NationStates Jolt Archive

How big an impact has the proliferation of technology really had on our personal happiness?

I'm about the same age now as my parents were when I was born (33). I was idly thinking about what life was like when I was little and comparing it to my life now.

*When I was little, my parents had a decent collection of records, about an even mix of 45s and LPs. Maybe 100 records in total. They played them on a stereo turntable.
*Today, I have a few dozen CDs, a handful of cassette tapes and with iTunes and LimeWire I have access to virtually any song I could ever want. I can play them on my surround sound DVD/CD player or on my computer's stereo speakers.

Am I happier than they, musically?

*When I was little, we had no VCR until I turned about 6. We had all blank VHS tapes to record movies with, and pre-recorded tapes were almost $100 each. We had a handful of movies, mostly copied form tapes my dad encountered at work as an electronics tech.

*Today, I have close to 200 individual DVDs with a vast collection of movies I can download through iTunes, NetFlix or LimeWire. I can watch them on any of the computers in my home or on that surround sound DVD player. I can also get movies on demand through my digital cable service.

Am I more satisfied with my movie options than they?

*When I was little, we had basically 4 VHF channels (from Washington, and we could also get the same network channels from Baltimore with a big enough set of rabbit ears) and a handful of UHF channels, although normally the signal wasn't very strong and so the picture was snowy. All watchable on a 28" console television.

*Today, I have digital cable providing well over 100 channels in half a dozen laguages, all watchable on my 36" widescreen HD LCD tv.

Do I watch 10 times more TV than they do?

*When I was little, we rode around in my dad's 1972 Vega wagon which seated 5 people plus some cargo area in the back.

*Until recently I drove a 4 door 2001 Mitsubishi that seated 5 people and had a big trunk. Now we have a minivan that seats 7 but gobbles fuel like it's going out of style.

Do I enjoy riding in a car more now than when I was little? Do cars go any faster? Are they m ore comfortable?

*When I was little, every telephone was a landline and the handset was connected by a wire to the base. Phone numbers were 7 digits and long distance was expensive and had to be called collect.

*Today, our home phone is cordless but we use our cell phones exclusively anyway. Phone numbers are 10 digits but long distance is no different from calling local.

Do I spend more time on the phone? Do I enjoy it more?

*When I was a kid we had a ColecoVision video game console. It was nicer than the Atari but with a more limited selection of game catrtridges. The controller was a paddle joystick with 2 buttons, with a numeric keypad for interacting with menus. I had 2 controllers for it. Sound was blips and bleeps with primitive music, and the graphics were only something like 300x250.

*Today, I have a PS2, an XBox and a GameCube. Each of them uses DVDs as the game media, have a vast selection of titles, and have controllers with more buttons on them than I have fingers. Each system can have up to 4 controllers plugged in (PS2 needs a multitap) and games are saved on memory cards. The graphics are close to photorealistic and the sound is lifelike.

Do I play console games more now than when I was a kid? Do I enjoy it more?

*When I was a kid there was no Internet. If we needed an address we had to have a phone book or dial the Operator. If we wanted to order something by mail we had to have a catalog and an order form, and send a check or money order. If we wanted to look up information we had to go to the library.

*Today I can look up any piece of informatino I want, or order virtually any product I want in a matter of minutes online, and pay for it using any form of payment I choose except cash.

Do I buy that much more stuff from home?

I have to be honest here... Not one single question above would I answer with a yes. I enjoy the benefits of all this tech but to be honest it doesn't seem world better than what we had when I was little, even though quantitatively the comparison is unimaginable.

I had a Commodore 128 computer when I was a teenager. It has a 1 or 2 MHz processor (Depending on what mode it was in) with no hard drive, 128KB of RAM, 2 floppy drives, a 1200bps modem and a monitor that displayed 640x480 even though the computer could never produce images of that resolution.

My computer at home today has a 2.7GHz processor (that's almost 3 THOUSAND times faster than the old one) with a 120GB hard drive, a DVD RAM, 4GB of RAM (that's 4 MILLION times more memory capacity) a 100MBps Ethernet connection (that's a thousand times faster than the old modem) and my monitor can display anything my video card can throw at it (which is currently 1280 x 980 widescreen).

My games now are a LOT more complex and visually impressive than the old one, yet the price of the equipment in total is about the same as it was, and to be honest, sometimes I miss my old games on that C128.

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

Thoughts?

tl;dr

But I am reminded of an article I read somewhere* about choices. Too little choices can make us unhappy, too many choices can also make us unhappy too.

*Edit: The title is "the Tyranny of Choice" in Scientific American, March 2004.

Well, I've got a handful of CDs, and a handful of DVDs, no car, small normal TV...
But I do have the internet, and that has made one hell of a difference. Without it, I would never have met my fiance. So, yes, that particular bit of technology made me very happy indeed.

As for the rest, I don't really care for it all that much t obe honest. I prefer seeing films in the cinema, and I'm not that much into music or console games or cars.

things dont make you happy. happiness comes from within.

good entertainment comes from technology and i am very happy that we have amazingly broader choices now than we did when i was a kid.

I don't like the question. It strikes me as making a false assumption that only owning a handful of records way back when is somehow comparable to only owning a handful of records in this segment of the information age.

My mother and her sister used to fight over who got the lego windows for the lego house, a concept my siblings and I could only laugh about when we played with legos. But back then, the windows were the best thing available, and my mother was about as happy about a simple window as I would be about a lego shark or parrot. Both are obsolete by now.

