have a choice, they cannot encounter a good
               | vegetables and fruits in the normal stores. They CANNOT,
               | at least in the UK. It's that simple. Maybe during some
               | events, as a curiosity.
               | 
               | Good quality vegetables are not available on the shelves
               | in general. Maybe in some cases, yeah. Some. But
               | generally not. Similarly with meat, although it's much
               | easier here to find something decent.
               | 
               | The difference in taste and quality between the cheapest
               | and most expensive fresh fruits and vegetables in the
               | supermarkets is virtually none. If you don't believe me,
               | you don't have to, I simply grew plenty of that as a kid
               | and a teenager, I keep growing some, and the difference
               | between the average garden-sourced (or PYO/small farm
               | sourced) and the Aldi/M&S/Waitrose/Tesco is simply too
               | big to describe, you'd have to try it.
               | 
               | So there's an illusion of choice between awful and bad -
               | in that case I'm simply choosing imported (thanks to the
               | landfill and manufacturing waste in our great British
               | food chain). People who don't know, or don't care pick
               | whatever looks the best.
               | 
               | Some buy the cheapest. Not everyone buys the cheapest -
               | you can't seriously claim that in case of the expensive
               | stores (Sainsbury's, M&S, Waitrose).
               | 
               | And then there's palate problem. If someone was raised on
               | these garbage produce, they may even favour it over
               | healthy, proper ones. Proper radish will have a bite to
               | it. Proper tomato has a complex profile (and there's
               | hundreds of varieties of that too), instead of how garden
               | stores describe it being "tasty"....
               | 
               | Consumers have been dumbed down and trained into
               | accepting inferior livestock feed as food, and thanks for
               | that they can for example say with a straight face that
               | they actually like or prefer Tesco white toast bread.
               | 
               | (they've been scammed)
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | At a restaurant it's hard because people use way too much
             | and it's expensive stuff. A solution could be tiny packaged
             | packets of it, the way they do with butter (in part for
             | much the same reason)
        
               | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
               | I was very dismayed to find that the single serve maple
               | syrup packets that I thought existed are instead just
               | more corn syrup, which cost 21C/ per 1.4oz packet, or
               | 15C//oz. Meanwhile a jug of maple syrup is 56C//oz and
               | single serve packets seem to be a bit more than a dollar
               | per ounce.
        
             | sciencejerk wrote:
             | I grew up with fake Maple Syrup (high fructose corn syrup),
             | so when I first tried REAL maple syrup as an adult, I
             | preferred the fake, thick corn product over the genuine
             | watery, ultra sweet tree product.
        
             | boscillator wrote:
             | Huh, I've been to plenty of places were you could order it
             | for an up charge and it came in it's own little bottle.
        
           | api wrote:
           | When it comes to these lines of thinking, and to romanticism
           | which is closely related, I have a hard time not seeing some
           | of it as disdain for the middle class and nostalgia for the
           | stories classic aristocracy told about itself.
           | 
           | I'm American and grew up inundated with cultural disdain for
           | the suburbs, tract housing, malls, all those things, and at
           | some point I asked, well, what then? What's better?
           | 
           | Sauce made slowly by hand is better. Carefully curated
           | culture is better. Hand made, artisan, intentional.
           | 
           | Rare. Special. And if it's rare and special few can have it,
           | making it also expensive and aristocratic.
           | 
           | As soon as you try to give everyone that experience, you get
           | chain stories. You get tract homes. You get mass culture.
           | Because it's a mass. It's million, billions of people, and we
           | are not as unique as we think we are. None of us are.
           | 
           | I'm not saying the whole critique is this. There's another
           | side to it that's about exploitation and addiction and that
           | one rings true to me. But I find that it's hard to peel the
           | two things apart.
           | 
           | It's not exploitation to raise the standard of living of
           | masses of people, and if you think it's inherently tacky
           | maybe you're a neo-feudalist reactionary and don't know it
           | yet. There's a reason that stuff took hold so easily among
           | certain kinds of hipsters.
           | 
           | I see a lot of leftists where if you could get them to let go
           | of one idea, namely equity and equality, you'd instantly have
           | a "trad." Most of their other opinions are already aligned.
        
             | plastic-enjoyer wrote:
             | I don't see my post as making any judgement, let alone
             | offering criticism. It's simply my observation that many
             | people prefer the artificial stuff to the original product.
             | 
             | But since you've brought this up, I'd argue that it's not a
             | question of elitism, but rather that 'the masses' simply
             | isn't given access to these products. What they get is an
             | abstraction of the original, which merely imitates the
             | flavour but abstracts anything else away. Take, for
             | example, meat or vegetable stock, which is now a staple in
             | every kitchen in the form of powder or stock cubes. If you
             | take a look at the ingredients and nutritional values,
             | they're rather disappointing. The masses may get access to
             | the taste, but not to the nutrients.
        
               | api wrote:
               | I didn't mean to come off as criticizing you, just
               | providing a balancing counterpoint on some of the ideas.
               | 
               | The question is: _can_ you give billions of people the
               | "authentic" version?
               | 
               | In some cases you can. In the US at least there's
               | boutique groceries and farmers markets that sell more
               | authentic organic food that usually does have better
               | nutritional value. But it costs more.
               | 
               | The artificial mass market imitation is cheaper because
               | it is thermodynamically cheaper. It takes far less labor
               | (the most costly input to almost all processes) and it
               | substitutes things that can be bulk produced at a lower
               | unit cost. Being less nutritious probably directly
               | correlates since nutrition is chemical complexity is
               | lower entropy, higher energy, harder to scale.
               | 
               | There's a lot of rare "authentic" experiences that cannot
               | be scaled. That means most people can't have them, ever.
               | 
               | You can't have both rarity / exclusivity and
               | democratization / equality. One side has to give.
        
               | pluralmonad wrote:
               | This is exactly what the article touches on, the race to
               | the bottom. It drags everyone's experience down. This
               | appeal to scalability is part of the problem, IMO. Not
               | every experience is or should be scalable. Some kids find
               | blackberry bushes at grandma's instead of strawberries.
               | Little is gained by strip mining human experience so the
               | thinnest veneer can be "scaled".
        
               | api wrote:
               | That means most people can never have it, which is why
               | romanticism ends up pining for aristocracy.
        
               | eszed wrote:
               | I take your point, but the _other_ argument against
               | scaling in this way doesn 't rely on sentiment: it's
               | unsustainable. I actually hate that word, but the point
               | is that current production methods create (unpriced)
               | environmental externalities. We're draining aquifers,
               | exhausting topsoil, pouring fertilizer into rivers, using
               | too much petroleum - and then throwing a massive portion
               | of what we produce away. (And that's just for food;
               | similar arguments exist for fashion, and sometimes for
               | buildings and infrastructure.) That argument gets
               | effectively zero traction - despite, I think, being the
               | better one - so some people who care more about that
               | argue from sentiment instead, which (for the reasons you
               | explain, and rightly object to) has better legs with the
               | general public.
        
               | api wrote:
               | I look at this as a technical problem. We just aren't
               | very good at this yet. We are, in fact, slowly getting
               | better. Renewable energy was the largest category of new
               | installed energy for the last few years at least, and
               | that's a start. The question is whether we can get good
               | at this fast enough to outrun ourselves.
               | 
               | My issue with at least some of green ideology is that
               | it's viewed as a moral problem. We are sinning by asking
               | for more than we deserve and, if you really scratch the
               | surface, by trying to give too much to the unwashed
               | hordes. Beneath the surface I think you find romanticism,
               | and beneath that you find nostalgia for a fantasy world
               | that never really existed. That fantasy world is the
               | fantasy of the old aristocracy. It's the story they told
               | themselves.
               | 
               | I think those kinds of greens are "trads" who don't know
               | it yet. The only thing keeping them from going down that
               | road is an attachment to the idea of equality and things
               | like LGBTQ rights. If you give up those things, the rest
               | aligns perfectly. If you want a world of rare authentic
               | things enjoyed by cultured people and all of it to fit
               | within present techno/ecological limits, you have to put
               | the masses back in feudal serfdom and establish a rigid,
               | religious, traditional system to hold everything in
               | stasis that way. It would be sustainable.
               | 
               | But as I said a few levels up, there is another side of
               | the critique that I think has more legs. That's the
               | critique of engineered addiction and manipulation. Those
               | are not mandatory effects of scale. They're engineered to
               | maximize short term profits or for other purposes like
               | political manipulation, which I guess is another kind of
               | profit (power rather than money).
        
               | eszed wrote:
               | Good points. I expect you're familiar with the Abundance
               | Agenda folks? They're mostly talking right now about
               | energy and infrastructure, which I think is a correct
               | choice, but there is a next step to take with consumer
               | goods, so that we can end up with an abundance of quality
               | and not more engineered addiction.
        
               | brookst wrote:
               | But what do you do about free will? If billions of people
               | _want_ maple syrup, do you say "no, no, we can't scale
               | the real thing and corn syrup is a poor substitute, so
               | you can't have even a simulacrum of the experience"?
        
               | recursive-call wrote:
               | okay but most kids don't find any kind of bushes. do they
               | just not get to eat fruit?
        
           | diydsp wrote:
           | >French cultural pessimism
           | 
           | Specifically Jean Baudrillard describes copies of copies with
           | decreasing relavence and quality. But more sinisterly, the
           | loss of knowing what is real, important, safe, efficacious.
           | 
           | His work builds extensively on Plato, Lucretius, and
           | Deleuze's concept of the _Simulacrum._
        
             | wincy wrote:
             | This is like how 95% of SUVs are basically just minivans
             | with a slightly different body. You have to research to
             | find one with a truck engine that can say, haul a travel
             | trailer. Another one that comes to mind is shutters on
             | windows. People like the look but they're just planks of
             | wood in the vast majority of cases now.
        
               | numbsafari wrote:
               | .. and here I am wanting better minivan options that can
               | pull a travel trailer.
        
