37
Everyone is on their phone
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
37 points (82.5% liked)
News
21759 readers
1924 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I know it's just a comic but I still disagree with it's message. Phones are essentially mini-computers connected to the Internet which has the potential for endless dopamine-inducing entertainment and we carry them around with us 24/7. A very powerful dopamine-pump, with us around the clock, every day. This has actually never happened before in history.
This is what literally all those other people were saying in that comic. That's why each panel had a date.
Books were considered mini-dopamine pumps that could be carried around everywhere, all day and every day. Well, they would've been, if they'd known what dopamine was.
people have been bitching about how technology will ruin society since the dawn of technology. Which, just for the record, predates modern humans. some neanderthal husband probably complained about his mate using ~~buffalo~~wooly mammoth jumps instead of like, trying to pick a fight with a wooly mammoth.
society changes to adapt to the technology. you can argue if this is a good thing or not, but one thing that is perfectly incontrovertible is that it will not ruin society.
In high school I had novels in my backpack and spent all my free time reading. Would rush to class early to read more.
It's the same shit at a different scale.
Is there any medical basis for for phones causing infinite dopamine production? The body has finite resources, so I'd imagine you'd eventually run out, get bored, and move on to something else.
Dopamine is also produced when you're around someone you love, but no one says we're dangerously addicted to our loved ones...
I'm not a doctor or anything though.
I dont know man... citation fuckin needed.
Andrew Huberman is a neurologist who covers this in depth, with citations and references, if you’re actually interested. It’s pretty well established
Huberman always struck me as a guy more interested in building a business than public health. After all he hocks supplements just like all the other quacks and "alt" medicine guys. I do not take him seriously.
Source? Source? Source? Do you have a source on that? Do you have a source on that? Source? A source. No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered.