Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 203 posts

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#131

Post by zodPod »

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #52
Gruselbauer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no feasible way for me to agree more with this. I very much belong to those negatively affected by this phenomenon. I'd wager many a HN commenter is. My RSS feeds are a carefully crafted web of information, as much of a not-echo chamber I can create. From stuff I don't agree with on almost anything - Breitbart and its national counterparts, neocon blogs, libertarian thinktanks - to sources I think of as pret…

What practical use do you get out of reading "news" such as: >Breitbart and its national counterparts, neocon blogs, libertarian thinktanks - to sources I think of as pretty neutral - like the simple feeds of press conglomerates just feeding headlines... If you are feeling such crippling despair from consuming this information, why are you consuming it (Assuming you're not a sadist.)? Especially when you said yoursel…

> If you are feeling such crippling despair from consuming this information, why are you consuming it (Assuming you're not a sadist.)?

This! I stopped reading mainstream news years ago and I'm a LOT better off feeling. I'm less stressed, less angry, less fearful. I don't know "that funny/offensive thing that Trump said" and I don't know about the latest celebrity breakups but I can still form opinions about people and politics without sensational bullcrap being shoved down my throat on a daily basis!

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#132

Post by qntty »

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #123
oarsinsync wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't understand the opposing viewpoint, you can't discuss it with those that agree with it. You're reduced to "no, you're wrong", which is the same viewpoint they have. Sticking to places that are skewed towards a similar bias as yourself doesn't help you understand those that have differing views to you. It can be especially important to be able to do this when those people are in your family, in order to ke…

>rather than letting those viewpoints tear you apart. Is that not what you're already doing? How can you bring light into your family's life when you're full of darkness? It's okay to let people be wrong and biased, because haven't we all been? >Would you like to save the world from the degradation and destruction it seems destined for? Then step away from shallow mass movements and quietly go to work on your own sel…

Sorry to be pedantic, but I googled the quote because it didn't sound like Lao Tzu to me. It's a nice quote, but it sounds vaguely Buddhist. It looks like it was written in a Taoist book called the Hua Hu Ching several hundred years after Lao Tzu's death, as a Taoist response to Buddhism.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#133

Post by Ccecil »

edanm wrote: post #126
Ccecil wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you just called one of them? Or stopped by for a visit? I apologize if I upset you by implying mass brainwashing...I just find it odd that many share the same reasoning. In my personal opinion...social media furthers the disconnect from actual relationships and creates imaginary ones that are based on reading posts and looking at pictures but you never really get to see the real person.

And in my personal opinion, social media allows me to be almost 100% more in touch with my family that lives on the other side of the globe, who I would probably barely think about if it wasn't for Facebook. Personally, I find this a good thing. In the counterfactual world in which FB didn't exist, I would have zero contact with them - now I have some. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, everyone can make thei…

Lol...I get everything except the balls thing. But anyways...no problem. Do as you please.

Not saying it is wrong to disagree with me...just saying that there is a common theme in responses...which makes me concerned. I wasn't intending to put down those who use social media. Just stating 2 cases where I see a near verbatim response from multiple people in different locations and times. It brings out my paranoia that their response is "scripted" in some way. Not saying I am correct in any way...just a concern I have.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#134

Post by roymurdock »

losteverything wrote: post #116
malz wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over 100 million of us watched The Day After when it aired, a TV movie about nuclear war. So not only was it top of mind, the range of media alternatives was so much smaller. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_After

But.... Imo. Top Of Mind did not last at all. Sure for 2 weeks we talked about it. But "it" was the movie. Not the fact destruction is coming.

Interesting...even with a greater existential threat...the lack of available media made it less of a focus? Even if people had wanted to discuss, they wouldn't have had the platform or information available to have a discussion about the threat of nuclear war?

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#135

Post by cha-cho »

protomyth wrote: post #56

Perhaps Rolling Stone would like a little introspection given their fear mongering and false reporting about the University of Virginia. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/business/media/rolling-sto...