Well, I've got a handful of CDs, and a handful of DVDs, no car, small normal TV...
But I do have the internet, and that has made one hell of a difference. Without it, I would never have met my fiance. So, yes, that particular bit of technology made me very happy indeed.

As for the rest, I don't really care for it all that much t obe honest. I prefer seeing films in the cinema, and I'm not that much into music or console games or cars.

I'm with you in the difference it's made, in the sense that I too met my significant other via the Internet.

But I'm talking more genrally.

But thereis one thing I forgot to put on the list that HAS changed sionce i was a kid and DOES make me more happy:

BATTLESTAR GALACTICA!

I don't like the question. It strikes me as making a false assumption that only owning a handful of records way back when is somehow comparable to only owning a handful of records in this segment of the information age.

My mother and her sister used to fight over who got the lego windows for the lego house, a concept my siblings and I could only laugh about when we played with legos. But back then, the windows were the best thing available, and my mother was about as happy about a simple window as I would be about a lego shark or parrot. Both are obsolete by now.

I'm curious then... Wouldn't you equate an LP of 1978 with a CD of 2008? In terms of content they're generally similar in capacity and some argue that records sound better. My thinking is that technology has enabled us to acquire more volume and arguably quality.

I think technology has improved our experience with music and computer games and so on.

It's just that happiness is based on something much much deeper than computer games.

I have to be honest here... Not one single question above would I answer with a yes.
Same here... except the asnwer is a resounding HELL YEAH! :D
I started 5 years earlier (and in a country behind the Iron Curtain to boot) so in my perspective the difference is even more dramatic. I don't think these things make me MUCH happier, it's icing on the cake. But it's nice!

Same here... except the asnwer is a resounding HELL YEAH! :D
I started 5 years earlier (and in a country behind the Iron Curtain to boot) so in my perspective the difference is even more dramatic. I don't think these things make me MUCH happier, it's icing on the cake. But it's nice!

Well I certainly wouldn't argue that they make *no* difference... I mean after all, all that tech didn't just spontaneously appear in my apartment :D

But it does make me ask myself why I should bother going out and buying an XBox 360 when my PS2 or my wife's XBox is still as much fun as playing the ColecoVision was.

I'm curious then... Wouldn't you equate an LP of 1978 with a CD of 2008? In terms of content they're generally similar in capacity and some argue that records sound better. My thinking is that technology has enabled us to acquire more volume and arguably quality.LPs and CDs are poor examples for this argument, as they are largely unrepresentative of influence of more advanced technology as a whole.

I'm with you in the difference it's made, in the sense that I too met my significant other via the Internet.

But I'm talking more genrally.

But thereis one thing I forgot to put on the list that HAS changed sionce i was a kid and DOES make me more happy:

BATTLESTAR GALACTICA!

More generally? No. People today aren't overall happier than they used to be. People never are.

There are many, many instances of medical technology that have made lives happier. Because of advances in detecting breast cancer, my children have a grandmother who is still alive.

I bet they think that's pretty awesome.

People are generally happy, so long as they see improvement on the horizon, so, while the actual technological consumer goods that have resulted have in and of themselves not created happiness, the prospect of more, cooler stuff, and the realistic capability to achieve ownership of such stuff actually does develop a degree of hope for the future, and the resultant happiness.

Not only in our personal lives, but in our perceptions of the society in which we live, if we perceive there as being a bright future for our children and grandchildren, we are happy. So, to say that techno-toys don't make us happy is true, but we must also admit that the improvements on those techno-toys, and our hopes of other positive developments, does.

More generally? No. People today aren't overall happier than they used to be. People never are.

The bar always goes up and up and up... and sometimes it takes a visit to a foreign country like Cambodia to realize how hight it went.

LPs and CDs are poor examples for this argument, as they are largely unrepresentative of influence of more advanced technology as a whole.

True, I was just curious.

More generally? No. People today aren't overall happier than they used to be. People never are.

except when watching BATTLESTAR GALACTICA!

That makes me REALLY happy :D

There are many, many instances of medical technology that have made lives happier. Because of advances in detecting breast cancer, my children have a grandmother who is still alive.

I bet they think that's pretty awesome.

Agreed. Medical technology is an area where clearly there's a vast difference and I count myself fortunate not to have had to interact much with it. But since you brought it up I was thikning the day before yesterday, as my new daughter was being born via C-Section, that because of our advanced medical technology I really wasn't nervous about the procedure at all. I trusted in the knowledge, experience and intelligence of the people performing the procedure, naturally, but also in the incredible line of electronics, pharmaceuticals and instruments that were used that probably didn't exist 33 years ago.

People are generally happy, so long as they see improvement on the horizon, so, while the actual technological consumer goods that have resulted have in and of themselves not created happiness, the prospect of more, cooler stuff, and the realistic capability to achieve ownership of such stuff actually does develop a degree of hope for the future, and the resultant happiness.

Not only in our personal lives, but in our perceptions of the society in which we live, if we perceive there as being a bright future for our children and grandchildren, we are happy. So, to say that techno-toys don't make us happy is true, but we must also admit that the improvements on those techno-toys, and our hopes of other positive developments, does.

Excellent point.

The bar always goes up and up and up... and sometimes it takes a visit to a foreign country like Cambodia to realize how hight it went.

I think it has a lot to do with the human adaptive nature. When I go to South America it's a world apart from how I live here, and I'd say the overall level of technology in the average home is comparable to what we had here 30 years ago. Yet the expectations aren't the same either, just as they weren't for us.

