7 ms·

This is the issue that is top of mind for me at the moment. If you're frustrated by political polarization, this is one of the root causes! I'm very eager to he

by nicd 2y ago

This is the issue that is top of mind for me at the moment. If you're frustrated by political polarization, this is one of the root causes! I'm very eager to hear any ideas on steps we can take to systematically reverse this damage to society.

reducesuffering 2y ago
Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. We optimize for a big GDP number but never for a population happiness level.
- Dracophoenix 2y ago
  > How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Are they on anti-depressants because life has gotten worse or because of decreasing stigma resulting from greater accessibility to better-informed patients? Until the turn of the century, just mentioning you saw a shrink in any sincere capacity would get you funny looks in most parts of the country. > Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. There's an old joke where a reporter asks a bank robber why he robs banks. The latter's response: "Because, that's where the money is". The bank and bar of today is the Internet. It's what funds and facilitates most social ventures, even the ones that take place IRL. Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair.
  - flenkzooz 2y ago
    I'm not sure I completely agree with your last assertion (except according to a very rigorous definition of "optimize"). While people do very much differ, there are certain things that predictably make the majority of people happier. Social connectedness, for example. We may not be able to truly optimize for these things, but I think we can reliably improve human wellbeing at scale. A successful example from the past would be the efforts to add more green spaces to cities. People like parks, and they're happier on average when they have access to them.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Yeah increasing treatment of medical conditions seems like a very poor proxy for proving an increase in incidence.
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    > Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair. This right here is exactly what's wrong. People are put into impossible conditions and then blamed when they can't magically make themselves happy with the arrangement. Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy?
    - Dracophoenix 2y ago
      Happiness isn't self-induced solipsism. I don't claim that external conditions have no effect on individual happiness, but rather that external conditions do not uniformly or systematically determine an individual's happiness nor can one reliably use such conditions to extrapolate the happiness of others. A policy that addresses a so-called collective need often comes at the cost of individual agency and thus individual happiness. It is therefore, necessary to recognize that the domain of happiness and its relevant parameters does not belong to an abstract blob, but solely to the individual. > Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy? Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owner's house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content as they are well-fed.
      - throaway54 2y ago
        >Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owners house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content, as they are well-fed. Not if they are given a space which is too small and not stimulating enough for them, then they just pace around for their whole lives.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    Maybe an increased stigma was better? Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness, if you discount the former I think there are some examples.
    - Dracophoenix 2y ago
      > Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness The conditions that make someone miserable are just as variable. Some of the most content people possess little education and are mired in the throes of poverty. If you started a national misery program where the government impoverishes its population left and right, there would still be a minority who find enjoyment, even thrive, in such circumstances.
      - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
        I mean you are talking about anomalies which is not what people mean here. Obviously masochists exist but that’s not very interesting
- cess11 2y ago
  Capitalism can't reproduce itself through happy people. It needs enormous amounts of suffering to continue, and as a kid growing up you'll at some point notice this. At least you did, before the screens became dominant over reality.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    What does any of this mean? What is capitalist reproduction? How is any of that true? Does a system in which someone has a right to your labor somehow solve this?
    - cess11 2y ago
      It's an expression from economics. Do you disagree that societies reproduce themselves? We're living in a world system where almost all societies are based on the idea that one class of people has a right to the labour of almost all the rest. I'm not sure why you suggest furthering it is a solution to our current predicaments.
  - eli_gottlieb 2y ago
    Modes of production are not modes of consumption. The system doesn't change if the "plastic trivia" companies go bankrupt from everyone suddenly growing a sense of thrift.
- matrix87 2y ago
  > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Is it because they're emotionally worse off, or is it because pharma is advertising them more aggressively, kickbacks, etc
  - reducesuffering 2y ago
