This is a terrible comment, and I want to explain why. It subtly changes the subject.
It's not about what others think of your technology use. It's what you think about it yourself. The reason many of us feel moved by the article and the video isn't some need to tell others what to do, it's the recognition that we ourselves are missing out on important parts of life in some kind of weird attempt to become a TV reporter.
So sure, for the .1% time that you're texting your sick wife with cancer and she's able to vicariously experience things, you are probably feeling pretty good about what you're doing. Now how about the other 99.9% of the time? Do you personally feel that all that tech use is in the interests of some greater good? If so, have fun with it. After watching my own habits, I am very doubtful that this is true. I see people all the time use tech in such a way that's directly opposed to their own best interests -- and they're smart enough to realize this, too. The problem isn't my judging them -- heck I don't care what people do -- it's that we're turning into a society that's spending significant time doing things that we don't want to do. They just give a bit of immediate gratification.
This is a terrible comment and I want to explain why. It uses hyperbolic language in an aggressive manner far out of proportion to content of the comment it is replying to.
Youtube comments are generally terrible. Stormfront comments are terrible. 4Chan comments can be terrible. This comment had content directly related to article it was replying to, talking about the utility this technology can provide, and also that the main thrust of the article and the video it contains seems to be someone else's value judgement on what other people should enjoy.
So sure, for the .1% of the time that a comment on this site is actually derailing or contains just blatant flamebait, trolling, attacks, etc it probably feels pretty good to call it out as terrible. But for the other 99.9% of the time? Have some perspective, grapple with the content of the comment, and do so in a non-aggressive manner entirely in proportion to what you are replying to. Don't go for the over the top hyperbole, no matter how much immediate gratification it gives you.
Good grief. Just to be clear, no disrespect to the commenter was intended or made. The comment itself was bad, because it took a wonderful personal story and used it to derail the attempt by the larger group to analyze the topic. Good people can make bad comments. I do it all the time. Most of the time I try to self-identify such comments by prefixing them with "sidebar" "meta" or another tag.
Maybe 'bad' is not the best description for getting your point across in this case. I feel that the two of you understand differently what you tried to say.. 'bad' is quite emotionally charged for some (for someone it's directed at) and can distract from the discussion for this reason, and I think there are adjectives that do a similar enough job without this while still explaining what happens here from your point of view.
Yep, it is not disrespectful in any way to call someone's point stupid and use your own incorrect projections as a way of doing so. Maybe the next time you think "I'm going to make a helpful comment on the internet" just go sit in the corner and don't bother the people who are actually having a useful adult discussion that involves facts versus baseless, passive aggressive projected insults. I genuinely feel like you would have contributed more to society by just sleeping in today...
Huh? I didn't say that my wife is on the phone any non healthy amount of time. She was on the phone for a short period of time for a very good reason and someone lacked the mental health and self awareness to think "maybe me butting in and lecturing two strangers eating dinner IS more rude than someone being on their cell phone." Normally our usage is completely fine and not a problem, so during all of this, I never had a problem with our usage and only some old stranger did. This is a problem.
The fact that you called my point a terrible point and projected that I must be "turning into a society that's spending significant time doing things that we don't want to do." when you don't know me at all is a pretty scary lack of self awareness. Your entire point is rock bottom terrible and you STILL start off by telling someone else that their point sucks. I don't even know why I bothered to respond because you don't seem even slightly interested in your argument connecting to the actual reality at hand and instead construct it to argue against a strawman version of our society you've built.
"So sure, for the .1% time that you're texting your sick wife with cancer and she's able to vicariously experience things, you are probably feeling pretty good about what you're doing. Now how about the other 99.9% of the time?"
Is the implication here that I must only be using my cell to waste time and drive myself into some sort of deep depression while being too stupid to realize it? Well finally the internet messiah came along to save me! Anyway, my call very certainly saves me time when I use it and I only use it when I need to. I'm not sure why I've become the example when I presume my habits must not be known to you?
"... I never had a problem with our usage and only some old stranger did. This is a problem..."
This is a problem, sure. But it's not related to people themselves using their phones and being unhappy with their usage.