We all seem to agree that tech =/= happiness precisely because we, as humans, adapt to what we have at our disposal anyway, so our happiness must derive form other, more basic sources. Things like friends, family, personal success in our given environment, etc are the basis for that. Everything else is just diversion.

But it does make me ask myself why I should bother going out and buying an XBox 360 when my PS2 or my wife's XBox is still as much fun as playing the ColecoVision was.

Dude, you have nooooo idea.

Dude, you have nooooo idea.

Oh gawd don't tell me that... my self control is already strained to the breaking point...

I don't base my happiness on consumerism.

I think technology makes life tougher at times. Think about in the 60's and 70's. One parent had to work to make a household work. Now it takes most two incomes to provide for the family.

More technology allows for the government and employers to add more stresses to ones life by micro-managing things.

I could go on and on but I have to answer these damn emails piling up in my inbox. ;)

How big an impact has the proliferation of technology really had on our personal happiness?

Unanswerable! You speak of a historical trend (technology) and then ask of it's impact on subjective experience (personal happiness.)

You need to compare similar cases across different times, or compare different cases in similar times.

I'm about the same age now as my parents were when I was born (33). I was idly thinking about what life was like when I was little and comparing it to my life now.

That's not idle, it's important thinking. The origins of our personalities IN CHILDHOOD is profound -- we are not the complete, independent individuals we like to pretend at, but growing children. Until the day we die.

*When I was little, my parents had a decent collection of records, about an even mix of 45s and LPs. Maybe 100 records in total. They played them on a stereo turntable.
*Today, I have a few dozen CDs, a handful of cassette tapes and with iTunes and LimeWire I have access to virtually any song I could ever want. I can play them on my surround sound DVD/CD player or on my computer's stereo speakers.

Am I happier than they, musically?

Well, your parents' 100 or so LPs were chosen from a very wide range of available recordings. That it was not what you PERSONALLY chose is perhaps pertinent.

Recordings, of music or theatre, are rather perverse. You are not actually listening to someone play music ... rather, you are simulating that ancient experience, which was more a matter of being there at the right time and experiencing something unique. But recordings remove the uniqueness, they remove the option to participate. You have the art, without the artist. The voice, without the speaker. As such, you the audience are cast into an entirely passive role, the Fan with nothing to offer but your adoration or sexual favours.

This process was well under way in your parents' day. For more of a challenge, imagine not having recordings of any kind. Imagine being illiterate, and how you might perceive music if you'd lived in the seventeenth century!

*When I was little, we had no VCR until I turned about 6. We had all blank VHS tapes to record movies with, and pre-recorded tapes were almost $100 each. We had a handful of movies, mostly copied form tapes my dad encountered at work as an electronics tech.

*Today, I have close to 200 individual DVDs with a vast collection of movies I can download through iTunes, NetFlix or LimeWire. I can watch them on any of the computers in my home or on that surround sound DVD player. I can also get movies on demand through my digital cable service.

Am I more satisfied with my movie options than they?

No, probably not. They probably had some idea that the movies they had copies of were the BEST movies ... whereas you, confronted with more movies than you have time to watch them properly, find them all equally mediocre.

*When I was little, we had basically 4 VHF channels (from Washington, and we could also get the same network channels from Baltimore with a big enough set of rabbit ears) and a handful of UHF channels, although normally the signal wasn't very strong and so the picture was snowy. All watchable on a 28" console television.

*Today, I have digital cable providing well over 100 channels in half a dozen laguages, all watchable on my 36" widescreen HD LCD tv.

Do I watch 10 times more TV than they do?

Perhaps. :p The point is that you have more choice. The real question is: are you happier with your choice, made between more options, than they were with theirs?

*When I was little, we rode around in my dad's 1972 Vega wagon which seated 5 people plus some cargo area in the back.

*Until recently I drove a 4 door 2001 Mitsubishi that seated 5 people and had a big trunk. Now we have a minivan that seats 7 but gobbles fuel like it's going out of style.

Do I enjoy riding in a car more now than when I was little? Do cars go any faster? Are they m ore comfortable?

They might have gotten less enjoyable, what with all the whining greenies trying to guilt you about driving AT ALL.

*When I was little, every telephone was a landline and the handset was connected by a wire to the base. Phone numbers were 7 digits and long distance was expensive and had to be called collect.

*Today, our home phone is cordless but we use our cell phones exclusively anyway. Phone numbers are 10 digits but long distance is no different from calling local.

Do I spend more time on the phone? Do I enjoy it more?

I can't answer that. I recently lost my cell phone, located it at State Rail lost property ... then didn't bother going to get it. I've always hated talking on the phone, so that decision made itself. I don't have a damn phone any more!

*When I was a kid we had a ColecoVision video game console. It was nicer than the Atari but with a more limited selection of game catrtridges. The controller was a paddle joystick with 2 buttons, with a numeric keypad for interacting with menus. I had 2 controllers for it. Sound was blips and bleeps with primitive music, and the graphics were only something like 300x250.

*Today, I have a PS2, an XBox and a GameCube. Each of them uses DVDs as the game media, have a vast selection of titles, and have controllers with more buttons on them than I have fingers. Each system can have up to 4 controllers plugged in (PS2 needs a multitap) and games are saved on memory cards. The graphics are close to photorealistic and the sound is lifelike.

Do I play console games more now than when I was a kid? Do I enjoy it more?

I don't know. But we're getting into the seriously subjective stuff now. How long can you keep doing the same kind of thing (playing a single-player game) and still find it the same kind of fun?

I can't, wide awake and sober, enjoy a game of Monopoly like I did when I was little. The game didn't change ...

