The Horrible Future of Social • Hacker News Board

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#141

Post by illuminate » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 3:57 PM UTC

zerostar07 wrote: post #125

I find it funny when people protest about the way social sites cheapen life experiences. Somehow it is assumed that people have an innate need for privacy. Privacy is mostly social conditioning (have you seen kids playing?). Social sites bring forward that repressed part of the human nature because they give incentives, but the drive is always there. Its just human nature, revealed. People say that they are repulsed…

"Somehow it is assumed that people have an innate need for privacy."

It makes me sad that someone with your attitude will probably end up an employee of a Social site, if you aren't already.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#142

Post by illuminate » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 4:02 PM UTC

gwillen wrote: post #39

spartango wrote: post #38

Notably, a lower-tech version of this social dynamic (particular the sexual version) appeared in a high school in California this year[1]. We think of these things as incredibly immature and disrespectful, but it appears that they happen anyway. [1] http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50133713n

These stories are perennial in the media. They are inevitably exaggerated or outright fake. Remember, their sources are kids who are bored and want to be on TV.

Yep, like http://www.snopes.com/risque/school/bracelet.asp or "rainbow parties". Kids also enjoy pranking the media.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#143

Post by jblock » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 4:30 PM UTC

jamesmiller5 wrote: post #104

sanderjd wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your parent also accurately captures why Google Glass is a solution to a self-inflicted problem.

I was going to throw a nod to this in my original post. Although Google Glass in this case is using technology to solve a personal/social/cultural problem I do think it's one of the few times in recent memory to be an actually good solution. I believe it gives the individuals such as myself and others who do value the living over the sharing a chance to get the best of both while giving those who value sharing over l…

At the same time, when do we hit our mental limits for absorbing information simultaneously? Yes there's the capacity to unobtrusively "share" and "capture," but you have to extend some mental energy to efficiently and usefully absorb this information.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#144

Post by zerostar07 » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 4:33 PM UTC

illuminate wrote: post #141

zerostar07 wrote: post #125

I find it funny when people protest about the way social sites cheapen life experiences. Somehow it is assumed that people have an innate need for privacy. Privacy is mostly social conditioning (have you seen kids playing?). Social sites bring forward that repressed part of the human nature because they give incentives, but the drive is always there. Its just human nature, revealed. People say that they are repulsed…

"Somehow it is assumed that people have an innate need for privacy." It makes me sad that someone with your attitude will probably end up an employee of a Social site, if you aren't already.

Nice ad hominem and public display of self righteousness, care to respond in a civil grown up and rational manner?

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#145

Post by theorique » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 5:14 PM UTC

X-Istence wrote: post #108

theorique wrote: post #80

You were repulsed by the above description of this imaginary site. But not because of some prudish reasons, not even because it had to do with sex. No. You were repulsed because sex.ly violates something very deep and fundamental about humanity. But what, in particular? Mind read much? My feeling upon reading this was hardly the horror that the writer anticipated. Probably more of a "meh, it takes all kinds". I can s…

These websites already exist. Fetlife, Adult Friend Finder, Bedpost and others. That isn't even counting all of the sub-reddits dedicated to this in some way shape or form. Honestly I wasn't repulsed, I was intrigued and interested in seeing how this social network sets itself apart from the rest of them. Not sure why the author tried to tell me that I was repulsed when I wasn't.

Good point. Yes, such sites do exist, and they serve a niche demographic of people who are interested in 'alt' sexuality. People who do their own thing and don't hurt anyone else

The aggressive moralizing in the OP biased me against any otherwise good message in his blog post.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#146

Post by illuminate » Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 7:27 PM UTC

zerostar07 wrote: post #144

illuminate wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Somehow it is assumed that people have an innate need for privacy." It makes me sad that someone with your attitude will probably end up an employee of a Social site, if you aren't already.

Nice ad hominem and public display of self righteousness, care to respond in a civil grown up and rational manner?

It is not an ad hominem to be disappointed that some still believe that the desire for control over one's own privacy is an entitlement, not a right.