    There are many studies showing US youth report feeling worse than previously. The CDC: "Youth in the U.S. are experiencing a mental health crisis." https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-health-numbers.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-healt... Increased pharma pushing is an easy scapegoat, but it would have to be making these youth more depressed before they were ever taking antidepressants. Social media and phones have been disconnecting real interactions and pushing people onto fake digital "connections." Then when people are more lonely than ever, we're now pushing them "AI bot connections" to help loneliness, purely because VC's see $ in it, basically giving desperate people soda to help their hunger.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    I think social media even promotes this hyper therapy and medication seeking behavior. My guess it probably even creates a kind of Overton window sort of thing for physicians, big pharma notwithstanding. It’s very easy for people to get prescriptions for these drugs and a lot of doctors seem to think “patients reports depression so I prescribed SSRI” or whatever is popular.
    - harvodex 2y ago
      When I was 20, no one my age had got incredibly wealthy or famous who wasn't an actor or musician. It is like a hyper version of de Tocqueville now. No matter how poor someone is, they still don't feel that far from being rich and famous in America. This creates enormous status anxiety coupled with the reality of student loans and inflation it is a really bad deal for young people's mental health.
    - matrix87 2y ago
      yeah I see the same trend, at some point I just kinda decided to mentally slot all of those people into the stupid category, tune them out, and go on living
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I totally agree with you but there is a lot of tech that is not social media related. But, that fact probably doesn’t change your quantitative observation.
- watwut 2y ago
  > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. You need to factor in alcohol and drug use rates for previous generations, crime rates of youth and so it. It is not that current situation is optimal, but when I was young, you would not get antidepressants even if you actually desperately needed it. The taboo against admitting even to yourself that you might have mental health issue was too high. Conservative minded people like to complain about lack of risk taking among youth ... but quite a lot of risk taking was pure self destruction or destruction of whoever you got pregnant (if you was a guy).
MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
The article recommends seeking out interactions with others even when (especially when) we would avoid it. I don't know how to make that a movement, but I'll be more mindful of it.
hansonkin 2y ago
I've been working on a project to solve the social connection problem using a new approach. In a post third space society, I want to make it easier for people to connect with others nearby in small groups around shared hobbies and activities. Having a small group size makes it easier to host at someone's place and it's also cheaper than going out. I did a soft launch earlier this week by posting on NYC subreddits to get early feedback and test out my hypothesis . The reaction has been very positive with many comments saying they like the concept. Obviously there's a long way to go to really nail down the product market fit and build a sustainable business around it but the early feedback makes me feel like there is really something there.
- vaginicola 2y ago
  Could help me find your reddit posts? I'm interested in learning more, but am having trouble locating them through search... I share your enthusiasm for making it easier for people to connect in person, focused around shared interests (incl. established online social networks). I'm sincerely concerned about the potential outcomes of our current and growing social isolation. That said, I believe that "third spaces" are still essential. Effective third spaces can provide safe, neutral ground for those who are unacquainted to get to know one another on their own terms. I think that the thought of inviting a strangers into your personal space is pretty uncomfortable to many people. I also think people want to get out of their cave every now and then--especially with the rise of work-from-home. I think the failure of traditional third spaces (cafes, bars, social clubs, libraries, etc.) has more to do with them being unable to adapt to the needs of modern society & socialization. My thought is that there needs to be a new type of third space which meets those needs. Perhaps something like WeWork, but geared towards the third space? Something that can adapt to and support the diverse interest/hobbies/networks that have come about due to the internet. Something that tics all of the "Great Good Place" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place) boxes and more. I have some ideas, but need to develop them further.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    A social crutch I really like is games. I’m terrible at talking to people, but I love playing competitive but social games. Stuff like chess boards, card games could go a long way.
jasdi 2y ago
Read the UN report on the Attention Economy. Everything is connected to Attention being over fished by platforms. The human pool of Attention is slow growing and finite (the limit being number of minutes in a day*people). Yet Content keeps exploding to infinity. Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In traditional economics, more money chasing the same goods = inflation. In the Attention Economy, more content chasing the same attention = engagement inflation (harder to get noticed, costs more to be seen). The real winners - Platforms, since they act like central banks controlling both supply (content) and demand (attention via algorithm). The Attention Economy behaves like a manipulated market where demand is fixed but distorted, and supply keeps increasing, benefiting the gatekeepers (platforms) while exhausting the participants (creators, advertisers, businesses, users). History teaches us where the story goes.
- yesco 2y ago
  > History teaches us where the story goes. Does it? When else has this happened before? Or do you just mean manipulated markets specifically?
- robwwilliams 2y ago
  > Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In some sense perhaps, but I now value my attention more since there is so much more competing for attention. Out with Twitter/X, in with Hacker News; out with daily papers, in with long news: Aeon and Atlantic and Foreign Affairs. And zero broadcast TV.