               | doubled112 wrote:
               | And here I am just wanting station wagons to come back,
               | and be reasonably priced.
               | 
               | The towing numbers are always higher in Europe than US
               | too, despite being the same cars (as far as I know).
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | > The towing numbers are always higher in Europe than US
               | too, despite being the same cars (as far as I know).
               | 
               | Mostly due to differences in environment, AFAIK.
               | Americans drive faster, and towing instability seems to
               | increase with the square of the speed. Also, most travel
               | trailers in the US wouldn't be car-towable anyway,
               | because we have expectations on amenities and size that
               | are predicated on using at least a half-ton pickup for
               | the tow vehicle. Trailers with the compromises needed to
               | be towed European-style aren't popular, so it becomes a
               | self-reinforcing cycle.
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | > People like the look [of shutters] but they're just
               | planks of wood in the vast majority of cases now.
               | 
               | I'm confused, what are real window shutters then?
               | 
               | Or do you mean the kind that are attached to the wall and
               | don't actually close?
        
           | virtualritz wrote:
           | Same with truffle mayo or truffle-based products. [1]
           | 
           | People who grew up on the artificial flavor prefer it over
           | the real one. I have quite a few in my circle of friends.
           | 
           | You go to an Italian restaurant and you get plain pasta,
           | panned in butter or olive oil and then someone comes with a
           | real truffle and grates it in front you of over your dish
           | until you tell them to stop. You pay for that amount.
           | 
           | Unless you go to a restaurant with a great reputation or some
           | Michelin star venue, that is the only way to be sure you're
           | eating real truffles. The dish has no truffle-aroma itself
           | and the truffle is grated while you watch.
           | 
           | Assuming ofc (and probably true for most people): your palate
           | is not well acquainted to the taste of the real thing enough
           | to tell it apart from the many fakes/substitutes.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.tasteatlas.com/truffle-industry-is-a-big-scam
        
             | ahartmetz wrote:
             | If the real thing doesn't taste like gasoline, I'd probably
             | prefer the real thing. I find fake truffle disgustingly
             | gasoline- or solvent-like.
        
               | vctrnk wrote:
               | Never thought of the fake variant as gasoline-like but it
               | sure has that strange, very heavy 'chemical' aftertaste
               | that lingers in your palate. Also never tried the real
               | thing, I wonder if i'd like it or not.
        
               | hilariously wrote:
               | +1 - it tastes so obviously of petrochemicals that I
               | throw the food out - truffle fries, truffle pasta - might
               | as well pour mineral spirits on it for the same
               | experience.
        
         | fssys wrote:
         | every time someone coins a new term for these phenomena i think
         | of how Adorno already explained it all. "enshittification" SHUT
         | UP
        
           | clydethefrog wrote:
           | There was a major campaign the last decade from many pro-
           | capital and libertarian thinkers to label Adorno and other
           | philosophers as the root cause of many people grievances.
           | Remember Peterson et all all warning about "Cultural marxism"
           | and "postmodernism"?
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_th.
           | ..
           | 
           | I try not be against new terms like "enshittification" or
           | "dopamine fracking" for this reason, the tech people at the
           | levers that might be convinced to change course seem to be
           | more open to substack and blogpost concepts (see SSC /
           | rationalist popularity for all this new terminology that just
           | describes old continental philosophical concepts) instead of
           | having to read old European thinkers that use too much
           | Marxist terminology.
           | 
           | Edit: case in point, literally users here are now linking to
           | SSC essays explaining critical theory lol
        
             | tpm wrote:
             | > There was a major campaign the last decade from many pro-
             | capital and libertarian thinkers to label Adorno and other
             | philosophers as the root cause of many people grievances.
             | 
             | I feel it's still ongoing, the reactionary elements are
             | campaigning against anything circa modern (not modernist as
             | in art but modern as organisation of society, so also
             | anything that can be traced back to Enlightenment) and
             | later, postmodern etc. They are actively destroying natural
             | sciences too, which is a part of this effort. Feels like
             | going back to feudalism.
        
             | topaz0 wrote:
             | Since I can't upvote @thrance's reply, I'll second it here:
             | certainly complaints about postmodernism date to the 90s or
             | earlier and fear of Marxism is as old as Marx (less sure
             | about when "cultural Marxism" specifically became a scare-
             | term of art)
        
         | eloisius wrote:
         | This is the essence of the Situationists' Spectacle.
        
         | cassepipe wrote:
         | As someone who has struggled with _understanding_ Adorno for a
         | long time, I found this recent review of a book about Frankfurt
         | School a pleasant read : https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-
         | review-the-dialectical...
        
           | cmrdporcupine wrote:
           | You can read and enjoy Adorno in bits without swallowing a
           | whole overarching theoretical foundation. As he also often
           | wrote that way.
           | 
           | Minimia Moralia for example is a collection of more personal
           | and essay form writings.
           | 
           | Also I absolutely _love_ Negative Dialectics as a piece of
           | theoretical writing but I am not convinced it fits into the
           | standard  "Frankfurt school" label. It's more about
           | epistemology than it is about culture.
           | 
           | (He _was_ , however, more than a bit of a snob. I wouldn't
           | take his musings on culture at face value unless you truly
           | believe -- like he did -- that jazz and other popular music
           | is just intrinsically and objectively worse than Bach forever
           | and always absolute truth. Ahem.)
        
           | cmrdporcupine wrote:
           | From this (mostly fine) article you linked to: _" Marx was a
           | left-Hegelian, which meant he filed the serial numbers off
           | God and called Him "communism"."_
           | 
           | I mean, no. That's a complete misreading of Marx. (Though
           | perhaps one that was convenient to Stalinists or Maoists to
           | continue to let breathe...).
           | 
           | For one, it would only apply to Marx in his 20s. Grown up
           | Marx substantially threw out most of the Hegelian stuff,
           | seeing it as superstitious nonsense while he studied
           | commodity prices in the British Museum's reading room.
           | 
           | Or at least -- in his own younger-self terms -- he "turned it
           | on its head" by throwing out the Idealist aspects of the
           | dialectic. Even a traipse through the Theses on Feuerbach
           | shows him rejecting all the transcendent forces of history
           | crap.
           | 
           | I'd argue by the time we get to Capital the dialectic and the
           | Hegel stuff generally is barely present.
           | 
           | If he is speaking of dialectic, it's mostly as "here's a way
           | to look at history as it has happened, let's go poke at the
           | contradictions and see what's in there" _not_ "here's a
           | recipe for how history works and from this we can predict..."
           | 
           | And back to Adorno, this is actually precisely what he is
           | getting at in Negative Dialectics. Reinterpreting the
           | "dialectic" as a non-Platonic, non-Hegelian process of
           | looking at contradictions in reality and history but without
           | expecting any kind of unification or resolution to a more
           | perfect form. Living with the negative and the unknowable.
           | Because the alternative, in Adorno's mind, was the path to
           | Auschwitz.
        
             | swed420 wrote:
             | A misreading of Marx (intentional or otherwise) is
             | precisely what I'd expect from Alexander.
        
               | cmrdporcupine wrote:
               | Honestly, Marx's work is like "the Bible", nobody is
               | really reading it honestly "from scratch". They are all
               | coming in with an existing identity / framework / world
               | view, and getting it to say what they want it to say.
               | 
               | Something about people pretending it was the official
               | ideology of half the world tends to do that. The old man
               | himself would have thrown up into his soup if he knew.
        
           | foldr wrote:
           | > I've long complained that communists refuse to specify the
           | details of how a communist society will work, or why it would
           | be good.
           | 
           | Did capitalists do this in any comprehensive or satisfactory
           | way prior to the advent of capitalism? I'm not a communist,
           | but this seems like a fairly weak criticism.
        
             | SauntSolaire wrote:
             | The advent of communism was sufficiently long ago that it
             | I'm not sure your critique applies.
        
               | foldr wrote:
               | I'm not sure why that's relevant. My point is that it's
               | never really possible to provide a detailed plan for a
               | complete changing of the social order. While it might be
               | nice in theory to have such a thing, it's not clear that
               | it's really a reasonable thing to ask for.
        
         | YinglingHeavy wrote:
         | The taste of the masses will always be vulgar, by very
         | definition of the word. Vulgar as in commonplace.
        
       | kalx wrote:
       | Great read, thanks. Just always consider what you are doing when
       | you tag a friend in a meme: feeding your friend the internet
       | drug. Is that what you wanna do to someone you care about?
        
         | veunes wrote:
         | Sending someone a dumb meme can also be a form of affection
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | Occasionally if it's very relevant to the person. But so many
           | just dump every single thing they saw on TikTok in your DMs.
        
       | tablatom wrote:
       | Relevant: Antidote to the cult of performance, Olivier Hamant.
       | 
       | https://www.kobo.com/gb/en/ebook/tracts-n-50-antidote-to-the...
        
       | epolanski wrote:
       | When renovating my house and discussing solutions with my
       | girlfriend I noticed that she (but me too to large extent and
       | most of my millennial friends) felt towards Airbnb-ification.
       | 
       | Good taste and style apparently converged towards generic Airbnb-
       | like design of mixing wood lights, furniture, etc in a certain
       | manner.
       | 
       | This is a well known phenomenon and going around the world,
       | whether in Tokyo, Mumbai, Munich or Dallas most of the newest
       | hotels, offices, private houses or restaurants converge to the
       | same design choices. It feels like you're always in the same
       | place.
       | 
       | Music, videogames, movies, hell, finance even politics are
       | increasingly converging to a small subset of choices that seem to
       | be globally neutral.
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | This year especially, fashion in Berlin has converged to light
         | blue jeans and white t-shirt. It's as if fashion got distilled
         | into something easily seized, but ever more rapidly rotating.
        
