Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: jimmy olsen on September 14, 2017, 12:58:26 AM

Title: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: jimmy olsen on September 14, 2017, 12:58:26 AM
DOOM!

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/has-the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/

Quote
Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?

More comfortable online than out partying, post-Millennials are safer, physically, than adolescents have ever been. But they're on the brink of a mental-health crisis.

Jean M. Twenge
| September 2017 Issue 
| Technology

One day last summer, around noon, I called Athena, a 13-year-old who lives in Houston, Texas. She answered her phone—she's had an iPhone since she was 11—sounding as if she'd just woken up. We chatted about her favorite songs and TV shows, and I asked her what she likes to do with her friends. "We go to the mall," she said. "Do your parents drop you off?," I asked, recalling my own middle-school days, in the 1980s, when I'd enjoy a few parent-free hours shopping with my friends. "No—I go with my family," she replied. "We'll go with my mom and brothers and walk a little behind them. I just have to tell my mom where we're going. I have to check in every hour or every 30 minutes."

Those mall trips are infrequent—about once a month. More often, Athena and her friends spend time together on their phones, unchaperoned. Unlike the teens of my generation, who might have spent an evening tying up the family landline with gossip, they talk on Snapchat, the smartphone app that allows users to send pictures and videos that quickly disappear. They make sure to keep up their Snapstreaks, which show how many days in a row they have Snapchatted with each other. Sometimes they save screenshots of particularly ridiculous pictures of friends. "It's good blackmail," Athena said. (Because she's a minor, I'm not using her real name.) She told me she'd spent most of the summer hanging out alone in her room with her phone. That's just the way her generation is, she said. "We didn't have a choice to know any life without iPads or iPhones. I think we like our phones more than we like actual people."


I've been researching generational differences for 25 years, starting when I was a 22-year-old doctoral student in psychology. Typically, the characteristics that come to define a generation appear gradually, and along a continuum. Beliefs and behaviors that were already rising simply continue to do so. Millennials, for instance, are a highly individualistic generation, but individualism had been increasing since the Baby Boomers turned on, tuned in, and dropped out. I had grown accustomed to line graphs of trends that looked like modest hills and valleys. Then I began studying Athena's generation.

Around 2012, I noticed abrupt shifts in teen behaviors and emotional states. The gentle slopes of the line graphs became steep mountains and sheer cliffs, and many of the distinctive characteristics of the Millennial generation began to disappear. In all my analyses of generational data—some reaching back to the 1930s—I had never seen anything like it.

At first I presumed these might be blips, but the trends persisted, across several years and a series of national surveys. The changes weren't just in degree, but in kind. The biggest difference between the Millennials and their predecessors was in how they viewed the world; teens today differ from the Millennials not just in their views but in how they spend their time. The experiences they have every day are radically different from those of the generation that came of age just a few years before them.


What happened in 2012 to cause such dramatic shifts in behavior? It was after the Great Recession, which officially lasted from 2007 to 2009 and had a starker effect on Millennials trying to find a place in a sputtering economy. But it was exactly the moment when the proportion of Americans who owned a smartphone surpassed 50 percent.

The more I pored over yearly surveys of teen attitudes and behaviors, and the more I talked with young people like Athena, the clearer it became that theirs is a generation shaped by the smartphone and by the concomitant rise of social media. I call them iGen. Born between 1995 and 2012, members of this generation are growing up with smartphones, have an Instagram account before they start high school, and do not remember a time before the internet. The Millennials grew up with the web as well, but it wasn't ever-present in their lives, at hand at all times, day and night. iGen's oldest members were early adolescents when the iPhone was introduced, in 2007, and high-school students when the iPad entered the scene, in 2010. A 2017 survey of more than 5,000 American teens found that three out of four owned an iPhone.

The advent of the smartphone and its cousin the tablet was followed quickly by hand-wringing about the deleterious effects of "screen time." But the impact of these devices has not been fully appreciated, and goes far beyond the usual concerns about curtailed attention spans. The arrival of the smartphone has radically changed every aspect of teenagers' lives, from the nature of their social interactions to their mental health. These changes have affected young people in every corner of the nation and in every type of household. The trends appear among teens poor and rich; of every ethnic background; in cities, suburbs, and small towns. Where there are cell towers, there are teens living their lives on their smartphone.

To those of us who fondly recall a more analog adolescence, this may seem foreign and troubling. The aim of generational study, however, is not to succumb to nostalgia for the way things used to be; it's to understand how they are now. Some generational changes are positive, some are negative, and many are both. More comfortable in their bedrooms than in a car or at a party, today's teens are physically safer than teens have ever been. They're markedly less likely to get into a car accident and, having less of a taste for alcohol than their predecessors, are less susceptible to drinking's attendant ills.

Psychologically, however, they are more vulnerable than Millennials were: Rates of teen depression and suicide have skyrocketed since 2011. It's not an exaggeration to describe iGen as being on the brink of the worst mental-health crisis in decades. Much of this deterioration can be traced to their phones.

Even when a seismic event—a war, a technological leap, a free concert in the mud—plays an outsize role in shaping a group of young people, no single factor ever defines a generation. Parenting styles continue to change, as do school curricula and culture, and these things matter. But the twin rise of the smartphone and social media has caused an earthquake of a magnitude we've not seen in a very long time, if ever. There is compelling evidence that the devices we've placed in young people's hands are having profound effects on their lives—and making them seriously unhappy.

In the early 1970s, the photographer Bill Yates shot a series of portraits at the Sweetheart Roller Skating Rink in Tampa, Florida. In one, a shirtless teen stands with a large bottle of peppermint schnapps stuck in the waistband of his jeans. In another, a boy who looks no older than 12 poses with a cigarette in his mouth. The rink was a place where kids could get away from their parents and inhabit a world of their own, a world where they could drink, smoke, and make out in the backs of their cars. In stark black-and-white, the adolescent Boomers gaze at Yates's camera with the self-confidence born of making your own choices—even if, perhaps especially if, your parents wouldn't think they were the right ones.

Fifteen years later, during my own teenage years as a member of Generation X, smoking had lost some of its romance, but independence was definitely still in. My friends and I plotted to get our driver's license as soon as we could, making DMV appointments for the day we turned 16 and using our newfound freedom to escape the confines of our suburban neighborhood. Asked by our parents, "When will you be home?," we replied, "When do I have to be?"

