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

We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#321

Post by gchamonlive »

monktastic1 wrote: post #253
yunwal wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you going to do when you retire by 40 and all your friends (and s/o) are still working? I don’t really understand the appeal.

Perhaps "retire" is the wrong word. One can still work (whether for pay or not) and improve the lives of the people around them without staying on the consumption treadmill. Very few actually do. Again, this isn't meant as a judgement — it's just highlighting that we each have a role to play in slowing down this insane freight train.

This is completely the wrong approach. You can't dedicate your entire life to one specific task and expect when you retire to suddenly be able to "improve the lives of the people around (you) without staying in the consumption treadmill" because all you know is the consumption treadmill. Thinking otherwise is just wishful thinking.

If you see yourself improving the lives of people around you later in life, which is commendable and the right thing to do, you have to start now, while you are still in your prime years. If you leave it when you are older chances are you'll be just another John waiting in line for the next Black Friday.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#322

Post by abeppu »

Aurornis wrote: post #250
stdvit wrote: post #97

> Even in a world brimming with easy distractions—TikTok, Pornhub, Candy Crush, Sudoku—people still manage to meet for drinks, work out at the gym, go on dates, muddle through real life. They actually don't. Everything from dating and fitness to manufacturing and politics is in decline in activities, and more so in effect and understanding. You can't convince (enough) people anymore that it is even important as many…

I go out and do different activities that involve socialization. There are more people than ever going to the climbing gyms, meeting at the hiking trailhead, hanging out in the ski lift lines, and so on. All of the social places I’ve been going and activities I’ve been doing since a teenager are more crowded than ever, at a rate far faster than the local population growth. Many of the people doing these activities di…

You're basically saying that people who aren't social mistakenly view the rest of the world as not social because of their specific experience, but doesn't that effect also cut the other way? You're seeing people being social because you're going to those situations.

But there are time use surveys etc which provide a quantitative view of a lot of people. Because they're voluntary, they can't be a perfect representative sample of the overall population. But I think the broad, systematic view is still the best view we have of the overall trend. Also note that the scale and pace of the trend is slow enough that any individual _can't_ really provide an anecdotal view of it, because their own life is in a different place.

E.g. one source [1]:

> Atalay reports that, between 2003 and 2019, people spent an increasing amount of time alone. Over this 16-year period, the portion of free time people spent alone increased, on average, from 43.5 percent to 48.7 percent, representing an increase of over 5 percentage points.

Any given individual's time-use would probably change over 16 years regardless of what the population-level trends were just because that duration might also be the difference between e.g. being in school vs being married with young children or from being a busy professional to being a retiree.

[1] https://www.philadelphiafed.org/the-economy/macroeconomics/h...

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#323

Post by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #230
taormina wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gas costs money. The car costs money. You can only do the same hike that's an hour away so many times, before you're traveling to go to new places, and hotels cost money at that point. Pickleball courts cost money. The pickleball equipment costs money. People do go to the library, and then they go home and don't interact with other people.

The fact that many young people don't seem to think that "Hey, we'd just go over to someone's apartment/house to hang out and have a meal or drink" as a primary form of entertainment (vs. some "activity") makes me realize how much we have fucked over many young people as a society in general.

I did that as a kid and I loved it, but it made sense when everyone was in bicycling distance.

Then one by one, we got cars and the friend groups shuffled from "Who is in bicycling range" to "Who is in driving range", and driving range is so big that it's not practical to drive 4 miles to my closest friend, knock on her door, hope she isn't having sex with her husband, and ask if she wants to chill

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#324

Post by haswell »

roncesvalles wrote: post #279
anal_reactor wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit. Most people can afford grabbing a beer in a supermarket and going to the park. They just choose not to. I think the real change is that nowadays it's just easier and more practical NOT to maintain friendships. Yes, it's lonely, but it's more efficient.

Drinking outdoors (let alone at a public park) is just not a thing outside Europe.

Despite often being against the rules this is absolutely a thing all over Chicago during the warmer months.

Boozy picnics at the beaches, wine in plastic cups at the parks, etc. And fully sanctioned alcohol at the dozens of neighborhood street fests held throughout the year.

And it’s also a thing in suburbia, where backyard coolers full of beer are common at weekend gatherings.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#325

Post by HPsquared »

janderson215 wrote: post #312
HPsquared wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally illegal in many places. Edit: including much of Europe.

Which in itself is a crime, IMO.

