[HN Gopher] What if we talked about over-60s' screen time as we ... ___________________________________________________________________ What if we talked about over-60s' screen time as we talk about young people's? Author : okasaki Score : 256 points Date : 2022-11-23 20:15 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (webdevlaw.uk) (TXT) w3m dump (webdevlaw.uk) | JoeAltmaier wrote: | Really? We conflate the time spend by retired people with the | activities of the young and supposedly productive? | PartiallyTyped wrote: | Yes, because the consequences matter. | | Retired people have significantly more time, and thus have | significantly higher capacity to vote and influence society | even though they will not experience the long term consequences | of said influence. | | You ought to be worried about _who_ whispers _what_ from | sunrise to sundown. | | On the other hand, we should be very vigilant on the kind of | experiences kids get to have as those indirectly influence the | future of society. | notacoward wrote: | Not just over-60s, and not just TV screens. Yes, there are plenty | of people older than I am (at 57) who spend _way_ too much time | watching TV. There are also plenty of people right around my age | who spend all day listening to NPR or podcasts. Their eyes might | not be elsewhere, but their brains sure are. And you know who I | most often see actively using their phones _while driving_? Not | the kids, and not the old folks either. It 's the 40- and | 50-somethings, the tradespeople in pickups and the suburban | parents in minivans, flying down the road with their eyes glued | to a screen instead where they should be. Entertainment addiction | takes many forms, and the author makes a good point that the kids | with their phones aren't the only ones who deserve to be taken to | task for it. | tomcam wrote: | What TV do you watch? Streamed? Broadcast? Both? What are some | shows you like? I'm a senior but am stuck watching reruns of | "Justified", "Life", and "Tehran". | that_guy_iain wrote: | Over 60s are generally retired. With little money to do things. | Many end up with mobility issues. Watching tv is free and doesn't | require moving. | TedDoesntTalk wrote: | There seems to be no distinction between TV and gaming. It's all | just "screen time." But the distinction is VERY important. One | can be addictive. | ChoGGi wrote: | Both can be addictive. | thewebcount wrote: | While I disliked the tone of the piece, I mostly agree with the | sentiment. But this (very bitter) part just made me laugh: | | > But please, yes, tell me again about young people and screen | time and content and moral decay, and how the mobiles they're | engaging with are somehow a greater risk to their character than | their own parents and their own grandparents and the family | traditions they hold so dear, such as laughing in your face when | you suggest shared family mealtimes around a table, a suggestion | which might lead to talking to each other, listening to each | other, and being present in that shared moment with each other. | Tell me all about it. | | This sounds like something my parents would have said. We ate our | meal at a table in a room without screens. Nonetheless, my spouse | describes the meals I had with my family when we all lived | together as "psychological warfare," and I can't disagree. When | my parents tried to force us all to come together for anything, | we laughed in their faces because we hated being together. If | that's the reaction you get from your children, look inward. And | if your spouse won't help you figure it out, then you have at | least a partial answer. To this day I avoid interacting with my | family as much as possible because my parents couldn't keep the | household under control. They were arbitrary with their | punishments, and untrustworthy as far as confiding them with | thoughts and feelings. At best nothing would be done about it. At | worst, it would come back to bite you later. I didn't want to | talk to people in my family because the result was guaranteed to | be extremely painful. I suspect it was the same with the author's | children and husband. It sounds like she did the right thing by | getting out. | taurath wrote: | You really can't fake genuine emotional engagement and secure | attachment, and when those aren't there there are absolutely no | way to "force" it to happen. If your child doesn't feel safe | telling you about their hopes and dreams and their social | lives, forcing them to sit quietly at a dinner table is not | going to make those things happen, it will teach them instead | to both dread time with you and also to learn how to filter | everything they care about. | noasaservice wrote: | I'm one who did just that - my mom fell into the trap of qanon, | trumper, cultist, and worse bullshit. And every time I went over | there, she had that idiot box on, blaring foxnews propaganda. I | caught her more than a few times down a real rendition of 2 | minute hate from Orwell's 1984. | | So, I turned on the child filters on her tv and removed foxnews, | oann, and a few more. Is it ethical? Well, it's gray for sure. | But given how unhinged she was getting, sure, I'll take that hit. | ryandrake wrote: | > I caught her more than a few times down a real rendition of 2 | minute hate from Orwell's 1984. | | This is one thing I acutely remember about my grand-dad sitting | there watching endless conservative news on the TV: The red- | faced build-up and then vocal rage. These shows just hook onto | elderly people's emotions and gradually whirl them around in a | frenzy until they are visibly upset at "all these horrible | things the 'liberals' are doing". He would finally turn off the | TV absolutely disgusted at all these imagined problems and | conservative fever dreams, thinking he was watching actual | news. Pretty sad, and really nothing you can do about it unless | you physically intervened and started blocking antenna signals. | httpz wrote: | 30 years later, millennials will be on their smartphones while | complaining kids these days never come out of their VR world. | speakfreely wrote: | Nice try, zuck. | | In all seriousness, I suspect this is probably correct. I | imagine things will be very VR-oriented and Zuckerberg is | actually on the right track, just way too early. | Mountain_Skies wrote: | That someday EDM will be considered music for the elderly is | endlessly amusing. | a4isms wrote: | When I was first going to nightclubs, Disco and Funk were | counter-cultures. Disco was hated by the establishment | because it was associated with homosexuality at a time when | the Toronto police were conducting bath house raids and | arresting bookstores for carrying queer literature. Funk was, | as one documentary put it, "An unapologetic celebration of | blackness." | | Today I can listen to Disco and Funk any time I want, all I | have to do is push a shopping cart around the supermarket. | And yes, I turned 60 this year. | PaulHoule wrote: | Watch out! Over 60's vote and they can defend themselves from | your finger wagging and anyone who tries to make them feel | uncomfortable. | hindsightbias wrote: | The "boob tube" was common parlance back in the day, so all those | olds got it then. | | But we during commute, work and school all day we did not have a | phone in front of our face for 8 hours. I was watching a roofing | crew awhile back and the number of times someone pulled their | phone out was startling. | | That said, here is a free YC startup idea: tiktok for olds. | Scrape all those old shows and build memes. | Tao3300 wrote: | I feel like the article started off about one thing and turned | into something else. | | "Marital family" seems like an unusual way to describe the | arrangement, predicting a degree of distance that has nothing to | do with TV under the surface. | malfist wrote: | The average 65 year old consumes 6 HOURS of TV a day? Jesus. No | wonder they have a warped perception of politics. That little | fearbox is controlling their lives. | brandonmenc wrote: | > No wonder they have a warped perception of politics. That | little fearbox is controlling their lives. | | Ah yes, unlike us enlightened younger people who choose to | spend our time in fancy online echo chambers. | AmericanChopper wrote: | My grandma probably watches about that much TV, but it's mostly | quiz shows and live sports. Not sure I'd leap to the same | conclusion as you here. | glitchc wrote: | Your grandma watches live sports? So unusual and yet so | intriguing. Which ones are her favourites? | AmericanChopper wrote: | Cricket, tennis and rugby union are her favourites. But | she'll watch whatever's on if there's nothing better to do. | She's loving the World Cup at the moment... | | Edit: Incase anybody's wondering, I don't think Symbiote | and I have the same grandma. But I don't know for certain. | Symbiote wrote: | My grandma would watch cricket (which is the whole 6 hours | sometimes...), snooker, tennis, cycling and Formula 1. | | My dad would watch the cricket by seeing the TV to the | Teletext page for the score, and watching it refresh every | minute. (If you're young or from America, this is life | watching a Web page refresh.) There is only slightly less | movement than watching actual cricket. | [deleted] | aaron695 wrote: | louison11 wrote: | Sad indeed. Many people waste the last 2-3 decades of their | lives on TV. I'm not entirely sure why, but an assumption is | that they prob didn't live a very sovereign life in their | younger years, have grown increasingly disconnected from | themselves through life, and by the time they're older have | completely lost track of what makes them come alive/is healthy. | chrisseaton wrote: | I wonder what counts as 'watching'. Like if you measured it I | probably spend ten hours a day 'listening' to the radio - as in | it's on in the background in the kitchen most of the time. I'm | not sitting there intently listening to it and not doing | anything else. Probably the same for this TV statistic. | _-david-_ wrote: | Do you really think watching TV vs internet usage really | different for warping political views? | EamonnMR wrote: | I think that video media is for reasons I cannot explain, a | far more effective persuasive tool than written media. If | your internet diet is YouTube/TikTok you're definitely just | as vulnerable. | _-david-_ wrote: | I think we are agreeing. I think many people who consume a | lot of TV media would be the same people who consume a lot | of YouTube or TikTok. If the internet didn't exist heavy | YouTube users would be watching hours of TV. This causes me | to think the problem isn't so much TV causing distortions, | but other factors that are not unique to TV. | BirdieNZ wrote: | Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman addresses this; | it's more or less pre-internet but it speaks to how | different media forms work quite differently due to their | inherent nature. TV inherently is the way it is (and | lectures, and newspapers, and all other forms of media) | because it cannot be anything else. | malfist wrote: | I think they're both a contributing factor. But I think long | viewership of one channel is particularly dangerous. When you | watch something like Fox news or MSNBC, you're getting only | voices in your echo chamber and perspectives from one company | alone. | | The internet has somewhat of the opposite problem, it has an | echo chamber for every niche, and gives a platform to every | voice. | | I think spending more time with people, or in projects is a | much more healthy way to entertain yourself, and