  - 63 2y ago
    This requires conscious choice and some discipline though. For the average person, content competes for attention on their behalf before their conscious brain kicks in. Social media uses cheap tricks like rage bait that your local book club just can't compete with. Yes, an emotionally healthy person with some free time who enjoyed books as a child (already a minority of people it seems due to many factors) may choose the book club, but the higher barrier of entry just keeps most people from ever considering it. It's just so damn hard for any in-person activities to compete with instant gratification and addictive rage. In college in 2022, I was a member of several clubs with varying subjects and members. Every one of them struggled to get anyone to attend. The CS club hosted drone races and 3d printed model painting. The improv club had weekly themed meetings. The theater department hosted at least 1 large and 1 small show per semester and we couldn't even get people to sit in the audience. And this is college, where demands on participants' time are relatively lacking (compared to kids and a 9-5). I imagine a lot of social activities have failed to get members and then just ceased to exist as a result. Several of the clubs I was in no longer exist due to a lack of participants to take up leadership after my class graduated. Don't even get me started on how people talk and talk about causes they admire on the internet but then never actually volunteer their time to make anything better. I really think society has just fucked itself over by letting social media companies run rampant with our attention, feeding us lies and gossip that doesn't matter 24 hours later. I genuinely just don't know if most people can be conscious and disciplined enough to get themselves out of the trap. At the very least, it will take a few generations to develop new mores and standards and who knows what new tech will be around to ruin their lives by then. I find it hard to believe that anyone was ever hopeful about working in this industry.
intended 2y ago
Aren’t there many countries which are happily anti social? In any case - approaching this as if it is damage, will end up putting you in opposition to choices people are making. You can be incredibly alone in a crowd of people. You can be empty when people are singing your praises. Meaning - is different simple social interaction. People can find their comfort zone of personal interaction is much smaller than others. TLDR: Treating it like a problem, results in bad suggestions. Treating it like a choice, suggests that one look at the options available to people. It may turn out that people aren’t hanging out at bars, but at home. Frankly, why wouldn’t people stay at home, if home is where they have put their time and effort into setting up. If you want a good place to find solutions, look to boredom and monotony. Do note - polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record.
- bruce343434 2y ago
  > polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record. What do you mean?
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    The Reformation is one famous example.
    - jfengel 2y ago
      Reformation was itself really about long-standing conflicts between countries/nationalities. Few people really care whether they are saved through faith alone or not, just as East and West weren't really having wars over whether "filioque" belongs in the Nicene Creed. The Internet does give ordinary people the opportunity to be mean to each other on a daily basis rather than having wars. I'm genuinely not sure that's an improvement, since at least people would think twice before going into combat. The level of desiring to harass each other seems roughly constant.
      - philwelch 2y ago
tmnvix 2y ago
I'm sure people will disagree on the significance, but I think it seems obvious that a society that encourages (and in some cases requires) its members to isolate themselves in mobile metal boxes is going to be more antisocial than one that doesn't.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  I think cars are a symptom of a philosophy, not the root cause.
  - pesus 2y ago
    I'd say they're both, and it feeds into itself.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      Fair
- pesus 2y ago
  I'm with you on this one, and I think my time living in a fairly walkable city vs. previously living in a non-walkable suburb really underscored this point for me personally. I'm failing at finding it via google, but I also recall a study that showed drivers tended to view other drivers/cars on the road not as a person in control of a vehicle, but rather an inanimate object, which I think further supports your point. If anyone has a link to the study, I'd be grateful.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I feel like there is a political side that loves and thinks it clever to shame car ownership or blame everything on cars because because of sone socialist nonsense or something. People have been very social up until 2000 perhaps even later and so-called “metal boxes” have been a big part of American life for a long time. There have even been times when cars were an integral part of socializing in many circles. I get it “America sucks and ancient cities on the Continent are superior” or whatever , but isn’t this kind an f a cliche take at this point?
bdangubic 2y ago
until people realize that “social” media is the root of most evil plauging society currently nothing will change. and people will not disconnect from “social” media because of pure addiction. my life is drastically different today since I’ve ditched ALL social media. unlike other addictions, this came without withdrawals (10-20 minutes on HN helps :) )
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I think you’re more on point than anyone else. Social media not working but affects connections but it hinders connections in both platonic and romantic relationship for so many reasons.