         | clydethefrog wrote:
         | This was described in a 2016 essay in the Verge, coining it
         | "airspace". It has been going on so long that indeed it has
         | become the standard now, see this recent analysis, claiming
         | that airbnb estate agents should invest in "authentic"
         | interior.
         | 
         | https://www.nssmag.com/en/lifestyle/41707/airspace-aesthetic...
        
       | veunes wrote:
       | This feels related to Goodhart's law, but applied to pleasure and
       | culture
        
       | simonbarker87 wrote:
       | How refreshing to read something not written by an LLM, unless
       | they promoted it extensively with their own writing style first
       | and I've been tricked but this felt much nicer to read than a lot
       | of what I've read recently
        
         | lostlogin wrote:
         | Are you sure it wasn't?
         | 
         | The vast number of commas wouldn't fit the typical robot style
         | though, but the -- count might.
        
           | simonbarker87 wrote:
           | Yeh the style read like a human, but you're right, some
           | dashes, annoyingly I have historically used a lot of - in my
           | writing so now I need to stop using them
        
       | euazOn wrote:
       | Reminds me of Slavoj Zizek's classic example of synthetic sex
       | (look it up), or his grievances about today's academia: paper
       | written by ChatGPT, peer reviewed by ChatGPT, and consumed by
       | users as a synthesis from ChatGPT.
        
       | m4tthumphrey wrote:
       | So. Many. Commas.
        
       | lagrange77 wrote:
       | I've noticed as a kid, that strawberry flavoured candy doesn't
       | actually taste like strawberries. They are clearly and
       | collectively recognisable as strawberry candies, but that's just
       | pattern matching and conditioning on wording. The flavour has not
       | much to do with actual strawberries, even the sweetness is vastly
       | exaggerated. The synthetic aroma is much less complex, as the
       | author noted. We just fell into the habit (or trap) of using the
       | same word for both flavours.
       | 
       | On the other hand i'm wondering if that's just an implementation
       | detail. A temporary imperfection in simulating the real thing due
       | to constraints in (chemical) engineering and cost, not a hard
       | limit.
       | 
       | Neural Networks are universal function approximators. Throw
       | enough resources at them and they will mimic the most complex
       | function to an arbitrary level of detail.
        
         | sleepycat801 wrote:
         | The difference is driven by cost and shelf stability
         | considerations, more than taste. Most candy is sugar with a
         | hint of novelty.
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | I think all "fruity" candies are pretty much the same sugar,
         | and our brain merely looks at the color and packaging and fills
         | in a "flavor" for it. Maybe my taste buds are just not working,
         | but I don't think I could do a blind taste test and identify a
         | candy's claimed flavor.
        
           | lagrange77 wrote:
           | Yes i guess color and packaging make a huge part of the
           | effect. But they do use artificial flavors and i imagine that
           | i could blindly differentiate apple and strawberry candies,
           | but i could not blindly associate them with their natural
           | pendants.
        
       | ionwake wrote:
       | "dopamine fracking", should enter lexicon
        
       | Tade0 wrote:
       | > The constant search for the next big thing, the next big hit of
       | dopamine,
       | 
       | The search itself is the dopamine hit. I think the author, if
       | anything, meant endorphins, it's just that there's so much
       | misleading pop science about this, that everyone blames poor old
       | dopamine for their woes.
        
         | ivanjermakov wrote:
         | Amount of misinformation regarding dopamine is staggering.
         | While it plays a huge role in modern social media practices, it
         | is relevant in search/anticipation phase, not having
         | fun/resolution phase.
        
           | Tade0 wrote:
           | Personally I blame Jordan Peterson. He described dopamine's
           | role correctly, just didn't adjust the message to his
           | audience, who in turn misunderstood what he said and passed
           | that on, referencing him as an authority.
           | 
           | Now that I think about it adrenaline was the previous go-to
           | chemical which somehow explained all human behaviour.
        
         | teekert wrote:
         | True. I think it's the same as everyone calling pain killers
         | "aspirin" (where I live, maybe in the US is Tylenol? Which we
         | call Paracetamol), they call SARS-CoV-2 AND COVID-19 "Corona",
         | or "Corona-virus". Sending an App means sending a message via
         | Whatsapp here, it's not "sending a link to an app-store or
         | play-store app (or whatever)" as one would think. Some (way to
         | many!) people mean their browser when they say "the internet".
         | AI means LLMs, but not always, sometimes it includes CNNs (I
         | try to use gen AI and machine learning, but people look at me
         | weird)...
         | 
         | Similarly, Dopamine now just means "a short hit of instant
         | gratification" to the average person. I also don't like it, it
         | leads to misinterpretations of scientic texts (which are
         | usually very strict about word usage, and consequently differ
         | from the "popular" meanings of a word, or in this case,
         | molecule).
         | 
         | -\\(tsu)/-
        
         | ivxvm wrote:
         | Yeah, when people say "dopamine hit" nowadays that can mean
         | anything from serotonin to endorphins to even adrenaline. What
         | they usually mean is simply an optimized experience. Optimized,
         | commodified, industrialized, etc, in a way article describes.
        
       | rkuzsma wrote:
       | The strawberry example reminds me of the Instant Mashed Potatoes
       | non-book review [0].
       | 
       | > Since World War II and the large-scale industrialization it
       | fully unleashed, a core method driving 'progress' across many
       | different fields of human endeavor has been to shred something
       | real and reconstitute it into a faster, easier, less appealing
       | IMPish substitute for what we used to make out of it. This is the
       | parsimonious recipe for industry to fulfill our urges. We've got
       | the food processor whirring, and absolutely everything is going
       | in.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/your-review-my-fathers-
       | inst...
        
         | memcg wrote:
         | >In the interest of full fairness while writing this review, I
         | purchased a plastic cup of my dad's currently favored "Buttery
         | Homestyle" Idahoan brand instant mashed potatoes for $1.99. The
         | preparation was extraordinarily efficient; the aroma was
         | decent; the taste was a reasonable facsimile; but the texture
         | was all wrong - a smothering paste that coated my mouth and
         | constrained my tongue like a straightjacket. 3/10 would not buy
         | again.
         | 
         | I substitute warm heavy cream for half the water and add extra
         | butter which gets me to a 6/10. Mix in some cabbage or kale and
         | you have a quick Colcannon.
        
           | genewitch wrote:
           | yeah some of the instant ones aren't half bad, especially if
           | you're not just using them as mashed potatoes with gravy, but
           | in a pinch i can throw together a reasonably hearty and
           | savory shepherd's pie with instant, including the peaks.
           | Heavy cream definitely helps, and get lots of air in, if
           | possible.
           | 
           | obviously real potatoes taste better, but they haven't been
           | dehydrated and reconstituted, destroying the cell structures.
           | probably.
        
       | dalbasal wrote:
       | Our one dominant model of technology-driven economic progress is
       | the industrial revolution. Manufacturing.
       | 
       | As Ai companies argue for market cap based on projected economic
       | output... I'm increasingly thinking this model can be badly
       | misleading.
       | 
       | It's very rare that the PC Revolution and or the internet
       | Revolution are used as a primary model to explain technology and
       | how it affects the economy.
       | 
       | Network enabled PCS are administrative powerhouses. They really
       | did permeate all aspects of administration. But... The number of
       | employees in administrative adjacent roles is higher, not lower.
       | Accountants, university armin. HR. Project management. Etc.
       | 
       | It's very unclear how to quantify economic output/product. From
       | this ambiguity , everything downstream is also vague.
       | 
       | The web also totally exploded in use. Web companies got huge
       | revenue, even huger your profits.
       | 
       | It's very hard to draw lines, and apply economic reasoning that
       | describes who gains what.
       | 
       | Users get to use Facebook, google and whatnot.
       | Customers/advertisers get to advertize. The tech companies
       | business model is based on network effects, momentum and whatnot.
       | 
       | What value is being created? Who is capturing how much of IT?
       | These questions are almost philosophical. You just cannot apply
       | reasoning like you would to the economics of mass produced cars.
       | 
       | Dopamine fracking , financial arbitrage racking, sales
       | fracking... As a phenomenon, I think these occur in places where
       | competition between firms is most intense over something that
       | isn't correlated to external value.
       | 
       | Before advertising bands, cigarette companies were ad fracking.
       | Tobacco is a commodity. Producing cigarettes is trivial. The only
       | thing differentiating a billion dollars Tobacco Company from a
       | million dollar Tobacco Company was the recognizability of their
       | brand.
       | 
       | Government suppliers, or urban real estate can get to a point
       | where the main driver of success, is lawyers.
       | 
       | A lot of industries went through a gradual process, as they
       | matured... Where the domain of competition is decreasingly
       | relevant to external value. The digital industries often start
       | here or reach this point quickly.
       | 
       | Is manufacturing actually the exception?
        
         | movpasd wrote:
         | The original sin is the idea that the profit motive on a free
         | market will solve all our resource allocation problems, and
         | that consumption demand should be the ultimate arbiter of
         | social value. Markets are pretty freaking amazing things. But
         | their efficiency relies on assumptions that knowledge economies
         | and software break on pretty much every front. So, it's really
         | no surprise that we're in this mess. I don't really know what
         | would work better, though, in a way that can practically evolve
         | from our existing systems.
        
           | forlorn_mammoth wrote:
           | Hey, I appreciate your insight. Especially your observation
           | that when the underlying assumptions are wrong/broken then
           | the model produces less reliable results.
           | 
           | Like you, I also don't know what would work better, nor do I
           | believe any one individual can know.
           | 
           | But I do have some ideas for what would make a good framework
           | for the evaluation?
           | 
           | If the idea is to allocate resources in a way that provides
           | the most benefit to the most people, where most feel they are
           | getting a 'fair deal' or something...
           | 
           | and we have social institutions that convert 'resources' to
           | value (in quotes because time, attention, etc are
           | 'resources'. The key principle is organizing human behavior
           | over time to produce something humans value)...
           | 
           | Companies Religion Sports Government
           | 
           | then think about what value each creates, how it is
           | delivered, how it is captured, ... recognizing that each
           | offers some unique strengths and unique limitations.
        