doesn't as | easily lead to view distortion. | _-david-_ wrote: | You can be in just as much of an echo chamber online. I | think you are overestimating how much people really expand | themselves online (or maybe I'm underestimating it). I know | a lot of people who basically just get the same as Fox or | MSNBC, but online. If they see something they don't like | they block the user or unfriend their friends if they start | pushing politics they don't like. | | I guess my real question is if there is just a problem with | being in an echo chamber or if TV is uniquely worse. | seattle_spring wrote: | It has the potential to be different, absolutely. | notch656a wrote: | You and I are having a conversation about politics. I assume | you think you have some fairly moderate views and you aren't | being funded by a media mogul with billions of dollars. | | How would you and I talk over the TV? | | IMO unidirectional media is worse in a lot of ways; it trains | the counterparty they have no say and they are a passive | receiver of information with the only speakers being an | extremely narrow selection of paid parties. | _-david-_ wrote: | How many people actually use the comments vs just consuming | the content? Even if many people read the comments (which I | doubt) the majority of the comments aren't insightful and | don't provide any contradiction to the point of the video. | I don't have any evidence, but I think this may even make | things worse. Since many people like to be apart of the | crowd if all they are seeing is everybody agreeing it could | solidify their views. | | Also, when it comes to TV and radio some shows have callers | to the show. It does make it interactive and can provide | alternative points. This appears to be falling out of favor | though. | orwin wrote: | Also, written media is inherently superior to animated | media in my opinion, if you want something else than | entertainment and factoids. | | I mean, i like alternative history, and even history | channels on youtube or the television. But i would never | form an opinion from them. I would rather read, even old | and criticized Paxton books, because i know i would stumble | on some stuff, sometimes rightly, often not, and the | lecture of newer books will confirm, or infirm my original | thought, and allow me to form better one (not a WW2 nerd by | the way (i really prefer the 16th to 19th), but i think | Paxton should be the most read historian on a non history- | focused forum. And he was my entry point into the science). | dislikedtom2 wrote: | Same goes for twitter. Gosh I hope nobody uses 6 hours of | twitter a day. | sys_64738 wrote: | Retired folk have lots of time on their hands so can watch as | much TV as they want. They also don't need to be told by others | how to spend their remaining years. | tomcam wrote: | > Meanwhile, those aged 65 and over spend just under six hours on | average watching TV daily. | | Wait people are still watching broadcast TV? | | I guess if you're a pensioner in the UK who doesn't have to pay | the license it makes sense. Though 6 hours, even of the Beeb, | seems a bit nightmarish. | beardyw wrote: | My wife and I are over 70. We live in the UK. | | It's fun to generalise, but not always helpful. No, we don't | watch anything like 6 hours of TV a day. We have our evening | meal, like every meal, at a table. We mostly watch one thing a | day on streaming, usually well made fiction. We read news on our | phones but never watch it on TV because of all the uninformed | comment. | | Maybe we are not typical, but we do exist. | [deleted] | UncleEntity wrote: | When I was a kid they were similar concerns about kids spending | too much time in front of the TV... | | And in the 90s about kids spending too much time in front of the | Xboxen. | | Have to ask my parents what they were worried about in the 50s, | probably too much time reading books. | ianmcgowan wrote: | Listening to too much degenerate Rock and Roll on the radio. | wetmore wrote: | Just because similar concerns existed does not make them | invalid. I was a 2000s kid who spent far too much time playing | videogames and on the computer. If I could give my past self | advice against doing so, I would in a heartbeat. | sibeliuss wrote: | As if TV was even remotely related to spending all day scrolling | through social media. There's no comparison between the two. | Mountain_Skies wrote: | True, tv doesn't alter its content on the fly minute-by-minute, | using an algorithm tuned to your own personal emotional | triggers. | googlryas wrote: | I feel sorry for this lady. Sounds like she had a very boring | home life centered around the TV. But that doesn't mean the | screen time panic is necessarily wrong, though it is reductive in | the sense that it treats all screen time as equal. Chatting with | friends is the same as watching cat videos is the same as using | MITs OCW is the same as watching porn is the same as popping | virtual bubble wrap is the same as reading War and Peace on the | kindle app. Likewise, some TV programming can be thoughtful and | inspiring and other tv programming can be bland and mind numbing. | [deleted] | nottorp wrote: | I've always wondered how someone can talk about the perils of | mobile phones and then binge watch lousy TV series. | willhinsa wrote: | "Las Vegas pre-COVID" | | https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRC14TaE/ | | reference for anyone who doesn't want to click on a tiktok link: | | https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-people-playing-slots | softwaredoug wrote: | Do as I say, not as I do. | | Parents waste time on their phones, so the kids learn to as well. | I say this as a parent that struggles to regulate my screen time | and my kids. | | Putting it on the kids is a form of projection. It's hard to hold | our own shame and feel it. And easier to try and control others | behavior. | | The better conversation is why do we put so much shame into | screentime given the power and ubiquity of computing? The, at | best, the extremely marginal causal negative effects of | screentime on children's outcomes? Why don't we focus on things | that actually impact kids outcomes like Adverse Childhood | Experiences (abuse, etc)? | ortusdux wrote: | I've been hearing more and more anecdotal stories about children | blocking their parents access to Fox, OANN, etc. via parental | controls and wifi routers. | | https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/yz7y... | mensetmanusman wrote: | I wonder how many realize that censoring information is a human | habit as old as time? | bogwog wrote: | That's actually a really good idea. Someone should sell a pi | hole like box preconfigured to block all those | aggressive/conspiratorial sites. Maybe make it discrete too, | like a small box you plug into an outlet hidden behind some | furniture. | gspencley wrote: | My children are adults now, but when they were growing up we | wanted them to pursue productive creative endeavours so that they | could learn life skills and figure out what they want to do with | their lives. Our goal was to help them achieve self-sufficiency | so that they could move out and feed themselves. | | I'm not 65 yet, but once I am I hope that others will recognize | my productive achievements and will leave me the hell alone to do | whatever I want to with the rest of my limited time here on | earth. If that means sitting on my ass doing nothing - that's my | choice and my right. | | It's not hypocrisy. A child and a retiree are not even remotely | comparable. One is accountable to their parents, the other has | likely worked their ass off for decades to earn a bit of down | time. | NoraCodes wrote: | It's hard not to interpret this as a kind of "youth is wasted | on the young" sentiment - that children shouldn't be allowed to | do things they enjoy if those things are seen as wasteful, but | that retirees should. I'd submit that society might be better | off if we only required people to work to a degree reasonable | for their mental and physical health, and didn't frame our | entire lives around "getting somewhere" so we could finally be | left alone. That might mean profits stop growing quite as | quickly, but I think that's a fair trade for people actually | being happier. | ChrisMarshallNY wrote: | Better yet, why not snuff people when they get to 30? | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run_(film) | ar_lan wrote: | I think the same thing. The concept of retiring early has | never made sense to me - but I enjoy writing software, and | building things, and learning things, etc. Financial | independence _does_ make sense to me, but only in-so-much | that I want to be able to generally provide for my family, | and have enough slight cushion to be able to take drastic | creative risks and not have to starve to do so. | | I don't mind if I'm working when I'm 70/80 (as long as I'm | physically capable to) - I do mind if I'm slogging 60hr | weeks, doing things I'm not interested in, at those ages | however. | ChrisMarshallNY wrote: | I'm "retired," but that's mostly because I ran into a bunch | of the types of folks that have been adding to the comments | on this story, and gave up on looking for work. | | I won't go, where I'm not wanted. | | Best damn thing that ever happened to me. I "retired" at | 55, and have been more productive, in the last five years, | than I probably was, in the previous 20. It's amazing what | happens when you don't have clueless, jargon-addled middle | managers, interfering with the projects, and destroying | work productivity. | | The coroner is gonna need to rub "YTIa3W[?]" off my cheek. | nradov wrote: | People can already choose to work less for mental and | physical health reasons. Just move to a low cost area and do | the bare minimum work to obtain necessities. | | But people who want a nice large house, luxury cars, new | electronics, and fancy vacations are going to have to work | harder in ways that might not be optimal for health. Most | middle class people seem to be voluntarily willing to make | that trade, and you're not going to convince them otherwise. | | For society as a whole, growing profits represent an overall | increase in living standards (although the benefits are | unevenly distributed). If we were to collectively decide that | current living standards are sufficient and stop trying to | grow then we might have easy, pleasant lives for a couple | generations but would eventually be overrun by more growth- | oriented foreign societies. Life is a competitive sport and | we ignore that reality at our peril. There are more important | things than happiness. | Karrot_Kream wrote: | > It's hard not to interpret this as a kind of "youth is | wasted on the young" sentiment - that children shouldn't be | allowed to do things they enjoy if those things are seen as | wasteful, but that retirees should. | | This seems like a motivated conclusion. Children and retirees | are not the same. Children are flexible and lack life | experience. Small events leave large imprints on children. | Older folks tend to get less flexible with age and have lots | of life experience, so an understanding of what they do and | do not enjoy. While there's definitely similarities (we're | all human after all), I don't see this conclusion following | at all. | | That doesn't mean that retirees _should_ simply passively | consume low-complexity content or anything. More that older | folk will generally understand themselves, their habits, and | importantly their weaknesses better than children. Many | "retirees" spend