11–20 of 194 posts
It might be a bit unorthodox and I would possibly get flagged for writing this but I found the ideas of Kaczynski on impact of technology on us very profound and thought-provoking[0]. I try to separate the "art" from the "artist" and do not condone his violent actions thereafter. But this idea has been around in various shapes where people debate if its true that techonology is evolving at a much faster rate than our…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
His ideas are not original at all and he's no "thought leader"; the anarcho-primitivists had raised the same points a lot better and more coherently than he did. Just read the original sources, no reason to pay attention to a violent nutcase.
I didn't say his ideas were original, I said they were more coherent than you'd think. And sure, read the original sources, but I don't see the harm in reading Kaczynski himself, if only to see how a smart man went down the wrong path. The "thought leader" thing was supposed to be a joke.
Yes, I got your point but it could be misinterpreted. Plenty of people are quite unaware of where these ideas actually come from, and who deserves credit for them.
I was too stressed out at one point and what worked for me was just making myself unavailable for certain periods of the day and handling emails, voice messages, phone calls, etc. in batch mode at scheduled periods of the day.
The details of how exactly you go about doing this will depend on your situation, but it’s quite doable.
Yes I have. It was called the 1980's.
In terms of communications, I think the biggest problem is other people's expectations. "Why do you have a cell phone if I can't call you?" They ask. People want to be able to demand your time almost instantly and they have no patience for other methods. If your timeframe for being contacted is a day or two, they just won't contact you.
So, if you do it, be prepared to be the one that needs to contact them. You're the odd person out. Nobody will follow your (to them) weird rules. It can be lonely if you aren't proactive.
Apart from that, I find that social media (especially HN these days, unfortunately) is just depressing. Someone has a bad day. They go on to whatever platform and release their stress by being crappy to someone else. People are depressed, they get some catharsis by unloading their depression on others.
I have to limit my time on HN. Strangely, I hang out on Reddit these days, but only on /r/cheesemaking, which is full of wonderful and cheerful people. For me, this is the key. It's not technology, it's people. The technology brings a lot of disparate people together and often pits you against them for the viewing entertainment of the crowd. Best not to go there, but it's not really technology itself.
In terms of stress levels for communications, I think setting limits for yourself is good. I'm actually very comfortable with being contacted with work. If you send me 100 emails an hour, I'm totally fine with it. Bury me on Slack, and it's OK. I have work habits that allow me to jump back and forth between my work and communication (took me 30 years to get good at it, mind you...) But others sink and I often see it. Communicate your limits and stick to it. If you only check your email once an hour, tell people and just do it. It will (usually) be fine, but you have to be consistent about it.
Again, IMHO, it's not about technology. It's about people. Choose to hang around people you enjoy and who give you energy. Draw defined boundaries for interactions that you can't handle and be consistent. This will give you the best benefit, I think.
I noticed how much the screen alters perception. It's a bizarre 2d world. Completely unreal. We evolved to live in our bodies interacting with objects, but instead we end up glued to pathetic little screens, addicted to "information".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say his ideas were original, I said they were more coherent than you'd think. And sure, read the original sources, but I don't see the harm in reading Kaczynski himself, if only to see how a smart man went down the wrong path. The "thought leader" thing was supposed to be a joke.
> The "thought leader" thing was supposed to be a joke. Yes, I got your point but it could be misinterpreted. Plenty of people are quite unaware of where these ideas actually come from, and who deserves credit for them.
Buying notebooks to write in, and books to read, and a radio to listen to, helped.
That said, I would need some way to at least make sure my family is ok, when I'm away from them.
It might be a bit unorthodox and I would possibly get flagged for writing this but I found the ideas of Kaczynski on impact of technology on us very profound and thought-provoking[0]. I try to separate the "art" from the "artist" and do not condone his violent actions thereafter. But this idea has been around in various shapes where people debate if its true that techonology is evolving at a much faster rate than our…
Just looking over the introduction, certainly some strong beliefs there, but it does resonate to some degree. It does feel like this rejection of all-encompassing technological progress in favour of simpler human living is present in a number of modern movements. Things like minimalism, mindfulness and paleo diets spring to mind. But then again, maybe these are all manufactured and part of that same technological/industrial/consumerist wave.
It often feels like I switch on my phone or computer and they are instantly steering my attention towards things which I did not intend and which my simple human mind is too weak to fight against. In an ideal world there'd perhaps exist an OS or browser which has been designed with human weaknesses in mind, something to help one direct their attention to what they initially wanted, and to put walls up where one's attention is likely to spill out into mindless consumption. But it does seem like the world is currently structured in a way that technology is incentivized to give us an overwhelming kind of freedom, both in the sense that one is free to easily give in to personal weaknesses, and also in the sense that corporations are free to prey on these weaknesses.