       | paganel wrote:
       | > I don't have any solutions
       | 
       | Just touch more grass and try to get off the internet as much as
       | possible, it's 100% worth it. Also, stop consooming stuff.
        
       | herodoturtle wrote:
       | Great article (and phrase).
       | 
       | Thank you.
       | 
       | > Becoming aware of this concept has made it easier to navigate
       | the world. And it's becoming easier and easier for me to simply
       | stop a video and close a tab when I sense that it's just trying
       | to give me a hit of dopamine.
       | 
       | I've just gone ahead and placed a little sticky note at the
       | bottom of my monitor that says "dopamine fracking?"
        
       | brador wrote:
       | Also known as: giving people what they value.
       | 
       | It is not my duty to deny people their legal desires.
        
       | gyanchawdhary wrote:
       | to me this phrase/word/term is in the same category as
       | "weaponization" .. they are rhetorically powerful because they do
       | a lot of emotional work before any argument has been made .. Once
       | you've labeled something as "fracking" or "weaponized," you've
       | already framed it as extractive, destructive, and morally suspect
       | ..
       | 
       | P.S. my completely unscientific heuristic is that whenever an
       | authors bio contains phrases like "late stage capitalism" or a
       | Bluesky account (not X cause OBVIOUSLY Elon is evil), theres a
       | decent chance the article will arrive pre loaded with conclusions
       | rather than arguments ...
        
       | sleepycat801 wrote:
       | The term as used reminds me of opium addiction in the 19th
       | century, and how it brought down entire countries.
       | 
       | I find, particularly when working in software, that I want to
       | spend very little of my free time online, as though the novelty
       | has worn off. The diversion aspect of social media is
       | particularly irritating. It's like the Gruen transfer, a loss of
       | focus and reference designed into many shopping malls.
        
       | anon-3988 wrote:
       | The prime example for me of this phenomena is selfies. What is
       | the point of taking pictures, really? To capture the moment? Or
       | to post to social media? If I am going to be honest, most
       | pictures today are taken so that they are able to be broadcasted
       | it to everyone.
       | 
       | I believe I have superior taste in this where I don't take
       | selfies but instead take pictures of people and environment just
       | doing stuff. The moment someone says "smile for the camera!",
       | thats an inferior, fake situation that does not bring me any joy.
       | I don't like looking at those pictures because I know everyone is
       | faking it. I know because the moment the picture was taken, they
       | would immediately sighed and drop the smile.
        
         | rapnie wrote:
         | Carrying a camera around at all times killed the value of
         | photographs to large extent. I know people who come home from a
         | one week vacation with 100's of pictures, that are never looked
         | at again, and which spoiled all the moments where one could
         | really enjoy the scene. Music concerts where nearly all the
         | crowd film the concert and mostly miss the experience by doing
         | so, is another example.
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | I don't think it's having a camera that killed it, it's that
           | most people stopped printing their photos. Most people have
           | thousands of poorly sorted and duplicate photos on their
           | phone which aren't very enjoyable to scroll through.
           | 
           | I went and sorted through all my photos and printed out the
           | best ones to pin up on a board. I love looking at them and
           | everyone who comes over finds it interesting to look through
           | the photos on the wall too.
        
             | rapnie wrote:
             | Yes, you explained better. It is having the camera always
             | with you and the abundance of photos that are the result,
             | which for most people including me are too much and too
             | boring to sort out. I find myself in the opposite situation
             | now, when at a happening or event I take no photos at all,
             | because I came to hate taking them. Feel it is not worth
             | spoiling the moment. But that means not recording the
             | valuable moments for later, so I may come to regret that at
             | old age.
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | I started taking an old digicam with me to events. I
               | don't ask people for a photo for them to pose, I just
               | capture as it was before they notice.
               | 
               | The old flash photography combined with candid authentic
               | expressions is really refreshing to see again. The phone
               | camera and look is just so overdone that it's boring.
               | Taking photos with an old tech and different focal length
               | feels fresh and fun. I don't post these on social media,
               | I just print them and share the pics directly with the
               | person, everyone has loved it.
               | 
               | There's also a delayed gratification aspect. I can't just
               | post these from my phone as soon as I take them. I have
               | to go home, take the sd card out, and copy them over
               | before I can share them. I think there's something to be
               | said for just slowing down and enjoying the limitations.
        
               | rapnie wrote:
               | I like that, and I heard it is becoming a bit of a trend
               | where people also leave their phone at home, and more
               | deliberately choose the precious moments to capture.
               | Nice.
        
               | eszed wrote:
               | I took essentially no photos in my twenties (long before
               | phone cameras) for exactly this reason - and, in the
               | short term, absolutely did remember events better than
               | the folks who were constantly looking for their next
               | digicam shot. I'm now living the long-term of that,
               | though, and regret that I have nothing "tangible" to show
               | my wife and kid, or even to re-spark my own memory, about
               | all the amazing things I did back then.
               | 
               | I'm a bit more intentional now: I don't pull out my
               | (phone) camera all that often, but I try to look for
               | something that will represent - not record (that's
               | impossible), but spark a memory of - the moment later. By
               | the way, people are more important for this than things,
               | or "the thing" itself. I actually think the selfie
               | brigade are on the right track, for all that they may
               | become annoying by overdoing it.
        
         | wvh wrote:
         | I'd say there's at least a third reason: intellectual (or
         | rather technical) curiosity of photography itself. Often, when
         | I take a picture, it is just to see how a particular shot turns
         | out, much less so for any sentimental value to myself or
         | anybody consuming those images later on.
         | 
         | I'd also say that's most likely a healthy kind of dopamine
         | usage, as it's leading one into a life of exploration, learning
         | and wonder.
         | 
         | But you're right, taking a true in-the-moment picture is a
         | skill.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | I used to think this, and I only took photos of places (without
         | me in them). Then I realised that the value of the photo is to
         | remind me of what I was doing, how I was feeling, etc, not just
         | that I was in the place. I agree that faking smiles makes the
         | photo worth less, but just don't fake anything.
        
           | jannyfer wrote:
           | Agreed, I used to think this but now enjoy taking quick
           | selfies, and my phone will dig them up and remind me of fond
           | memories later on.
           | 
           | GP conflates selfies with posed photos.
        
           | anon-3988 wrote:
           | I am not against taking selfies in the literal sense. Go
           | ahead and take a snap of you and your surrounding. It becomes
           | sad and depressing when someone needs to do multiple takes
           | and even worse, touch up the image.
        
         | smallnix wrote:
         | I don't use social media (aside from HN). I take selfies to
         | remember a moment. Not to capture it, my memory is good enough
         | for me for that.
        
         | teaearlgraycold wrote:
         | I feel similarly. Take good photos of your friends doing cool
         | things. Absolutely do not stop everyone for a group picture.
         | Forget things. It's okay to forget the minutia of life.
        
         | Garlef wrote:
         | > What is the point of taking pictures, really?
         | 
         | Ephemeral communication?
         | 
         | It's fun; Gets a group together; They touch for a moment; Look
         | at it together; "Oh my good I look so fat"; ...
        
         | mft_ wrote:
         | I always remember a posed photo that one of my old bosses had
         | on her desk. It was of her and her daughter; she was giving a
         | big attractive (to my eyes faked for the camera) smile, and her
         | daughter looked miserable.
         | 
         | I appreciated the unintentional honesty: time and time again
         | you see kids being told to smile for a camera, when they're
         | young enough that society hasn't yet ingrained in the social
         | necessity of doing so.
        
         | basisword wrote:
         | >> I don't like looking at those pictures because I know
         | everyone is faking it.
         | 
         | Maybe you're not far enough removed from them yet. Looking back
         | on a group photo years later, especially if some of those
         | people have died, is a very pleasant experience. The point
         | isn't "look at us all smiling" when you know that it was posed,
         | the point is "remember all of those people there that day, we
         | were together, we did x etc". It reminds you of the entire
         | event, not the specific moment of taking the photo.
         | 
         | Edit: Sit with a parent or grandparent and go through their
         | photo albums. Almost all the photos are posed and you'll see
         | how great that can be.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | I'd say selfies just aren't for you, and that's fine. For many
         | others it's not, and friends at a distance may just like seeing
         | their friends' faces instead of just the subject. But I don't
         | understand it myself because I'm outside of those circles. (and
         | less face oriented but that's probably the autism/introversion
         | lmao)
        
         | drcongo wrote:
         | I posted something very similar on here last year after a visit
         | to Ibiza - as we sat eating lunch in the castle in Ibiza old
         | town, a group of young women spent the entire time we were
         | there, maybe an hour and a half, in turn posing for photos next
         | to a plant. Each time one went in for the pose, they'd pass
         | their phone to a friend to take the pictures. It went on and
         | on. The two things that really struck me about this were: 1.
         | all the photos seemed to be taken with the subject's phone, so
         | nobody had any photos of the people they were actually there
         | with, and 2. If they'd turned around, there was an absolutely
         | stunning view right behind them.
         | 
         | I felt old.
        
           | regexorcist wrote:
           | These days, go anywhere in the world with a pseudo famous
           | landmark and watch the same thing. I've been travelling long
           | enough to remember people being present and taking in the
           | experience. Now it's literal queues for the perfect spot to
           | take 100 near identical photos of themselves, and choose a
           | few later for social media.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | I've never understood the need to take a picture of
             | yourself. I know what I look like--I don't need a photo to
             | remind me. The rare times I ever even take a picture of
             | something, it's because that thing is interesting or
             | unique, and I'd like to look at it carefully later.
        
       | anArbitraryOne wrote:
       | I don't really think bro dude understands any of the
       | environmental effects of fracking, especially compared to other
       | drilling mechanisms. But it's just a metaphor.
        