But the allure of independence, so powerful to previous generations, holds less sway over today's teens, who are less likely to leave the house without their parents. The shift is stunning: 12th-graders in 2015 were going out less often than eighth-graders did as recently as 2009.

Today's teens are also less likely to date. The initial stage of courtship, which Gen Xers called "liking" (as in "Ooh, he likes you!"), kids now call "talking"—an ironic choice for a generation that prefers texting to actual conversation. After two teens have "talked" for a while, they might start dating. But only about 56 percent of high-school seniors in 2015 went out on dates; for Boomers and Gen Xers, the number was about 85 percent.


The decline in dating tracks with a decline in sexual activity. The drop is the sharpest for ninth-graders, among whom the number of sexually active teens has been cut by almost 40 percent since 1991. The average teen now has had sex for the first time by the spring of 11th grade, a full year later than the average Gen Xer. Fewer teens having sex has contributed to what many see as one of the most positive youth trends in recent years: The teen birth rate hit an all-time low in 2016, down 67 percent since its modern peak, in 1991.

Even driving, a symbol of adolescent freedom inscribed in American popular culture, from Rebel Without a Cause to Ferris Bueller's Day Off, has lost its appeal for today's teens. Nearly all Boomer high-school students had their driver's license by the spring of their senior year; more than one in four teens today still lack one at the end of high school. For some, Mom and Dad are such good chauffeurs that there's no urgent need to drive. "My parents drove me everywhere and never complained, so I always had rides," a 21-year-old student in San Diego told me. "I didn't get my license until my mom told me I had to because she could not keep driving me to school." She finally got her license six months after her 18th birthday. In conversation after conversation, teens described getting their license as something to be nagged into by their parents—a notion that would have been unthinkable to previous generations.

Independence isn't free—you need some money in your pocket to pay for gas, or for that bottle of schnapps. In earlier eras, kids worked in great numbers, eager to finance their freedom or prodded by their parents to learn the value of a dollar. But iGen teens aren't working (or managing their own money) as much. In the late 1970s, 77 percent of high-school seniors worked for pay during the school year; by the mid-2010s, only 55 percent did. The number of eighth-graders who work for pay has been cut in half. These declines accelerated during the Great Recession, but teen employment has not bounced back, even though job availability has.

Of course, putting off the responsibilities of adulthood is not an iGen innovation. Gen Xers, in the 1990s, were the first to postpone the traditional markers of adulthood. Young Gen Xers were just about as likely to drive, drink alcohol, and date as young Boomers had been, and more likely to have sex and get pregnant as teens. But as they left their teenage years behind, Gen Xers married and started careers later than their Boomer predecessors had.

Gen X managed to stretch adolescence beyond all previous limits: Its members started becoming adults earlier and finished becoming adults later. Beginning with Millennials and continuing with iGen, adolescence is contracting again—but only because its onset is being delayed. Across a range of behaviors—drinking, dating, spending time unsupervised— 18-year-olds now act more like 15-year-olds used to, and 15-year-olds more like 13-year-olds. Childhood now stretches well into high school.

Why are today's teens waiting longer to take on both the responsibilities and the pleasures of adulthood? Shifts in the economy, and parenting, certainly play a role. In an information economy that rewards higher education more than early work history, parents may be inclined to encourage their kids to stay home and study rather than to get a part-time job. Teens, in turn, seem to be content with this homebody arrangement—not because they're so studious, but because their social life is lived on their phone. They don't need to leave home to spend time with their friends.

If today's teens were a generation of grinds, we'd see that in the data. But eighth-, 10th-, and 12th-graders in the 2010s actually spend less time on homework than Gen X teens did in the early 1990s. (High-school seniors headed for four-year colleges spend about the same amount of time on homework as their predecessors did.) The time that seniors spend on activities such as student clubs and sports and exercise has changed little in recent years. Combined with the decline in working for pay, this means iGen teens have more leisure time than Gen X teens did, not less.

So what are they doing with all that time? They are on their phone, in their room, alone and often distressed.

One of the ironies of iGen life is that despite spending far more time under the same roof as their parents, today's teens can hardly be said to be closer to their mothers and fathers than their predecessors were. "I've seen my friends with their families—they don't talk to them," Athena told me. "They just say 'Okay, okay, whatever' while they're on their phones. They don't pay attention to their family." Like her peers, Athena is an expert at tuning out her parents so she can focus on her phone. She spent much of her summer keeping up with friends, but nearly all of it was over text or Snapchat. "I've been on my phone more than I've been with actual people," she said. "My bed has, like, an imprint of my body."

In this, too, she is typical. The number of teens who get together with their friends nearly every day dropped by more than 40 percent from 2000 to 2015; the decline has been especially steep recently. It's not only a matter of fewer kids partying; fewer kids are spending time simply hanging out. That's something most teens used to do: nerds and jocks, poor kids and rich kids, C students and A students. The roller rink, the basketball court, the town pool, the local necking spot—they've all been replaced by virtual spaces accessed through apps and the web.

You might expect that teens spend so much time in these new spaces because it makes them happy, but most data suggest that it does not. The Monitoring the Future survey, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and designed to be nationally representative, has asked 12th-graders more than 1,000 questions every year since 1975 and queried eighth- and 10th-graders since 1991. The survey asks teens how happy they are and also how much of their leisure time they spend on various activities, including nonscreen activities such as in-person social interaction and exercise, and, in recent years, screen activities such as using social media, texting, and browsing the web. The results could not be clearer: Teens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on nonscreen activities are more likely to be happy.

There's not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness. Eighth-graders who spend 10 or more hours a week on social media are 56 percent more likely to say they're unhappy than those who devote less time to social media. Admittedly, 10 hours a week is a lot. But those who spend six to nine hours a week on social media are still 47 percent more likely to say they are unhappy than those who use social media even less. The opposite is true of in-person interactions. Those who spend an above-average amount of time with their friends in person are 20 percent less likely to say they're unhappy than those who hang out for a below-average amount of time.

If you were going to give advice for a happy adolescence based on this survey, it would be straightforward: Put down the phone, turn off the laptop, and do something—anything—that does not involve a screen. Of course, these analyses don't unequivocally prove that screen time causes unhappiness; it's possible that unhappy teens spend more time online. But recent research suggests that screen time, in particular social-media use, does indeed cause unhappiness. One study asked college students with a Facebook page to complete short surveys on their phone over the course of two weeks. They'd get a text message with a link five times a day, and report on their mood and how much they'd used Facebook. The more they'd used Facebook, the unhappier they felt, but feeling unhappy did not subsequently lead to more Facebook use.

