IRC

64 readers

1 users here now

https://lemmy.world/post/21969100

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Illecors@lemmy.cafe

IRC is for old people (slrpnk.net)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by activistPnk@slrpnk.net to c/IRC@lemmy.cafe

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I visited a university recently and brought up IRC in a conversation. Some students did not know what it was and some said “that’s for old people”. So, that’s the genz perception. I wonder to what extent that’s true.. what proportion of IRC users on the notable networks are genz.

I have doubts, because it seems there are still snot nose trolls demonstrating that children are still around. But it would be interesting to have some reliable stats.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It is well established science that differences between the generations are largely overstated.

This is hand waving. It’s useless for countering science to the contrary which pinpoints a specific difference. Science does not work like you think it does. Abstract social science does not defeat actual survey results.

What differences remain tend to be driven by environmental factors

Yes, and? This is just assigning blame. It’s fair enough to blame the adults for cultivating the money-centrism in the young. It’s interesting, yet still irrelevant to the thesis.

You, on the other hand, seem to be lumping whole generations together and ascribing the differences to some kind of moral decay. Which, oh my god, is the most “get off my lawn” take ever. Seriously, you are acting the cliche.

The science speaks for itself. This emotional plea against survey results is just a show of desperation. It’s not compelling.

tf are you talking about? Yes, students in university are more concerned about their economic future these days…? This seems like a straightforward fact.

You’ve lost track of your own claim, which was to say that the cost of university is /why/ the survey results are what they are. Now you are talking about economic future, which is more what the survey was getting at -- the prioritisation of money post-grad and thereafter.

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Abstract social science does not defeat actual survey results.

Lol. If that's how science works for you, you are following some shit science. Survey results are notoriously the cheapest and shittiest way of gathering information about the world. Anyone saying that their survey results should supercede the opinion of actual experts in a field shouldn't be taken seriously.

It’s fair enough to blame the adults for cultivating the money-centrism in the young.

And those same adults would be the ones who said they were going to college for oh-so-noble reasons. Surveys are worth somewhere between jack and fucking shit in science because people can answer differently based on what they had for breakfast this morning. We could easily imagine that the difference exists because modern students are simply more self aware.

This emotional plea against survey results is just a show of desperation. It’s not compelling.

It isn't an emotional plea. I'm pointing out your biases, which are leading you to a myopic and closed minded view of the situation. I am hoping that by pointing out that "kids these days don't have any work ethic" is such a worn out cliche, existant aince the time of the greek philosophers, that you will take a step back and consider the fact that you are just an old man yelling at clouds.

You’ve lost track of your own claim, which was to say that the cost of university is /why/ the survey results are what they are. Now you are talking about economic future, which is more what the survey was getting at – the prioritisation of money post-grad and thereafter.

Are you high? The cost of university is intrinsically linked to students' economic future. If you are staring down the barrel of tens of thousands in student debt, you will be much more concerned about your economic future for entirely rational reasons.

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Lol. If that’s how science works for you, you are following some shit science. Survey results are notoriously the cheapest and shittiest way of gathering information about the world. Anyone saying that their survey results should supercede the opinion of actual experts in a field shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Anyone saying that a general finding supercedes a specific finding by actual experts in a field shouldn’t be taken seriously. Anyone who proposes disregarding evidence should not be taken seriously, and certainly not more seriously than Dr.Bregman who cites the research in his talks.

Surveys are worth somewhere between jack and fucking shit in science because people can answer differently based on what they had for breakfast this morning.

If you don’t control for that, you’re doing it wrong.

We could easily imagine that the difference exists because modern students are simply more self aware.

We could imagine that, only if you actually study the wording of the survey and first find that it was incompetently worded to ask the questions straight, prima facie, so as to leak to the study subjects what is being studied.

It isn’t an emotional plea. I’m pointing out your biases,

The bias is evident in your emotion. You cannot counter the evidence so you look to attack the person. It’s despirate.

which are leading you to a myopic and closed minded view of the situation.

To be close minded is to disregard the facts. Such as claiming the evidence should be ignored because a survey was used.

You would do better to actually look at the evidence and find specific flaws, rather than rely on broad hand-waving at every level of analysis.

I am hoping that by pointing out that “kids these days don’t have any work ethic” is such a worn out cliche

It’s a worn out strawman. It requires you to misquote me to make an emotional plea.

Are you high? The cost of university is intrinsically linked to students’ economic future.

Plz don’t post when you are drunk. Surely if you were sober you could separate the cost of university from future goals and outlooks. It is in fact extrinsic motivation that is replacing intrinsic motivation.

There is no intrinsic link between the cost of university and the students’economic future. You are conflating cost with attendence. Attendence is intrinsicly linked to the students’economic future. The cost, which may or may not be paid by the student whole or in part, is extrinsic.

If you are staring down the barrel of tens of thousands in student debt, you will be much more concerned about your economic future for entirely rational reasons.

That concern requires being money-centric to begin with.