their days doing their best work | unencumbered by the self-doubt and expectations they had of | themselves when they were young. | sgustard wrote: | There's also something childlike about elders as they | experience mental decline. There's a reason we try to protect | people from "elder scams." Personally I hope if I'm found in | front of the TV absorbing conspiracy theories for hours a day | somebody clocks me on the head and drags me to safety. | onecommentman wrote: | How many hours a day do _you_ spend on various social media | being manipulated by dark patterning, agitprop and echo | chambers...eh, Sonny? :-) Are you sure _you're_ staying | balanced and objective? | | Just easier to ID manipulative media when you aren't the | target demographic (and it isn't your flavor of conspiracy). | It's not necessarily age-driven, but you're right that the | isolation of age and the relative lack of trusted feedback | makes it worse. | | Please post your viewing habits so the Elders can assess | whether they should send someone to perform preventive | percussive maintenance on _your_ skull. :-) | waboremo wrote: | Especially as more "elder scams" resort to tapping into their | loneliness to encourage action, it's important families and | communities pay more attention to this growing problem of | elders attached to their screens. | bumby wrote: | I think this misses the productivity aspect of the parent's | comment. Conceivably, there is a bigger productivity hit with | young people since the assumption may be that retired | people's most productive years are behind them * | | * I do recognize all the problems with this assumption, like | the fact that older people can continue to be productive in | retirement, even if it's not necessarily economically | productive. I also cringe at the idea that a society is | always hyper-focused on productivity. Despite all that, I | also know it's a common viewpoint. | bobthepanda wrote: | To some degree, we kind of caused this, because we've | structured work society where we essentially burn out by | the time we're 65. | | Before the advent of old age systems like pensions or | Social Security elders mostly suffered through high elderly | poverty rates. The current system is certainly better, | because elders are not starving or forcing themselves into | sex work to pay for food and medical bills [1] but now it | turns out being too idle might also be problematic. | | I know in Japan, there are attempts to address this with | organizations that hire seniors to do part time jobs like | sweeping and cleaning. It mostly serves as an optional | supplement to income and it gets them out of the house if | they're alone. But the way we run cleaning operations in | the US is also to run people down to the bone. | | [1] - This is a thing in South Korea where elder poverty is | much higher than the rest of the OECD due to a very bare | social net. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacchus_Ladies | ClumsyPilot wrote: | > will leave me the hell alone to do whatever I want to with | the rest of my limited time here on earth. | | Many elders are left to wither away alone, and loneliness of | older people is a rampant issue - they want to feel loved or at | least feel relevant in the family and not forgotten. | bawolff wrote: | I find the view that productive achievements are a chore, a | thing, that once accomplished, thankfully we never have to do | again, kind of sad. | | What's the point of living if not to interact with the world? | myaccount9786 wrote: | I disagree that consuming media and participating online is | not "interacting with the world". I spend a lot of my free | time reading Wikipedia, watching YouTube, and playing games. | This content comes from "the world". At my job I sit in front | of a computer and interact with people via text and voice | call. This is interacting with "the world". | | I don't understand why we fetishize in-person interaction as | being "the world" and virtual interaction as "not the world". | | What about reading books? Would you criticize someone for | reading too many books? Does that person not have a "point in | living" in your opinion? | | In my opinion, this is a true Scotsman fallacy. And the bias | is due to nostalgia. | myaccount9786 wrote: | That being said, I think there is a general bias in | American culture towards "making something of yourself", | which results in the act of participating in non-productive | activities (ex: "mindless tv" such as gameshows, | infomercials) as something which you need an excuse to do. | For example: "I need to de-stress so I can be productive | tomorrow". When you get old, this excuse is no longer | possible. Which is why folks refer to vegetating like this | as "sad". | | A hedonistic/utilitarian framework is a better model to | look at these situations. Is that elderly individual | enjoying themselves? Yes. Will their inaction today result | in negative consequences (financial, health, etc.) later in | life? No. In this framework, it's a perfectly good use of | their time then. | | As a redneck, I love America. But I think this question | posed by the OP is interesting because it shows the | tradeoff everyone must make in American culture between | exercising individual freedoms and increasing social | credit/value/standing. | oblio wrote: | > This is interacting with "the world". | | To each their own, but no, it's not the world. We're made | for real, in person interaction. Huge chunks of our brains | are made to discern subtle facial details or body | movements. | | I remember there are studies that socialization is good | even for introverts. They think it isn't, but it is. | | We're social creatures by design, it's built very deep into | us. To try otherwise is foolish for 99.9999% of people. Of | course, everyone thinks they're that 1 person in a | million:-) | MouseTown wrote: | How about raising children with the stated goal of having | them move out? | bawolff wrote: | I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I'm not suggesting | you should do the same productive achievement all your | life. Life changes and so should your goals as time moves | on. | | Also, why are you having children if your only goal is to | get rid of them? Yes, part of having children is hoping and | preparing for them to eventually be independent adults, but | that's hardly the only thing raising children is about. | MouseTown wrote: | You have the "right" as much as the next person but society is | most benefited from those with experience helping those | without. | | The argument that you deserve to watch TV all day because you | once had a job is curious. | gspencley wrote: | > The argument that you deserve to watch TV all day because | you once had a job is curious. | | How so? I think you're missing the most important part of my | comment, which was about encouraging children to discover | their passions and achieve self-sufficiency. | | It's not about "once holding a job." It's about being able to | take care of yourself. I'm not saying that I like the idea of | spending the latter part of my years being unproductive, but | that the wealth accrued during those productive years gives | one the ability to do that. | | If I'm not dependent on anyone, if I worked and saved in | order to earn that life for myself, then yes I deserve to | pursue my own happiness whatever that means for me and it's | no one else's business or place to dictate otherwise. | dylan604 wrote: | Then by your argument, there should be no young teachers as | what the hell kind of experiences could they possibly have to | teach? | vkou wrote: | Most of the job of a teacher is being a publicly appointed | babysitter. | | Much of the rest is teaching the basics, which, as a | functional adult, they should have decades of experience | with. | oneoff786 wrote: | Teachers don't teach experiential knowledge | Zagill wrote: | Probably all of the experience they gained by getting a | degree and becoming certified to teach, for a start | gus_massa wrote: | Most people while you are working, save money in the | retirement plan. So when they retire, they are just using the | money they saved, not living out ot thin air. | | In some jobs, old people can still contribute. But other jobs | like that require a lot of physical strength are almost | impossible. | | An extreme case are sports. After some age, your body is just | not good enough. Some can transition to being a coach or | reporter. Some are only good at kicking a ball. If they are | good enough to make millions of people happy, why can't they | save some of the money they earn and have a nice life? | kevinventullo wrote: | Okay deal, we'll leave you alone if you promise not to vote. | lmm wrote: | Children are more stressed and have less free time than anyone | else; it's not their fault that they're legally barred from | doing anything "productive". They're not even allowed to vote | on the laws that bind them! | taurath wrote: | > It's not hypocrisy. A child and a retiree are not even | remotely comparable. One is accountable to their parents, the | other has likely worked their ass off for decades to earn a bit | of down time. | | Interesting that the perceived needs of people change over time | based on how productive they are or were. This belies a sort of | strangely managerial/administrative mindset as to the values | that make a person "valid" to take time to pursue things they | enjoy, and "earn" down time. | yamazakiwi wrote: | I do agree that they are difficult to compare directly as the | scenarios are quite different. I can also say that your | attitude towards raising children is the minority, most parents | will let a tv or tablet babysit for them unfortunately. | thenerdhead wrote: | I like this perspective. It reads like the Ben Franklin quote: | "Many young men die at age 25, but are not buried until they're | 75." | thwayunion wrote: | My MiL spends 10+ hours a day watching conspiracy theory videos | on the internet (used to be YouTube, but now a lot of the | channels are suspended so she uses alternative sites). It | doesn't make her happy, it isn't good for her physical health, | and it causes extreme social isolation. | | Anger and conspiracy completely dominate her personality. We | can't go more than 10-20 minutes without some sort of serious | accusation, which are often passive-aggressive and accusatory | toward people in the room. She has directly accused me of | multiple serious felonies and conspiracies, by virtue of the | fact that I work in tech. | | She is no longer allowed to visit one of her daughters because | my BiL (wife's sister's husband?) is not on speaking terms with | her. She chooses not to visit another daughter. She floats | around church social groups, who all sort of give her a few | months and then punt her to the next group. | | To be clear: these aren't down to major political | disagreements. Most of her family and friend group are all on | the same page. Even her Q Anon neighbor won't speak with her | anymore. It's bad. She has no friends and is slowly losing her | family. | | When she visits us for holidays we have to warn friends not to | engage with the fights she tries to pick. We train them on how | to treat her as they would a child without being patronizing. | It's hard. | | She is not happy, and I wish we could get her to spend less | time watching videos on the internet. | satvikpendem wrote: | There are stories of adult children deprogramming their | parents / in-laws by blocking these sites via their routers, | and within a few weeks they're able to see their parents' | views and demeanor visibly change for the positive. | | The truth is most people don't really go to these sites out | of choice, they do it out of habit. If you can alter the | habit, you can stop them from consuming such content. It's no | different that stopping any other habit, like (if you're a | smoker or alcoholic) not going to places where people smoke | for example. | | https://old.