The comment was bad because it took a discussion around whether we are ourselves with our tech use and turned it into some kind of reminiscence about annoying mentally unhealthy people. That's a great story, but it has nothing at all to do with what this article is about.
If you and your wife are happy about your tech use, good for you. If there are rude people in the world, that's a shame. Okay. Got it. Now can we move on to the subject of the article, which is something along the lines of "are we really happy with our own tech use?"
Or we could continue talking about how rude the guy at the restaurant was, how rude I am, how people are always nosing into other people's business -- and a dozen other things not related to that. As long as you realize you're changing the topic, works for me.
There's going to be a very big adverse selection effect on the comments to this story anyway, because anyone who has a healthy relationship to technology is going to think "Eh, it's not worth my time to participate in the debate and get worked up over something generally inconsequential to my life."
I thought about reading through the comments here and participating, but I'm going out for a walk with my family instead.
"Your point, as I understand it, is that since there is one good use case for texting while eating, we should not discourage people from texting while eating in general. That is pretty clear from your post."
I don't think you should discourage anyone from doing this because you don't know what you're talking about.
"The comment was bad because it took a discussion around whether we are ourselves with our tech use and turned it into some kind of reminiscence about annoying mentally unhealthy people. That's a great story, but it has nothing at all to do with what this article is about."
No actually the story pretty much reads like a "I'm sick of these damned kids doing this thing I don't like! I don't understand it and therefore it is evil!" story and assumes that every single time someone uses their phone at dinner they are terribly unhappy and socially unhealthy. My point was simply that he is wrong. There are many completely acceptable uses and sitting there watching someone do something productive or useful on their phone and thinking "this is upsetting! I need to stop this!" really reverses the role of who actually has the problem with unhappiness here.
"If you and your wife are happy about your tech use, good for you. If there are rude people in the world, that's a shame. Okay. Got it. Now can we move on to the subject of the article, which is something along the lines of "are we really happy with our own tech use?""
Um, yeah, my answer was simply. We are happy with our tech use but multiple people want to push a belief on us that we are not happy for no reason. This again seems much less mentally healthy to me.
"Or we could continue talking about how rude the guy at the restaurant was, how rude I am, how people are always nosing into other people's business -- and a dozen other things not related to that. As long as you realize you're changing the topic, works for me."
Whereas you being rude while being 100% disconnected from the topic in any way while twisting my words to the point they couldn't be recognized. Finally the messiah has come to save us all from our own stupidity right?
This article is about being on your phone putting your eyes on advertisements put out by facebook, buzzfeed, etc. because you need to be constantly entertained. It's an encouragement to people who are in that situation to stop doing it.
If you're not in that situation, proclaiming that you're not in that situation and that maybe other people aren't in that situation is a useless comment. It's simply not relevant to the discussion. It's like coming in to a discussion about Hulu and Netflix and telling everyone that you only watch live sports on broadcast TV. What's the point?
[EDIT: P.S. you're not, by any chance, Ryguy from Rangers blue squad?]
wrong. the article is very much about one person (an assertive type-a sociopath) imposing what they think of technology on others:
> A few weeks ago, while out with some friends, I took everyone’s phone and powered them off for the night, saying that we were going to focus on the night rather than our “stupid fucking phones.”
> Next time you’re in a restaurant with friends, have everyone put their phones stacked and face down in the center of the table. If anyone takes their phone off of the stack during the meal, they have to pay everyone else’s bill.
It's not about what others think of your technology use. It's what you think about it yourself. The reason many of us feel moved by the article and the video isn't some need to tell others what to do, it's the recognition that we ourselves are missing out on important parts of life in some kind of weird attempt to become a TV reporter.
So sure, for the .1% time that you're texting your sick wife with cancer and she's able to vicariously experience things, you are probably feeling pretty good about what you're doing. Now how about the other 99.9% of the time? Do you personally feel that all that tech use is in the interests of some greater good? If so, have fun with it. After watching my own habits, I am very doubtful that this is true. I see people all the time use tech in such a way that's directly opposed to their own best interests -- and they're smart enough to realize this, too. The problem isn't my judging them -- heck I don't care what people do -- it's that we're turning into a society that's spending significant time doing things that we don't want to do. They just give a bit of immediate gratification.