Social-networking sites like Facebook promise to connect us to friends. But the portrait of iGen teens emerging from the data is one of a lonely, dislocated generation. Teens who visit social-networking sites every day but see their friends in person less frequently are the most likely to agree with the statements "A lot of times I feel lonely," "I often feel left out of things," and "I often wish I had more good friends." Teens' feelings of loneliness spiked in 2013 and have remained high since.

This doesn't always mean that, on an individual level, kids who spend more time online are lonelier than kids who spend less time online. Teens who spend more time on social media also spend more time with their friends in person, on average—highly social teens are more social in both venues, and less social teens are less so. But at the generational level, when teens spend more time on smartphones and less time on in-person social interactions, loneliness is more common.

So is depression. Once again, the effect of screen activities is unmistakable: The more time teens spend looking at screens, the more likely they are to report symptoms of depression. Eighth-graders who are heavy users of social media increase their risk of depression by 27 percent, while those who play sports, go to religious services, or even do homework more than the average teen cut their risk significantly.

Teens who spend three hours a day or more on electronic devices are 35 percent more likely to have a risk factor for suicide, such as making a suicide plan. (That's much more than the risk related to, say, watching TV.) One piece of data that indirectly but stunningly captures kids' growing isolation, for good and for bad: Since 2007, the homicide rate among teens has declined, but the suicide rate has increased. As teens have started spending less time together, they have become less likely to kill one another, and more likely to kill themselves. In 2011, for the first time in 24 years, the teen suicide rate was higher than the teen homicide rate.

Depression and suicide have many causes; too much technology is clearly not the only one. And the teen suicide rate was even higher in the 1990s, long before smartphones existed. Then again, about four times as many Americans now take antidepressants, which are often effective in treating severe depression, the type most strongly linked to suicide.

What's the connection between smartphones and the apparent psychological distress this generation is experiencing? For all their power to link kids day and night, social media also exacerbate the age-old teen concern about being left out. Today's teens may go to fewer parties and spend less time together in person, but when they do congregate, they document their hangouts relentlessly—on Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook. Those not invited to come along are keenly aware of it. Accordingly, the number of teens who feel left out has reached all-time highs across age groups. Like the increase in loneliness, the upswing in feeling left out has been swift and significant.

This trend has been especially steep among girls. Forty-eight percent more girls said they often felt left out in 2015 than in 2010, compared with 27 percent more boys. Girls use social media more often, giving them additional opportunities to feel excluded and lonely when they see their friends or classmates getting together without them. Social media levy a psychic tax on the teen doing the posting as well, as she anxiously awaits the affirmation of comments and likes. When Athena posts pictures to Instagram, she told me, "I'm nervous about what people think and are going to say. It sometimes bugs me when I don't get a certain amount of likes on a picture."

Girls have also borne the brunt of the rise in depressive symptoms among today's teens. Boys' depressive symptoms increased by 21 percent from 2012 to 2015, while girls' increased by 50 percent—more than twice as much. The rise in suicide, too, is more pronounced among girls. Although the rate increased for both sexes, three times as many 12-to-14-year-old girls killed themselves in 2015 as in 2007, compared with twice as many boys. The suicide rate is still higher for boys, in part because they use more-lethal methods, but girls are beginning to close the gap.

These more dire consequences for teenage girls could also be rooted in the fact that they're more likely to experience cyberbullying. Boys tend to bully one another physically, while girls are more likely to do so by undermining a victim's social status or relationships. Social media give middle- and high-school girls a platform on which to carry out the style of aggression they favor, ostracizing and excluding other girls around the clock.

Social-media companies are of course aware of these problems, and to one degree or another have endeavored to prevent cyberbullying. But their various motivations are, to say the least, complex. A recently leaked Facebook document indicated that the company had been touting to advertisers its ability to determine teens' emotional state based on their on-site behavior, and even to pinpoint "moments when young people need a confidence boost." Facebook acknowledged that the document was real, but denied that it offers "tools to target people based on their emotional state."

In July 2014, a 13-year-old girl in North Texas woke to the smell of something burning. Her phone had overheated and melted into the sheets. National news outlets picked up the story, stoking readers' fears that their cellphone might spontaneously combust. To me, however, the flaming cellphone wasn't the only surprising aspect of the story. Why, I wondered, would anyone sleep with her phone beside her in bed? It's not as though you can surf the web while you're sleeping. And who could slumber deeply inches from a buzzing phone?

Curious, I asked my undergraduate students at San Diego State University what they do with their phone while they sleep. Their answers were a profile in obsession. Nearly all slept with their phone, putting it under their pillow, on the mattress, or at the very least within arm's reach of the bed. They checked social media right before they went to sleep, and reached for their phone as soon as they woke up in the morning (they had to—all of them used it as their alarm clock). Their phone was the last thing they saw before they went to sleep and the first thing they saw when they woke up. If they woke in the middle of the night, they often ended up looking at their phone. Some used the language of addiction. "I know I shouldn't, but I just can't help it," one said about looking at her phone while in bed. Others saw their phone as an extension of their body—or even like a lover: "Having my phone closer to me while I'm sleeping is a comfort."

It may be a comfort, but the smartphone is cutting into teens' sleep: Many now sleep less than seven hours most nights. Sleep experts say that teens should get about nine hours of sleep a night; a teen who is getting less than seven hours a night is significantly sleep deprived. Fifty-seven percent more teens were sleep deprived in 2015 than in 1991. In just the four years from 2012 to 2015, 22 percent more teens failed to get seven hours of sleep.

The increase is suspiciously timed, once again starting around when most teens got a smartphone. Two national surveys show that teens who spend three or more hours a day on electronic devices are 28 percent more likely to get less than seven hours of sleep than those who spend fewer than three hours, and teens who visit social-media sites every day are 19 percent more likely to be sleep deprived. A meta-analysis of studies on electronic-device use among children found similar results: Children who use a media device right before bed are more likely to sleep less than they should, more likely to sleep poorly, and more than twice as likely to be sleepy during the day.

Electronic devices and social media seem to have an especially strong ability to disrupt sleep. Teens who read books and magazines more often than the average are actually slightly less likely to be sleep deprived—either reading lulls them to sleep, or they can put the book down at bedtime. Watching TV for several hours a day is only weakly linked to sleeping less. But the allure of the smartphone is often too much to resist.