*When I was a kid there was no Internet. If we needed an address we had to have a phone book or dial the Operator. If we wanted to order something by mail we had to have a catalog and an order form, and send a check or money order. If we wanted to look up information we had to go to the library.

*Today I can look up any piece of informatino I want, or order virtually any product I want in a matter of minutes online, and pay for it using any form of payment I choose except cash.

Do I buy that much more stuff from home?

I have to be honest here... Not one single question above would I answer with a yes. I enjoy the benefits of all this tech but to be honest it doesn't seem world better than what we had when I was little, even though quantitatively the comparison is unimaginable.

I had a Commodore 128 computer when I was a teenager. It has a 1 or 2 MHz processor (Depending on what mode it was in) with no hard drive, 128KB of RAM, 2 floppy drives, a 1200bps modem and a monitor that displayed 640x480 even though the computer could never produce images of that resolution.

My computer at home today has a 2.7GHz processor (that's almost 3 THOUSAND times faster than the old one) with a 120GB hard drive, a DVD RAM, 4GB of RAM (that's 4 MILLION times more memory capacity) a 100MBps Ethernet connection (that's a thousand times faster than the old modem) and my monitor can display anything my video card can throw at it (which is currently 1280 x 980 widescreen).

My games now are a LOT more complex and visually impressive than the old one, yet the price of the equipment in total is about the same as it was, and to be honest, sometimes I miss my old games on that C128.

There is no love like first love. You are growing old.

I played a few hours of Railroad Tycoon yesterday. It's still the exact same game, it's not as much fun as it was. So it goes.

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

Thoughts?

Again, you are growing old. The quite normal urge for mastery over your environment is rendering your world safe but boring.

To take a stab at the initial point of your enquiry, it makes little sense to compare the happiness of one person to that of another in almost the same situation (we would conclude only that some people are happier than others.) Even less to compare the happiness of people in very different situations. And least of all, to compare the happiness of people who not only have different environments and are different people, but whose experience is mediated to us in the present by personal memory or by anecdote, ie across time.

I do think about this question myself. The simple existence of people who seem happier to me than I am, despite living lives I would run a mile from, persuades me that no simple thing like movies to watch or a well-equipped kitchen is the origin of happiness.

Finally, my best shot: each technological step is welcome to those who are using the existing technology. The new stuff sells at a premium precisely because it shows up the limitations of what we were using before ... why throw good time after bad? ... and so, even as it makes the activities easier and more comfortable, it diminishes the value of our effort and our passion in the past. We trade in the past for a better future ... and we affirm our choice by finding the present better than the past we have renounced.

We're just suckers for progress.

I'm buying a Sega Genesis for 60$.

It's worth the happiness.

Happiness, like Freedom, is one of those sentimental judgements we make about things we have no control over.

Happiness, like Freedom, is one of those sentimental judgements we make about things we have no control over.

Unless you have a nice chuck of cash.

Unanswerable! You speak of a historical trend (technology) and then ask of it's impact on subjective experience (personal happiness.)

You need to compare similar cases across different times, or compare different cases in similar times.


Wouldn't those pairings be an example of similar cases, or am I misunderstanding your meaning?


That's not idle, it's important thinking. The origins of our personalities IN CHILDHOOD is profound -- we are not the complete, independent individuals we like to pretend at, but growing children. Until the day we die.


True dat.


Well, your parents' 100 or so LPs were chosen from a very wide range of available recordings. That it was not what you PERSONALLY chose is perhaps pertinent.

Recordings, of music or theatre, are rather perverse. You are not actually listening to someone play music ... rather, you are simulating that ancient experience, which was more a matter of being there at the right time and experiencing something unique. But recordings remove the uniqueness, they remove the option to participate. You have the art, without the artist. The voice, without the speaker. As such, you the audience are cast into an entirely passive role, the Fan with nothing to offer but your adoration or sexual favours.

This process was well under way in your parents' day. For more of a challenge, imagine not having recordings of any kind. Imagine being illiterate, and how you might perceive music if you'd lived in the seventeenth century!


I've tried to do that and come up short. Music is so ubiquitous in our lives today that you can't go more than a couple hours at most with any type of entertainment media in proximity without hearing some, even if it's just a jingle.

People in the seventeenth century probably had a much greater appreciation for music than we by virtue of the fact that they so rarely heard it.


No, probably not. They probably had some idea that the movies they had copies of were the BEST movies ... whereas you, confronted with more movies than you have time to watch them properly, find them all equally mediocre.

Perhaps. :p The point is that you have more choice. The real question is: are you happier with your choice, made between more options, than they were with theirs?


With the declining quality of Television, I doubt it. Quality over quantity.

Except for BATTLESTAR GALACTICA, of course. :)


They might have gotten less enjoyable, what with all the whining greenies trying to guilt you about driving AT ALL.


True.

I just find it so ironic that while automotive technology has improved greatly over the last 30 years, cars don't go any faster than they did back then. They're arguably safer and have a great many features, but if all you need to do is go to work, is a 2008 Corolla any better than a 1980 Corolla?


I can't answer that. I recently lost my cell phone, located it at State Rail lost property ... then didn't bother going to get it. I've always hated talking on the phone, so that decision made itself. I don't have a damn phone any more!


I don't blame you. By being easier to contact, I find I'm also easier to pester. If it weren't for caller ID, i'd just leave my phone off altogether.


I don't know. But we're getting into the seriously subjective stuff now. How long can you keep doing the same kind of thing (playing a single-player game) and still find it the same kind of fun?

