> Looking at the US from outside, I am starting to wonder how close they are to a societal collapse
We're fine, the trick is to remember to GET OFF THE INTERNET and remember that reality isn't the same as the Internet. Treat the Internet like a highlight reel channel on TV - if you don't like your current 'algorithm', then change 'channels'. Also, remember why tech has always pushed for Adblockers - then filter out the things demanding your attention. Once you realize a lot of news agencies (political, financial, tech, etc) is using the same dark patterns as ads, you start to filter them out of your attention.
I'm enjoying rewatching Supernatural on Amazon Prime right now.
Oh sure. The war isn't happening as long as you don't look at it. In fact, it's not technically a war so we shouldn't care about it.
You are correct in that we must be better about selecting our news sources. But the answer is not about drowning yourself in pleasant fiction on Amazon Prime or ignoring current events.
The answer is to pick non-clickbait / non-doomscrolling news sources that provide more actionable news and stronger analysis. I've picked The Atlantic for this, once a week magazine is fast enough and gives enough time for the writers to provide deep and through analysis on current events.
The fast moving clickbait media of Twitter and Facebook is trash. It's often incorrect, it's full of propaganda, and the people drawn into it seem like idiots (and arguing with them pulls your intelligence down). Find better media, find better people and leave the trash behind.
---------
Pick your news sources. Otherwise, the news sources will pick you. That's always been true since the early days of Yellow Journalism. The media landscape is harder to figure out today, but there continues to be well written independent media today, if only you went out to support them and reach out.
Sure it is important to be aware, but If being perpetually aware of the current events makes one feel anxious, helpless and fearful of the future then I think it is better to drown in pleasant fiction than read news.
Just being anxious and concerned in your home has not helped any cause except of that of the media that want your perpetual attention, eye balls and clicks.
> Sure it is important to be aware, but If being perpetually aware of the current events makes one feel anxious, helpless and fearful of the future then I think it is better to drown in pleasant fiction than read news.
There is a difference between the upthread claim that there is no significant real problem and the impression that there is is an illusion created by the internet which one should disconnect from to avoid being misled and your claim that it can be better for your mental health to cutoff from stressful news sources independently of whether those news sources accurately depict the real state of the world.
What you are saying may be broadly true, but it is orthogonal to the argument you were responding to.
100s or 1000s of families' lives are permanently shattered in Iran because the US started a questionable war and didn't do enough due diligence before dropping bombs. The only reason we have the luxury of ignoring current events is because they rarely come home to roost, no matter how much destruction our government causes elsewhere.
I started doing my GET OFF THE INTERNET shtick last year on Digg 4.0 (before Kevin pulled the plug), so it's not really about Iran. Not ignoring current events, just saying "change the channel" every once and a while, and a little "think local" on how you can be the change you want to see "out there"
Aye comrade, those smarties at the Kremlin will take care of everything for us! Better to choose the path of blissful ignorance. Have another vodka it makes it easier to forget.
That's just Twitter/Facebook doom scrolling and shitty writing style. They are selling clicks to advertisers and nothing sells clicks better than doom.
Yes. Stop going to internet algorithmic feeds. However, do not ignore the news. Simply choose better, less angst and less clickbaity news. Do you think the Civil Rights protests of the 1960s were informed by angsty clickbait articles? Or were they filled with ignorant dufuses who ignored the news?
Ditto with the Vietnam war. You know, the one with an actual draft and far worse situation than we have right now in Iran. You have to stay informed of events, but that doesn't mean you have to accept the shitty, angst inducing writing style of these clickbait magnets.
No. Back then, they chose better sources of news that inspired action and provided plans. Same is required for today. Stay informed, but ignore the crap, clickbait and idiots.
I second that. Consume every other click bait title and another useless analysis from someone is just nerve wrecking. Media thrive from your attention, but you do not.
I don't say to ignore everything bur being constantly in the loop gives you nothing. Your anxiety is someone else business model. I do not use media like X, watch tv or similiar. It's absolutely ok to not know what uterrly stupid some politician did with intent to get you mad.
I watch few independent analysts on youtube from time to time and I do not miss anything important. Really. It's the best and easiest thing you can do for your mental health now.
>This Is Not How Presidents Typically Communicate. (About trump)
And it screams to me that this is a biased site.
So I think it is not possible for a layman to know the ground truth. Not even close. Have you seen the movie "Wag the dog?" It is a 1997 movie. Things have only gotten real worse since..
So given that, what is the point? Either put your life on line and go to these places and understand the truth and do something about it, or just zone out and enjoy the what ever little fragile peace that you have right now.