Sleep deprivation is linked to myriad issues, including compromised thinking and reasoning, susceptibility to illness, weight gain, and high blood pressure. It also affects mood: People who don't sleep enough are prone to depression and anxiety. Again, it's difficult to trace the precise paths of causation. Smartphones could be causing lack of sleep, which leads to depression, or the phones could be causing depression, which leads to lack of sleep. Or some other factor could be causing both depression and sleep deprivation to rise. But the smartphone, its blue light glowing in the dark, is likely playing a nefarious role.

The correlations between depression and smartphone use are strong enough to suggest that more parents should be telling their kids to put down their phone. As the technology writer Nick Bilton has reported, it's a policy some Silicon Valley executives follow. Even Steve Jobs limited his kids' use of the devices he brought into the world.

What's at stake isn't just how kids experience adolescence. The constant presence of smartphones is likely to affect them well into adulthood. Among people who suffer an episode of depression, at least half become depressed again later in life. Adolescence is a key time for developing social skills; as teens spend less time with their friends face-to-face, they have fewer opportunities to practice them. In the next decade, we may see more adults who know just the right emoji for a situation, but not the right facial expression.

I realize that restricting technology might be an unrealistic demand to impose on a generation of kids so accustomed to being wired at all times. My three daughters were born in 2006, 2009, and 2012. They're not yet old enough to display the traits of iGen teens, but I have already witnessed firsthand just how ingrained new media are in their young lives. I've observed my toddler, barely old enough to walk, confidently swiping her way through an iPad. I've experienced my 6-year-old asking for her own cellphone. I've overheard my 9-year-old discussing the latest app to sweep the fourth grade. Prying the phone out of our kids' hands will be difficult, even more so than the quixotic efforts of my parents' generation to get their kids to turn off MTV and get some fresh air. But more seems to be at stake in urging teens to use their phone responsibly, and there are benefits to be gained even if all we instill in our children is the importance of moderation. Significant effects on both mental health and sleep time appear after two or more hours a day on electronic devices. The average teen spends about two and a half hours a day on electronic devices. Some mild boundary-setting could keep kids from falling into harmful habits.

In my conversations with teens, I saw hopeful signs that kids themselves are beginning to link some of their troubles to their ever-present phone. Athena told me that when she does spend time with her friends in person, they are often looking at their device instead of at her. "I'm trying to talk to them about something, and they don't actually look at my face," she said. "They're looking at their phone, or they're looking at their Apple Watch." "What does that feel like, when you're trying to talk to somebody face-to-face and they're not looking at you?," I asked. "It kind of hurts," she said. "It hurts. I know my parents' generation didn't do that. I could be talking about something super important to me, and they wouldn't even be listening."

Once, she told me, she was hanging out with a friend who was texting her boyfriend. "I was trying to talk to her about my family, and what was going on, and she was like, 'Uh-huh, yeah, whatever.' So I took her phone out of her hands and I threw it at my wall."

I couldn't help laughing. "You play volleyball," I said. "Do you have a pretty good arm?" "Yep," she replied.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 01:50:55 AM
Too long, didn't finish.

I'll note that I, a "gen xer", spend most of the day on my smartphone.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Brain on September 14, 2017, 03:56:11 AM
I don't have the attention span to read that.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Josquius on September 14, 2017, 05:03:09 AM
People who talk on phones are weird.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: DGuller on September 14, 2017, 08:12:27 AM
I don't know if anyone made this observation before, but this new generation just doesn't measure up compared to mine or my parents' generations.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 08:32:01 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 14, 2017, 08:12:27 AM
I don't know if anyone made this observation before, but this new generation just doesn't measure up compared to mine or my parents' generations.

I may have heard it once before, when I was a kid, from my parents - but back then, of course, it was utterly absurd. Now it is both wise and true.  ;)
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 09:09:06 AM
Don't trust anyone under 30.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Monoriu on September 14, 2017, 09:42:40 AM
When I was a kid, they said similar things.  Video games and anime would destroy my generation, they said.  Maybe somebody once said that cars would destroy another generation.  Changed a generation, for sure.  Destroyed?  Doubt it. 
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 09:46:10 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 14, 2017, 09:42:40 AM
When I was a kid, they said similar things.  Video games and anime would destroy my generation, they said.  Maybe somebody once said that cars would destroy another generation.  Changed a generation, for sure.  Destroyed?  Doubt it.

Well, the last century's equivalent generation managed to do it  - with WW1.  ;)
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Grey Fox on September 14, 2017, 10:36:51 AM
Thank you people without kids & your wonderful opinion.

This scares me a lot, social media is BAD.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 10:46:15 AM
Malthus has kid.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 10:59:07 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 14, 2017, 10:36:51 AM
Thank you people without kids & your wonderful opinion.

This scares me a lot, social media is BAD.

As mentioned in another thread I eventually banned my son from Youtube. We will see how it goes.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 11:03:52 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 14, 2017, 10:36:51 AM
Thank you people without kids & your wonderful opinion.

This scares me a lot, social media is BAD.

Is it a challenge? Yes.

Is it the doom of the generation? Please. Some perspective on this. One can make the case that social media poses challenges for responsible parenting, without the doom-saying. 

When I was a kid, Dungeons and Dragons was going to turn us all into Satanic killers, assuming punk rock didn't do it first.  :P Admittedly social media is a more profound and far-reaching change than D&D or Punk, but still.

Looking at the article, it is amazing that the author is proposing that teens having sex later (for example) is a symptom of encroaching doom. Imagine if he'd discovered that they had sex earlier. Would that somehow be better? 

The idea that "kids these days" are kids seemingly forever is hardly new. 
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 11:20:38 AM
Young adults are very insecure about their future and thus very self centered but they eventually grow out of it...yet for some reason people seem to think this is some kind of aberration. I don't get it. It is not like when babies shit in their diapers people fret that the next generation will never use the toilet.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldlifemagazines.com%2Fmedia%2Fcatalog%2Fproduct%2Fcache%2F1%2Fimage%2F9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95%2Fc%2Fv%2Fcv051768_1.jpg&hash=965eac6b608b0d81fabc129d973b1bb5e79aa13c)

'Oh no! This boomer generation is lazy and does not want to work for a living!'

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.timeinc.net%2Ftime%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2Fcovers%2F1990%2F1101900716_400.jpg&hash=253ad19e3486227553895a6fea1dfa07e7e93173)

'Oh no! This generation X is a bunch of lazy slackers!'

