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

‘Luddite’ Teens

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 297 posts

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#61

Post by themadturk »

sequoia wrote: post #41

This is interesting but I can't help but notice how intensely performative these kids are as well, at least how they're characterized in this article. They're wearing Carhartt (an unusual choice for a metropolis like NYC), reading Dostoyevski and gathering to "listen to the wind." I will say most teens are like this and I certainly was myself, but I hope they are careful not to cultivate their own "artisan" brand of…

I'm old and I love the Carhartt tee shirts I bought a few years ago...thick cotton, softened through wear and washing, the best shirts I've ever owned. These kids have good taste.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#62

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

ender341341 wrote: post #18
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll still stick it to the man when their employer expects them to provide a personal phone for 2FA and don't have one.

Several people at my work refuse to install work software on personal phones so the company bought them yubikeys to use instead.

I held out on this after a factory wipe on my phone invalidated my authenticator keys. The IT guy ended up using his own phone because cheapskate companies won't pay for real security.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#63

Post by themadturk »

falcolas wrote: post #19

I appreciate that they’ve recognized they have choices, and are being supported in the choices they’re making. It’s not a choice I’ll make (I lived that life without a choice for several decades; I’m good), but I still like that they can.

I agree. I'm Team Smartphone, but those who want and can do without have my admiration.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#64

Post by seanw444 »

antihero wrote: post #37
psychphysic wrote: post #35

These fads always remind me of this Ali G skit. https://youtu.be/xx5t5ps-bwc

How is wholesale rejection of the shitty companies and websites that prey on your attention span to sell adverts in favour of good literature and genuine connection a “fad”? I’ve deleted social media from my phone and it’s been…amazing. I don’t know what to do and end up staring into space instead of giving into my cravings for fresh content. You start to pay attention to your surroundings and think. It’s wonderful.

Boredom is crucial. Boredom creates will.

Your body hates boredom, because traditionally, it meant you weren't doing anything to better your life. Today, we won't die if we're not filling our boredom with farming/hunting our meals by hand. It's too easy to live nowadays. Now, we plug that hole with social media and entertainment. Rather than adapting that caveman survival instinct to something else: improving knowledge, personal health, or real relationships.

That's not to say these things as a whole need to be banned entirely. Like all things, they can be enjoyable in moderation. But too much is unhealthy. Even water has this caveat. The problem is we don't moderate.

Rather than doing/creating something useful and/or memorable, you're stuck scrolling a feed, watching other people improve. It's actually quite sad.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#65

Post by LarryMullins »

wara23arish wrote: post #59
freemanofthewan wrote: post #52

"They marched up a hill toward their usual spot, a dirt mound located far from the park’s crowds. Among them was Odille Zexter-Kaiser, a senior at Edward R. Murrow High School in Midwood, who trudged through leaves in Doc Martens and mismatched wool socks." Wow, these kids sound like the new beatniks. "The club members cite libertine writers like Hunter S. Thompson and Jack Kerouac as heroes," and there's Jack..

I don’t think beatniks particularly wore the equivalent $150+ Doc Martens. Tangent, I really enjoyed reading On the Road

What did they wear? Sandals or something? I tried birkenstock sandals before but they only lasted about a year before they became too gross to wear.

$150 doc martens seem like good value to me. They last about 5-8 years at the rate I wear through them, or about $20-30 per year. Certainly more efficient than any sneakers.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#66

Post by adingus »

floren wrote: post #4

I admire the hell out of these kids. If I had a little more strength in my own convictions, a little more willpower, I would probably go flip-phone only too. Yes, they're kind of posturing and pretentious, but in ways that remind me of myself in high school; I feel like I get them. Your average high school kid is a lot more confusing to me these days. I did have to laugh at this: > "I talked to my adviser, though, an…

I don't get the 'classist' argument at all. You don't need to be rich to want to stop doomscrolling, or to put your phone down for an hour. It sounds more like the kids who call it 'classist' understand phone addiction but don't want to face the fact its actually bad for them... like when an overweight person says 'Id rather enjoy life than eat that salad, I bet that in-shape person is a bore to be around!"

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#68

Post by aaroninsf »

sequoia wrote: post #41

This is interesting but I can't help but notice how intensely performative these kids are as well, at least how they're characterized in this article. They're wearing Carhartt (an unusual choice for a metropolis like NYC), reading Dostoyevski and gathering to "listen to the wind." I will say most teens are like this and I certainly was myself, but I hope they are careful not to cultivate their own "artisan" brand of…

Hottake: the author is effectively oblivious to the impact of the aesthetic scene and unable to filter its impact on contemporary youth culture.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#69

Post by nickthegreek »

verdenti wrote: post #43
Archipelagia wrote: post #40

It reminded me of one of pg's old essays – http://paulgraham.com/addiction.html . Highly recommended. On a personal note, it's also something that worries me for the day when I'll finally have my own children. I wouldn't want them exposed to modern cyber-addictions from young age, but at the same time, I'm not sure how to protect them, when I can expect that all their peers will be on whatever social app's gonna be p…

You protect them by not giving them a smart phone. My daughter is 2 and she hasn’t seen a screen yet.

Sounds pretty easy to do at that age. But how long are you going to protect them? Until their 18? Or 16? Or 12? When do you see yourself allowing a phone. Are you keeping iPads away too?

Some of my friends with kids gave them cell phones around 12-14. But most of the kids had iPads prior.

Re: ‘Luddite’ Teens

#70

Post by freemanofthewan »

wara23arish wrote: post #59
freemanofthewan wrote: post #52

"They marched up a hill toward their usual spot, a dirt mound located far from the park’s crowds. Among them was Odille Zexter-Kaiser, a senior at Edward R. Murrow High School in Midwood, who trudged through leaves in Doc Martens and mismatched wool socks." Wow, these kids sound like the new beatniks. "The club members cite libertine writers like Hunter S. Thompson and Jack Kerouac as heroes," and there's Jack..

I don’t think beatniks particularly wore the equivalent $150+ Doc Martens. Tangent, I really enjoyed reading On the Road

Some pay $150+, some go to the thrift store. True beat-fashion or not, I would never malign someone for choosing quality footwear.
Post reply on HN