by nicd 2y ago

reducesuffering 2y ago

Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. We optimize for a big GDP number but never for a population happiness level.

Dracophoenix 2y ago
> How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Are they on anti-depressants because life has gotten worse or because of decreasing stigma resulting from greater accessibility to better-informed patients? Until the turn of the century, just mentioning you saw a shrink in any sincere capacity would get you funny looks in most parts of the country. > Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. There's an old joke where a reporter asks a bank robber why he robs banks. The latter's response: "Because, that's where the money is". The bank and bar of today is the Internet. It's what funds and facilitates most social ventures, even the ones that take place IRL. Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair.
- flenkzooz 2y ago
  I'm not sure I completely agree with your last assertion (except according to a very rigorous definition of "optimize"). While people do very much differ, there are certain things that predictably make the majority of people happier. Social connectedness, for example. We may not be able to truly optimize for these things, but I think we can reliably improve human wellbeing at scale. A successful example from the past would be the efforts to add more green spaces to cities. People like parks, and they're happier on average when they have access to them.
- brookst 2y ago
  Yeah increasing treatment of medical conditions seems like a very poor proxy for proving an increase in incidence.
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  > Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair. This right here is exactly what's wrong. People are put into impossible conditions and then blamed when they can't magically make themselves happy with the arrangement. Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy?
  - Dracophoenix 2y ago
    Happiness isn't self-induced solipsism. I don't claim that external conditions have no effect on individual happiness, but rather that external conditions do not uniformly or systematically determine an individual's happiness nor can one reliably use such conditions to extrapolate the happiness of others. A policy that addresses a so-called collective need often comes at the cost of individual agency and thus individual happiness. It is therefore, necessary to recognize that the domain of happiness and its relevant parameters does not belong to an abstract blob, but solely to the individual. > Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy? Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owner's house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content as they are well-fed.
    - throaway54 2y ago
      >Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owners house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content, as they are well-fed. Not if they are given a space which is too small and not stimulating enough for them, then they just pace around for their whole lives.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  Maybe an increased stigma was better? Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness, if you discount the former I think there are some examples.
  - Dracophoenix 2y ago
    > Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness The conditions that make someone miserable are just as variable. Some of the most content people possess little education and are mired in the throes of poverty. If you started a national misery program where the government impoverishes its population left and right, there would still be a minority who find enjoyment, even thrive, in such circumstances.
    - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
      I mean you are talking about anomalies which is not what people mean here. Obviously masochists exist but that’s not very interesting
cess11 2y ago
Capitalism can't reproduce itself through happy people. It needs enormous amounts of suffering to continue, and as a kid growing up you'll at some point notice this. At least you did, before the screens became dominant over reality.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  What does any of this mean? What is capitalist reproduction? How is any of that true? Does a system in which someone has a right to your labor somehow solve this?
  - cess11 2y ago
    It's an expression from economics. Do you disagree that societies reproduce themselves? We're living in a world system where almost all societies are based on the idea that one class of people has a right to the labour of almost all the rest. I'm not sure why you suggest furthering it is a solution to our current predicaments.
- eli_gottlieb 2y ago
  Modes of production are not modes of consumption. The system doesn't change if the "plastic trivia" companies go bankrupt from everyone suddenly growing a sense of thrift.
matrix87 2y ago
> 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Is it because they're emotionally worse off, or is it because pharma is advertising them more aggressively, kickbacks, etc
- reducesuffering 2y ago
  There are many studies showing US youth report feeling worse than previously. The CDC: "Youth in the U.S. are experiencing a mental health crisis." https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-health-numbers.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-healt... Increased pharma pushing is an easy scapegoat, but it would have to be making these youth more depressed before they were ever taking antidepressants. Social media and phones have been disconnecting real interactions and pushing people onto fake digital "connections." Then when people are more lonely than ever, we're now pushing them "AI bot connections" to help loneliness, purely because VC's see $ in it, basically giving desperate people soda to help their hunger.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I think social media even promotes this hyper therapy and medication seeking behavior. My guess it probably even creates a kind of Overton window sort of thing for physicians, big pharma notwithstanding. It’s very easy for people to get prescriptions for these drugs and a lot of doctors seem to think “patients reports depression so I prescribed SSRI” or whatever is popular.
  - harvodex 2y ago
    When I was 20, no one my age had got incredibly wealthy or famous who wasn't an actor or musician. It is like a hyper version of de Tocqueville now. No matter how poor someone is, they still don't feel that far from being rich and famous in America. This creates enormous status anxiety coupled with the reality of student loans and inflation it is a really bad deal for young people's mental health.
  - matrix87 2y ago
    yeah I see the same trend, at some point I just kinda decided to mentally slot all of those people into the stupid category, tune them out, and go on living
dinkumthinkum 2y ago
I totally agree with you but there is a lot of tech that is not social media related. But, that fact probably doesn’t change your quantitative observation.
watwut 2y ago
> 25% of US university students on antidepressants. You need to factor in alcohol and drug use rates for previous generations, crime rates of youth and so it. It is not that current situation is optimal, but when I was young, you would not get antidepressants even if you actually desperately needed it. The taboo against admitting even to yourself that you might have mental health issue was too high. Conservative minded people like to complain about lack of risk taking among youth ... but quite a lot of risk taking was pure self destruction or destruction of whoever you got pregnant (if you was a guy).