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.timeinc.net%2Ftime%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2Fcovers%2F2013%2F1101130520_600.jpg&hash=66d46370ccc58a1ef9598ab3786f8dcfba00ee82)

'Oh no! These millennials are lazy and entitled!'

I mean it is the same damn shit over and over again.

Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 01:35:23 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 11:20:38 AM
'Oh no! These millennials are lazy and entitled!'

I mean it is the same damn shit over and over again.

Not really.  Millennials really are the worst.  Glad I haven't had to work with many. 
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Admiral Yi on September 14, 2017, 01:38:17 PM
A little surprised by the decline in sex.  I thought that was what they were texting about.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 01:48:51 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 01:35:23 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 11:20:38 AM
'Oh no! These millennials are lazy and entitled!'

I mean it is the same damn shit over and over again.

Not really.  Millennials really are the worst.  Glad I haven't had to work with many. 

If you haven't had much experience with them how do you know they are the worst? :hmm:
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 01:48:51 PM
If you haven't had much experience with them how do you know they are the worst? :hmm:

Spicy is confident in his prejudice.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: HVC on September 14, 2017, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 10:59:07 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 14, 2017, 10:36:51 AM
Thank you people without kids & your wonderful opinion.

This scares me a lot, social media is BAD.

As mentioned in another thread I eventually banned my son from Youtube. We will see how it goes.

your this generation parent who doesn't let his kid watch tv :P
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:16:43 PM
Quote from: HVC on September 14, 2017, 02:12:53 PM
your this generation parent who doesn't let his kid watch tv :P

Well he is only six years old HVC I will let him got on there eventually. :P
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 02:18:23 PM
We let our son watch kids youtube, but not regular.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Grinning_Colossus on September 14, 2017, 02:19:09 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 14, 2017, 01:38:17 PM
A little surprised by the decline in sex.  I thought that was what they were texting about.

The effect of free and ubiquitous pornography combined with unrealistic body standards (for everyone) in media/advertising.

Dick pics aren't sex per se.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:21:35 PM
Who knew the solution to unwanted pregnancy and STDs decimating our youth was free porn? The solution is obvious: porn makes us moral.

As far as media and advertising presenting unrealistic body standards that at least dates back 50 years so has little to do with this generation. That can be safely discarded as a thesis. Clearly porn is the savior of humanity.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 01:48:51 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 01:35:23 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 11:20:38 AM
'Oh no! These millennials are lazy and entitled!'

I mean it is the same damn shit over and over again.

Not really.  Millennials really are the worst.  Glad I haven't had to work with many. 

If you haven't had much experience with them how do you know they are the worst? :hmm:

My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.

They will. But remember Millennials are now well into their early 30s now. Heck by some standards people in their early 40s are Millennials. You may be talking about the people in their early 20s who are supposed to be the generation after the Millennials...whatever they are called.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Brain on September 14, 2017, 02:45:49 PM
I'd do the Time chick.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:05:23 PM
Heh, the law students and young associates we get in just make me feel cynical - they are so eager, hard-working and bright, and so damned pleased to have a real law job. I have to resist the urge to rain on their parade with warnings of how easy it is to burn out.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Grinning_Colossus on September 14, 2017, 03:25:48 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:21:35 PM
As far as media and advertising presenting unrealistic body standards that at least dates back 50 years so has little to do with this generation.

The difference is that men as well as women are now on the receiving end of that.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Grinning_Colossus on September 14, 2017, 03:28:56 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.

They will. But remember Millennials are now well into their early 30s now. Heck by some standards people in their early 40s are Millennials. You may be talking about the people in their early 20s who are supposed to be the generation after the Millennials...whatever they are called.

Yeah, I'm a Millennial and I just turned 31.  :( The younger ones are Gen Z. Now them, they're fucked up. All nazis from what I understand.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: HVC on September 14, 2017, 03:37:58 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:05:23 PM
Heh, the law students and young associates we get in just make me feel cynical - they are so eager, hard-working and bright, and so damned pleased to have a real law job. I have to resist the urge to rain on their parade with warnings of how easy it is to burn out.

we were all eager once. it'll get beat out of them. all roads lead to CdM :D
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: mongers on September 14, 2017, 03:50:52 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:05:23 PM
Heh, the law students and young associates we get in just make me feel cynical - they are so eager, hard-working and bright, and so damned pleased to have a real law job. I have to resist the urge to rain on their parade with warnings of how easy it is to burn out.

Guys, just LOOK at me.


FYP
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:56:40 PM
Quote from: mongers on September 14, 2017, 03:50:52 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:05:23 PM
Heh, the law students and young associates we get in just make me feel cynical - they are so eager, hard-working and bright, and so damned pleased to have a real law job. I have to resist the urge to rain on their parade with warnings of how easy it is to burn out.

Guys, just LOOK at me.


FYP

:lol:

Not kind, but possibly true.  :D
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Brain on September 14, 2017, 04:01:10 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 03:05:23 PM
Heh, the law students and young associates we get in just make me feel cynical - they are so eager, hard-working and bright, and so damned pleased to have a real law job. I have to resist the urge to rain on their parade with warnings of how easy it is to burn out.

As if. This footage of Malthus was retrieved at great risk to our operatives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bOKsOveYD0
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 04:11:08 PM
Quote from: The Brain on September 14, 2017, 04:01:10 PM

As if. This footage of Malthus was retrieved at great risk to our operatives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bOKsOveYD0

Now there, right there, is the guy the Americans should have elected President!
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: dps on September 14, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 14, 2017, 09:42:40 AM
When I was a kid, they said similar things.  Video games and anime would destroy my generation, they said.  Maybe somebody once said that cars would destroy another generation.  Changed a generation, for sure.  Destroyed?  Doubt it. 


But, but, I kinda want the millennials to be destroyed.

Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: DGuller on September 14, 2017, 06:10:43 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.
It's often a mismatch of work styles as well.  The younger generation is less tolerant of authoritarian hierarchy at the workplace, they are more likely to be motivated by inspiration.  The "do it because I'm your boss and I told you to do it" doesn't work as effectively as "here is what we need done, and why we need it done".
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: jimmy olsen on September 14, 2017, 06:15:58 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 11:20:38 AM
Young adults are very insecure about their future and thus very self centered but they eventually grow out of it...yet for some reason people seem to think this is some kind of aberration. I don't get it. It is not like when babies shit in their diapers people fret that the next generation will never use the toilet.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldlifemagazines.com%2Fmedia%2Fcatalog%2Fproduct%2Fcache%2F1%2Fimage%2F9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95%2Fc%2Fv%2Fcv051768_1.jpg&hash=965eac6b608b0d81fabc129d973b1bb5e79aa13c)

'Oh no! This boomer generation is lazy and does not want to work for a living!'