I can't, wide awake and sober, enjoy a game of Monopoly like I did when I was little. The game didn't change ...


I think a board game is a different case, though. Board games don't really evolve much, and you're talking about the exact same game it's always been.

I love to play computer games. It's my biggest time sink when I'm not sleeping or at work. My favorites are EverQuest II, Medieval II Total War and Unreal Tournament. What make sthem better than the older games is their level of complexity and graphic detail, but am I truly having more fun? I mean, certainly if it were, like your Monopoly example, the exact same computer game, then naturally I'd have been bored of it long ago but I will say that with greater tech comes greater flexibility to create variety, and that helps.

But overall I'd say that was a way to keep up with my expectations, as opposed to making them actually more fun.


There is no love like first love. You are growing old.

I played a few hours of Railroad Tycoon yesterday. It's still the exact same game, it's not as much fun as it was. So it goes.


It's hard to translate that from a qualitative perspective to a quantitative one. I mean, certainly I remember the computer fondly because it was my first real computer (I had a Coleco Adam prior to that but it wasn't very useful.) but in quantitative terms, my current model is many orders of magnitude superior in every measurable way. Such is the human mind that I cannot see the two computers in those relative terms.


Again, you are growing old. The quite normal urge for mastery over your environment is rendering your world safe but boring.


Damn good point. I may sig that...


To take a stab at the initial point of your enquiry, it makes little sense to compare the happiness of one person to that of another in almost the same situation (we would conclude only that some people are happier than others.) Even less to compare the happiness of people in very different situations. And least of all, to compare the happiness of people who not only have different environments and are different people, but whose experience is mediated to us in the present by personal memory or by anecdote, ie across time.

I do think about this question myself. The simple existence of people who seem happier to me than I am, despite living lives I would run a mile from, persuades me that no simple thing like movies to watch or a well-equipped kitchen is the origin of happiness.

Finally, my best shot: each technological step is welcome to those who are using the existing technology. The new stuff sells at a premium precisely because it shows up the limitations of what we were using before ... why throw good time after bad? ... and so, even as it makes the activities easier and more comfortable, it diminishes the value of our effort and our passion in the past. We trade in the past for a better future ... and we affirm our choice by finding the present better than the past we have renounced.

We're just suckers for progress.

Agreed.

But it would seem how we measure progress isn't as all inclusive as it might at first appear.

Recordings, of music or theatre, are rather perverse. You are not actually listening to someone play music ... rather, you are simulating that ancient experience, which was more a matter of being there at the right time and experiencing something unique. But recordings remove the uniqueness, they remove the option to participate. You have the art, without the artist. The voice, without the speaker. As such, you the audience are cast into an entirely passive role, the Fan with nothing to offer but your adoration or sexual favours.


How is the audience less passive when watching, say, a play live other than the fact the actors might hear their laughter and applause?

I joke about TV now - 500 channels and still nothing worth watching.

Music is portable now, which makes me very happy. I love having choices when I'm driving - radio or cd, Mozart or Godsmack. It's all good. (I'm not real pleased with the idea of TVs and DVDs in the car - way too distracting).

I like cordless phones - to be able to take the phone anywhere in the house, even out into the yard is a great convenience, so yes, it contributes much to my happiness. Cell phones, on the other hand, are a mixed blessing - on the one hand, if there's an emergency, a cell phone is invaluable - no trying to find a pay phone and fumbling for quarters, no taking risks walking from a broken down car, just make the call. On the other hand, it's a damned electronic leash, never allowing you to get away from someone, even for a minute, unless you "forget" to recharge your phone or "forget" to put it in your purse or pocket - then people get after you about it.

But I have to admit, I love the internet. If I'm curious about something, I can look it up immediately. I still love books and reading, I make a trip to the library every week or two, but I no longer make special trips to riffle throught the card catalog looking for information. I'm very happy about this. I have friends I can contact on line, some of whom I met on line (one has to be careful of this, but it's still a good way communicate). I really don't know what I would do without my computer - when I look back to the 50s and 60s when I was growing up, I realize how narrow our horizons were and what a restrictive world view we had without the internet - so yes, the internet really does make me happy.

I grew up reading and watching science fiction. I was eagerly anticipating the current technology long before most people even knew it was possible. Then, too, I guess I'm one of the few people around who don't find having a lot of choices to be a problem.

I don't think it had a positive impact on happiness. Without technology (assuming I existed) I would probably be happy with my spear and fur, technology only gave us more desires without satisfying them.
It also didn't really do much to save us time, I believe we've only recently attained the same level of free time as hunter gatherers IIRC. The quality of work also hasn't really improved much (again, it's only recently that it isn't backbreaking work on a small field, only yielding enough results to barely sustain oneself <=might be a little bit over-dramatized :p). On top of that, technology is also unhealthy (polution, unhealthy diets, sedentary lifestyles, noise everywhere etc)

So yeah, there are probably also many positive aspects of technology, but I don't think that it improved happiness. Not that it matters because it's quasi impossible to go to a technology-less lifestyle.
(with technology I mean all technologies which have come after hunter gatherers.)

*When I was little, my parents had a decent collection of records, about an even mix of 45s and LPs. Maybe 100 records in total. They played them on a stereo turntable.
*Today, I have a few dozen CDs, a handful of cassette tapes and with iTunes and LimeWire I have access to virtually any song I could ever want. I can play them on my surround sound DVD/CD player or on my computer's stereo speakers.

Am I happier than they, musically?