It feels a little insulting to read that headline after watching the 20/20 report on the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax. For that story they relied on one source and didn't listen to their own fact checkers. In the process they damaged the reputation of a university, seemingly destroyed the career of the dean, and wasted the time of a lot of well-intentioned people. An ounce of scrutiny or patience could have prevented the whole mess.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#136

Post by whamlastxmas »

kefka wrote: post #106
tossaway1 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reason it matters is because our Constitution explicitly grants citizens (not foreigners) certain rights. Our government is not allowed to violate those rights and if they do, they can technically be held accountable. The government can do shady things to outsiders within the constraints of the Constitution. As long as our government is honoring the Constitution, we have some hope of fixing its problems/flaws. If…

Hmmm... https://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bil... I'm not seeing "citizens" or "non-citizens" in any of these contexts. What I do see is: "Congress shall make no law", "right of the people", "consent of owner", and likewise. It's an unpopular view of the Bill of Rights, but shouldn't these rights be extended to everyone, and not merely "citizens"? Cause I'm certainly not seeing that word anywher…

I believe "the people" is interpreted to mean the citizens of the United States. There are a lot of subtleties to the constitution and how our laws work.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#137

Post by whamlastxmas »

jacquesm wrote: post #83
tossaway1 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reason it matters is because our Constitution explicitly grants citizens (not foreigners) certain rights. Our government is not allowed to violate those rights and if they do, they can technically be held accountable. The government can do shady things to outsiders within the constraints of the Constitution. As long as our government is honoring the Constitution, we have some hope of fixing its problems/flaws. If…

I don't give a fuck about the constitution of a country I don't live in but I too have rights.

Agreed, which is why the US and many other countries have shit track records by human rights groups.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#138

Post by whamlastxmas »

Ccecil wrote: post #108

I have asked no less than 10 people why they listen to talk radio when it is clearly propaganda. The response is strangely always almost verbatim "I like to stay informed". It amazes me that they always say the same thing in response. I have found a similar thing when I mention I have no Facebook account...the response is almost always "I just like to keep in touch with people"...but they never seem to point out thes…

I am as anti-Facebook as they come while still using Facebook. I care about people in my past even if I haven't talked to them in ten years. I am curious what they are up to, and it makes me happy to see people from my past living happy lives. Being connected to people is a positive feature in my life, even if it comes at the expense of privacy.

Social media is what you make of it. If the beginning and end of your exposure to current events, politics, and information is Facebook, then yes, there's likely to be some uninformed opinions being created.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#139

Post by kilroy123 »

cel1ne wrote: post #9

We live in the age of fear because the hose of information that floods us is constantly opened further: Letters → Telegram → Telephone → Radio → TV → Internet → Mobile Internet. Human beings need time to manage their emotions. Time spent waiting. Time being bored. Time when NO new information, not even positive, is arriving. We are constantly distracted and thus increasingly unable to sort out our feelings. That is t…

Yes, this is very spot on. I try to unplug as much as I can every Sunday. Get outdoors, go visit a museum, or spend a chunk of the day read a good book.

I also think unplugging for an entire week or more every year is healthy. Go camping for a week, or go somewhere remote, and get the hell away from the computer and phone.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#140

Post by apatters »

cel1ne wrote: post #9

We live in the age of fear because the hose of information that floods us is constantly opened further: Letters → Telegram → Telephone → Radio → TV → Internet → Mobile Internet. Human beings need time to manage their emotions. Time spent waiting. Time being bored. Time when NO new information, not even positive, is arriving. We are constantly distracted and thus increasingly unable to sort out our feelings. That is t…

A thousand times this.

Making similar arguments, Tim Ferriss introduced concepts he called the "media fast" and "low information diet" when he published The 4-Hour Workweek back in 2007. The overarching idea was that you should devote some time and energy to actively identifying the least useful information you're consuming, and stop consuming it. IIRC, his taxonomy was that information which requires your action or affects you directly in the near future is useful, everything else is not. So he didn't follow election coverage at all for example.

I still think of this as one of the most useful ideas I've ever come across and have taken it pretty far over the years, for instance disabling all notifications on my phone, culling my Facebook feed very aggressively (and uninstalling their app), and following very few media sources--because most news is non-useful in this sense. It definitely gives me more peace of mind, and when I slip and start reading more crappy useless information I notice myself getting more anxious.

It's also made me feel that the world would be better off without ad-based media as we know it, because the companies which publish it are the ones most responsible for putting out this low information, amygdala-terrorizing crap. If you really need it (and you probably don't), you can get a pretty good, reasonably unbiased feed of what's going on in the world via news wires like Reuters and AP. But we have this giant industry which basically spins and distorts what those organizations produce, slaps ads on it, produces clickbaity headlines and gives it to you for free. It's free because deep down inside, we all know it's not useful. If it was useful we'd pay for it. We're reading it because our lizard brain hungers.

Post reply on HN