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.timeinc.net%2Ftime%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2Fcovers%2F1990%2F1101900716_400.jpg&hash=253ad19e3486227553895a6fea1dfa07e7e93173)

'Oh no! This generation X is a bunch of lazy slackers!'

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.timeinc.net%2Ftime%2Fmagazine%2Farchive%2Fcovers%2F2013%2F1101130520_600.jpg&hash=66d46370ccc58a1ef9598ab3786f8dcfba00ee82)

'Oh no! These millennials are lazy and entitled!'

I mean it is the same damn shit over and over again.

But it's not the same thing. The article does not argue that they are lazy or entitled or self centered. It's that voluminous data indicates that they suffer from crippling insecurity which has lead to a huge spike in depression and suicide. The numbers don't lie.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 06:16:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 14, 2017, 06:10:43 PM
It's often a mismatch of work styles as well.  The younger generation is less tolerant of authoritarian hierarchy at the workplace, they are more likely to be motivated by inspiration.  The "do it because I'm your boss and I told you to do it" doesn't work as effectively as "here is what we need done, and why we need it done".

Yeah, I have to say that if you find that an entire generation of people are difficult to manage that mostly speaks to your skills as a manager.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: mongers on September 14, 2017, 06:19:44 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 06:16:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 14, 2017, 06:10:43 PM
It's often a mismatch of work styles as well.  The younger generation is less tolerant of authoritarian hierarchy at the workplace, they are more likely to be motivated by inspiration.  The "do it because I'm your boss and I told you to do it" doesn't work as effectively as "here is what we need done, and why we need it done".

Yeah, I have to say that if you find that an entire generation of people are difficult to manage that mostly speaks to your skills as a manager.

Well you Are a mod here.  :P
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 06:29:10 PM
Quote from: mongers on September 14, 2017, 06:19:44 PM
Well you Are a mod here.  :P

:lol:

Languish gets the quality of service it pays for.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Razgovory on September 14, 2017, 06:30:13 PM
Well, there may be some truth in the idea that newest generation is lazy.  Employment is pretty low for people born in the last five years.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: CountDeMoney on September 14, 2017, 07:16:39 PM
Quote from: HVC on September 14, 2017, 03:37:58 PM
we were all eager once. it'll get beat out of them. all roads lead to CdM :D

The looks on their faces will be priceless.


Seriously, though;  this crop is ignorant and illiterate, but more importantly, they collectively lack interpersonal interaction skills of the depth necessary to navigate a work environment with other human beings. 

I don't believe in the whole vaccines = autism thingy, but man, they certainly make it fucking plausible.  Fucking Assburgers everywhere.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Ed Anger on September 14, 2017, 07:18:26 PM
Entitled little shits
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: CountDeMoney on September 14, 2017, 08:03:40 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 14, 2017, 11:03:52 AM
When I was a kid, Dungeons and Dragons was going to turn us all into Satanic killers, assuming punk rock didn't do it first.  :P Admittedly social media is a more profound and far-reaching change than D&D or Punk, but still.

No, there's no "but still" here, False Equivalency Man.  One was a niche hobby, the other is the now-mainstream means of modern media and communication.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Berkut on September 14, 2017, 08:46:55 PM
On the one hand, the "ZOMG the next generation is shite we are all doomed" crap is so fucking done already.

On the other hand, it is silly to dismiss real, quantifiable data because the form of the basic observation resembles that generational bullshit that is so ubiquitous.

Example: The rise of the telephone in households in Victorian England was seen as the end of society as they knew it - young people were talking to each other on the phone, whenever they wanted, and without chaperones! This is going to lead to the end of managed relationships that defined much of the social structure! We are all doomed!

The "we are all doomed" part was bullshit, but the observation that this would result in radical change was not. It DID destroy (or contribute to the destruction) the previous way of interaction.

This is more of the same. The article can be completely correct in that this represents a serious change in how people will relate to each other, and that may have some significant negative consequences. But it probably has some incredible positive consequences as well.

Mostly though, it is change. And that scares us old people.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: CountDeMoney on September 14, 2017, 08:48:03 PM
I want a horse.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Ed Anger on September 14, 2017, 08:50:41 PM
Brain wants a horse sex farm
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: MadBurgerMaker on September 14, 2017, 09:16:42 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 14, 2017, 08:48:03 PM
I want a horse.

My uncle had horses (along with the cow named Brisket that I think I've mentioned here before).  They're a pain in the ass and expensive to take care of. 

Well.  Not for me, cause I wasn't doing it.  They were pretty great as far as I was concerned.  :P
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 09:27:08 PM
Quote from: dps on September 14, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 14, 2017, 09:42:40 AM
When I was a kid, they said similar things.  Video games and anime would destroy my generation, they said.  Maybe somebody once said that cars would destroy another generation.  Changed a generation, for sure.  Destroyed?  Doubt it. 


But, but, I kinda want the millennials to be destroyed.

So why'd you marry one?
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: HVC on September 14, 2017, 09:30:39 PM
I had a horse. He was an asshole.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: jimmy olsen on September 14, 2017, 10:30:14 PM
Quote from: Berkut on September 14, 2017, 08:46:55 PM
On the one hand, the "ZOMG the next generation is shite we are all doomed" crap is so fucking done already.

On the other hand, it is silly to dismiss real, quantifiable data because the form of the basic observation resembles that generational bullshit that is so ubiquitous.

Example: The rise of the telephone in households in Victorian England was seen as the end of society as they knew it - young people were talking to each other on the phone, whenever they wanted, and without chaperones! This is going to lead to the end of managed relationships that defined much of the social structure! We are all doomed!

The "we are all doomed" part was bullshit, but the observation that this would result in radical change was not. It DID destroy (or contribute to the destruction) the previous way of interaction.

This is more of the same. The article can be completely correct in that this represents a serious change in how people will relate to each other, and that may have some significant negative consequences. But it probably has some incredible positive consequences as well.

Mostly though, it is change. And that scares us old people.

