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

Era of Distraction

raymundtamayo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: Era of Distraction

#31

Post by frou_dh »

tedks wrote: post #24
frou_dh wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All your quote shows me is that you home in on something (anything!) to be offended about. What's wrong with an author's book excerpt?

It's hard to "home in" on something that's only in the last line of the article. But before coming to the comments, I too chuckled a little at the irony of an ad for an ebook being disguised as a polemic against consumerism and distraction. If you do not see the irony in this, that's fine; you are still a special person and your life or viewpoints are no less valuable. But that's not a reason to personally attack tho…

Trying to "gotcha" article authors by flinging out a oneliner about why they're a hypocrite has to be the longstanding most lazy, negative thing that's done on aggregator sites. Here's the key thought-technology[0]: just because we formulate one, doesn't mean it's worth posting. A private chuckle suffices.

[0] I love this term from the fantasticly earnest podcast: http://www.merlinmann.com/roderick/

Re: Era of Distraction

#32

Post by crpatino »

dopeboy wrote: post #13

I don't think the author should be using the "we" pronoun. He's welcome to talk about himself but it's a step too far in generalizing that everyone has those behaviors and tendencies. Second, he needs to take a deep breath and relax. There is a balance that can be achieved through focus and discipline. How about changing the discussion to educating parents on these distractions and nipping the false sense of anxiety…

I think the author is perfectly entitled to use "we" for the phenomena he is both experimenting first hand and observing around his environment. I can say his experience seems uncomfortably familiar to me, and have talked with more people (both online and face to face) that see the same things and share the same concerns. So, there is a non trivial number of people inside that "we". If you don't experiment this problem in person, you might as well count your blessings.

Your point about there being a balance... it might be correct on the individual level. However, you cannot deny the problem at the society level. A large number of people (maybe the majority) never learn how to focus, because they grow up in environments that do not promote formation of discipline - either they are left to do as they see fit, or they are told what to do all the time, but only rarely are held accountable to own up the consequences of their own actions until very late in their upbreeding.

Re: Era of Distraction

#33

Post by jerf »

eterm wrote: post #21
thegainz wrote: post #10

I've recently given up a big temptation/distractor in my life. I packed up my gaming desktop and gave it away, and now I just use my laptop which I long ago set aside as school-only. This thing couldn't even play games if I wanted to, but it CAN ssh and compile code. I mean, after 9.5 years of playing DotA, what's the point? My grades have improved and I'm overall happier as I invest more time learning skills that I…

Good for you. I'm often tempted to do the same, I still play 2-3 hours a day of PC games most nights after work. It isn't healthy but then if I didn't I suspect I'd binge on netflix or even just regular TV instead. I think eventually I'll grow out of it and do more reading, cooking and other activities, but it'll take a decision on my part to make that happen.

I find I have about an hour before bed where I really shouldn't be trying to be productive (because if I keep coding or whatever, it'll actually prevent me from sleeping), where some nice video games or some passively-consumed video content can be slotted in guilt-free.

Now, I'm not saying that's the only time I relax, because that would be a lie. But it is a time that at least speaking for myself, I have to relax or I can't sleep.

Re: Era of Distraction

#34

Post by chipsy »

JadeNB wrote: post #19

> I don’t want to offend anyone, and I’m saying this with absolute care and humility… but if only they hadn’t had that much stuff then they would have had an easier time evacuating their homes and focusing on making sure their families are safe. I've never understood these "I'm not a racist, but"-type comments. This is offensive, and does not demonstrate care and humility. Someone who learns from such a tragedy princ…

You're right that it's poor rhetoric. "Oh Woe" flagellation doesn't fit well in self help writing.

The ancient way of fitting a potentially offensive statement in is to write it esoterically, so that only the people who really want to analyze get the message. The modern way is to call everything a positive, I think.

Re: Era of Distraction

#35

Post by JadeNB »

ggreer wrote: post #27
JadeNB wrote: post #19

> I don’t want to offend anyone, and I’m saying this with absolute care and humility… but if only they hadn’t had that much stuff then they would have had an easier time evacuating their homes and focusing on making sure their families are safe. I've never understood these "I'm not a racist, but"-type comments. This is offensive, and does not demonstrate care and humility. Someone who learns from such a tragedy princ…

From Scott Alexander's post, The Eighth Meditation on Superweapons and Bingo [1]: > But why would someone use "I'm not racist, but..."? It sounds to me like what they are saying is: "Look. I know what I am saying is going to sound racist to you. You're going to jump to the conclusion that I'm a racist and not hear me out. In fact, maybe you've been trained to assume that the only reason anyone could possibly assert i…

> Most often, people who use such disclaimers really aren't racist. Or if they are, it's by accidental ignorance, not purposeful maliciousness. In any case, it's more productive to respond with civil discourse rather than claiming offense and biting their head off.