Probably. Variety is a good thing. Broader access to materials helps to increase variety. But I dont think they were musically "unhappy"

*When I was little, we had no VCR until I turned about 6. We had all blank VHS tapes to record movies with, and pre-recorded tapes were almost $100 each. We had a handful of movies, mostly copied form tapes my dad encountered at work as an electronics tech.

*Today, I have close to 200 individual DVDs with a vast collection of movies I can download through iTunes, NetFlix or LimeWire. I can watch them on any of the computers in my home or on that surround sound DVD player. I can also get movies on demand through my digital cable service.

Am I more satisfied with my movie options than they?

Probably just as satisfied. Sure, more movies are made and available today, but most of them are crap. Back then, most of the movies were good because it was a much more difficult endevour, so you wanted to make damn sure it was good. So you have probably just as many good movies as they did, but more bad ones.

*When I was little, we had basically 4 VHF channels (from Washington, and we could also get the same network channels from Baltimore with a big enough set of rabbit ears) and a handful of UHF channels, although normally the signal wasn't very strong and so the picture was snowy. All watchable on a 28" console television.

*Today, I have digital cable providing well over 100 channels in half a dozen laguages, all watchable on my 36" widescreen HD LCD tv.

Do I watch 10 times more TV than they do?

Id imagine. However, whether or not that makes you happy is up to you.

*When I was little, we rode around in my dad's 1972 Vega wagon which seated 5 people plus some cargo area in the back.

*Until recently I drove a 4 door 2001 Mitsubishi that seated 5 people and had a big trunk. Now we have a minivan that seats 7 but gobbles fuel like it's going out of style.

Do I enjoy riding in a car more now than when I was little? Do cars go any faster? Are they m ore comfortable?

With the Mitsubishi you were probably happier. Now, meh no guy likes driving a minivan, especially a gas guzzling one with those prices. But cars are faster and more comfortable.

*When I was little, every telephone was a landline and the handset was connected by a wire to the base. Phone numbers were 7 digits and long distance was expensive and had to be called collect.

*Today, our home phone is cordless but we use our cell phones exclusively anyway. Phone numbers are 10 digits but long distance is no different from calling local.

Do I spend more time on the phone? Do I enjoy it more?

Meh, we probably spend more time on the phone, but Id imagine the level of enjoyment is the same.

*When I was a kid we had a ColecoVision video game console. It was nicer than the Atari but with a more limited selection of game catrtridges. The controller was a paddle joystick with 2 buttons, with a numeric keypad for interacting with menus. I had 2 controllers for it. Sound was blips and bleeps with primitive music, and the graphics were only something like 300x250.

*Today, I have a PS2, an XBox and a GameCube. Each of them uses DVDs as the game media, have a vast selection of titles, and have controllers with more buttons on them than I have fingers. Each system can have up to 4 controllers plugged in (PS2 needs a multitap) and games are saved on memory cards. The graphics are close to photorealistic and the sound is lifelike.

Do I play console games more now than when I was a kid? Do I enjoy it more?

Probably, at least I would. However, classic games are still enjoyable.

*When I was a kid there was no Internet. If we needed an address we had to have a phone book or dial the Operator. If we wanted to order something by mail we had to have a catalog and an order form, and send a check or money order. If we wanted to look up information we had to go to the library.

*Today I can look up any piece of informatino I want, or order virtually any product I want in a matter of minutes online, and pay for it using any form of payment I choose except cash.

Do I buy that much more stuff from home?

Its probably relative from person to person. I know for me, being a college kid still lacking a credit card, I do not. But Im sure others do.


So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

I think that this would be reltive from person to person. I know that while some aspects of technology are simply astetic in their uses, the ones that make us live longer (should) make us happier (I personally enjoy living).

I think it makes us complacent. Here's what I mean:

Probably. Variety is a good thing. Broader access to materials helps to increase variety. But I dont think they were musically "unhappy"


See, I can't remember the last time I uttered the phrase "ooh! I love that song! turn it up!" because if I hear something I like I make a mental note to either go get it off iTunes later so I can listen to it as much as I want, or I already have the song and the excitement is dead since I know whenever I feel like it I can go listen to it. It's like my level of appreciation has decreased as my access to the music has increased. I don't even bother listening to music radio anymore.


Probably just as satisfied. Sure, more movies are made and available today, but most of them are crap. Back then, most of the movies were good because it was a much more difficult endevour, so you wanted to make damn sure it was good. So you have probably just as many good movies as they did, but more bad ones.


There are movies in my collection that would have astounded someone of the late 70s. Imagine being used to the crapastic stop motion/claymation monsters common for movies and TV of that day and then sitting down to watch the Balrog attack in Fellowship of the Rings. OMFG how did y'all find a real live demon to film for the movie?

And yet I seldom touch my DVD collection these days. If my entire collection of DVDs were stolen I'd be furious, but it wouldn't make much of an impact on my day to day life.


Id imagine. However, whether or not that makes you happy is up to you.


One would think...


With the Mitsubishi you were probably happier. Now, meh no guy likes driving a minivan, especially a gas guzzling one with those prices. But cars are faster and more comfortable.


I'd debate those last 2. Production model cars aren't any faster now than they were 30 years ago. With speed limits in place there's been no reason to make them faster. I'd even argue that with unrestricted fuel access and no emmissions equipment, some production model cars from the 60s and 70s are faster. As for comfort, it's a tougher call but the cloth seats in most cars today don't strike me as much of an improvement.


Meh, we probably spend more time on the phone, but Id imagine the level of enjoyment is the same.