I think the car was a bigger factor in that, though the telephone helped.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 10:43:34 PM
We should ask Grumbler for his first hand perspective.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Tonitrus on September 15, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 10:43:34 PM
We should ask Grumbler for his first hand perspective.

Everything went to hell after Tiberius Gracchus.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: dps on September 15, 2017, 03:00:28 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on September 14, 2017, 09:27:08 PM
Quote from: dps on September 14, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 14, 2017, 09:42:40 AM
When I was a kid, they said similar things.  Video games and anime would destroy my generation, they said.  Maybe somebody once said that cars would destroy another generation.  Changed a generation, for sure.  Destroyed?  Doubt it. 


But, but, I kinda want the millennials to be destroyed.

So why'd you marry one?

Well, it was a good way to destroy the life of at least one of them.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 15, 2017, 08:23:00 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 14, 2017, 08:46:55 PM
On the one hand, the "ZOMG the next generation is shite we are all doomed" crap is so fucking done already.

On the other hand, it is silly to dismiss real, quantifiable data because the form of the basic observation resembles that generational bullshit that is so ubiquitous.

Example: The rise of the telephone in households in Victorian England was seen as the end of society as they knew it - young people were talking to each other on the phone, whenever they wanted, and without chaperones! This is going to lead to the end of managed relationships that defined much of the social structure! We are all doomed!

The "we are all doomed" part was bullshit, but the observation that this would result in radical change was not. It DID destroy (or contribute to the destruction) the previous way of interaction.

This is more of the same. The article can be completely correct in that this represents a serious change in how people will relate to each other, and that may have some significant negative consequences. But it probably has some incredible positive consequences as well.

Mostly though, it is change. And that scares us old people.

Exactly.

It's a change, a major change, and all major changes pose challenges.

It is just too bad that we tend to lack perspective. Think of the changes our grandparents went through - a case can be made that social media is a whopper of a change, maybe a case could be made that it compares in scale to a society that went from mostly animal powered vehicles to near-ubiquitous car ownership in a single lifetime ... point being that major changes are hardly unknown in our society. 
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Berkut on September 15, 2017, 08:33:13 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 15, 2017, 08:23:00 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 14, 2017, 08:46:55 PM
On the one hand, the "ZOMG the next generation is shite we are all doomed" crap is so fucking done already.

On the other hand, it is silly to dismiss real, quantifiable data because the form of the basic observation resembles that generational bullshit that is so ubiquitous.

Example: The rise of the telephone in households in Victorian England was seen as the end of society as they knew it - young people were talking to each other on the phone, whenever they wanted, and without chaperones! This is going to lead to the end of managed relationships that defined much of the social structure! We are all doomed!

The "we are all doomed" part was bullshit, but the observation that this would result in radical change was not. It DID destroy (or contribute to the destruction) the previous way of interaction.

This is more of the same. The article can be completely correct in that this represents a serious change in how people will relate to each other, and that may have some significant negative consequences. But it probably has some incredible positive consequences as well.

Mostly though, it is change. And that scares us old people.

Exactly.

It's a change, a major change, and all major changes pose challenges.

It is just too bad that we tend to lack perspective. Think of the changes our grandparents went through - a case can be made that social media is a whopper of a change, maybe a case could be made that it compares in scale to a society that went from mostly animal powered vehicles to near-ubiquitous car ownership in a single lifetime ... point being that major changes are hardly unknown in our society. 

I do think it is dangerous, however, to just dismiss change as "Meh, we've had major change before, and it all worked out fine! Don't worry about it!". (Not saying you are doing this, just using this as a springboard for conversation).

Unless you believe in a god that cares a lot about humans, the fact that we have managed to survive major change previously* doesn't imply any guarantee that the next major change is going to be ok as well.

You see this with the automation and value of labor arguments, and I think that is very wrong. Just because we've gone through tech adjustments that changed how labor was allocated before, and the result was better efficiency but still full need for human labor, doesn't guarantee that will always be the case. And indeed, simple logic will tell us that *at some point* it CANNOT be the case. The value of human labor has been going down, and continues to go down, and at some point will basically become zero. That is not just a cycle that repeats endlessly.

There is no reason, outside faith, to assume that any conceivable societal or technological change will necessarily be a net positive, or particularly compatible with a human being who is the product of evolution and the influences of natural selection that simply cannot respond to the pace of change currently available.

*It is also worth noting that plenty of the huge changes humans have "survived", we've survived, but at a often incredible cost in pain and suffering. So it would be great if we could avoid another mega war for example. Sure, we may survive it fine, but that doesn't mean we should not be willing to spend considerable effort on avoiding massive upheaval that major social and economic changes force on us.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Malthus on September 15, 2017, 08:55:39 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 15, 2017, 08:33:13 AM


I do think it is dangerous, however, to just dismiss change as "Meh, we've had major change before, and it all worked out fine! Don't worry about it!". (Not saying you are doing this, just using this as a springboard for conversation).

Unless you believe in a god that cares a lot about humans, the fact that we have managed to survive major change previously* doesn't imply any guarantee that the next major change is going to be ok as well.

You see this with the automation and value of labor arguments, and I think that is very wrong. Just because we've gone through tech adjustments that changed how labor was allocated before, and the result was better efficiency but still full need for human labor, doesn't guarantee that will always be the case. And indeed, simple logic will tell us that *at some point* it CANNOT be the case. The value of human labor has been going down, and continues to go down, and at some point will basically become zero. That is not just a cycle that repeats endlessly.

There is no reason, outside faith, to assume that any conceivable societal or technological change will necessarily be a net positive, or particularly compatible with a human being who is the product of evolution and the influences of natural selection that simply cannot respond to the pace of change currently available.

*It is also worth noting that plenty of the huge changes humans have "survived", we've survived, but at a often incredible cost in pain and suffering. So it would be great if we could avoid another mega war for example. Sure, we may survive it fine, but that doesn't mean we should not be willing to spend considerable effort on avoiding massive upheaval that major social and economic changes force on us.

Can't see much to argue with you here, as I tend to agree with everything you say.

Indeed, I pointed out upthread, that it is worth comparing our century with the past century in terms of "destroyed generations" of youth - we have smartphones in 2017, they had ... WW1 in 1917.

Of course, even WW1 did not literally "destroy" a generation, but it did a shitload of damage to it.