Strange, are you familiar with the story or did you miss the news this weekend?
I think it's pretty factual to point out that US Presidents don't normally send the message "Praise Allah" on Easter Sunday. A blasphemy like that is certainly news and warrants the Atlantic's headline.
Or do you consider the message of "Praise Allah" to be a normal thing for sitting US Presidents to say? It's a straightforward situation, there's no reason to beat around the bush on this news item.
Is it really contrary to facts to point out that this is not normal? You started this by saying The Atlantic's headline was incorrect.
The question is what is or isn't normal, as per the headline you disagreed with.
I do believe that a sitting US President tweeting such a thing is extraordinary. And does indeed deserve some analysis for how we got here. Not like in a clickbait we are doomed way, but just a reminder of how far we have gone as a country here.
Its an active negotiation going on about a currently on going conflict. People are literally dying over these words.
Say what you will about it, but the President's words _DO_ matter. Especially in times of war, negotiation, and global posturing.
----------
The hundreds of idiots hyperventilating about this don't matter. But what I can say is that in the USA vs Iran conflict, these words absolutely matter. We can ignore the pundits who don't matter. But the words being discussed here are the President's words.
And I happen to like The Atlantic's overall analysis on this particular situation. But you can't convince me that... this is "pointless". Its literally life or death here man.
-----------
> I don't want to spend any more time on this.
NONE OF US want to spend any time on this. But staying informed about how this war and conflict plays out is hugely important. Digging your head into the sand because you don't care is... well... take your pick at any way to finish that sentence.
We've been forced to spend time on it because it affects business, it affects military readiness. It affects our global positioning, the lives of our soldiers, the lives of Iranians, etc. etc. Even the unrelated Europeans (who did nothing) are forced to pay attention because of the oil crisis that flows out from these events.
You already "know" that the president is someone not fit to be the president. This news outlet shows you trivial stuff that confirms your impression, getting your attention and approval.
You feel that you are staying "informed" but all that this is doing to you to push you further into your bubble.
Yes. The Atlantic posted an article that I care about and informed me of an important story. That's a good thing. And we all should care about this issue.
This is war. Literally war. I will be paying attention. Maybe you should too.
And the whole point of Twitter is to wear you down with irrelevant stories to the point that you feel disconnected from Politics.
That's wrong. And the sooner you get off of clickbait / boy cried wolf style hyperventilating, the sooner you can focus on what matters.
You know. Like what the President says during wartime. While ignoring a million of useless bots and bad analysis.
--------
Your opinion is correct, with regards to Twitter and other awful clickbait media. Most things there don't matter.
But The Atlantic wrote a story about the Presidents escalating words and rhetoric in wartime situation. That actually matters.
The issue of today's media is one of prioritization. Deciding what does, and doesn't matter, is key.
------------
I get that you are tired of the clickbait and crap. But my recommendation to you is to cut out the crap from your life. Disconnect from Twitter and Facebook and maybe you will feel better.
Choose better media. And think about what is or isn't important. Decide how you spend your time and what stories you should be reading. Don't cut off the world, but instead focus your attention on what matters.
[Responding to all the comments, so you may need to read through the thread again if I miss context here]
> The war isn't happening as long as you don't look at it.
I'm not ignorant of the war, and yes I follow it; however my mentality stems from the sheer number of months of bad news happening somewhere. I can only give so much of my attention to The World when there's things at the local level to worry about. So I don't engage in "all of it" on the Internet. I have those conversations in person.
> But the answer is not about drowning yourself in pleasant fiction on Amazon Prime or ignoring current events.
I disagree, but also not drowning. Rather engaging online in the manner pre-COVID. You know, like Walking Dead "How would I survive a zombie apocalypse" or Game of Thrones "who's next to die". The 24/7 Internet chatroom known as "the comments section" just wants to deviate the conversation back to politics. I also disagree with the sentiment that we're in "Idiocracy", but I still enjoy the film.
> The fast moving clickbait media of Twitter and Facebook is trash. It's often incorrect, it's full of propaganda
So is every aggregator site. Agenda-Setting Theory [1] dictates what information you're receiving on any given day, and smaller scale Discords with self-promotion know how to gamify Trending algorithms (since most rely on some degree of 'velocity' based on time since post). Couple that with how we've over engineered attention by A/B testing thumbnails [2] and how the mind reads TEXT LIKE THIS [3] (which was also A/B tested for email campaign clickthroughs), I'm left with a curiosity of "what headline text is emotionally anchoring a sentiment"?
Heck, GET OFF THE INTERNET isn't even yelling [4], it's just me abusing that all caps does thing in brain.
