Life is Short

You may lose friends because they may think you don't care enough about them since you don't call them frequently anymore (and emails do not work for everyone).

You are unreachable through the modern messengers because you refuse to waste time on a gazillion of them.

Other people update their friends through Facebook. If you opt for an alternative like email (async and focusing on message) then you may be weird for some.

Being focused is great and indeed makes wonders in productivity. Nevertheless, in most cases around 6 hours of quality mental work is the limit. The rest you have to do a lower mental effort activity. That means either writing boilerplate code, answering emails, meetings, reading hn but possibly not learning a new language or meeting new people.

Stress levels fell because you are in control of your life or so you feel since you have limited external signals. That may not be true but you can't be sure always since you have limited environmental feedback. Nevertheless, being ultra responsive means less control also for me (without getting too philosophical).

All in all, I agree with all the steps listed above. That does mean they are the path to enlightenment for everyone or without drawbacks.

Having mentioned that, I feel that for a similar strategy was net positive. Mostly because context switching has large costs and because our modern world makes money by distracting us (feeds us with us about superficial needs/lifestyle and forcing us to measure our sense of self on metrics based on narrow minded philosophies -- consumerism of info(/)products).

"So it is—the life we receive is not short, but we make it so, nor do we have any lack of it, but are wasteful of it. Just as great and princely wealth is scattered in a moment when it comes into the hands of a bad owner, while wealth however limited, if it is entrusted to a good guardian, increases by use, so our life is amply long for him who orders it properly."

...

"But those who forget the past, neglect the present, and fear for the future have a life that is very brief and troubled; when they have reached the end of it, the poor wretches perceive too late that for such a long while they have been busied in doing nothing. "

http://www.forumromanum.org/literature/seneca_younger/brev_e...

Not really.

Contradiction means pointing to possible holes in our assumptions. So online discussions - are a way to test our assumptions and learn.

Online discussions is a playground for training our decision-making skills.

Of course, we should maintain a healthy balance between learning in online discussions, other ways of learning and actual decision-making (work). But that healthy balance should probably include more than zero time in online discussions.

I had an IBM laptop before I had a Mac. At least one major component had to be replaced every single year for the duration of the four years I had it. Keys broke. the screen was shite. Windows crashed constantly. I lost all my files multiple times. After having it for more than a year it ran as if someone had permanently applied the brakes and it was just grinding against them and no amount of service seemed to be able to fix this. I spent weeks searching for the specific charger I needed only for the company to ship the wrong one, then when I had to replace it a second time they no longer manufactured it so I had to buy one second hand. That machine was an utter sinkhole of money and time. I swore off Windows products that day and have not spent a dime on them since. Maybe things have gotten better since XP but I'm not about to risk it.

Now I have a Mac. I have had the same MBP for 6+ years and it has never once required service, it runs perfectly, has never lost data, and has been a charm to work with. Sure, it cost me 2x as much as the IBM but in cumulative costs that is nothing. I could easily see this laptop lasting me another year at least.

I am not saying you are wrong, just providing my experience in which the cost of ownership in money and time has in fact been lower.