The problem with the scaremongering articles, at least to folks not given to panicky enthusiasm, is that it is likely to turn off any actual critical analysis - it is easy to dismiss with jeers yet another apocalyptic prediction. Any discussion of actual social problems (and possible benefits!)posed by the phenomenon under discussion is likely to not happen. 
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Berkut on September 15, 2017, 09:09:39 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 15, 2017, 08:55:39 AM

Can't see much to argue with you here, as I tend to agree with everything you say.

I think we can leave it at that.

:P
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: viper37 on September 15, 2017, 09:21:25 AM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on September 14, 2017, 03:28:56 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.

They will. But remember Millennials are now well into their early 30s now. Heck by some standards people in their early 40s are Millennials. You may be talking about the people in their early 20s who are supposed to be the generation after the Millennials...whatever they are called.

Yeah, I'm a Millennial and I just turned 31.  :( The younger ones are Gen Z. Now them, they're fucked up. All nazis from what I understand.
of course they're fucked.  There's nothing after Z.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Brain on September 15, 2017, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: viper37 on September 15, 2017, 09:21:25 AM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on September 14, 2017, 03:28:56 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 14, 2017, 02:22:48 PM
My wife has had to hire, manage, and fire tons of them.  My brother is dealing with a couple of them at work now, and I have I have several other acquaintances that have struggled with managing and working with them in their jobs.  Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, and hopefully the rest will grow up at some point.

They will. But remember Millennials are now well into their early 30s now. Heck by some standards people in their early 40s are Millennials. You may be talking about the people in their early 20s who are supposed to be the generation after the Millennials...whatever they are called.

Yeah, I'm a Millennial and I just turned 31.  :( The younger ones are Gen Z. Now them, they're fucked up. All nazis from what I understand.
of course they're fucked.  There's nothing after Z.

Å, Ä, and Ö.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Minsky Moment on September 15, 2017, 10:12:19 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 15, 2017, 08:33:13 AM
You see this with the automation and value of labor arguments, and I think that is very wrong. Just because we've gone through tech adjustments that changed how labor was allocated before, and the result was better efficiency but still full need for human labor, doesn't guarantee that will always be the case. And indeed, simple logic will tell us that *at some point* it CANNOT be the case. The value of human labor has been going down, and continues to go down, and at some point will basically become zero.

The value of human labor has been increasing for two centuries and automation is one reason why (the other main contributors being investments in human capital and physical infrastructure).   

The "problem" we have is that human labor has become to valuable to do things like dig out rocks with shovels and hands, or bash pieces of metal together in factories, or perform very simple repetitive tasks.  It's really a feature not a bug - but it does become a problem when our society and culture cannot adjust quickly enough to that reality.

The concern of running out of jobs for people to do - its not happening yet in America.  Since 2010, total jobs keep increasing by about 150-200K a month.  The BLS forecast over the next decade shows some occupations declining but others rising.

Longer term it's hard to say but one feature of the post-1800 world was rapid increases in population.  Over the past few decades, more and more countries are experiencing demographic transitions to much lower growth rates - much of the OECD either at zero or negative now, and even many developing countries are slowing.  So again I would suspect we will not see labor disappearing in our lifetime.

That said it's conceivable that at some future date the labor-leisure tradeoff may be much more slanted to leisure than today.  If so, it could be the attainment of the dreams of Marx (" hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner") or Keynes' Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren.  It is only scary because our current cultural and political suppositions are so ill-suited for such a world.  To quote Keynes:

QuoteThus we have been expressly evolved by nature-with all our impulses and deepest instincts-for the purpose of solving the economic problem. If the economic problem is solved, mankind will be deprived of its traditional purpose.

The much-maligned millennial generation - who seem to value leisure and personal interests over traditional economic status markers as compared to prior generations - may not be the shiftless, entitled, and self-absorbed snowflakes they are mocked as being.  They may instead be the early stages of a rational evolutionary-cultural response to emerging technological reality that is changing the nature of work.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: alfred russel on September 15, 2017, 11:36:08 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 15, 2017, 10:12:19 AM
If so, it could be the attainment of the dreams of Marx (" hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner")

I think Brain already rears cattle most evenings.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: The Brain on September 15, 2017, 12:01:07 PM
Hey! :angry:
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Grinning_Colossus on September 15, 2017, 12:20:36 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 15, 2017, 10:12:19 AM
The much-maligned millennial generation - who seem to value leisure and personal interests over traditional economic status markers as compared to prior generations - may not be the shiftless, entitled, and self-absorbed snowflakes they are mocked as being.  They may instead be the early stages of a rational evolutionary-cultural response to emerging technological reality that is changing the nature of work.

:yes: And we're right on schedule.

Quote from: J.M. Keynes, in 1930For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to every one that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still. For only they can lead us out of the tunnel of economic necessity into daylight.
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Savonarola on September 21, 2017, 03:07:14 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 14, 2017, 12:58:26 AM
Quote
theirs is a generation shaped by the smartphone and by the concomitant rise of social media. I call them iGen.

P-p-p-eople try to put them down
(Talking 'bout iGeneration)
Just cause they don't g-g-get around
(Talking 'bout iGeneration)
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Savonarola on September 21, 2017, 03:43:37 PM
Seriously, though, this relates to something my cousin (the psychologist turned yoga instructor in the anime thread) once told me.  At one time she had been a college counselor; and, like me, she came from a time when there was conversation, letters, landline phones and not much else.  So when students came to talk to her about conversations they had with their friends which upset them, she'd often have to stop them midway and ask "Wait, where did this conversation occur?"  Texting was then the hot new technology and by changing the medium of conversation it had changed the impact and understanding of what was being communicated; leading to misunderstandings that wouldn't have happened in a face to face conversation.  That in turn could be devastating for a younger person.

Snapchat, Facebook and whatever the hot new social media platform is are probably even worse in that respect (and, as the article says, would make it much easier for a cyber-bully.)
Title: Re: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Post by: Savonarola on September 22, 2017, 01:44:56 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 14, 2017, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 14, 2017, 01:48:51 PM
If you haven't had much experience with them how do you know they are the worst? :hmm:

Spicy is confident in his prejudice.

Heh, I fist read Derspiess quote and thought, "That's ridiculous, I work with a lot of educated hard working millennials, like Talal, Thiago, Nikolay, Dong, Christiane, Harish, Alejandra, Vinicius, Rafael... oh."

;)

That's more of a tribute to GE's ability to misuse the H1-B visa than a condemnation of the US born millennials.