MathMonkeyMan 2y ago

The article recommends seeking out interactions with others even when (especially when) we would avoid it. I don't know how to make that a movement, but I'll be more mindful of it.

hansonkin 2y ago

I've been working on a project to solve the social connection problem using a new approach. In a post third space society, I want to make it easier for people to connect with others nearby in small groups around shared hobbies and activities. Having a small group size makes it easier to host at someone's place and it's also cheaper than going out. I did a soft launch earlier this week by posting on NYC subreddits to get early feedback and test out my hypothesis . The reaction has been very positive with many comments saying they like the concept. Obviously there's a long way to go to really nail down the product market fit and build a sustainable business around it but the early feedback makes me feel like there is really something there.

vaginicola 2y ago
Could help me find your reddit posts? I'm interested in learning more, but am having trouble locating them through search... I share your enthusiasm for making it easier for people to connect in person, focused around shared interests (incl. established online social networks). I'm sincerely concerned about the potential outcomes of our current and growing social isolation. That said, I believe that "third spaces" are still essential. Effective third spaces can provide safe, neutral ground for those who are unacquainted to get to know one another on their own terms. I think that the thought of inviting a strangers into your personal space is pretty uncomfortable to many people. I also think people want to get out of their cave every now and then--especially with the rise of work-from-home. I think the failure of traditional third spaces (cafes, bars, social clubs, libraries, etc.) has more to do with them being unable to adapt to the needs of modern society & socialization. My thought is that there needs to be a new type of third space which meets those needs. Perhaps something like WeWork, but geared towards the third space? Something that can adapt to and support the diverse interest/hobbies/networks that have come about due to the internet. Something that tics all of the "Great Good Place" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place) boxes and more. I have some ideas, but need to develop them further.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  A social crutch I really like is games. I’m terrible at talking to people, but I love playing competitive but social games. Stuff like chess boards, card games could go a long way.

jasdi 2y ago

Read the UN report on the Attention Economy. Everything is connected to Attention being over fished by platforms. The human pool of Attention is slow growing and finite (the limit being number of minutes in a day*people). Yet Content keeps exploding to infinity. Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In traditional economics, more money chasing the same goods = inflation. In the Attention Economy, more content chasing the same attention = engagement inflation (harder to get noticed, costs more to be seen). The real winners - Platforms, since they act like central banks controlling both supply (content) and demand (attention via algorithm). The Attention Economy behaves like a manipulated market where demand is fixed but distorted, and supply keeps increasing, benefiting the gatekeepers (platforms) while exhausting the participants (creators, advertisers, businesses, users). History teaches us where the story goes.

