Haha, I wish I had that kind of commitment to a bit.

Probably the core limiting factor.

Believe me, it’s already in my long list of caveats. Not to mention the environmental damage of it all (which I guess you probably meant too). And yep, the numbers are goosed anyway.

Ultimately the choosing of what to do and how is the central element of whether “doing more stuff” is good. Still, short term, I’d rather see more people in jobs and affording necessities and feeling some degree of agency. And to my original point, I do think it would make the owner class richer probably, not that it’s a goal of mine lol.

But yep, as Deceptichum pointed out, they could never stand the idea of leaving something deliberately unexploited, lest it be exploited by someone else. It’s basically their defining feature, this need to exploit and extract, first and most thoroughly among their hideous peers.

Anyway, cheers, getting off my gripe-horse for a while.

You could actually do it! If you founded a small dynasty of humans willing to type relentlessly for many hundreds of years, in succession.

I’m not sure I agree, I do think that broadly positive things happen from more people using their time to do “more stuff”, in the most general sense - for me this is the nature of life being decidedly not zero-sum. An unavoidable consequence, part of the same fact, basically.

But adding all of the caveats I’d attach to that statement I just made, along with just my original acknowledgement that of course the worst among us will reap the (by far) largest share of rewards - I mean it would make for a comment too long to be worth reading, which I already struggle with because I crave accuracy of delivery.

With that said, you’re exactly right that the most vulnerable people and the least-training-required jobs make for exactly the disgusting combo of exploitability that we already see, and that are easiest to compel, on both counts. As to not make a euphemism of “compel”, I of course mean force, by causing suffering, of all the many available ways.

I’d go farther (though provisionally) and say that you pointing that out has all the familiar hallmarks of one of the many moments in my life when I have the good fortune to consider a POV in a way that causes me to go “hmm, yep, just found an old remnant of indoctrination in my head, that idea has gotta go”. So I’ll do some sincere thinking, and I appreciate you.

The really stupid part is it probably actually COULD. Healthier, happier people are more productive and more willing to spend their time in the ways that make those people rich.

So, thereby grow the whole pie, they still take the majority of it, get even more. But they’re so goddamn greedy and small-minded, they actually make it worse for themselves. To say nothing of the conditions for the rest of us, and also leaving out the way taking this too far tends to result in turmoil and (gasp) dead rich people.

It all worked out, but I appreciate your defensiveness! It was a mixed group, 'twas the lads cracking jokes, and not even to her - she’s a sensitive one (which I love). The funniest part is the coach wore a silly (admittedly less silly) mustache the whole season, his son was one of the goobers cracking jokes, and everyone actually really got along great over the season.

On the other hand, the kinda stuff you’re describing does happen, and my kiddo has already had to extract herself from a friend group that was heading solidly in that direction. No bueno! Bad parenting by crappy people usually, in my experience.

“oh that? Yeah that’s my poopin’ wedge, wanna take her for a spin?”

Thanks for the link that is really fascinating, though I also want to acknowledge that I feel almost crazy if this is a prevalent thing and I haven’t noticed?

I’d be kinda pleased if it were largely a rejection of performative positivity, one of the theories presented. I think we could all stand to be a bit more honest with each other about how things are going. Actually I think it’s probably necessary, if we’re ever going to meaningfully change.

I do worry about the ways the COVID pandemic (another theory) interrupted social development for an enormous number of kids, just huge. Though to be clear I was in favor of pretty strict, sweeping measures to limit spread, and don’t feel differently today.

I bristled a bit at first, on the mention of “quiet quitting” - AKA behaving perfectly rationally, given the available opportunities and treatment today, by my measure. But the (still Wikipedia) article it links to is a solid overview of a collective action tactic, so hell yeah.

e: can’t help but elaborate sometimes

I’m 2 weeks that kid is gonna look like he lost an argument with a weed whacker lol

I’m the opposite, I say bring on the stupid shit and do it often! Life’s short and looking kinda silly on purpose sometimes is fun. My most recent foray into such was a mustache large enough to be mocked by my daughter’s soccer teammates, first practice, basically on sight hahaha. Causing her to cry (and me to shave it, lol, but it was fun while it lasted, and I don’t intend to further traumatize her with sartorial silliness).

I should definitely have not been left unsupervised as a teenager either lol. And yet, my mom wasn’t even in the same state some of the time lmao

Yep I’m this way and have recently come to realize that at my core I just don’t actually believe any other human has the right to tell me what to do. Full stop. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I should be allowed to do whatever I want, I understand my responsibilities, to my loved ones and society, better than most honestly. I just really can’t tolerate being told what to do.

And oddly it makes me a productive employee, a thoughtful partner, a good friend…largely to avoid scenarios where someone feels like they need to tell me what’s up.

But yeah, all the time society feels more and more like a constricting, stifling set of agreements…which I never actually agreed to.

Completely agree that learning about some of that made me kinder. Don’t agree about your reasoning for it not being scary, though.

It’s not “new” in the same way that using a computer wasn’t new when home PCs were introduced. However - home PCs massively increased the accessibility of computing and resulted in a huge boom in use, including by lots of people who never previously considered it. That’s what this is, that increase in accessibility, but for parasocial relationships with inanimate objects.

I’m not dooming so hard that I think society is in trouble via AI faux-mance in particular. But I do think it’s sad and troubling that many more people will now accept a (sometimes high) degree of self-imposed isolation, due to misplaced belief in a piece of technology, a false belief which the technology deliberately tries to engender.

And let’s remember, human social life is the original “network effect”. By that fact, it seems clear that taking more people out of IRL socialization (and replacing it strictly with simulation), is bad even for people who never touch the stuff.

Feels like a big increase in the ongoing general loneliness and atomization of society is headed our way.

I was just fooling around.

If you think you’re too good to get your hands dirty planting new-cat seeds, and you just want to enjoy them once they leave the vine, you’ve really got some thinking to do.

Interesting. Good to have a less rent-seeking option, not sure I love the idea of the Fed just (assumedly) having access to all my transactions, though.

Ah yes, self-righteously ponder the humanity and tragic loss of those who despise us, that’ll bring about change, you’re so right.

Yours is a code of behavior for the morally impotent.

These are arguments to refuse censorship much harder, not to comply.

Really wish we would all shun this voluntary self-censoring of very mild words. Fuck the platforms and their algorithms and fuck the people who censor basic language.