I hate to be on the phone anyway, but it makes me loathe the cell even more.


Probably, at least I would. However, classic games are still enjoyable.


Kinda makes me want to go get an old Atari 2600 and play 'Combat'


Its probably relative from person to person. I know for me, being a college kid still lacking a credit card, I do not. But Im sure others do.


I'll admit that on this one there's been greater satisfaction as a result of eBay making it possible to find almost anything you want. Online gaming stores mean not having to drive an hour to reach a good hobby store.



I think that this would be reltive from person to person. I know that while some aspects of technology are simply astetic in their uses, the ones that make us live longer (should) make us happier (I personally enjoy living).

On that I agree.

Wouldn't those pairings be an example of similar cases, or am I misunderstanding your meaning?

I think I was saying "I can compare my happiness with that of someone I know well, when we are in similar circumstances."

I cannot compare my happiness now, with my happiness ten years ago. I have a firm impression of those two (clear improvement) ... but I couldn't prove it.

If I can't prove a difference between two people (me then, me now, both based on the same personal memories and apprehension of "who" I'm talking about) ... it's just ridiculous to compare my own happiness, or my sister's happiness, with that of some historical figure.

I see I went off on a bit of a tangent there. When you spoke of "personal happiness" I guess you meant to confine this question (of technological change) to individual lives. Our individual lives.

I've tried to do that and come up short. Music is so ubiquitous in our lives today that you can't go more than a couple hours at most with any type of entertainment media in proximity without hearing some, even if it's just a jingle.

People in the seventeenth century probably had a much greater appreciation for music than we by virtue of the fact that they so rarely heard it.

And perhaps the Church got a free kick there ;)

I just find it so ironic that while automotive technology has improved greatly over the last 30 years, cars don't go any faster than they did back then. They're arguably safer and have a great many features, but if all you need to do is go to work, is a 2008 Corolla any better than a 1980 Corolla?

The reason cars don't go faster than they did is road rules, which have for a long time now been set to limit human stupidity not mechanical faults in cars.

Cars are unsafe at any speed ... when there's a human driving them!

I don't like to ride in cars, I'll admit. But I prefer an old banger to a modern model, so I'd have to say older is better not the other way around. I particularly hate air-conditioning, if it's hot it's hot and be damn glad you're not walking!

I think a board game is a different case, though. Board games don't really evolve much, and you're talking about the exact same game it's always been.

Well indeed. The rules of chess haven't changed in a century, people still play it. Does a game need to "evolve" in order to remain a good game? ... and is that really about "improving" the game, or simply putting new challenges in front of the player?

Kasparov would whup Capablanca, yet Capablanca is more glorious in chess history than Kasparov. Why? Kasparov was trained, he was educated in Chess, with all the benefit of the study and new theory based on centuries of chess-playing. Capablanca mostly worked it out for himself.

I haven't played a new computer game in years, but I read reviews. Better gamers than me write "all finished in twelve hours on Medium, I restarted on Challenging and am half-way through after eight hours."

I ask you, how good is a chess player who has played or studied for only twelve hours? They probably know four moves of a couple of openings, might have played a couple of end-games, and are probably hopelessly at sea in the middle game. They are, in short, a patzer.

Perhaps among computer games, we could distinguish a class of player-on-player games which are designed to be fair and allow an equal contest between human players, and another class of game which is primarily single-player. These latter should perhaps be called something other than a "game," since they really simulate the play of a game with another sentient being.

I love to play computer games. It's my biggest time sink when I'm not sleeping or at work. My favorites are EverQuest II, Medieval II Total War and Unreal Tournament. What make sthem better than the older games is their level of complexity and graphic detail, but am I truly having more fun? I mean, certainly if it were, like your Monopoly example, the exact same computer game, then naturally I'd have been bored of it long ago but I will say that with greater tech comes greater flexibility to create variety, and that helps.

But overall I'd say that was a way to keep up with my expectations, as opposed to making them actually more fun.

I think you're right there. Where did those expectations come from, though?

I mean, if you'd sat down to learn about Chess, you wouldn't have an expectation that after your first tournament win you'd get better bishops or more squares on the board?

It's hard to translate that from a qualitative perspective to a quantitative one. I mean, certainly I remember the computer fondly because it was my first real computer (I had a Coleco Adam prior to that but it wasn't very useful.) but in quantitative terms, my current model is many orders of magnitude superior in every measurable way. Such is the human mind that I cannot see the two computers in those relative terms.

Your younger mind had a fair appreciation of what was a wonder at the time. Don't diss it, your mind was just as ignorant of the future as ours are now.

In fact, even if you sit down and play one of the old games (probably on an old computer, ia64 has broken a bunch of old games which worked OK on Athlon/P4 for me) you'd probably find that the biggest problem is distractions. Wondering if there's an update or patches or a player community online.

There's still plenty of fun, long hours with nothing really bad happening, constantly engaged with clicking things on the screen ... but like you say, we have higher expectations now.

But it would seem how we measure progress isn't as all inclusive as it might at first appear.

It worries me. Specifically, I think we might be regressing ethically by learning the rules of so many trivial games. Perhaps we think faster, perhaps we have more information in our grasp, but there are still limits to what an individual can care about and really have a grasp of. And we occupy our minds with a LOT of stuff which will be obsolete in a few years, sometimes at the expense of real people who will still be there, trying to live their lives.

And here's the really bad lesson of progress: "never mind if you fuck up, the rules will be different tomorrow."

Though I don't think that what people do when they are playing a game is their first response to a real world situation.