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/comments/vb3ddu/rhe. | .. | neura wrote: | I have a relative like this, but she watches absolutely | nothing. She believes some of her family members are out to | get her though. She's in an assisted living facility and her | phone has been taken away because she has called the police | too many times, claiming that one of her family members is | breaking in her window, to poison her. | | I'm not claiming that's the same thing, but I'm not sure less | time watching videos will correct the issue or won't just | lead to some other issue. | ajsnigrutin wrote: | I find it sad, that you can find such stuff on discovery | network channels... so channels that were for legit education | and documentaries not that long ago, and now show some | reality crap (pawn stars,...) and fake conspiracy crap | (ancient aliens, mermaids, bigfoot, etc.). | ClumsyPilot wrote: | > bigfoot | | That particular one offends me the most - we went from 0.3 | megapixels to 300 and it's still fucking blurry | kristianc wrote: | There is something to this -- the general theme of daytime TV | in Britain, when it's not doing endless property shows, or | shows where people buy property in other countries, is "the | man is out to get you" -- a litany of shows on small time | criminals, consumer scams, or local crime waves. Perhaps not | surprisingly, Britain's elderly population tends to be very | right wing. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | > a litany of shows on ... consumer scams | | That sounds like it could be good to be aware of, came | across so many acams myself, most prosperous industry after | brexit | _jal wrote: | In the 80s, US AM radio was taken over by similar content. | It is happening again with local news, both broadcast and | "print". | | Seems to be the fate of declining media modalities. | jeffbee wrote: | > accused me of multiple serious felonies and conspiracies, | by virtue of the fact that I work in tech. | | You can't use this site for an hour without that happening | right here. | Gordonjcp wrote: | > She floats around church social groups, who all sort of | give her a few months and then punt her to the next group. | | My teenager and her friends know someone like this who they | described as "speedrunning friendships", and honestly that's | the best description you're going to hear. | thwayunion wrote: | It's even worse. She _cycles_ through, as in multiple times | with each group. The church knows her issues, so they cycle | her through 3-4 small groups for a few months at a time so | that she 's included and taken care of but not overly | burdensome on any particular group of people. | Gordonjcp wrote: | The patience of saints. Good to know that someone's | keeping an eye on her, I guess. | onecommentman wrote: | My impression is that there have been "cranky paranoid old | pensioners" around since the dawn of time. I wouldn't ascribe | your MiL's attitude or behaviors primarily to on-line videos | or TV. They've been ranting in fraternal lodges, political | party offices, coffeehouses, etc. for many hundreds of years | prior. Twas ever thus. Keeps the circulation flowing for old | folks. | | If you can find someone her age who shares her "disruptive" | world-views and likes arguing, facilitating a _folie-a-deux_ | might make things better for all concerned. Older folks tend | to become more blunt and uncensored as time progresses and | they also accept blunt and uncensored feedback...but | generally only from those in their own age group. Of course, | then there are two of them :-). | | If it gets really bad, then a (surreptitious?) evaluation for | some degenerative brain disorder probably needs to happen. | Count your blessings, it isn't that bad yet and as a SiL you | are blissfully distant from the need to initiate anything. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | > I wouldn't ascribe your MiL's attitude or behaviors | primarily to on-line videos or TV | | The social network rahe machine feeds your inherent fears | like a drug dealer feeds off those in desperate or dead end | life situation. They are somewhere between exploiting for | profit an existing condition, or creating / worsening it. | vkou wrote: | I have a close friend who is in that exact same situation | with his mother. She lost her job, her husband lost his job, | she's representing herself in a vaccine lawsuit (Spoilers: | it's not going well), and she is completely incapable of | being a human being around her children, all of it because | she's fully committed to the Qult. | | This isn't advanced age mental decline, this is just the | consequence of a garbage-in-garbage-out information diet, and | every nutty group building their own Facebook echo chamber. | rapind wrote: | > This isn't advanced age mental decline, this is just the | consequence of a garbage-in-garbage-out information diet. | | I'm not goong to excuse crappy behaviour, but given that | they both lost their job I think we can assume the economy | is also a contributing factor (not claiming it's the sole | factor though). | vkou wrote: | They lost their jobs in 2021, because they, among other | things, thought that someone who has taken the COVID | vaccine 'emits particles that damage the female body'. | (They would not allow their son into their house for | months after he was vaccinated.) | | The economy was not the problem last year, unassailable | certainty in ignorant beliefs was. They have new jobs | now, which are harder, and much worse paying. | rapind wrote: | Just wanted to acknowledge your response. Don't really | have anything to add though. Probably a whole bunch of | contributing factors /shrug. | SargeDebian wrote: | You mean the economy that is facing a worker shortage has | caused them to lose their job? | rapind wrote: | Is it a worker shortage or a wage shortage though? | the_lonely_road wrote: | A 55 year old losing their 100k job and facing only | minimum wage offers that replaces 30% of their income is | a sad reality for a lot of Americans right now. There is | not a worker shortage in every area of the economy just | in the economy as a whole. | SQueeeeeL wrote: | I love the idea of forcing a fired 59 year old mid level | executive to suddenly serve coffee at a Dunkin Donuts, | and shouting at them asking "Why aren't you happy with | this job!?!" | | Realistically, the reason we have a worker shortage is | because all the jobs are non-unionized shit jobs that | treat you like a meat puppet and actively abuse you | [deleted] | jonny_eh wrote: | DougN7 wrote: | I don't understand where this sentiment comes from. Don't | vote?? It's not like being tired is being dead. The status of | the world/country/society still impacts older people too. | chrsig wrote: | Karunamon wrote: | Replace "boomers" with any other demographic group if you | wish to understand why this is an ugly statement to be | making. | | Hint: it isn't because "boomers" are more vulnerable to | misinformation | bawolff wrote: | > Hint: it isn't because "boomers" are more vulnerable to | misinformation | | Is this actually true though? Well all demographics are | vulnerable to misinformation, seniors do seem on average | somewhat easier to manipulate. There is a reason that | scams often target seniors, it isn't because all groups | are equally susciptible to manipulation. | dylan604 wrote: | It's lovely to see that the youth of today know | everything just like the youth of your day (my day, | whatevs). The boomers get made fun of by the kids because | they don't know tech, but the kids don't want to admit | that they fall prey to the similar | scams/conspiracies/blah just because it comes from some | influencer. | [deleted] | mitchdoogle wrote: | What's doing whatever you want have to do with voting? You | suggesting that people who have leisure time shouldn't be | voting? | bawolff wrote: | I dont agree with the setiment, but i think the logical | connection is the social contract of voting: in exchange | for the right to chose leaders, the citizenry are expected | to be informed voters. I suspect the parent post is | allegeding that those who watch tv all day are remiss in | their duties as an elector. | Mountain_Skies wrote: | Sounds like the justification that was used to deny the | right to vote to people, mostly minorities, that couldn't | pass a poll test. | bawolff wrote: | Or like the current justification for why non-citizens | cant vote. | | But yes, i agree it is a very easily abused slipery slope | and why i dont agree with the sentiment except in a | hortatory sense. | tomcam wrote: | I love kids being addicted to screens. Bored teenagers are less | likely to incite trouble on trains, waiting in line, etc. when | they can just be rocking out or Snapchatting. | seydor wrote: | Until rioting becomes a meme | paganel wrote: | > I've never understood the sanctimony about the need to | "protect" young people from excessive screen time | | Supposedly a person already in his 60s or 70s already has the | best parts of his life behind him, he can spend how many hours he | wants in front of the TV. At the same time, a person in his 20s | still has a lot of life to, well, live, it definitely seems like | it is wasted if said life is spent in front of a phone screen. If | it matters I'm a person in my early 40s and I spend almost no | time in front of the TV (not even Netflix), although I do spend | too much time in front of my computer. | throwaway22032 wrote: | The idea here seems to be that it's OK for people to watch hours | of TV a day every day. | | I find it amusing that they consider TV-watching "the traditional | British way". It's the traditional working class British way, | sure. It's a status symbol here to _not_ have a TV, or to have a | tiny one like 15" in a large room. | | The issue is really that doing _anything_ mindlessly is a waste | of life. TV, flicky flicky lighty box things like TikTok, and | World of Warcraft enable that in exactly the same way. | | And yeah, I played years of that shit when I was younger. A | complete waste. Am I still here? Sure. Did it have some minor | benefits? Sure. Would I recommend it? No, huge waste of time. | | There's also an enormous difference here in that older people | often can't really do much else. My grandma finds it difficult to | read books because her eyesight is going and lots of physical | pursuits are out for obvious reasons. Cosying up in front of the | TV is comfortable for a woman living out the end of her days. | paulcole wrote: | > The issue is really that doing _anything_ mindlessly is a | waste of life | | So? It's your life and what's a waste to you isn't a waste to | me. I watch about 15 hours of TikTok a week and love it. | slothtrop wrote: | Everything is a waste. The only issue as it pertains to well- | being is that too much passive consumption is both unhealthy | and leads to lethargy. It can have it's place. Some people seem | to enjoy it more than others. | morepork wrote: | I don't think it's fair to judge what is a "waste of life" or | not. What one wants to do with their own life is a subjective | thing. Each have their own interests, comfort zones, and | personal struggles that they