We are nowhere near fine. The country is being run by incompetent sycophants in thrall to a criminal who is musing about committing crimes against humanity on social media. He's using his own private paramilitary to terrorize anyone he dislikes all while gutting any institutions that may constrain him, working to subvert voting, destroying the economy for anyone that isn't already obscenely rich, destroying the climate at an accelerated rate, gutting international relations, destroying alliances. Congress enables him instead of checking him, as does the Supreme Court.
I think this is normalising the situation a bit too much. You might 'get of the internet' and stop caring about politics, but the politics still cares about you and does in fact affect the real world.
The "realpolitik" is in fact, and almost by definition, not online.
I think a ton of people didn't get the memo during the first Trump term, and are still baffled by it during his second one.
Republicans have never used the media like the Democrats. Conservative values change very slowly and are disseminated through institutions like the military, religion, etc. Trump has taken it to the next level by only ever using the internet to troll the chronically online and anyone else out of the loop. That's radio discipline.
Nah, this is giving him far too much credit. I've read many a theory about how this or that thing that has been said is just a ruse or a troll and the real plan makes so much more sense and his actions have done nothing to demonstrate that.
I've also heard what you're saying before and I'm equally confused by this take.
I'm not saying the Republicans keep their plans secret. The brutal simplicity is the main appeal for Republican voters. They emphatically don't want discussion. They want action. There's nothing to pick apart or analyze, and that's the point. It's hard to argue with someone waving a big stick.
> Jonathan Clarke, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs and prominent critic of Neoconservatism, proposed the following as the "main characteristics of neoconservatism": "a tendency to see the world in binary good/evil terms", a "low tolerance for diplomacy", a "readiness to use military force", an "emphasis on US unilateral action", a "disdain for multilateral organizations" and a "focus on the Middle East".
This is the same game plan since the 1970s. If you want to hear any debate about it, you're gonna have to go that far back. Nobody in today's Republican party is ever going to entertain or reiterate any of this because it will just make them look weak to voters.
OK, then what's the ruse that's got the online people so distracted? Because what you've linked tends to be what people are getting angry about (I mean, there's other things as well, but this is the latest one). Like, the main thing is that there's lot's of action, pretty much none of it actually making much sense.
> what's the ruse that's got the online people so distracted
Now you may understand why the Republicans are constantly and loudly asking that same question and insisting that all of social media is hoaxes/conspiracies/lies.
I know these answers all seem so simple and convenient, but they're just plain true. Take it for what it is.
> none of it actually making much sense
I think you just disagree with how little depth there is to this, and while that's understandable, I wouldn't go as far as saying it doesn't make sense.
Given that religions are losing members, especially the youth, and that the most people do not join the military, what will keep disseminating the ideas in the future?
For now, the neoconservatives are running the Republican party. They also have a pretty clear game plan that doesn't require constant chatter. I am just stating where the values originate, and of course things can get murky over time without stronger leadership.
The equivalent question for the Democrat party would be where they expect to find new leaders when their voter base is increasingly antisocial and doesn't believe in higher education.
> We're fine, the trick is to remember to GET OFF THE INTERNET and remember that reality isn't the same as the Internet.
That works fine, except in the cases where the bad news reflects reality, or understates how bad the reality is. In that case it's like saying cancer isn't the problem, the problem is that you visited the doctor and listened as he told you bad news.
> That works fine, except in the cases where the bad news reflects reality
The issue is that the 24/7 Internet chatroom/forums shift the "bad news" target on a daily basis. Sometimes its war, others its natural disaster, others its a horrific crime, etc. If you've been only seeing bad news since Covid, then it makes you (read, made me) think the world's in a terrible place. I stopped spending allll my time in the 24/7 chatroom and when I say this IN the chatroom everyone thinks I'm completely unaware. I'm not. I just engage on other matters, like cheering on my buddies when they release something.
The world is (and the US is) a measurably more terrible place than only a few years ago, and a big part of the reason is that, whether or not they remain online, people are helplessly detached from events; being blissfully ignorant is not substantively different in societal impact than being in a state of paralysis from oversaturation of a mix of real, mis- and dis-informaton, even if it is more enjoyable in the near term.
Shutting off the feeds (especially those that are becoming more extremely manipulated to produce ineffective rage, which is part of how the world is worse) may be an effective way to manage the near-term stress of the present combination of media and material conditions, but it doesn't do anything to actually address the material conditions. Heck, detachment and demobilization to reduce resistance to arbitrary exercise of power is a big part of what you are being manipulated for. It's not an accident that that works as stress relief; that's part of the design of the manipulation.
