51–60 of 176 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think OP's point is that if your life is so blessed that "90% of the news is unimportant to you" then that itself is a great, fortunate privilege. For example, I can tell you that if you are an immigrant in the USA from one of the (now many) targeted countries, even one with legal residency, news about ICE's actions is very relevant and very important to you.
[flagged]
I've been trying to migrate back to command-line-only applications to get a facsimile of this. I don't think that command-line tools are better in any kind of "objective" sense, but I find that if you live primarily within tmux + neovim (and maybe Codex/Claude if you want to be super cool), then it's much easier to not be distracted by the rest of the world. Nowadays, when I do work I will have a full screen terminal…
I'd love to see a photo of this 85" TV setup, if you're willing to share :)
ETA:
https://i.imgur.com/HHBt0QE.jpeg
Forgive the messy desk. I wish I could say it's atypical, but it's not. I always have a ton of projects going on concurrently and as a result it's easy for stuff to pile up. I'll probably clean it this week.
My work computer isn't plugged in so I'm afraid you'll have to use your imagination for the million tmux splits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's definitely privileged to take a trip to the Galapagos, but I don't think it's privileged to ignore the news. A lot of poor people ignore the news. They may be too busy, or they may feel powerless to change anything. I think the real question is what exactly this entirely content-free statement means: "I’ll be focusing more on stories that actually matter instead of chasing the flash-in-the-pan ephemera that nobo…
Privilege isn't just about wealth. The point is that although anyone can ignore the news, the news won't necessarily ignore them!
Being relentlessly informed of all the miseries of the world is a choice for most people in developed countries not in the middle of a war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ICE's actions is very relevant and very important to you. Maybe the first few stories are, but what past masked goons throwing up Nazi salutes and sending people to foreign labor camps do you need to keep up on? If you're into politics, then sure, but your average Joe probably doesn't need to know that they're, yet again, terrorizing people and acting like a secret police force.
Apparently more people need to see more information about those things because they’re still happening
This is foisting misery on people who have no capacity to affect change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Millions of people who are from other countries are living perfectly fine in the US and not hiding in fear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that 90% of the news is unimportant. Often you can read a weekly and that is enough A politician said something and other politicians reacted. Usually unimportant unless it was backed by a law or something. If it was important then the weekly will cover it. Main Character of the day on Social media. unimportant A crime happened nearby. Unimportant A celeb did something. Unimportant Something happened to…
I think OP's point is that if your life is so blessed that "90% of the news is unimportant to you" then that itself is a great, fortunate privilege. For example, I can tell you that if you are an immigrant in the USA from one of the (now many) targeted countries, even one with legal residency, news about ICE's actions is very relevant and very important to you.
The downside is that I now interact with HN a lot more, which I was hoping would not happen.
Ignoring the obvious contradictory nature of the post (a trip to a place that is generally so expensive and time consuming that only the wealthy leisure class can access it yields polite people), what is the alternative to the fast news cycle? I've been toying with different solutions over the years but haven't found anything great. Magazine subscription to something like the Economist? Weekly Sunday paper subscripti…
I switched to a weekly subscription of Economist (print) and it has been great. I haven't seen then news in a year (on phone, or TV). If there's something really important happening, then people around me generally tell me. At that point I check what's happening online, but that doesn't last more than a day or 2. It has allowed me to escape the news cycle. I am yet to find an equivalent of the Economist for India (wh…
Regardless. It's good to feel disconnected from these things. But at the same time I recognize I have a responsibility to take care of the things within my reach.
Is this what people were doing in 1939 though? I really hope not.