have to deal with. | luckylion wrote: | Waste is waste, that's not a judgement about the person | wasting something, it's a description of what's happening. | | If you throw away food, you're wasting it. You might be | allergic to it, but that doesn't change the "thrown-away food | is food-waste" bit, it just explains why you don't want that | food around. | Karrot_Kream wrote: | Then can you come up with a rigorous definition of "waste" | here that others would agree with? Definitions usually | require consensus. | afarrell wrote: | Resources spent which, after their consumption, do not | result in an experience which a human would look back | upon with fondness or gratitude. | cpsns wrote: | Probably not, because video game addicts will not admit | they have an issue, much less one that wastes valuable | time. | willis936 wrote: | I'm wasting my life working on world changing problems when | I could be spending it playing WoW. | luckylion wrote: | Doesn't it get incredible repetitive and boring with | time? You get a new extension/DLC and you have a few new | things to discover and monsters to slay or whatever, and | then it's back to farming gold? | | At that point, you're probably 'playing' it because of | the social interaction with other people, aren't you? | willis936 wrote: | I'm playing devil's advocate. I haven't actually played | much WoW, but I have spent a long time thinking about | escapism with a critical eye. It's one of my biggest | regrets. | | I encourage people to waste their time. I was the | happiest when I had free time to putz around with games | and hobbies. I made stuff for the joy of it. I wouldn't | wish a successful career on my worst enemy. | | I don't see any utility in distinguishing between flavors | of escapism. Why would productivity make a judge say one | waste of time is better than another? Because that judge | doesn't see the value in wasting time and the ones with | creativity seem more like work and less like fun. | luckylion wrote: | I don't think that everything "non-productive" is | "wasting time", but wasting time is by definition not | productive. | | It's the difference between sleeping so you can be awake | and putting yourself into a dreamless coma because you | can't think of anything better to do. Watching TV (and | not having it play in the background while you're doing | something else) is the equivalent of a coma. | markdestouches wrote: | There are two different types of "want". You want to live a | full and meaningful life. You also want another cigarette if | you're addicted to smoking. Sure there are people who would | consciously choose a cigarette, but they are a minority. Most | people would rather be productive and do something that makes | their lives better even if they end up lighting a cigarette. | ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: | You're already positioning yourself in a very specific | value framework when you put productivity and self- | improvement at the forefront. There are many other | frameworks in which finding pleasure in the present has | value. | | I've known people who chased the future so hard they never | took the time to live. | dools wrote: | So if they had watched more TV would that have | constituted "taking the time to live"? | ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: | If watching TV had brought them pleasure in the present, | yes that would fit the definition I was using. | sneak wrote: | Consider a moment the framework where people's actions tell | the truth about their true wants, and the possibility that | many people constantly and effortlessly tell lies (to | themselves and others) about what they actually want. | yamazakiwi wrote: | Don't confuse output with productivity. | | You can also do "productive" things while you smoke a | cigarette (albeit physically unhealthy). | | Many people do a lot of things they think are productive | but see no improvement in outcomes. i.e. reading articles | bscphil wrote: | > Many people do a lot of things they think are | productive but see no improvement in outcomes. i.e. | reading articles | | Or to put a different spin on this, some people spend so | much time producing things that they never pick up a | book. | skellertor wrote: | Speaking about wasting time! Reading that article was a waste | of time. That was more of a journal entry of a woman | disgruntled with her family life, than it was on the "screen | time" of various age groups | jodrellblank wrote: | > " _The idea here seems to be that it 's OK for people to | watch hours of TV a day every day._" | | No, the idea is that it's unfair for people who watch 6 hours | of TV/day to be trying to support authoritarian and intrusive | legislation against young people on the grounds that the young | people "spend too much time watching screens, which is bad for | them and bad for society". The idea isn't "it's OK to watch 6 | hours of TV", it's "if you want to be left alone to watch 6 | hours of TV, stop trying to control the life of someone else | who wants to be left alone to watch 6 hours of TikTok". | | > " _The issue is really that doing _anything_ mindlessly is a | waste of life._ " | | No, that's a different issue. The issue is that the government | in the UK keeps pushing for more and more authoritarian | surveillance and control laws over the internet and smartphones | and justifying it with the kind of rhetoric used in the blog - | screen time is bad because of radicalisation, spectres of | terrorism, the collapse of society and community, and etc. And | the Conservative government's largest voter base in the UK is | the elderly. | | > " _There 's also an enormous difference here in that older | people often can't really do much else._" | | I'm assuming your grandma is significantly older than 65? With | a UK average life expectancy in the 80s, a lot of people past | 65 are still well capable of doing things; even then part of | the problem mentioned in the blog post is that UK society | supports little else for people to do, what with the cost of | living crisis (Conservative government mostly voted for by | older people policies of austerity, running public services | into the ground), Brexit, mostly voted for by older people, | house price crisis, largely propped up by - and beneficial to - | older people, the binge drinking culture, wider social issue | where the one thing to go out to of an evening is go to the | pub, the car focus instead of public transport focus | (Conservative government, see above). | | That is, there is a big feeling in the UK that the elderly have | screwed up the country's future with selfish short-term | policies, which disproportionately hurts the young who have | more future to care about and fewer saved resources, and are | trying to control the young even more while living on pension | payments propped up by the working young. | scotty79 wrote: | > The issue is really that doing _anything_ mindlessly is a | waste of life. | | So as long as I'm gaming mindfully it's all fine? | | > Would I recommend it? No, huge waste of time. | | I have a suspicion that on my deathbed I'd be regretting only | one thing. That I didn't get more time to play and have fun. | LatteLazy wrote: | I don't disagree that it's a waste. That said, I don't like the | idea of society (the older end especially) or the government or | anyone else really telling me what to do with my time. This | isn't just some libertarian stance. The UK has been very clear | with anyone under 50: Want an education? You're on your own. | Want a decent job? You're on your own. Want housing? You're on | your own. The idea that having had to do all the difficult bits | myself, other people now want to sweep in and tell me what I | can do in my spare time is offensive. I know that's not what | you're suggesting, I just want to voice the reason people would | object despite you being correct about the ultimate affects... | Gordonjcp wrote: | > The UK has been very clear with anyone under 50: Want an | education? You're on your own. Want a decent job? You're on | your own. Want housing? You're on your own. | | *England* has. Scotland takes a very different approach. | LatteLazy wrote: | Careful, Scotland manages more affordable education only | because it gets special subsidies. For which it has to stay | in a union it does not like. | | And where does that leave the situation on jobs and | housing? Better than in England? Really? | | The truth is, this is a generational struggle, not a | geographical one. An imaginary line on a map won't help you | I'm afraid. | InCityDreams wrote: | But who the heck is anyone to define a 'waste of time'. It's | taken me quite some years to convince my partner that a | smartphone is considerably less expensive to keep on, rather | than the tv. She uses the tv for 'company', even when the whole | family is at home. I had to rig her smartphone to some larger | speakers to provide a level of bass that seemed realistic to | her, so that's that. Technically, she's gone from 10hrs a day | with the tv on (watching?), to 10 hrs a day "extra" (watching) | on her smartphone. Neither is correct, (and nor is she | British). It is however, her time, her life. And it is beyond | me to agree, or disagree (with her) that 'the issue is really | that doing _anything_ mindlessly is a waste of life'. We are | here, we are going to not be. | standardUser wrote: | WoW is a more social activity than a lot of people ever partake | in on a regular basis. Claiming it is "exactly the same" as | flipping channels doesn't add up. In fact, I can't think of a | less interactive, less social, less engaging activity than | flipping channels (something I spent much of my youth doing). | ericmcer wrote: | I have a lot of fond memories of WoW. While it is a bit of a | waste for a young person who is doing it instead of working | on their future, it seems ideal for someone who is retired. | Problem solving, socializing, etc. is way healthier than most | screen activities. | Nav_Panel wrote: | I agree that WoW is a waste when considered in relation to | the space of possible things a young person can be doing. | In practice, though, teenagers are basically trapped in | their school related social circle and activities. For me, | WoW was a place to _be someone else_ , other than who I was | at school, and to feel valued for reasons beyond my | performance in high school social games. | | Beyond that, I legitimately think that my experiences with | raiding, min-maxing, grinding, etc. were a sort of | preparation for the social dynamics of... corporate | leadership. Of course, a lot more was required (technical | skills, philosophical grounding, etc), but it was a good | start. | komali2 wrote: | Growing up in suburban Houston our options truly were | limited to make WoW not a bad option to engage with all | sorts of people. ALL other social activities require a | car, so until my mom or dad will was available to drive | me my only recourse was the internet. | | Now I live in Taiwan and I envy the young people who i | see out and about all over thanks to the bus and train | system, participating in all sorts of random activities. | Karrot_Kream wrote: | Depends on how you use/play it, just like it depends on how | you use social media or TV. A lot of my social media usage is | finding stuff and sharing with friends in group chats and us | having discussions/laughs over them. Most of the "TV" | (streaming services, anime, etc) that I watch is done with my | partner or a group of friends. If you just turn your brain | off and grind, then WoW or any other MMORPG is an