I don't believe that I bit anyone's head off (but maybe you weren't claiming that I did).

As for a claim of accidental ignorance, I don't buy it in the context of the "I'm not racist, but …" disclaimer. If you are aware enough of how you sound to say that, then it seems too much to claim that any actual racism is accidental.

In fact, what I meant to say here was not that racist-sounding remarks are always racist and should never be heard, but rather that someone who wants to say something that sounds racist, but that he thinks isn't, had better explain why it isn't rather than just asserting that it isn't.

Re: Era of Distraction

#36

Post by JadeNB »

chipsy wrote: post #34
JadeNB wrote: post #19

> I don’t want to offend anyone, and I’m saying this with absolute care and humility… but if only they hadn’t had that much stuff then they would have had an easier time evacuating their homes and focusing on making sure their families are safe. I've never understood these "I'm not a racist, but"-type comments. This is offensive, and does not demonstrate care and humility. Someone who learns from such a tragedy princ…

You're right that it's poor rhetoric. "Oh Woe" flagellation doesn't fit well in self help writing. The ancient way of fitting a potentially offensive statement in is to write it esoterically, so that only the people who really want to analyze get the message. The modern way is to call everything a positive, I think.

> The ancient way of fitting a potentially offensive statement in is to write it esoterically, so that only the people who really want to analyze get the message.

I'm not sure that I understand this. Are you referring to some older equivalent of dog-whistle rhetoric (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics)?

Re: Era of Distraction

#37

Post by HenryTheHorse »

habitue wrote: post #11
HenryTheHorse wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very real problem of people not being aware of their impulse to buy. In fact, it's the foundation for all advertising: plant messages in the buyer's mind well before the buying occurs. I know that sounds Manchurian Candidate-ish but that's the nature of Marketing and Advertising. So perhaps the author is not entirely wrong in positing that distraction is, in a way, fueling meaningless purchases?

It's certainly possible, but if true, its in spite of our tendency to have one device we use all the time, not directly because of it

You bet. People have been making questionable purchasing decisions for a LONG time. To blame it ALL on a smartphone or some other distraction is a bit simplistic.

Re: Era of Distraction

#38

Post by Animats »

That reads like a rant from the 1950s. People have been complaining about that since the introduction of television. Before television, entertainment was a scarce resource. After television, anyone with a receiver could obtain more entertainment than they could consume.

About a dozen years ago, ABC, the TV network, had a promotion to the industry with banners around the Hollywood area. One on Wilshire near Beverly Hills said "All we ask is five hours a day". That refers to the average TV viewing time of Americans. That number has dropped since, much to the annoyance of the TV networks.

We may have passed peak cell phone overuse. I see fewer people walking around while looking at their little screen. It's been several years now since someone walked into me while looking at a screen; in the early days of smartphones, that happened often in stores. I'm no longer seeing people on the California Coastal Trail watching little screens. Society seems to be dealing with this.

Re: Era of Distraction

#39

Post by mbrock »

frou_dh wrote: post #31
tedks wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to "home in" on something that's only in the last line of the article. But before coming to the comments, I too chuckled a little at the irony of an ad for an ebook being disguised as a polemic against consumerism and distraction. If you do not see the irony in this, that's fine; you are still a special person and your life or viewpoints are no less valuable. But that's not a reason to personally attack tho…

Trying to "gotcha" article authors by flinging out a oneliner about why they're a hypocrite has to be the longstanding most lazy, negative thing that's done on aggregator sites. Here's the key thought-technology[0]: just because we formulate one, doesn't mean it's worth posting. A private chuckle suffices. [0] I love this term from the fantasticly earnest podcast: http://www.merlinmann.com/roderick/

Sorry, I'll try to keep my snark to myself.

Re: Era of Distraction

#40

Post by j_camarena »

eterm wrote: post #21
thegainz wrote: post #10

I've recently given up a big temptation/distractor in my life. I packed up my gaming desktop and gave it away, and now I just use my laptop which I long ago set aside as school-only. This thing couldn't even play games if I wanted to, but it CAN ssh and compile code. I mean, after 9.5 years of playing DotA, what's the point? My grades have improved and I'm overall happier as I invest more time learning skills that I…

Good for you. I'm often tempted to do the same, I still play 2-3 hours a day of PC games most nights after work. It isn't healthy but then if I didn't I suspect I'd binge on netflix or even just regular TV instead. I think eventually I'll grow out of it and do more reading, cooking and other activities, but it'll take a decision on my part to make that happen.

I used to do the same thing. Went to the gym instead.
Post reply on HN