Most places do have a few dedicated areas like beer gardens. No supermarket beer allowed, of course.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#326

Post by monktastic1 »

gchamonlive wrote: post #284
monktastic1 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be so quick to divide the world so neatly into victims and perpetrators. Every FAANG engineer I know, for example, could easily retire by mid-40s by keeping consumption in check. Instead, nearly every single one chose instead to "improve their lifestyles." Not blaming them, either, because it's cultural programming -- but until we all learn to slow down a bit and reflect, the madness isn't going to stop.

Even if you knew every FAANG in existence that would account for a very small fraction of the population. It might be true for this class, but you can't expect everyone to be a able to retire by 40. Even if everybody could, they wouldn't because they are immersed in a culture that celebrated consumerism at every instance. You can't just turn a switch and now you live self-sustainably.

My assumption here is that FAANG employees are not fundamentally different from the rest of the populace along that particular dimension (desire to inflate lifestyle). I chose them in particular to demonstrate that even when we have the choice, we can easily opt not to take it. Of course many do not have that choice.

And yes, I agree with your second paragraph. "The culture" celebrates it — but that culture is not violently enforced top-down by a handful of people twirling mustaches. We all participate in our own little ways — and the more of us that step off the treadmill, the less those messages find footing, in a virtuous cycle. Again, it's not about blame. But for those of us who have the capacity and desire to decondition ourselves, it's very much worth doing. It can affect the feedback loop more powerfully than we think.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#327

Post by DrillShopper »

roncesvalles wrote: post #279
anal_reactor wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit. Most people can afford grabbing a beer in a supermarket and going to the park. They just choose not to. I think the real change is that nowadays it's just easier and more practical NOT to maintain friendships. Yes, it's lonely, but it's more efficient.

Drinking outdoors (let alone at a public park) is just not a thing outside Europe.

This is highly regional.

I live in the Midwest US. The city government sponsors floating (as in they move around, not that they're in water) beer gardens across public parks in the summer, and our local Lutheran and Catholic churches will run outdoor beer gardens and barbecues as a way to enjoy the nice weather and bring in a little money. The various state fairs also sell beer, and a local outdoor, public music festival goes through a staggering amount of alcohol consumed in public.

People are out in public, often with the authorities around, drinking beer and mixed drinks out of clear plastic cups (usually) and nobody cares. It's just a summer thing.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#328

Post by Krasnol »

ryandrake wrote: post #165
WHA8m wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here: I agree. On the other hand, it's a pest upon humankind that we can't leave public spaces clean and respect public property. We need money to pay people to make nice things, because apparently there is no critical mass that cares about the community. It's always individuals that burden it on their shoulders. And that's obviously not sufficient. Solution: money. Yeah, I hate it too.

> On the other hand, it's a pest upon humankind that we can't leave public spaces clean and respect public property. Toxic individualism and an intolerance towards collective ownership is killing community. We should not blame humankind on a problem easily solvable by hiring a few people to clean and fix things. Somehow, this (the public bearing any cost whatsoever to have and maintain high quality public property) h…

It didn't become unacceptable. The general public does pay already.

What becomes more and more unacceptable is the way those who already have a lot avoid to participate in this collective maintenance.

Besides that, there are things you can't solve with money. Sure you can sand "a few people" to clean up a place but the fact that people didn't use the trash bins (if the community was able to afford some) won't go away. It will create more and more costs while the collective money to patch over this will get less and less.

There will be a point when it snaps and some will be surprised it did because their bubble was kept clean all the time. They paid extra for it and your kids are not allowed on the loan.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#329

Post by Aurornis »

roncesvalles wrote: post #279
anal_reactor wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit. Most people can afford grabbing a beer in a supermarket and going to the park. They just choose not to. I think the real change is that nowadays it's just easier and more practical NOT to maintain friendships. Yes, it's lonely, but it's more efficient.

Drinking outdoors (let alone at a public park) is just not a thing outside Europe.

You might be surprised to learn that many people in public parks are not, in fact, drinking water out of their water bottles or La Croix out of their La Croix cans.

Also, drinking in public is not allowed in much of Europe. Don’t go there and assume it is.

There are also many US locations and parks where alcohol is allowed.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#330

Post by 13_9_7_7_5_18 »

Den_VR wrote: post #302
anal_reactor wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bullshit. Most people can afford grabbing a beer in a supermarket and going to the park. They just choose not to. I think the real change is that nowadays it's just easier and more practical NOT to maintain friendships. Yes, it's lonely, but it's more efficient.

So, who are you going to go drinking with at the park? And in reverse, you’re visiting the park and see someone there drinking. What’s your impression?

[dead]
Post reply on HN