       | afh1 wrote:
       | Lost me on false but popular claims on fracking on the first
       | paragraph. If you don't even take the time to research the main
       | topic of your "metaphor", can't expect much depthness from the
       | Discord philosopher.
        
         | poppadom1982 wrote:
         | Which ones?
        
       | kerorin wrote:
       | Fun fact: Schizophrenia is explained by the dopamine hypothesis,
       | or more accurately, the aberrant salience hypothesis. When
       | dopamine signaling in certain neurons becomes dysregulated, the
       | brain's attention system goes awry. Blocking the D2 dopamine
       | receptor with medication actually reduces real hallucinations,
       | the positive symptoms of schizophrenia.
        
       | killerstorm wrote:
       | I'm not sure these things are about "big hit of dopamine". It's
       | more about keeping user's attention on screen. And e.g. tiktok
       | repeatedly shows minimally interesting videos, keeping viewer in
       | expectation: how does this video end? would next the next video
       | show?
       | 
       | So it's not about intensity, but quantity and repeatability.
       | 
       | MrBeast videos consists of many short segments each one having
       | some small intrigue and/or delivering a tiny piece of interesting
       | information.
       | 
       | The direct analogy with fracking is that these methods attract
       | attention to things which normally don't warrant user's
       | attention. I.e. normally we have defenses against getting
       | attention stuck on one thing - it quickly becomes boring. But the
       | industry managed to circumvent this by breaking these things into
       | small pieces with tiny story-arcs in them.
        
         | shellkr wrote:
         | Yes! Exactly this... Attention... We become so dependent on
         | always being distracted so that we can not function without it.
         | I remember there where a similar discussion about TV back in
         | the days.. but the level it is on now is unprecedented. I think
         | society will adjust to this behavior as it has always done
         | before. How damning or not is yet to be decided. It does not
         | necessarily has to be a bad thing... but being dependent on
         | something usually is.
        
           | leeoniya wrote:
           | so, Your Attention is All They Need?
        
       | Thanemate wrote:
       | Besides the obvious examples of living our power fantasy of
       | "finally writing Rust without knowing Rust, thanks to AI", I
       | noticed the same exact thing in video games, and it has so many
       | layers of bull that I could easily come up with a blog post about
       | it.
       | 
       | What made it so obvious in video games is the that, while video
       | games are already artificial, some decide to simply extract the
       | things that give you dopamine hits and pleasure and shove them
       | into a colorful bucket and call it a day. Yes, I'm talking about
       | Vampire Survivors and Vampire Crawlers. We went from games that
       | are mechanically complicated and a joy to explore and master, to
       | games that are mechanically simple and exist just to give you
       | dopamine hits.
       | 
       | And just like many comments already said, there are in many
       | people who will opt to play that kind of games, so they do make
       | money. But for me, a "game" isn't just mentally stimulating but
       | also mentally engaging, either with the storytelling or with the
       | game mechanics.
       | 
       | Furthermore, the mass appeal of gaming after 2000's did
       | constrained creativity and made the games that are really
       | expensive to make effectively same-y, so you can see that the
       | concept that I grew up loving was reduced to the necessary parts
       | that will make it sell, and reproduced over and over and over to
       | the point where it's rare for me to find an AAA game that care
       | about. However, that's because I've been playing video games
       | since the Atari era, and I developed my taste towards a specific
       | way, so you can make a case that I'm not like those who grew up
       | eating the artificial flavor of strawberries and preferring it to
       | the real thing.
        
       | pknerd wrote:
       | Ironically, many such companies and their products are proudly
       | featured and funded by the company that maintains HackerNews
        
       | raffael_de wrote:
       | I think the contemporary canonical term has to be Dopamaxxing.
        
       | api wrote:
       | Turn it off, then.
       | 
       | I've almost completely turned off social media. Realized I'm
       | missing nothing.
       | 
       | All this stuff can pretty easily be ignored.
        
         | Gigachad wrote:
         | I've already done that but it's clear something more needs to
         | happen to fix this on a societal level. Tech companies have
         | hacked the human brain and optimised it to an absolutely insane
         | level. They have truely won.
         | 
         | On a train recently I watched a literal toddler scrolling
         | Instagram reels on an iPhone as big as their head.
         | 
         | We are going to need laws and regulations to straight up ban
         | this new wave of incredibly addictive short form media and
         | addition mechanics.
        
       | shellkr wrote:
       | I think most of us older than 25 understands this. We have seen
       | the development and the war on attention. I guess the term
       | Dopamine Fracking is not bad. I don't think we should be too
       | alarmist though... we are kids of our time.. in that we will
       | arrange the society around us. In essence we are not that
       | different from the Romans. We just have a lot more toys.
       | 
       | Unregulated capitalism is bad. We all know that. I think the
       | automation will ultimately be that thing that brings us past
       | that. Via UBI or something similar... but that is far from now.
        
       | akoboldfrying wrote:
       | Underneath this thesis are the assumptions that "taste" is (a)
       | some objective thing that (b) is worth pursuing for its own sake,
       | both of which I wholeheartedly reject.
       | 
       | The idea that "good taste" exists and matters is a form of social
       | conservatism that communicates nothing of value and is inevitably
       | self-serving. It is _always_ possible to restate  "X is more
       | tasteful than Y" as "I and people I like/respect prefer X to Y"
       | without losing information; the only thing that changes is the
       | subtle implication that the speaker's subjective experience is in
       | some way superior to that of others.
       | 
       | I encourage the author to go and eat a wild banana, to experience
       | the raw, wondrous near-inedibility of nature untainted by humans'
       | shameful lust for making things nicer.
        
       | loorke wrote:
       | TBH, I cannot stand the snobbery of this article. The phenomenon
       | of creating your own dull terms like "Dophamine Fracking" that
       | cover all aspects of life should be added to the list of
       | pathologies in DCM-11 section of personal disorders, this is a
       | form of narcissism.
       | 
       | While quietly implying his personal superiority and deep
       | understanding of things, this German sets up a premise that
       | everything deteriorates because of CAPITALISM and now also AI,
       | listing numerous completely distinct areas of human life. For
       | such bold claim he gives only one wrecked example: strawberry
       | flavor substitutes real berries. How did he come to this
       | conclusion? Did he look up any data? To me, personally, this is
       | not a common knowledge. I know a bunch of people who really like
       | and enjoy real strawberries. At the same time, I am personally
       | not interested in neither.
       | 
       | OK, he has some sort of a premise, but what is the conclusion?
       | Did he just write his own opinion to highlight how smart he is?
       | Apparently so. I guess we could assume that what comes out of all
       | this, is that "we're having less and less experiences".
        
       | hntiz wrote:
       | I couldn't fully relate to the article because the finish comes
       | across as hurried and too convenient. I went through the same
       | process of giving up the things listed, and my life didn't
       | suddenly become easier.
       | 
       | There was an awkward period where I free'd up my time from giving
       | up the same habits and, frankly, did not know what to do with my
       | free time.
       | 
       | I think the two-word analogy explained itself, and if the author
       | had saved some energy not re-explaining it then there would be
       | enough word count left to take the subject more seriously than
       | the rushed ending.
        
       | tancop wrote:
       | its just like normal drugs, alcohol, weed cocaine and everything.
       | dopamine, quick release, addiction, none of that is harmful by
       | itself. some of them just have danegrous side effects when you OD
       | so you need to watch out if you decide to take them.
       | 
       | i know im a dopamine addict. i watch reels, play fortnite and
       | only go out when i have someone to talk with. just walking by
       | myself is too calm even with music. i cant sit on the bus for 5
       | minutes without turning on clash royale. i dont read books or
       | watch long form movies because its not stimulating enough. i need
       | something new every minute or i get bored. the only time i can
       | focus something for a long time is when i feel like i really need
       | to get it finished, like writing this comment.
       | 
       | but i still got a social life, go to college and work. and i
       | think 90 percent of the people you call sick are just like that,
       | _normal functioning people_. theres nothing wrong with doing what
       | feels good.
        
         | thewoodsman wrote:
         | > theres nothing wrong with doing what feels good.
         | 
         | except that, according to your own experience, it eventually
         | leads to you becoming unable to engage with anything that isn't
         | an instant dopamine hit whose entire arc occurs in a few
         | minutes. you just used _writing a 3 paragraph comment_ as an
         | example of an activity that required long term focus.
         | 
         | and to be clear, i have a lot of the same problems, so i'm not
         | trying to come off overly judgmental here. but i view it as a
         | personal problem that I struggle to finish a book these days,
         | or to invest sustained attention in a challenging side project
         | or even, at times, a fucking _video game_. (i 've caught myself
         | scrolling youtube shorts _in my chair at my pc_ ,
         | procrastinating _playing a video game_ of all things).
         | 
         | what you describe (and again, what I also experience, maybe to
         | a slightly lesser extent) doesn't seem conducive to a happy and
         | fulfilling life - or at least it seems fair to guess that a
         | life _without_ the dopamine addiction you 're diagnosis could
         | be _happier_ and _more_ fulfilling.
        
       | pablogancharov wrote:
       | Maybe I'm optimistic but I do find pleasure on picking a topic,
       | let's say Strawberries, Coffee or Barbecue and dig into the
       | origins, trying to understand the real soul of the craft, and why
       | industry choose the profile they choose to explode. As Uruguayan
       | I see how Our national dish Asado get's blended in the "barbacue"
       | concept, even often confused with Argentinian / Brazilian
       | versions. The same happens to the Mate
        
       | NonHyloMorph wrote:
       | Neat conceptualisation and neat graphical design of the blog.
       | Keep up the good work!
        