I am not "uncivil, immature, and irrational" simply because your personal opinion differs from mine.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#147

Post by sanderjd » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 12:10 AM UTC

jblock wrote: post #143

jamesmiller5 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to throw a nod to this in my original post. Although Google Glass in this case is using technology to solve a personal/social/cultural problem I do think it's one of the few times in recent memory to be an actually good solution. I believe it gives the individuals such as myself and others who do value the living over the sharing a chance to get the best of both while giving those who value sharing over l…

At the same time, when do we hit our mental limits for absorbing information simultaneously? Yes there's the capacity to unobtrusively "share" and "capture," but you have to extend some mental energy to efficiently and usefully absorb this information.

I think there is a really significant editing problem - if you share everything, the unfiltered stream is way too much for yourself or anyone else to meaningfully consume at a later time, but if you are constantly picking and choosing what is and isn't worthy of sharing, then you lose the unobtrusiveness of the solution that your parent praised.

I think I may have said the same thing you said.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#148

Post by calbear81 » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 2:52 AM UTC

kybernetikos wrote: post #128

lathamcity wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was watching some video the other day where Jon Stewart made a random appearance. All the people around him had their phones out taking pictures of him instead of actually experiencing him being there. It was like proving to other people that they'd had an awesome experience was more important than actually having that experience. Or like they were going through life as tourists, making sure they checked every box…

I think I can top that. I saw a photo in a newspaper a few years ago with the Dalai Lama walking through a crowd. People were reaching out to shake hands with him and he was shaking hands with one girl in the crowd who, rather than looking at him was looking at the screen of the phone she was using to take a photo of him shaking her hand.

This is especially annoying at live events like concerts when the person in front of you is holding up a smartphone to record the concert and they're watching it on the tiny screen instead of focusing on the person standing in front of them. I'm completely distracted by their recording and yet at the same time I feel immense pity for them.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#149

Post by calbear81 » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 2:57 AM UTC

greggman wrote: post #123

lathamcity wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was watching some video the other day where Jon Stewart made a random appearance. All the people around him had their phones out taking pictures of him instead of actually experiencing him being there. It was like proving to other people that they'd had an awesome experience was more important than actually having that experience. Or like they were going through life as tourists, making sure they checked every box…

Isn't it kind of cynical to assume the reason they are taking a picture is because they want to brag about it to their friends? I have I'm guessing 10-20k pictures I've taken in the last 12 years. I've taking probably > 1k pictures with my phone this year. I've shared less than 2% of them. I happen to enjoy looking back at all these photos. They bring back memories of various events in my life. IMO, memories I'd like…

I don't disagree that people are not doing it to brag but perhaps as someone else mentioned the memory that has been captured is now not as fulfilling or vivid or "memorable" as it should have been if the phone wasn't such a distraction.

Going back 25 years, I think you'll find that people rarely connected in as wide of a network but the circle of friends they did connect with was possibly on a much more fulfilling and deeper level and they got significantly more out of it than a shallow network of thousands of "friends".

I too feel that it's easier than ever to connect with friends on Facebook but somehow the convenience has also made the friendship feel more superficial. Whereas before I had to make an effort to write a birthday card or give someone a call, today, I simply click and write "have a great birthday". Engaging with Facebook has almost become like tending a farm in Farmville, I see alerts, I do routine actions that keep up the appearances of being "social" and that's it. It's sad that I think back now and I don't even remember how my friends sound because we interact in person and on the phone so much less.

Re: The Horrible Future of Social

#150

Post by mikescar » Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 6:08 AM UTC

firefoxman1 wrote: post #119

jeremymcanally wrote: post #65

I see this every time I go to Disney World (I live nearby). It's almost impossible to enjoy a single ride or fireworks show without a ton of people videoing the whole thing or taking horrible pictures of it with a smart device of some sort. Rather than enjoying it and capturing some deep memory of a moment with their family, they have their face stuck in a digital device capturing a crude facsimile of the experience…

I'm in complete agreement with both you and the author on this subject. In fact, I've been intentionally without a smartphone for close to 2 years now. I recently had a similar experience on a trip. I'll try to keep it short: Recently I took a trip to San Francisco for the first time (and I'll admit I brought my deactivated Palm Pre along to take some vids). On my third day there I came upon a guy making a cool form…

It's pretty easy to own a smartphone and not go around acting like a jerk who isn't aware of the surroundings. You can drive a car without talking on it. If the phone rings, beeps, or vibrates, you can even ignore it.