equivalent | mindless time waste to just consuming TV. I suspect it gets | more fondness in nerdy circles just because more folks in | these circles relate to it. | standardUser wrote: | I didn't play very long (under a year) but I had a ton of | fun mostly thanks to my guildmates. I didn't mind some | grinding, and WoW has _plenty_ , but most of what kept me | coming back was to meet up with other players I had gotten | to know and had a lot of fun playing and chatting with. | Karrot_Kream wrote: | Definitely, and I have many friends who still play MMOs | as adults who do the same thing. They open group chats | with longtime (and new!) friends and play. The grind is a | thing to do while everyone hangs out. But I also know | people who turn their brain off and grind as a way to | just pass the time. One of my favorite ways to waste time | is to get a little high, fire up Diablo, and grind away. | It's the same with social media. Social media can be | social or it can be parasocial depending on how you use | it. | hollerith wrote: | The problem WoW shares with TV is that for many (most) | people, logging in to WoW is an easier route to a pleasurable | experience than any safe affordable activity available to a | person living 70 years ago or 700 years ago or 7000 years | ago. One worry that neuroscientist Andrew Huberman and others | have is that if you partake often in potent pleasures that do | not require much effort to achieve, you lose motivation to | work hard at pursuits that haven't been carefully crafted by | "designers" to be maximally engaging and pleasurable or | require more effort or sacrifice to access than WoW or TV | require. | | It is not obvious to me that WoW's being very interactive (or | its putting you in communication with real people) protects | it from having the adverse effect I just described. Maybe the | interactivity merely gives the designers of WoW more levers | to pull in their quest to make WoW as engaging and compelling | as possible -- which is more engaging and compelling than is | probably good for you for something as easy to access as WoW | is. | | Specifically, if you binge on WoW it can take over a month | for your motivational system to return to normal, and while | it its taking its time returning, you have less motivation to | tackle real life. Also, since pleasure causes whatever you | were doing right before the pleasure to be "reinforced", if | you play WoW a lot, then stop, for years afterwards whenever | you are tired or under stress while at the computer you will | tend to type in the command to start up WoW without any | conscious awareness of intending to do so. | | Of course video games, online role-playing games and TV | aren't the only activities with this problem. The paperback | novel for example is an invention that provides customers (at | least those good at turning printed words into mental | imagery) easy access to a fairly potent pleasure. This is a | problem that society has been grappling with for a few | centuries. | profstasiak wrote: | parasocial maybe, but not social. | SketchySeaBeast wrote: | I don't understand - the relationships between guild mates | aren't one sided at all. WoW raiding is like being on the | phone with all your friends while you play a video game | together. | Apocryphon wrote: | Proxysocial | yamazakiwi wrote: | At least in my case they are absolutely social in nature, | not parasocial in the slightest, what are you on about? | lezojeda wrote: | "Adjective. parasocial (not comparable) One-sided | (especially of a relationship, as for example between | celebrities and their audience or fans)." | | In which way organizing a raid via (say Discord or whatever | communication way you use) coordinating efforts towards a | common objective and, in some cases, meeting your teammates | offline is something parasocial? | PeterisP wrote: | Well, for every raider on WoW there are multiple people | who just mindlessly do stuff solo. Most players never | even reach raiding. | komali2 wrote: | This was kinda me, I literally have never done a single | raid in WoW despite absurd hours of /played. Still | doesn't fit definition of parasocial but since we've | diverted: that was the cool thing about WoW, you really | could make it your own game back in the day (200...7? To | about 2010ish). My buddies and I, irl and online-only, | would spend our time chit chatting either in game or | using VoIP software while flying around on the game's | transit system, levelling alts. Or I would be sitting in | a city getting into political debates on /2 (channel | available across all cities for your faction when you're | in a city). | | So it was still a very social game even if you weren't | raiding. And the problem solving was very strong back | then for the pvp scene, the concept of "meta" was still | in it's infancy, I remember when one guy utterly changed | the entire game of pvp with his pvp warrior videos, or | another dude started publishing naked rogue gank videos. | Anyway point is the social aspect was like any human | society: incredibly diverse in form. | austhrow743 wrote: | Huh TIL. Never played WoW and everything I've heard about | it has involved guilds and raiding with people. I didn't | even know it was possible to play solo. | BlueTemplar wrote: | Yeah, after yet another "fetch 5 random organs" quest I | gave up in disgust around level 20 (twice). | throwing_away wrote: | > And yeah, I played years of that shit when I was younger. A | complete waste. Am I still here? Sure. Did it have some minor | benefits? Sure. Would I recommend it? No, huge waste of time. | | My job feels like way more of a "huge waste of time" than | taking in new information via TikTok, socializing with friends | in WoW, or watching the latest culturally relevant media. | SoftTalker wrote: | Yeah even as a kid I was never into video games. Just seemed | like a waste of time. I rarely watch TV or movies now for the | same reason. But what do I do instead? I find other ways to | waste time like reading, other hobbies, browsing websites like | this one. All activities with no external postive impact on | anything. Just filling time. | whatever1 wrote: | Why is not not waste of life to read novels? Why is not waste | of life to hike? Why is not waste of life to pursue hobbies? | | These are very subjective matters. And sometimes you are just | exhausted and you only want to decompress without thinking. | Watching TV, TikTok, aimlessly browse the internet are all | great ways to do so. | xwdv wrote: | Try as we might, most of life will be a waste. There are only | a few moments in life that we truly cherish and would not | consider waste. | | Anything that is not bringing you closer to experiencing one | of those moments is a waste. Spending more effort than what | is necessary in pursuit of those moments might also be a | waste, especially if the payoff isn't worth it. | | Therefore, you should setup your life so you can experience | as many of those moments as possible. Money is the common | tool of achieving a life of endless experiential | opportunities. But it's not enough, you must also learn to | greatly reduce or eliminate all responsibilities as well so | you can live freely. You must be financially independent, | location independent, and ideologically independent. Only | then can you truly stop the waste of life. | | Some people are so bound to a time and place, a source of | income, a way of thinking, that they will be lucky if they | ever experience a single moment in life that is not a wasted. | dancek wrote: | That is quite a depressed take on life. Many people find | all of life good. Why not set up your life so you can | cherish every moment? | xwdv wrote: | Not possible. | antisthenes wrote: | The author was speaking for himself, so there's no | contradiction there. | | If anyone wants to consider parts of their life a waste, let | them do so, it's only their business. | Spooky23 wrote: | It's the type of engagement. | | Watch television geared towards old people or young children | sometime. It's engineered to grab passive attention and the | active content is ads. | | It's easy to see the effects on people. Little kids will go | crazy to obtain some product. The older people face a more | insidious marketing message - fear. | [deleted] | PeterisP wrote: | The main idea I saw in that article is effectively an | observation that if the older generation and younger generation | disagree about what is proper and not, then the older | generation currently gets to say that the younger generation is | doing everything wrong and should be nudged towards proper (as | elders understand it) ways, and the younger generation | currently doesn't get to do the exact same thing in reverse. | komali2 wrote: | I think there's another question though, that of | vulnerability to new techniques in social engineering. Leave | aside the question of which is a greater "waste of life," TV | or doom scrolling, and ask, which is actually causing more | changes to your personality, values, maybe even your brain | chemistry? Maybe both equally, but if that's the case I feel | like many in the newer generation grew up with more tools to | fight back. | | I don't know if this happened in previous generations with | TV's, but I know among my friends there's a self | consciousness about the bad feelings from what Instagram is | doing to their mental health, and an active rejection: some | quit entirely, some use the tools on their phones to limit | app time, etc. I don't know if the previous generation has | this or not. | | Or ads. I know very few people that just let ads run: we all | either pay for premium services, or use ad blockers and pi | holes to block ads. Meanwhile even though teevo is a thing I | still know old people that just "let the ads run." It's | ALWAYS a shock to me when I visit home and shown just how | absurd the ratio of content : ads is for American television. | | Anyway it seems many in my generation are more aware of the | threat of Algos latching onto you. I see comments all the | time on YouTube mentioning it, "the Algo brought me here." | But I don't ever hear older people talking about the previous | version of that, the specialized social engineering and | rhetorical techniques of entertainment companies like Fox | News and their hosts such as Tucker Carlt. Their techniques | of ragebait and leading questions seems blatant to me, as | obvious as the slew of creepy ads that follow me around | Facebook, Google, Instagram, or the "YouTube thumbnail" shit | (everyone makes the same face), but I don't get much reaction | when I try to bring this up with relatives. | | Basically I'm less interested in whether watching TV or doom | scrolling is a waste of time, and more interested in whether | it can literally program you lol. Like how many of us lost | friends to qanon conspiracy holes due to effective Facebook | engagement algorithms? Do you know relatives that became | wickedly radical and racist in the last 4 years because they | stopped hanging out and instead spent all their time first on | mass media consumption and then weirder and weirder Twitter | and Reddit clones? I do. How many times have you heard tucker | Carlson quotes at Thanksgiving from people that used to have | way more thoughts of their own? | | People may be able to say no one way of spending your time is | better than another but I want to talk about what these | various forms of media are doing to keep you hooked. Are we | going to act like there's no danger here because we don't | want to appear like elitists that say anything other