Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
There would benefits just as disadvantages.
If your primary arguments are related to social media and such then you're wrong. That what you are describing is nothing but an abuse of technology and its potential and has nothing (conditionally speaking) with the simple and ever-so-dumb fact that people abuse technology. People as an individual and as a group. -
I don't think it's a problem with tech, I think it's a problem with people. Our neocortices figured out how make things way beyond the abilities of our more primitive brain parts to handle in a responsible way. I don't see a good way out of this mess. Tech has allowed for fantastic things, but also terrible, and it's because we are all fucking stupid geniuses ^_^
-
@nnee @catadoxa Both your arguments revolve around the neutrality of tech (or media). Those McLuhanists actually argue the opposite: that a provided content has a symbiotic relationship with the media that transmits it. I'm not decided on these theories yet, distrust them actually, but for software you can also go the reverse path like Pieter Hientjes who convincingly argues that software is a social construct (much like science or any human endeavor) - so how should it ever be neutral?
-
@phorkyas So I see those points and I think they are valid arguments as far as they go. They are very human-centric though. I mean, yeah, to me obviously software and technology are social constructs because they were made by these neurotic apes. When I write code I am not writing universal truths or anything I am just manipulating them.
Unless the universe turns out to be deterministic despite the apparent randomness of quantum mechanics. Then literally nothing matters, right? -
@catadoxa The social construct thing is a bit of an rowhammer argument, I know. Computer 'science' kind of inherited this purporting to be objective from the other sciences. Maybe some part is and the theoretical findings about complexity classes look like absolute truths, and if you overlook the total absurd ineptitude of the computer metaphor for our brain they may even pose sth like boundaries to what we can know. But how far is this from everday's programming where the arbitrariness of errors let you doubt dealing with deterministic machines! Even quantum mechanics is deterministic, but what entangled spaghetti we produce.
Related Rants
Find the difference...
Do you all sometimes have this strange feeling, that.. actually humanity would not lose anything, if we killed all that useless tech we earn our money with?
Yeah, we get all that propaganda how technical prowess is empowering and sure we all know it's a nice feeling if you can apply the right clicks and bit flips to make the machine do as you want so you feel like the apprentice's sorcerer.
BUT even if you believe your user story adds some business value to some abstract package - what do these devices mostly do? Distract, diffuse your focus, envy other eye-porn provider, endless aberration of clips.
Fuck social media!
(Yes, I know I am on one, but this is because I haven't given up hope on this one.)
rant
f** tech
social media
f** computers