       | kriro wrote:
       | There's a certain irony in coining the term on discord. Nice blog
       | post but I'm used to reading these from people who hang out on
       | IRC. Times are changing indeed.
       | 
       | My private version of anti-dopamine fracking is playing the phone
       | game. Every social event I attend, I try to be the last person to
       | look at their phone (well basically not look at it at all). It is
       | fairly sad how easily this game is won in under 30 minutes in
       | most casual settings.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | > There's a certain irony in coining the term on discord
         | 
         | And the section in the middle where they start praising a
         | YouTube video series that validated his anger and encourages us
         | to go watch it.
         | 
         | You can sense the author's struggles with self-regulation at
         | the center of this article, but they have a blind spot for the
         | content and apps that they really like. I think people in this
         | situation would do better to start looking for positive outlets
         | for their time like taking up an activity or exercise routine
         | that gets them out of the house and away from screens. Trying
         | to set arbitrary boundaries to avoid really bad content and
         | apps is good, but if that time is just backfilled with other
         | apps and videos then it's only a very partial help.
        
           | igmn wrote:
           | I agree. I'm the author, and I think freeing up my time is
           | the core of making myself feel better. And I think it could
           | help others.
           | 
           | Because I don't scroll nearly as much anymore, I have less
           | things to immediately and effortlessly distract myself with.
           | This inadvertently forces me into creativity, mindfulness or
           | rekindling hobbies, which are healthier and more fulfilling
           | activities than TikTok. It also promotes experimentation and
           | trying new things. For example: I don't write often, but
           | having more time and boredom allows me to actually try
           | instead of wishing I had. And now we're having this
           | conversation as a result.
           | 
           | YouTube and Discord are as much of a distraction as anything
           | else, but their nature (or I guess how I use them) makes them
           | feel more finite, and I can often "run out" of content to
           | consume in a short amount of time. Previously, I couldn't run
           | out, and it was ruining my life and personality.
           | 
           | I can finally feel my life's sort of global content feed
           | becoming finite and manageable.
        
             | a3c9 wrote:
             | > I can often "run out" of content to consume
             | 
             | As a reformed YouTube addict myself, that feeling of
             | "running out" really is great. Tragically, that was its own
             | exciting rush which has since faded. :)
        
       | JohnBooty wrote:
       | I'm maybe going to blow some fucking minds here -- _learning this
       | certainly blew my own mind_ --- BUT
       | 
       | I have a friend who works in the "fragrance and flavor" industry.
       | (Which is actually pretty fascinating, mostly in the sense that
       | there are only about three major players, who kind of decide how
       | everything in the world looks and tastes)
       | 
       | Annnnnnnnnnnd one of the things fake strawberry fragrance is user
       | for is... strawberries. Like, actual supermarket strawberries.
       | Some produce companies put fake scents onto real fruit so they,
       | you know, smell more fruity.
       | 
       | Fuck this world.
        
       | onaclov2000 wrote:
       | I've thought about aspects of this off and on for a while, so it
       | was a good read, I grew up making lefse with my mom, it's a big
       | nostalgia hit for me, but my siblings don't make it, it's time
       | consuming and sometimes I don't feel like it, and I wonder if the
       | next generation or maybe even one more down the line will have
       | just completely stopped making this. I think about what other
       | things people used to make that just aren't really 'easy' to
       | manufacture, or whatever and so they are only made by small
       | groups of people and that will probably die off one day. I also
       | think about the food we eat is largely designed to be the highest
       | profit, we only have strawberries because they're cost effective
       | enough, for now, but how many other fruit/vegetables/etc are we
       | missing out on, because growing them are just too much of a
       | hassle, and they're as good or better for us....sorry for the
       | ramble but good read, def some things to think about
        
       | regexorcist wrote:
       | As someone under 40 who never had any social media, I cannot
       | overstate the negative impact it's had on my peers and their
       | behaviours. Worst thing to ever happen to society imo, I feel for
       | the younger ones who grew up with it.
        
         | Gigachad wrote:
         | I grew up with social media but at the start of the year I quit
         | all of it and deleted my accounts. AI slop and obvious bots
         | everywhere was the tipping point.
         | 
         | I should have done it long before, quitting has been so
         | massively beneficial and I don't feel I'm missing anything. All
         | real social interaction online these days is in messaging apps.
         | Social media is just a feed of endless slop designed to put you
         | in a zombie like state of scrolling.
        
         | oa335 wrote:
         | why doesnt hackernews count as social media?
        
           | thatjoeoverthr wrote:
           | We have social media-like systems going arguably Compuserve
           | and the like, as well as games. There's a matter of
           | "refinement", like how some older people describe the change
           | of drugs over the decades. TikTok, Twitter and many of the
           | games are just "too strong", and it matters. Nobody gets
           | "addicted" to Mario 3 or IRC to the point it resembles
           | alcoholism.
        
             | raldi wrote:
             | People were definitely addicted to IRC.
        
             | Aurornis wrote:
             | > Nobody gets "addicted" to Mario 3 or IRC to the point it
             | resembles alcoholism.
             | 
             | People definitely became internet junkies in the past. IRC
             | was where you could find chronically online people before
             | that term was popular.
             | 
             | The good old IRC quote databases were full of jokes about
             | people not leaving their house and being online all the
             | time. I remember being mocked in IRC rooms because I was
             | out doing things instead of being on IRC all weekend. IRC
             | was the place for the chronically online. This has always
             | been a thing and it's weird to see it dismissed so
             | casually.
        
           | pfortuny wrote:
           | I guess it is mostly (by default):
           | 
           | a) real pseudonymity b) no photos/videos c) no infinite
           | scroll d) no notifications e) very specific (mildly speaking)
           | topic range f) very very good ranking and filtering algo ....
        
             | throw10920 wrote:
             | (g) guidelines designed for curiosity and intellectual
             | discussion that are enforced by the moderators. No "real"
             | social media platform has anything similar. (so maybe it's
             | more like a discussion board? LessWrong/old phpbb forums)
        
               | pfortuny wrote:
               | So true!
        
           | eggnet wrote:
           | The lack of ads, and the algorithm for sorting the feed.
           | 
           | I think the spectrum runs from social media, to forum, to
           | news feed... maybe other things. HN isn't toxic.
        
           | PowerElectronix wrote:
           | It does, but as you really can't get money out of it in a
           | reliable way by exploiting the user addictive behaviors, it
           | doesn't have that effect on society.
           | 
           | It's just a cool place to visit now an then an check cool
           | stuff out.
        
             | Aurornis wrote:
             | Kind of interesting how many people don't realize that the
             | purpose of Hacker News was to be an advertisement for Y
             | Combinator and their portfolio companies.
             | 
             | You don't see it as much these days, but YC portfolio
             | companies can post privileged threads on this site for job
             | listings, which in practice double as ads for the company.
             | You're not allowed to comment on them.
             | 
             | I haven't seen one for a while because I suspect every
             | company is already inundated with 1000 applications for
             | every job in this market, but this is what Hacker News was
             | for.
        
               | frakt0x90 wrote:
               | I think most people know this and are fine with it. YC
               | owns the site and advertises their stuff on it sometimes.
               | The site itself is not trying to milk you for every penny
               | or trying to exploit you.
        
               | regexorcist wrote:
               | > people don't realize
               | 
               | Y Combinator is right there in the URL. People know and
               | don't care because it's a well run forum with interesting
               | discussions, the privileged posts don't change that.
        
               | scubbo wrote:
               | > Y Combinator is right there in the URL
               | 
               | Most people aren't so slavishly devoted to capital that
               | they have memorized the names of firms.
        
               | j_w wrote:
               | Just live on /active and that stuff doesn't show up.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | Whatever the purpose _was_ , that's not really the
               | reality of HN as most of us experience it.
        
             | FrustratedMonky wrote:
             | And, HN doesn't show your ranking, at least obviously, so
             | it doesn't get the same gamification to try and maximize
             | points.
             | 
             | But, it is social media. Just that they make a point to try
             | and tone it down and keep it focused.
        
             | overgard wrote:
             | Man, I wish. It used to be that, but I suspect now that
             | there's a lot of astroturfing and probably bots.
        
               | nyantaro1 wrote:
               | I also notice that. I don't really know where else to go
               | now
        
           | vaylian wrote:
           | Why should it? Can I add you as a friend on HN? Can I become
           | your follower? What are the social features that would make
           | HN social media?
        
             | teolandon wrote:
             | Talking to people
        
           | copper4eva wrote:
           | If you want to be pedantic, everything that has user
           | interaction I think technically counts as social media. So
           | just about any forum on the internet counts. But there's a
           | pretty big difference in an anonymous forum, and something
           | like twitter, facebook etc.
        
           | swed420 wrote:
           | > why doesnt hackernews count as social media?
           | 
           | It doesn't intentionally insert dark patterns into the
           | platform.
           | 
           | It's not without flaws, of course, but it's 1+ orders of
           | magnitude better than anything else.
        
           | bachmeier wrote:
           | Whether or not it counts as social media, there is no
           | algorithm targeting individuals as far as I know. Social
           | media in the sense of HN is just the internet.
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | because we're not putting our personal lives on display here.
           | it's a news aggregator and discussion forum. sure, some folks
           | post their personal projects, but it's framed as news to be
           | discussed, not desperation for validation.
        
       | Self-Perfection wrote:
       | Superstimuli and the Collapse of Western Civilization
       | https://www.lesswrong.com/s/MH2b8NfWv22dBtrs8/p/Jq73Gozjsuhd...
       | 
       | I remember this LW essay most often
        
       | sheepscreek wrote:
       | I love this term - I think it beautifully describes the direction
       | that at least, YouTube is heading towards. Take for example, this
       | racket where a channel copies popular (non-kids) creators' parody
       | work, splits the screen in half with the content on left, adds a
       | completely random DIY type video on the right half, and lo and
       | behold its content for kids who are too young to know any
       | better[1].
       | 
       | Another one: AI voiceovers on videos taken from Asian apps, with
       | some made up emotional story, followed by "if you love your mom,
       | like and subscribe" - which kids (< 8yrs) actually do![2]
       | 
       | Or for that matter that YouTube makes it so hard to block
       | channels and impossible to unblock specific channels (at least
       | for kids). The platform has been unwilling to do anything about
       | it for years. I suppose maybe this isn't the best example but
       | it's definitely along the lines of a corporation prioritizing
       | profits over all else, especially disregarding the wellbeing of
       | their users.
       | 
       | 1. https://youtu.be/VF4V7bRjjdo https://youtu.be/UoGuLabqgrk
       | 
       | 2. https://youtube.com/shorts/B2ZNFiix8JA
       | https://youtube.com/shorts/0eYYKRRcYrA
        
         | smallmancontrov wrote:
         | It's wild that the same easily detectable spam formula from a
         | decade ago is still active beneath every finance video today:
         | "I'm confused! Well I gave my money to Mr. Scammy McScamface
         | and he gave me 1000% returns! Google Scammy McScamface now!"
        