> The world is (and the US is) a measurably more terrible place than only a few years ago
I neither agree nor disagree (if that makes sense), but I certainly agree that being modern Internet has warped people's views on things. I hear it called a "screen detox" via my Spotify BetterHelp ads and while I never used that service, I get what they mean.
Back during Digg 4.0 last year, one of the core members of users referred to it as "trying to have a conversation while attending a riot". Its a lot of third parties and faceless usernames chiming in, and if you don't answer all of them the impression can get equally get warped about the original intent of the conversation. Even how the conversation gets steered after the original comment is interesting to see.
I just think Covid made us all "get on the same wavelength", then someone(s) tainted that through things like heavy Reddit moderation. Like, we were all doing our own little things, then "everyone" is refreshing Johns Hopkins' dashboard, wondering if they have enough toilet paper because of the Seuz Canal, or watching all of the protest/riots unfold in other states.
But what got lost was no one going out to things, saving/gambling their money on the next short squeeze, and not supporting local stuff. If anything, GET OFF THE INTERNET is my attempt at manipulation/psyop/marketing campaign. And, locally, yeah, we're offline, openly talking about what we see on the different platforms since Reddit and Twitter are politically skewed, and sort of remembering a time before the pandemic.
I go to Magic the Gathering events at my LGS now. Its pretty cool to meet the nerds in that "missing third space". We're still talking about tariffs and global conflicts. We're just doing it respectfully and not trying to ruin the game at the same time cause not everyone agrees. I can even tell when someone is fresh off Arena because they play some of those insta-win meta combos. I just make tribal decks, I don't have time to study all that.
You can still read print media like WAPO, NYT, or WSJ. Stay away from opinion and editorial sections and you'll still be informed about what matters but not manipulated so much that it gives you anxiety.
Yeah, here's what Bezos wrote. I seriously doubt it ends with the opinion section:
> I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages...We are going to be writing every day in support of defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others...
I'll leave it to others to make a decision on whether WAPO qualifies as a propaganda outfit.
While those listed papers may not be outright fabrications, they are very much manipulated by what their billionaire owners want you to know.
Part of the problem here is you can only list a few papers that might tell you the truth at all, when in the past there was far more independent news organizations that would vie against each other. Now they need to check in with their shareholders first.
late checking in on the conversation. I agree with you to a degree but it's better than the rage bait online. Also, with a physical piece of paper you can reach the end, it doesn't scroll forever. I was subscribed to the paper wsj for a while and that was my favorite part, i could reach the end.
Every WaPo reporter and editor doesn't check in with Bezos before a story goes to print. Yeah, the owners steer some stuff and kill some articles, but for the most part there's still very good reporting going on at the major US papers. It's a convenient fallacy to handwave away all established journalism because billionaire owners are chipping away around the edges.
>WaPo reporter and editor doesn't check in with Bezos before a story goes to print.
Reporters are at the bottom of the list, there is a pile of middle and upper management that does all this work for Bezos without his need to keep an eye on it.
All it takes is one phone call from him saying they need to be careful around a topic and that's it. Funds dry up for investigations into that topic.
Now, I never said 'throw away' journalism, I said to ensure you understand the bias of the paper in question. Just because WaPo isn't reporting on Bezos doesn't mean there isn't anything to report on said guy.
>We're fine, the trick is to remember to GET OFF THE INTERNET and remember that reality isn't the same as the Internet.
I can understand how somebody could hold onto this comfort: it used to be (mostly) true. Political "scandals" were usually either truly bad but localized (e.g. a politician caught and kicked out for bribery) or performative furor (e.g. a lapel pin).
It's different now. Those times were our "pro wrestling" era: earnest professionals who put in the work but also put on a show to keep the fans. No matter how dirty the script got, everyone made sure the lights stayed on. Now we're in the "teenage street gang" era. The "show" is actually how they see the world, participants literally delight in physical pain, and citizens on the sidelines are only terrorized.
How anyone could think things would be fine after what the childhood vaccine panel tried to do is beyond me. Or Noem withholding relief funds. Or blanket tariffs without any further plan for improving our industries. Those acts have huge negative effects across the population. The vast majority of citizens have been needlessly harmed by those choices.
I disagree, but sadly I don't think text will provide my full reasoning. But it stems from "modern WWE" (AEW is a different 'culture' right now with Brodie King), but comparing it to Ole Anderson [1] getting stabbed by a fan compared to these day when most wrestlers are just getting swarmed by people wanting them to autograph their ebay resells. Again, more about how fans (not IWC) treat wrestlers IRL, not politics. (Aside, looks like the was an attempted stabbing too so may be a moot point [2])
I think politics has just now entered its "pro wrestling" era. And yes, its largely due to a certain President that's appeared on WWE in the past.