yesco 2y ago
> History teaches us where the story goes. Does it? When else has this happened before? Or do you just mean manipulated markets specifically?
robwwilliams 2y ago
> Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In some sense perhaps, but I now value my attention more since there is so much more competing for attention. Out with Twitter/X, in with Hacker News; out with daily papers, in with long news: Aeon and Atlantic and Foreign Affairs. And zero broadcast TV.
- 63 2y ago
  This requires conscious choice and some discipline though. For the average person, content competes for attention on their behalf before their conscious brain kicks in. Social media uses cheap tricks like rage bait that your local book club just can't compete with. Yes, an emotionally healthy person with some free time who enjoyed books as a child (already a minority of people it seems due to many factors) may choose the book club, but the higher barrier of entry just keeps most people from ever considering it. It's just so damn hard for any in-person activities to compete with instant gratification and addictive rage. In college in 2022, I was a member of several clubs with varying subjects and members. Every one of them struggled to get anyone to attend. The CS club hosted drone races and 3d printed model painting. The improv club had weekly themed meetings. The theater department hosted at least 1 large and 1 small show per semester and we couldn't even get people to sit in the audience. And this is college, where demands on participants' time are relatively lacking (compared to kids and a 9-5). I imagine a lot of social activities have failed to get members and then just ceased to exist as a result. Several of the clubs I was in no longer exist due to a lack of participants to take up leadership after my class graduated. Don't even get me started on how people talk and talk about causes they admire on the internet but then never actually volunteer their time to make anything better. I really think society has just fucked itself over by letting social media companies run rampant with our attention, feeding us lies and gossip that doesn't matter 24 hours later. I genuinely just don't know if most people can be conscious and disciplined enough to get themselves out of the trap. At the very least, it will take a few generations to develop new mores and standards and who knows what new tech will be around to ruin their lives by then. I find it hard to believe that anyone was ever hopeful about working in this industry.

intended 2y ago

Aren’t there many countries which are happily anti social? In any case - approaching this as if it is damage, will end up putting you in opposition to choices people are making. You can be incredibly alone in a crowd of people. You can be empty when people are singing your praises. Meaning - is different simple social interaction. People can find their comfort zone of personal interaction is much smaller than others. TLDR: Treating it like a problem, results in bad suggestions. Treating it like a choice, suggests that one look at the options available to people. It may turn out that people aren’t hanging out at bars, but at home. Frankly, why wouldn’t people stay at home, if home is where they have put their time and effort into setting up. If you want a good place to find solutions, look to boredom and monotony. Do note - polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record.

bruce343434 2y ago
> polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record. What do you mean?
- HPsquared 2y ago
  The Reformation is one famous example.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    Reformation was itself really about long-standing conflicts between countries/nationalities. Few people really care whether they are saved through faith alone or not, just as East and West weren't really having wars over whether "filioque" belongs in the Nicene Creed. The Internet does give ordinary people the opportunity to be mean to each other on a daily basis rather than having wars. I'm genuinely not sure that's an improvement, since at least people would think twice before going into combat. The level of desiring to harass each other seems roughly constant.
    - philwelch 2y ago

tmnvix 2y ago

I'm sure people will disagree on the significance, but I think it seems obvious that a society that encourages (and in some cases requires) its members to isolate themselves in mobile metal boxes is going to be more antisocial than one that doesn't.

BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
I think cars are a symptom of a philosophy, not the root cause.
- pesus 2y ago
  I'd say they're both, and it feeds into itself.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    Fair
pesus 2y ago
I'm with you on this one, and I think my time living in a fairly walkable city vs. previously living in a non-walkable suburb really underscored this point for me personally. I'm failing at finding it via google, but I also recall a study that showed drivers tended to view other drivers/cars on the road not as a person in control of a vehicle, but rather an inanimate object, which I think further supports your point. If anyone has a link to the study, I'd be grateful.
dinkumthinkum 2y ago
I feel like there is a political side that loves and thinks it clever to shame car ownership or blame everything on cars because because of sone socialist nonsense or something. People have been very social up until 2000 perhaps even later and so-called “metal boxes” have been a big part of American life for a long time. There have even been times when cars were an integral part of socializing in many circles. I get it “America sucks and ancient cities on the Continent are superior” or whatever , but isn’t this kind an f a cliche take at this point?

bdangubic 2y ago

until people realize that “social” media is the root of most evil plauging society currently nothing will change. and people will not disconnect from “social” media because of pure addiction. my life is drastically different today since I’ve ditched ALL social media. unlike other addictions, this came without withdrawals (10-20 minutes on HN helps :) )

dinkumthinkum 2y ago
I think you’re more on point than anyone else. Social media not working but affects connections but it hinders connections in both platonic and romantic relationship for so many reasons.