The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction • Hacker News Board

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#101

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 10:31 PM UTC

word-reader wrote: post #81

hoorayimhelping wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I've been making an effort to do more is to try to have a softer look on my face when I'm in public. I tend to be pretty intense looking, especially when I'm thinking hard, which I usually am when I'm walking or standing in line. I've noticed that consciously thinking about something that makes me very happy, or something I find funny, will make that happy emotion show on my face. When I project happy into…

When I moved to NYC, I was used to walking around with a pleasant and welcoming face, "without armor" as you say. Unfortunately, this caused me to be accosted multiple times a day by beggars, scammers, or just crazy people. After a few months, I developed the mild scowl and cold attitude required to keep them away.

[deleted]

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#102

Post by word-reader » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 10:35 PM UTC

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #100

ncr100 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dense cities are a "product" ripe for disruption - great stimulation opportunities but simultaneously an unhealthy environment for humans. Consider: Containerized city. 0-population cities where rapid transit brings people in during active-hours only? Walkable areas being vehicles themselves, forceably removing people after N-hours and dumping them in to less-dense habitation areas?

FWIW, I haven't made the parent comment's sort of experience in either Berlin, London, or Paris. So it might be somewhat specific to New York. And I have trouble understanding what you are actually suggesting, but it seems to be an entirely technocratic take ignoring what actually makes cities liveable, with possibly some dehumanisation of homeless people thrown in for extra discredit?

In US cities it seems the norm is to never say a word to strangers about anything, ever, so it then follows that anyone who does talk to you is more likely trying to grift you. Which makes you even less likely to talk to strangers in the future, in a vicious cycle. I've never actually read Jane Jacobs but I'm pretty sure this isn't what she was interested in preserving. I don't know if it's technology, population churn, or what.

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#103

Post by totablebanjo » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 10:52 PM UTC

word-reader wrote: post #102

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I haven't made the parent comment's sort of experience in either Berlin, London, or Paris. So it might be somewhat specific to New York. And I have trouble understanding what you are actually suggesting, but it seems to be an entirely technocratic take ignoring what actually makes cities liveable, with possibly some dehumanisation of homeless people thrown in for extra discredit?

In US cities it seems the norm is to never say a word to strangers about anything, ever, so it then follows that anyone who does talk to you is more likely trying to grift you. Which makes you even less likely to talk to strangers in the future, in a vicious cycle. I've never actually read Jane Jacobs but I'm pretty sure this isn't what she was interested in preserving. I don't know if it's technology, population chu…

I would disagree that all US cities are like that. In the midwest, people will talk to strangers on the train or street in Chicago. Even in the coastal cities there have been instances where I’ve spoken w people around me if something funny or odd is happening.

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#104

Post by byko3y » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 10:53 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #97

byko3y wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could it be the information bombardment made you impenetrable to the real information? For example, since I found really important information and sources I value, no bullshit sources distract my attention. I don't watch TV, I don't visit popular news websites (including HN, made an exception today), I'm not captured by any social net service. I feel like I'm still half-blind and thus see no clear way out of the pris…

Would you be willing to share those sources?

They are not something private and hidden, it's more like a diamonds lying in the road dust because people are just too busy to stop and take a close look at something, unless it jumps right into them in a form of a colorful advertisement picturing a women with big tits offering you to try something. Basically those are random people, random articles/books/lectures I encountered and considered helpfull.

I don't have much to share with english-speaking folks, most amazing "sources" I got acquainted with speak russian. I really enjoyed George Carlin, he provides some helpfull insights for starters.

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#105

Post by handoflixue » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 11:25 PM UTC

chrisfinne wrote: post #88

The Jews identified this problem and the solution thousands of years ago, hence their weekly Sabbath ritual of disconnecting from work/technology and focusing on their family/faith. I've got a growing appreciation for rituals that seem silly, worthless or out-dated. If the ritual has survived this long, deep examination is in order before altering or dismissing it.

I really like Zvi's article on bringing back the Sabbath as a secular tool for disconnecting and ensuring your life is balanced enough that you can survive a day offline: https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2017/10/07/bring-back-the-sabba...

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#106

Post by netsharc » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 11:27 PM UTC

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #100

ncr100 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dense cities are a "product" ripe for disruption - great stimulation opportunities but simultaneously an unhealthy environment for humans. Consider: Containerized city. 0-population cities where rapid transit brings people in during active-hours only? Walkable areas being vehicles themselves, forceably removing people after N-hours and dumping them in to less-dense habitation areas?