This might be possible outside the US, but in the US the internet has become reality. Trump tweets and it effects financial markets. People post on X, go viral, get hired by OpenAI. Filtering out news about institutional instability doesn't make institutions more stable, it just makes you less informed about it. And maybe one day you'll find yourself actually facing the consequences of that without knowing how you could have prevented it.
Hell, his tweets affect real world violence in the US. You have to keep an eye on his posts to figure out if there's going to be Nazi marches tomorrow.
There's a stark difference between being Extremely Online and sticking your head in the sand. The US is not fine. The US is waging an illegal war of aggression abroad, committing war crimes and threatening more. The US has invaded its own cities, mine included, with untrained goons who have shot and killed multiple US citizens.
If you're not aware of what's happening, how will that impact your political views? Your spending? Your habits? Your vote?
Edit - A few more:
- The war in Iran is triggering an energy and economic crisis globally. Fuel prices are skyrocketing globally as a result, with some countries mandating that people cannot work (thus, cannot get paid) more than a few days a week to preserve fuel. This is pushing up prices on groceries, materials and other goods that will disproportionately impact the global poor. Many will not be able to survive.
- The US has been intentionally and illegally embargoing oil and gas shipments to Cuba plunging the country into blackouts and instability, also against international law. People can't work, or cook, or refrigerate food, or turn on their lights.
You sure we're fine?
Edit 2: Downvotes already! Amazing. Good to see the right wing slant in Silicon Valley is alive and well. Looking forward to the day the market crashes and all of your RSUs and stock holdings are worth fuck all. You can't eat stocks, but you can eat the rich.
> We're fine, the trick is to remember to GET OFF THE INTERNET and remember that reality isn't the same as the Internet.
"reality isn't the same as the internet" was already starting to be a dangerously out-of-touch delusion when Boomers and Silents were saying it in the 1990s.
I mean if we're trying to source where "liminal space" started, I'd like to add Portal and Portal 2 into the mix. It didn't have the surreal, creepy components because jump scare horror games like Five Nights hadn't been popularized yet but the entire second area of Portal 2 where you're introduced to Cave Johnson and the older Aperture Science HQ is very much "liminal".
If we want to go deeper, then I really think its Earthbound's absurdist take on childhood adventures with cultists, ghosts, dreamscapes, etc. but I think at that point I might as well say dice games influenced things.
i think there's also a strong Lynchian influence to the liminal space aesthetic. Industrial spaces, flickering fluoresecnt lights, and a sense of unease that comes from dream-logic and shots that linger to emphasize emptyness.
Another issue I've seen from some of the more prolific YouTube channels is they slowly become another mouthpiece for "news coverage". The algorithm very much expects you to continue uploading, because everyone is always looking for the newest content; at least before YouTube removed the Trending section. I admit that I only really check my Subscription page at this point, and after going through a subscription purge I only see maybe a half a dozen to a dozen new videos. Its actually been very useful since it encourages me to not get sucked in to watching hours of videos.
However, given my experience during Digg's v4 attempt this past year, I will say being willing to put yourself out there has served as a pseudo-networking activity and I've gotten the chance to speak with several people and now I'm giving talks "out there".
Damn. I still have faith that what a lot of us that migrated to new Digg envision is possible. Post pandemic Internet has choppier waters than before, but I'm going to try and keep a positive outlook and I look forward to their followup emails.
Damned for virtual signalling if they make posts about their contributions, damned for destroying tech when they don't. I love these kinds of articles and share them with students all the time.
> I think Minecraft and Roblox replaced flash for the new generations.
I think this is the biggest shift. Minecraft starting out as a .jar file allowed for reverse engineering and modding support became a huge part of its "culture". Coupled with artists focusing on spritesheets, you got to have that same Newgrounds online underground scene but for the next generation of kids.
Roblox is takes a similar place now that Minecraft is ~15 years old and all "grown up". Maybe once Roblox hits that similar fate this new Flash will be ready to fill its shoes.
We're fine, the trick is to remember to GET OFF THE INTERNET and remember that reality isn't the same as the Internet. Treat the Internet like a highlight reel channel on TV - if you don't like your current 'algorithm', then change 'channels'. Also, remember why tech has always pushed for Adblockers - then filter out the things demanding your attention. Once you realize a lot of news agencies (political, financial, tech, etc) is using the same dark patterns as ads, you start to filter them out of your attention.
I'm enjoying rewatching Supernatural on Amazon Prime right now.
reply