than | reading a book or programming is a waste of time? | mindslight wrote: | Bingo! We got our experience mainlining Internet conspiracy | theories decades ago. Back when you had to keep them to | yourself, because the sheer majority just wouldn't | understand. Fuck, you couldn't even talk about how the | Internet was heavily tapped by the US government until | around 2012 or so, and that was abundantly clear from | multiple whistleblowers! | | Boomers are going through that today, but since so many are | doing at once it's pop culture. And instead of only weird | "Internet friends" who could understand, it's the entirety | of their real life social circle on Facebook. Then they | turn on the "official" seeming Fox news, which has also | been pwned, further cementing the nonsense. | golemiprague wrote: | HappySweeney wrote: | While too much of anything is detrimental, I don't find | watching TV to be a waste if you are enjoying yourself. | Recreation is important for mental health. | birdyrooster wrote: | If one is like I used to be, TV _is_ mindless but it can be | mindful. After meeting someone who changed my perception of | the medium, I find that TV is one of the most engaging and | challenging exercises. You are constantly searching for | symbolism, inspirations and trademarks of actor | /writer/director. There is so so much to do when watching TV | that anyone who says it's a waste is missing a huge | opportunity! | godelski wrote: | Yeah there's definitely different types of shows. Just like | there's different types of books. There are some shows and | movies that have deep philosophy to them and you can spend | hours, days, or weeks mulling over and discussing. The same | is with books. There are also plenty of trash novels that | are purely for entertainment. Is there a difference between | that and your standard mindless sitcom? Probably not. But | we also shouldn't paint with too wide of a brush or we're | closing ourselves off to a potentially powerful form of | art, expression, and even a method of learning. | | I also think there is nothing wrong with purely engaging in | entertainment. But this is an issue when it gets addictive | and becomes too much. We need to be nuanced about these | discussions rather than being so judgemental and putting | our own perspectives as the higher status. That's just | stroking our own egos and that's similarly not healthy nor | beneficial to society as a whole. | standardUser wrote: | TV got good. It's hard to even talk about "TV" these days | because we're combining artfully-crafted, thought-provoking | shows like The Leftovers or The Wire with things like Big | Bang Theory and Two and a Half Men. Same medium, but | radically different forms of content. | gregmac wrote: | Another big difference is the way we consume. "Watching | TV" used to mean watching whatever was on in the current | timeslot, which often meant flipping through channels | until you found the least-bad thing you could tolerate. | | In the last 10-15 years that style has all but | disappeared* and been replaced with Netflix-style | services (and maybe PVRs for sports fans and 60+), where | you don't watch "TV" but watch "a show". | | Browsing tiktok or YouTube might be the closest thing | that people still do to channel flipping, but since it's | customized and endless, there's never a need to settle | for the "least-worst" thing you can find. | | (* I'm sure there are people that still do this, but I'm | saying this based on my circle of close family/friends, | many of whom are non-technical). | standardUser wrote: | Strongly agree with all of that. When I hear people | complain online about all the different streaming | services, I assume they're very young and didn't have to | suffer through "appointment viewing" and "channel | flipping" and watching "whatever's on". And a third of it | all was commercials. | | The fact that many people still watch TV that way baffles | me. | dlivingston wrote: | Have you watched Severance on Apple TV+ yet? It's so | good, and thick with symbolism and dual-meanings. | wobbly_bush wrote: | Not the person you are responding to - I agree with you that | recreation is important. I think we should be talking more | about how to do recreational activities that feel beneficial | down the line. Or are recreation and being beneficial | mutually exclusive? Overall, it feels harder to do beneficial | recreational activities. | [deleted] | datavirtue wrote: | None of it is good for any group, and I'm not sure what the main | insight is because I had to stop reading her first-draft article. | Perhaps an editor could have turned this wall of drivel into | something profound? We will never know. | NaturalPhallacy wrote: | This is fair. My boomer dad is almost never not watching TV... | gus_massa wrote: | My father used to read the dead-tree newspapers every morning. | I'm now reading them online. Is it fair to count that time as an | increase of my screen time? | | I guess there are some similar examples, like looking for cooking | recipes in a book vs online, or paper-encyclopedia vs wikipedia. | patall wrote: | I would probably prefer if my grandparents (~80) watched TV for | 6h a day. Instead, they spend a similar amount of time on their | smartphones, reading conspiracy blogs. And recently started to | prepare for the imminent doom. Only thing worse would be an elder | with dementia that is constantly shopping on amazon... | cameronh90 wrote: | To be fair, at age 80, doom is probably fairly imminent. | WorkerBee28474 wrote: | While the average lifespan (American stats) is about 79, if | someone makes it to 80 their average lifespan is 88. | pneumic wrote: | My 70+ parents are the same but the other way--obsessed with | all things Donald Trump and getting angry about him. Hours and | hours lost to a politician they despise. | | (edited for clarity) | bakugo wrote: | I like how you had to clarify that your parents hate Trump | because other commenters immediately assumed they liked him, | even though 90% of attention Trump gets is from people who | dedicate most of their headspace to hating him. | freedomben wrote: | Extreme risk of getting off-topic, but I've been really | wondering what Trump fans think of Trump's announcement of | candidacy in 2024 and it's nearly impossible to ask people | nowadays. Are your parents generally positive or negative on | it? Did they like DeSantis last week and now think he needs | to stay in Florida? | pneumic wrote: | Sorry, what I mean is that they are obsessed with hating | Trump. | MaxfordAndSons wrote: | I think GP meant their parent's are anti-Trump. Mine are as | well, but ironically, during Trumps rise and presidency, I | noticed them starting to act quite like mirror images of | (what I imagine to be) their Fox watching right wing peers | - driven to nightly flights of righteous indignation by | MSNBC or CNN, increasingly conspiracy minded and less | concerned with non-political news/life. | pneumic wrote: | Exactly matches my experience. | mitchdoogle wrote: | I can't imagine trump fans being anything except positive | about him running again. Why would they even be negative? | mathlover2 wrote: | Sorry to hear that. | pneumic wrote: | Sorry, what I mean is that they are obsessed with hating | Trump. Countless hours devoted to hanging on to and getting | worked up over every bit of information about a guy they | despise. | dylan604 wrote: | It could be the opposite of what your thinking and that | they are not actually Trump fans, but getting angry about | still having to deal with Trump. This describes a lot of | the older folks that I know. | pneumic wrote: | Yeah, that's what I meant, wish I was clearer. | [deleted] | rsynnott wrote: | I expect consiracy-based TV shows are also available. Though | possibly not to the same degree of nonsense you get on the | internet, I suppose. | folmar wrote: | You can start with Ancient Aliens if you'd like. | xnx wrote: | Fox News is close to a conspiracy-based channel. | speakfreely wrote: | Not completely wrong, but I feel like they've retreated | towards the center in recent years as the more far-right | channels took over. Fox News has generally been less than | enthusiastically MAGA and focused on the traditional | conservative talking points: culture wars, border crisis, | etc. with resistance to things like election denial, Trump | worship, etc. (commentators like Carlson and Hannity not | included in this assessment, of course) | ceejayoz wrote: | I'm not sure how you could talk about Fox News without | including Carlson and Hannity. | dredmorbius wrote: | We did. | | And by "we", I mean Newton Minnow, former chair of the Federal | Communications Commission, and Jerry Mander, advertising | executive. | | Minnow's commentary came in what came to be known as his "Vast | Wasteland" speech. | | <https://vimeo.com/55481067> | | You can find a contemporaneous interview of Minnow by Studs | Terkel here: | | https://studsterkel.wfmt.com/programs/newton-minow-discusses... | | And a recent (2021) take here: | | <https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-05-06/newton-min...> | | Audio (MP3): | | Mander's argument was the book _Four Arguments for the | Elimination of Television_ , which is just what it says: four | arguments, and not for limitation, change, or curtailment, but | elimination of television. Those arguments being that television: | | - removes the sense of reality from people | | - promotes capitalism | | - can be used as a scapegoat, and that | | - all three of these issues negatively work together | | (Via Wikipedia) | | Wikipedia: | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Arguments_for_the_Elimina...> | | Internet Archive: | <https://archive.org/details/fourargumentsfor00mand_0> | | LibGen: | <http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=448E80906BCD92C0AA02235E...> | | And they were far from the first or only ones. Vance Packard | published _The Hidden Persuaders_ on the power of advertising in | 1957 ( <https://archive.org/details/vance-packard-the-hidden- | persuad...>). The Frankfurt School looked at (amongst many other | things) the role of mass media on culture and politics. There's | Dwight MacDonald's classic essay "A Theory of Mass Culture" | (1953) | <https://is.muni.cz/el/1421/jaro2008/ESB032/um/5136660/MacDon...