FWIW, I haven't made the parent comment's sort of experience in either Berlin, London, or Paris. So it might be somewhat specific to New York. And I have trouble understanding what you are actually suggesting, but it seems to be an entirely technocratic take ignoring what actually makes cities liveable, with possibly some dehumanisation of homeless people thrown in for extra discredit?

I've managed to make a (insert politically correct term for "gypsy" here) beggar in Paris turn around and walk away a few seconds after she bee-lined towards me with my scowl, which makes me wonder what look I had that was so effective...

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#107

Post by wnissen » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 11:33 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #51

wallflower wrote: post #9

Distractions are our lives now. You can choose to minimize them. Start by turning off “new email” notifications. You may not miss much by not knowing the moment an email arrives. If something is truly important and urgent, they will usually use multiple means to contact you, like calling you. You can also graduate to removing almost all notifications from your phone. I say almost all because the beauty of Slack is th…

Do Not Disturb mode, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Your life will change. No notifications, no vibrations, no dings, no texts, no calls. It's wonderful. You, and only you should be in charge of when you use your phone. Not some random caller or E-mail sender, not some app developer's "growth hacker", not AI running on some service's backend. Take back control of your attention!

I found my quality of life greatly improved when I started going to Facebook once a day, no app or notifications. So far it is improving again as I have stopped using Facebook. They sure are desperate to get you back, though, it's been two weeks of twice- or thrice-daily emails.

The straw that broke the camel's back in this case was the behavior of the Messenger notifications. They filled messenger with so many bullshit "friendaversary" and other notices that I stopped paying attention and I missed my real, actual friends who were trying to get in touch with me. Such a transparent Skinner box, I couldn't respect myself if I went along with that kind of manipulation. Then when I found it's basically impossible to disable Messenger it became clear that I had to delete it all. I'll download my data from them and call it a day.

It's such a shame because Facebook put me in touch with a number of people that I only sent a Christmas card to, if at all. But I think the nature of these social networks is that the more addictive and manipulative ones quickly crowd out the decent ones. Metcalfe's Law seemed like a great thing until you realize that the growth has to be exponential to have a chance of "winning".

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#108

Post by polynomial » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 12:14 AM UTC

aphextim wrote: post #3

One thing I try to always do is smile and/or wave at babies/young children if they make eye contact with you. In a world where there is a lot of negativity being broadcast on the news 24/7 and click bait headlines, it is good to instill a sense of happiness in the youth of today by being friendly. Walking places a lot of people are distracted by their phones and hardly make eye contact anymore of if they do they make…

There's literally an ad on the (NYC) Subway I saw just this morning implying making eye contact is something that is to be avoided at all costs.

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#109

Post by m463 » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 12:24 AM UTC

chrisfinne wrote: post #88

The Jews identified this problem and the solution thousands of years ago, hence their weekly Sabbath ritual of disconnecting from work/technology and focusing on their family/faith. I've got a growing appreciation for rituals that seem silly, worthless or out-dated. If the ritual has survived this long, deep examination is in order before altering or dismissing it.

I think the Amish have an interesting take on technology too.

They do adopt it - but very slowly and only to enhance their community.

Fascinating article by Kevin Kelly on Amish Hackers:

https://kk.org/thetechnium/amish-hackers-a/

Re: The Death of Social Reciprocity in the Era of Digital Distraction

#110

Post by sak5sk » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 12:58 AM UTC

byko3y wrote: post #49

sak5sk wrote: post #18

It's worse than that. It is all baked into our daily tools. Even HN as a community and a forum aids in distraction. Pretty much any community that lets you form an echo chamber around yourself (all social networks, and communities including HN)commands your attention by making you interact with people who think like you. If this were done in real life it would be much different, but the online medium of it falls shor…

Could it be the information bombardment made you impenetrable to the real information? For example, since I found really important information and sources I value, no bullshit sources distract my attention. I don't watch TV, I don't visit popular news websites (including HN, made an exception today), I'm not captured by any social net service. I feel like I'm still half-blind and thus see no clear way out of the pris…

I am not sure how you got that out of my comment. What exactly is real information? Personally, I think people who only get their news from "trusted" sources are actually closing themselves off to a variety of different opinions, however disagreeable. I do not feel bombarded with information because like you, I don't watch TV. Everything I read is selective based on what I want to read, not because it just happens to be there. Take twitter or HN for example, it's not like I'm clicking all the articles and leaving comments on all of them.

One could argue that by getting your info from a few selected sources you are actually just absorbing their information from whatever few sources they have and are not seeing the full picture.