         | skwirl wrote:
         | It is crazy to me that any parent of young children would let
         | their kids watch YouTube videos on their own. Maybe this
         | happened gradually enough that some parents didn't notice, but
         | we had our first kid a couple years ago and I nope'd out of
         | YouTube pretty quickly when I saw what was there. Even the
         | channels known for being good - which we occasionally let the
         | kids watch as long as we were present and choosing the videos -
         | started to clearly optimize for engagement over quality, and so
         | now we're done with it entirely. The stuff there for "kids"
         | legitimately horrifies me.
        
           | boringg wrote:
           | Agreed - even older children shouldn't be exposing themselves
           | to that garbage. Totally garbage in garbage out situation.
           | Youtube can be good if its highly curated -- otherwise its
           | just trash.
        
           | brandensilva wrote:
           | We blocked YouTube recently in the household for all devices
           | but one approved tv device that our kids are only able to
           | watch with us.
           | 
           | I let my oldest daughter at 10 watch stuff there a couple
           | times a week which she largely watches Minecraft videos. I
           | know everything she consumes for now.
           | 
           | Eventually that will stop and she's on her own when she is
           | more responsible as an older teenager but the important point
           | here is this isn't helicopter parenting, it's survival at
           | protecting her brain from dopamine overload making her a
           | content addict.
           | 
           | I don't want to go full Amish as I think it's important to
           | prepare our kids for the inevitable world they will be
           | exposed too but I feel I'd fail them letting them loose.
        
         | ghurtado wrote:
         | The problem of 8yr olds watching too much YouTube is definitely
         | not one for YouTube to fix.
         | 
         | We're quickly getting to a point where all parenting is
         | delegated to people and institutions that have nothing to do
         | with raising children.
         | 
         | And then we complain that our kids are not being raised
         | properly. We don't even know who to blame for this any more.
        
           | aaroninsf wrote:
           | This reads like literal propaganda.
           | 
           | Every assertion of personal responsibility (sic) in the face
           | of billion to trillion dollar industry spending is bad faith,
           | zero exceptions.
           | 
           | British Petroleum invented the concept of personal climate
           | footprint. That was bad faith and to put a point on it, evil.
           | 
           | Tech industry claims that engagement farming and addition
           | manufacture should be opposed by "parenting" are even less
           | credible.
        
             | kakacik wrote:
             | Yes and no. Look around you and count how many properly
             | failing parents there are. Parents who literally offload
             | their parenting to a tablet, TV, phone, nanny which is
             | often on phone herself, whatever. Then complain kids are
             | unruly when they don't simply listen to them like soldiers.
             | Parents, who are often as addicted to the screens (and
             | more) as their kids. Recent studies showed above half of
             | toddlers below 2 spend an hour or more daily on screens,
             | thats fucked up.
             | 
             | I can count many such parents, way too many that I know.
             | Kids before 5-6 should not access internet and should not
             | watch TV. Don't trust me, trust children psychologists. Its
             | toxic to their developing brains and personalities. Let
             | them fuck up their lives on their own later if they must,
             | don't give them hard addiction from the literal start of
             | life, just because 'oh daddy has this super important work
             | so doesn't have time to be a parent' syndrome, especially
             | when its mostly empty pathetic soul draining white collar
             | work with 0 added value to humanity.
             | 
             | And if one is truly changing the world for the better (as
             | in 1 out of those maybe 10 humans actually currently doing
             | it) and can't spare time for some kids, then don't have
             | them, its not some freakin' checkbox ticked and moving to
             | next challenge and achievement unlocked. Its by far the
             | hardest effort one can make in one's life, spans over 2+
             | decades, be never 100% successful, while facing many real
             | risks of failure completely outside of one's powers (no I
             | don't mean peer pressure phones in school, rather ie health
             | issues)
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | And how many of those parents are spending 50+ hours a
               | week (or more) working too?
               | 
               | There are finite fucks anyone can give, and if someone is
               | working all day keeping a roof over their head, what else
               | is it going to happen?
        
               | mplanchard wrote:
               | I think this is a "yes, and" kind of situation. Yes, a
               | lot of parents suck, and yes, we should try to improve
               | that situation, but also yes, we absolutely should punish
               | megacorporations for making parents' jobs harder by
               | targeting children with their proven-to-be-harmful
               | products.
               | 
               | Like, parents shouldn't give cigarettes to their
               | children, BUT ALSO it is both illegal and immoral for
               | tobacco companies to target children.
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | > Parents, who are often as addicted to the screens (and
               | more) as their kids.
               | 
               | This is a huge part of it. Kids are great at spotting
               | hypocrisy, and if you tell them to put down the screens,
               | yet you yourself are scrolling Instagram all day, the kid
               | is going to know you are full of shit! It's like smoking
               | a cigarette while telling your kid that smoking is bad
               | for you.
        
           | xyzzy_plugh wrote:
           | I'd like to agree but practically there are difficulties
           | enforcing it. Anecdotally I know of some parents having a
           | battle with their local school because their kids have been
           | watching this sort of crap in kindergarten.
           | 
           | Fundamentally it seems like building products designed to
           | target children with harmful content, or content that
           | substitutes for educational material, should not be accepted
           | by society.
           | 
           | So yes parents are responsible but maybe we should stop
           | building The Torment Nexus _but for children_.
        
             | bondarchuk wrote:
             | Fundamentally it seems like kindergartens showing youtube
             | videos to kids should not be accepted by society.
        
             | SauntSolaire wrote:
             | I see "Torment Nexus" has completed is evolution into a
             | catch-all term for "things I don't like".
        
             | fauchletenerum wrote:
             | > Anecdotally I know of some parents having a battle with
             | their local school because their kids have been watching
             | this sort of crap in kindergarten.
             | 
             | I'm imagining a scene from Idiocracy where a kindergarten
             | teacher is the person whose job it is to press play on
             | Youtube videos
        
           | lo_zamoyski wrote:
           | > We're quickly getting to a point where all parenting is
           | delegated to people and institutions that have nothing to do
           | with raising children.
           | 
           | This is just the logical conclusion of consumerism.
           | 
           | Consumerism produces careerism. Careerism produces the two
           | income household. A two income household cannot devote the
           | needed time to raising children during their early years. Day
           | care and school and after school activities has been used to
           | keep children busy while parents were hunting for that next
           | promotion and the bigger paycheck to get the better car to
           | get the better "status" in the eyes of their neighbors.
           | 
           | The zombie is the perfect symbol for consumerism, because it
           | involves a mindless, indiscriminate, beastly, and insatiable
           | hunger that would sell his own grandmother for that next
           | disposable morsel.
           | 
           | I think we really need to reshape things to conform to
           | biological and human reality instead of working against it.
           | In the case of women, our culture as well as our political
           | and economic structures must support the ability of women to
           | have children earlier and to be able to raise them themselves
           | during their early years. Many women do actually want this,
           | but the culture pressures them to do otherwise or convinces
           | them that the consumerist lifestyle is more attractive,
           | causing them to defer having children (constraining their
           | fertile years) and to pursue careers that increasingly make
           | it difficult to choose to relinquish for at least some time
           | as they raise their children.
        
           | tdb7893 wrote:
           | At that age I could watch TV or play video games without
           | strict parental supervision (I had older brothers and would
           | often play with them while my mom cooked or whatever). I was
           | lucky because while I did watch some age inappropriate media
           | (I watched Gundam Wing on Toonami when I was 7) I was really
           | lucky that none of these things were trying to addict me to
           | them in the same way media often does now.
           | 
           | I don't think the level of autonomy I had in the mid-late 90s
           | would be a good idea now, even though it helped me be an
           | independent and resilient adult, and I don't think that's
           | parents' fault. I would've really struggled with the
           | purposefully addictive nature of modern media and trying to
           | balance autonomy with managing the exploitative nature of
           | modern technology makes me anxious to have kids (and I've met
           | a lot of parents who had some issues with it).
        
             | sifar wrote:
             | >> trying to balance autonomy with managing the
             | exploitative nature of modern technology makes me anxious
             | to have kids
             | 
             | This is a legitimate concern and the anxiety is
             | understandable. I think that would make you a much better
             | parent than many. Most often, parents use these as
             | crutches, so as a parent one has to set ground rules (for
             | ourselves) and enforce them.
             | 
             | No tablets/phone access for entertainment till 6-7 yrs -
             | there is simply no reason for this. No unsupervised access
             | till 10-12 yrs.
             | 
             | Use game console like the switch instead of mobile games.
             | Curate stuff for them. Mostly be involved in how they use
             | technology, discuss with them what it is and what effect it
             | can have in a way they can relate too.
        