> | Noam Chomsky, Neil Postman, Edward Herman, Robert W. McChesney, | and numerous others. | | For what it's worth, I had the luck to grow up in a household | without television for many years, and afterwards, only very | limited access. The Tube largely repells me now, though other | screens do, I confess, have their allure. | fleddr wrote: | The piece sounds like a petty personal revenge, where it's hard | to detect any rational point. | | She grew up in a family abusing screen time, centering the TV | above anything and anyone. That was very bad, as she readily | admits. How then does it make any sense to look away when a | similar or worse issue is affecting young people? | | Instead of preventing it from happening twice, you focus on | "rubbing it in", because two wrongs make a right? | | Further, from a pragmatic point of view, the comparison makes | zero sense. Nobody cares how much TV the elderly watch because | there's little to ruin at this point. They're past their | productive years, so it doesn't matter from an economical point | of view. For most it won't affect their dating chances or | ambition to start a family. It matters little (or at least less) | for their health, as they're already in winter. | | For young people and society as a whole, these things matter far | more. I don't know what the proper regulation (if any) would be | for screen time but let's at least establish that the stakes are | a 100 times higher compared to an old guy watching a stupid TV | quiz. | | The nature of the screen time is also incomparable. Digital is | far more addictive, radicalizing, privacy-invading and | exploitative compared to TV. | hn_throwaway_99 wrote: | Such an odd take in my opinion. Just because there isn't a | comparative level of concern for older people's excessive screen | time doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned about younger | people's. | | Highest suicide rates have traditionally been among the elderly. | Is it then a "moral panic" if we are concerned about rising | suicide rates in teenagers? | girvo wrote: | Possibly, it would depend on how the discussion is framed. | | "Won't somebody think of the children" should always be looked | at critically, because far too often it has nothing to do with | the harms those kids face at all -- which the article brings up | at the end. | randcraw wrote: | But "screen time" tells you nothing. Is this video games? | Conversation with friends? Browsing through one-liner/tweet | forums? Watching documentaries? News? Films? TV shows? Porn? | | Is this happening in public? While driving a car? In the presence | of friends? | | Is this interaction purposeful, like taking an on-line course? | Like learning or improving a skill? | | Is the viewer actively engaged or passive? Are they consumer or | producer? Are they repeating mindless conspiracies or writing | independent, informed, well reasoned argument? Or are they | performing, recording it, and posting it online? | | Without a lot more context, pushing "screen time" as a sign of | the impending apocalypse is just more disinfo. | thenerdhead wrote: | What if we just talked about moderation in all things and kept to | ourselves? | nonrandomstring wrote: | The question is not now much time you spend at a screen, but who | is on the other side of it. | | Much of the conversation so far concerns time, and the virtues or | vices of how we spend it. Not all pastimes are equal. Knitting a | jumper, taking a hike, or skateboarding are actions one performs | on or in the world. Reading a book is more of an action that the | world (the author especially) performs upon you. It is a | different frame. Movies and video gaming are somewhere in the | middle. Some media forms, such as daytime trash-TV and TiKTok are | at the extreme of the passive/receptive frame. It is a pipeline | of affect directly to your hypothalamus. Any discussion of harms | or benefits must be understood in that light. | DougN7 wrote: | I've been pondering a bit in this area, especially around | things that are addictive harmful. It seems like things that | give a pleasure reward for little or no work, and aren't | furthering relationships, are dangerous. They sap motivations | (no need to work hard when your feel-good choice is so close). | This seems to cover social media/doom-scrolling, porn, drugs | and alcohol (at various levels and circumstances), easy | hookups(?), constant TV, etc. Still working on the idea... | jstarfish wrote: | These aren't all inherently bad things when consumed in | moderation, and over the course of a lifetime. Sometimes we | just need those quick hits of artificially-induced dopamine | to give us the drive to push through the responsibilities and | pressures of adult life. | | The problem isn't that the content is itself dangerous, it's | that it's being _mainlined_ by [adults and children alike]. | Absolutely nothing in life is safe to consume this way-- the | sort of drugs that otherwise provide these effects are | classified as class-II controlled substances. | bell-cot wrote: | I'm interested in how the over-60s' TV time is being measured. | | Why - I know a number of older folks who live alone, and claim | that they leave the TV on all day - not to watch it, but as a | source of "color noise", giving them a comforting illusion of not | being at home all alone. | yamazakiwi wrote: | That's a good point, I also do this as it brings some amount of | comfort vs being alone with complete silence. | NoraCodes wrote: | This is a great point! I think a lot of people, myself | included, do the same thing with YouTube videos or even long | Netflix shows; it's playing, I'm half-listening to it, but I'm | also accomplishing some annoying or semi-mechanical task. If | you asked how much video content I consume, you might be | shocked at the answer, but I wonder if we should count that as | "wasting time". | Mountain_Skies wrote: | During my childhood, my mother would do that with The Weather | Channel. It was, at least at the time, devoid of anything | political, and no sex or violence, though the coverage of | severe weather could be a bit anxiety inducing. But even | running in the background, I'm sure we still absorbed the | messaging of commercials to some extent. It's not quite the | same thing as actively watching but probably still imparts some | degree of impact. | mradek wrote: | Wasting time is relative. Everyone always has some excuse for it, | for why they think it's okay to burn their brain on TV WoW TikTok | whatever. | | Just do your thing and live your best life. Unsubscribe from what | other people think. | spoonjim wrote: | This doesn't make any sense. Forgive me for being crude but for | the vast majority of over 65's... it just doesn't matter what | they do with their time. They're waiting around to die. | | Children will grow up to build the future so what they do or | don't do matters a lot. | bell-cot wrote: | Not to endorse this attitude about my end of the population | pyramid - but it does raise an interesting point about how TV | screen time was measured for the older folks. | | In long-term care facilities, hospitals, doctors' offices, etc. | - where the TV's are just left turned on all day, "turn it off" | isn't an option, and a fair number of the older folks may have | failing hearing / eyesight / cognition (so they might have a | hard time following the content on the TV, even if they wanted | to) - was that "screen time" added into the numbers? | MaxfordAndSons wrote: | I've been thinking about this a lot lately, having been sharing | care-taking responsibilities for my mother who is in the mid- | stages of dementia. For the last year or so, her usage of her | phone has become increasingly problematic. She'll pick it up and | stare at it blankly for minutes on end, trying to remember what | she meant to do with it. She'll poke around the screen, | bewildered, sure she had something she needed to do but unable to | execute it, entrapped in a constant loop of frustration. And she | would compulsively text our family nonsensical gibberish, with | dozens of variations as she attempted to get out a well formed | version of whatever she meant to say. It's also enabled multiple | scammers to extract thousands of dollars from her. | | It was particularly striking to me, because she was never overly | obsessed with her phone or technology generally, prior to the | onset of her dementia. Mercifully, she's recently gotten to the | point where she can't use it anymore because of dexterity issues. | mathlover2 wrote: | Why is it that every time I read an article about modern British | politics and culture, I walk away almost feeling happier about | the state of the US? | | It's almost like God, while planning the course of current | events, looked at the inhabitants of the US recovering from 4 | years of Trumpian misrule and decided to console them by having | the original English-speaking developed country end up even worse | off than they were. | | (I'm kidding, of course. God doesn't actually exist, and I know | there's a lot of places way worse off than the US or the UK. I'm | also not actually this American-centric in my views. My point is | that the UK somehow seems worse off these days than the US is, | and that's a sentence I _never_ thought I 'd ever be saying 10 | years ago.) | FPGAhacker wrote: | I haven't hit my sixties yet, but it won't be long now. | | Youth is ignorance, and the only cure is getting older. When that | happens you will marvel at how much you thought you knew and | understood. You will listen or read the next generation making | preposterous proclamations about older people and the older | generations. Laughable in their certainty. Judging older people | and finding them unworthy. Especially family. You may try to | convey to the younger generation how you were just like them | once, trying to shortcut the wisdom of age for them. | | But there are no shortcuts. There is no easy way. So we can watch | and reflect, those older than us probably have the same thoughts | about us. Those ignorant 60 year olds think they know everything. | Wait till they hit 90. | medvezhenok wrote: | And yet, society advances as people holding backward views die | off (not actually from people changing their minds). Has always | been that way and always will be. If people lived twice as long | you could imagine that inequality would be at least twice as | bad and that society's views would evolve slower than they do | today. | [deleted] | [deleted] | tomcam wrote: | Yeah I'm in my 60s and... not too impressed by the supposed | wisdom of my fellow Boomers. | this_is_for_you wrote: | There is wisdom is what you are saying, as I have seen it | myself over the years from my younger days to my current age. | But there is something that needs to be said, so badly, that I | made this account despite swearing off HN commenting for good; | or so I thought. (Sorry Dang if this breaks a rule, but this | comment really needs to be made.) | | Here it is: Age in and of itself, does not equal wisdom. One | can be wise through long life, yes; but experience is why. If | one does not live an experienced life, they will still be just | as unwise and potentially as dumb as those who are younger than | them. Likewise, someone who has lived a rich and fulfilling | life no matter how those events play out, can be just as wise | if not wiser than those older than them. | | So while youth can be ignorance, so too can the egotism of age. | This will continue to be a problem in society until the day | when everyone can come to agree that our lives are not equal, | and never will be; because we cannot experience everything the | same way across the world. It is that diversity in experience | which is why it is so important that we learn to listen to each | other, even if we don't like what they have to say. To expect | obedience from anyone due to age alone is just a form of | authoritarianism which has no right to exist; especially when | the evidence shows abundantly that the older generations didn't | get everything right either. Just like how no one in their | right mind expects the younger to get everything right as well. | | It is only the daft and delusional that think they have gotten | everything right. | | And from the looks of things out there in society, we have much | more of that going on, than we have any wisdom being shared. | | As a final word. | | If you found this wise, consider this. I'm turning 34 soon. | | And with that said, this is the last any of you will hear from | me. This is all I have to say. | BlueTemplar wrote: | Hopefully you start noticing this by your 30s ? | | Though supposedly it hits diminishing returns soon after | that..? | | And I don't want to spend my life constantly regretting choices | made a few years before ! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-11-23 23:00 UTC)