       | alexk307 wrote:
       | While I'm empathetic to the overall theme of the post, the
       | strawberries are a terrible example and takes away from the
       | message. Strawberries are delicate little fruits that until a
       | handful of decades ago, were seasonal expensive treats. It's not
       | necessarily a bad thing that we've made a synthetic analog that
       | allows less fortunate people to experience the taste of a perfect
       | strawberry. Real strawberries aren't disappearing because of
       | this, if anything this would have the opposite effect because
       | strawberry consumption in the US have ~quadrupled in the past few
       | decades [1]. No one replaced "500 individual human experiences",
       | strawberries are not "extinct", there's no data to suggest that
       | people "prefer the synthetic version".
       | 
       | [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/charts-of-note/77884
        
       | hstaab wrote:
       | "The future is flavor blasted"
        
       | heddycrow wrote:
       | The real answer to "which came first, the chicken or the egg" - a
       | long line of chicken-like creatures hatched from an egg before
       | the first ever chicken hatched from an egg.
       | 
       | Why lead with this? There is a very long line of dopamine-
       | fracking-like behaviors that hatched before now.
       | 
       | How difficult is it to say that we can't use science to create
       | strawberry flavors but we can use science to basically create
       | what strawberry means in the first place? Oh, you think that the
       | strawberries we have now in all their varieties just arrived with
       | us on the planet in their current form?
       | 
       | Who is to say what the point is where too much tampering is
       | enough? HINT: it's not the ones consuming, they like the new
       | stuff regardless of whether it's real or not.
       | 
       | It's tempting to point the finger at The Capitalist or
       | Capitalism, but this misses the mark no matter how close it is.
       | You are the Consumer. You empower enshit.
       | 
       | Don't believe me? Go build something and see. People don't take
       | the time to look at what you have built and who you are to
       | determine if your product is a worthy investment. You have to
       | sell them. You have to court a demographic and place your
       | product. You will spend a lot of time doing this unless you are
       | already somehow connected into a network that turns everything
       | you touch into gold.
       | 
       | After this process, see if you are not sympathetic to strawberry
       | flavoring. And this is all your fault, right? It has nothing to
       | do with The Consumer, we can't blame those people. We can't blame
       | "You" because you aren't rich and powerful. Even though it's
       | "You" and many people like you that are the whole engine of this
       | thing.
       | 
       | TLDR; "dopamine fracking" is a great term. It lets us explain
       | what those "others" are doing to "us" while we sit by passively
       | and accept our fate.
       | 
       | Shame on them. When they hear this term they will be ashamed and
       | fix their ways or we will make them through our friend The
       | Government.
       | 
       | But where's the clever and magical term that makes "us" behave
       | differently?
        
       | sailfast wrote:
       | The article doesn't make it quite clear but dopamine fracking
       | (such as described) requires both you and the companies to work.
       | 
       | The companies are trying to make something you'll want, and you
       | want it! But if you allow fracking on your "property" then you
       | will be left with poisoned aquifers and empty of substance.
        
         | Matticus_Rex wrote:
         | > But if you allow fracking on your "property" then you will be
         | left with poisoned aquifers and empty of substance.
         | 
         | So it's analogous to the mythical bogeyman version of what
         | fracking was hyped up to be, and not how it actually turned
         | out.
        
       | suncemoje wrote:
       | Reminds me of a few parallels, mainly the attention economy [0]
       | and The Social Dilemma documentary [1]
       | 
       | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_economy
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Dilemma
        
       | thinkthatover wrote:
       | just because everyone seems to keep asking this on different
       | threads - hacker news is definitely social media, with a few
       | extra steps. Its where i come to get my dopamine hit at least
        
       | nlanier wrote:
       | I've found that this engineered optimization has a more
       | pernicious side effect: killing curiosity.
       | 
       | Lack of complexity stunts the desire to become curious - to give
       | reasons to look closer, ask questions, compare experiences - and
       | ultimately develop 'taste'.
       | 
       | When everything is optimized into its most obvious, frictionless,
       | immediately-rewarding form, the sum of all experience becomes
       | more 'pleasant' but harder to care about.
       | 
       | The author touches on something that's been grating at me (and is
       | professionally relevant) for some time now, and I appreciate his
       | effort to articulate it.
        
         | webdoodle wrote:
         | Interesting take. Do you think they are intentionally killing
         | curiosity? If so, why?
        
         | epistememe wrote:
         | What once motivated going deeper to satisfy the curiosity
         | instinct is now satisfied by breadth. Quantity has a quality
         | all its own.        "When everything is optimized into its most
         | obvious, frictionless, immediately-rewarding form, the sum of
         | all experience becomes more 'pleasant' but harder to care
         | about." This is an insightful and important point. Humans place
         | value on what requires effort and resources to achieve/acquire.
         | The timeline has been condensed so that immediate rewards are
         | required, or attention/effort is directed elsewhere. Any
         | extended effort or depth requires frequent dopamine rewards.
         | Those born well into the Internet age have a different
         | disposition that is difficult for older generations to
         | understand. In some ways, the difference is quite profound and
         | not unlike that of a foreign culture.
        
       | arthurofbabylon wrote:
       | > " Written by a human."
       | 
       | Thank you.
        
       | initramfs wrote:
       | Great article.
       | 
       | I've wanted to write an article about mulberries (long before
       | this article), and the reason why they are not sold in grocery
       | stores, is because of their precious shelf life and tendency to
       | stain with gendle handling.
       | 
       | I recently read about CERN transporting antiprotons to another
       | facility.
       | 
       | I then thought, if CERN can move antiprotons, surely someone can
       | figure out how to sell mulberries at the local grocery?
       | 
       | Of course, not everything needs to be commercialized. Some of the
       | best things in life are free.
        
       | sharpshadow wrote:
       | The conclusion acknowledges information compression, media
       | hygiene and awareness. Solid points which most online surfers
       | lack of.
        
       | lo_zamoyski wrote:
       | As the saying goes, experience keeps an expensive school, but
       | humanity will learn in no other.
       | 
       | The owl of Minerva only takes flight at dusk.
       | 
       | It is indeed interesting to observe how attitudes in tech seem to
       | be changing, especially with the specter of AI. I think some of
       | it is just the lament of the keypunch operator or some kind of
       | parochial and domestic grumbling concealed behind the appearance
       | of something greater, but some of it does seem like its rooted in
       | at least an intuition about where everything is headed...and has
       | been heading.
       | 
       | What the author is describing is consumerism. Consumerism devours
       | everything and soon enough becomes a way of life. But as a
       | society, we are enslaved to consumerism. We cannot let it go. We
       | don't even know that we should. Status in consumerist societies
       | is tied to consuming power! You don't want to be left behind, do
       | you? So, unfortunately, the only corrective for an obstinate
       | people is reality itself, which _will_ come for its pound of
       | flesh sooner or later. And we 're seeing it. The drowning man
       | must let go of his satchel full of fool's gold, but he is unable
       | to and the satchel takes him to the dark depths until perhaps he
       | is can no longer hold his breath. Reality has to pry his fingers
       | from that satchel.
        
       | mlboss wrote:
       | I know this article talks about digital media, but in general,
       | that is what any technology does. It distances us from nature and
       | makes things more convenient, but it also takes away the nuances
       | involved.
       | 
       | Any concept that helps us categorize real things also takes away
       | their individuality. Every tree is different, but the word "tree"
       | takes away its uniqueness. A "tree" becomes something that
       | provides humans with food, or something that can be used for
       | firewood or paper.
        
       | kinjba11 wrote:
       | This reminds me of the concept I learned of recently: that
       | metrics and simplified quantitative information has been
       | digesting the world for a long time. Simplified metrics like
       | 'pounds of strawberries sold' take over our value systems instead
       | of more squishy values like 'humans enjoying varied and great
       | tasting strawberries'.
       | 
       | The drive for 'number goes up' eliminates nuance and we lose
       | something _real_ but poorly quantified and thus not valued. And
       | this dopamine fracking has been happening for a while, is the
       | latest version of that. Whatever gets eyeballs and we can measure
       | getting eyeballs, wins, despite the dystopian consequences.
       | 
       | The book 'The Score' by C Thi Nguyen goes into this, has given me
       | a new way to see if something I value is actually just a metric I
       | learned and unconsciously am following. He outlines 'four
       | horsemen of bureaucracy' that have replaced more nuanced values:
       | the need to scale (losing nuance and geographical variability),
       | make something mechanical and repeatable (lose nuance and
       | adaptability), replaceable parts (losing nuance, make everything
       | fungible, humans as replaceable), and centralized control (lose
       | individualized voices). These were great in the first wave as
       | they've increased our standard of living and made e.g. mass
       | production of medicine and such possible, but now as more ways
       | are found to extract attention these forces are eating away at
       | our lives
        
       | marciob wrote:
       | I had a similar realization recently while reading books and then
       | watching YouTube videos on the same topic. The difference was
       | very obvious. YouTubers often distort the subject with engagement
       | hooks and unnecessary compression, which also misses the context.
       | Sometimes the result is in essence a very different thing.
        
       | OneOffAsk wrote:
       | > because just like in actual fracking, it is immensely harmful
       | to the long-term health and sustainability of anything it is
       | applied to
       | 
       | An otherwise good article, but weakened by this bit. Fracking and
       | the use of natural gas is actually pretty great ecologically
       | compared to the other ways we get and use fossil fuels. It got a
       | bad rap because it probably really stunted US adoption of
       | renewable resources... and it's my theory the coal industry was
       | behind the public damnation.
        
       | casey2 wrote:
       | Can someone define dopamine? I'm also not very comfortable with
       | re-purposing scientific terminology for memes.
       | 
       | My best guess is "guilty pleasure"
        
       | rphv wrote:
       | Humans are evolutionarily optimized to do this. Add this to the
       | long list of behaviors which were once beneficial from a survival
       | standpoint but are now detrimental to our health - e.g.
       | tribalism, shortsightedness, an insatiable taste for fats and
       | sugars.
       | 
       | "The human species can change its own nature. What will it
       | choose? Will it remain the same, teetering on a jerrybuilt
       | foundation of partly obsolete Ice Age adaptations? Or will it
       | press on toward still higher intelligence and creativity ...?" -
       | E.O. Wilson "On Human Nature"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-06-09 05:02 UTC)