I think I was saying "I can compare my happiness with that of someone I know well, when we are in similar circumstances."

I cannot compare my happiness now, with my happiness ten years ago. I have a firm impression of those two (clear improvement) ... but I couldn't prove it.

If I can't prove a difference between two people (me then, me now, both based on the same personal memories and apprehension of "who" I'm talking about) ... it's just ridiculous to compare my own happiness, or my sister's happiness, with that of some historical figure.

I see I went off on a bit of a tangent there. When you spoke of "personal happiness" I guess you meant to confine this question (of technological change) to individual lives. Our individual lives.


Now I see what you mean.


And perhaps the Church got a free kick there ;)


No doubt!


The reason cars don't go faster than they did is road rules, which have for a long time now been set to limit human stupidity not mechanical faults in cars.

Cars are unsafe at any speed ... when there's a human driving them!

I don't like to ride in cars, I'll admit. But I prefer an old banger to a modern model, so I'd have to say older is better not the other way around. I particularly hate air-conditioning, if it's hot it's hot and be damn glad you're not walking!


I'm a fan of A/C if for no other reason than it's good for my allergies, but even that tech is really no different from an A/C system in a car form the 70s. The only difference now is typically a computer controls when the compressor kicks in. So if you're not a fan of A/C now you probably (I'm assuming) never were.


Well indeed. The rules of chess haven't changed in a century, people still play it. Does a game need to "evolve" in order to remain a good game? ... and is that really about "improving" the game, or simply putting new challenges in front of the player?

Kasparov would whup Capablanca, yet Capablanca is more glorious in chess history than Kasparov. Why? Kasparov was trained, he was educated in Chess, with all the benefit of the study and new theory based on centuries of chess-playing. Capablanca mostly worked it out for himself.

I haven't played a new computer game in years, but I read reviews. Better gamers than me write "all finished in twelve hours on Medium, I restarted on Challenging and am half-way through after eight hours."

I ask you, how good is a chess player who has played or studied for only twelve hours? They probably know four moves of a couple of openings, might have played a couple of end-games, and are probably hopelessly at sea in the middle game. They are, in short, a patzer.

Perhaps among computer games, we could distinguish a class of player-on-player games which are designed to be fair and allow an equal contest between human players, and another class of game which is primarily single-player. These latter should perhaps be called something other than a "game," since they really simulate the play of a game with another sentient being.


Very good point.


I think you're right there. Where did those expectations come from, though?


I think they come from the realization that as technology improves, so can realism. Ultimately any game is a form of simulation of some kind of reality. Chess can be thought of as simulating a battlefield. When we start to realize that through advances in tech we can come closer and closer to the actual experience, our expectations become tuned to that end.

My favorite computer game of all time is Medieval II Total War. Is it the graphics? No. Is it the sound? No. It's because it is the most realistic portrayal of the Medieval battlefield currently available. In that way one can think of it not only as an evolution of the cimputer game, but of simulated battles in general, of which Chess is a part.

A game like M2:TW could not possibly exist on a Commodore 128. With literally thousands of individual soldiers programmed to act as individuals, including variables like their relative levels of skill, experience, armor, weaponry as well as types like archer, cavalry, heavy infantry, etc... Adding to that factors like weather, terrain, time, energy level, etc... The amount of computer power required to adequately run this simulation quickly adds up.


I mean, if you'd sat down to learn about Chess, you wouldn't have an expectation that after your first tournament win you'd get better bishops or more squares on the board?


True. The game doesn't change, so to expand one's experience one must rely on a study of strategies.


Your younger mind had a fair appreciation of what was a wonder at the time. Don't diss it, your mind was just as ignorant of the future as ours are now.


I just don't want to lose that sense of wonder.


In fact, even if you sit down and play one of the old games (probably on an old computer, ia64 has broken a bunch of old games which worked OK on Athlon/P4 for me) you'd probably find that the biggest problem is distractions. Wondering if there's an update or patches or a player community online.

There's still plenty of fun, long hours with nothing really bad happening, constantly engaged with clicking things on the screen ... but like you say, we have higher expectations now.


Which is why despite the fond memories, I'd probably quickly become bored with my old favorites.


It worries me. Specifically, I think we might be regressing ethically by learning the rules of so many trivial games. Perhaps we think faster, perhaps we have more information in our grasp, but there are still limits to what an individual can care about and really have a grasp of. And we occupy our minds with a LOT of stuff which will be obsolete in a few years, sometimes at the expense of real people who will still be there, trying to live their lives.

And here's the really bad lesson of progress: "never mind if you fuck up, the rules will be different tomorrow."

Though I don't think that what people do when they are playing a game is their first response to a real world situation.

Sigged :D

*snip*

But I have to admit, I love the internet. If I'm curious about something, I can look it up immediately. I still love books and reading, I make a trip to the library every week or two, but I no longer make special trips to riffle throught the card catalog looking for information. I'm very happy about this. I have friends I can contact on line, some of whom I met on line (one has to be careful of this, but it's still a good way communicate). I really don't know what I would do without my computer - when I look back to the 50s and 60s when I was growing up, I realize how narrow our horizons were and what a restrictive world view we had without the internet - so yes, the internet really does make me happy.

:) Me too.

My public library wasn't bad by the standards of the seventies, but it was difficult, incomplete and out-of-date compared to even a fraction of the current-day internet.

Desert island. Me, getting to choose between my 1980 public library, and the 2007 Wikipedia. Perhaps if I was resigned to living in that solitude for ever, I might take the bound books with their full text, but really I want answers quickly before my coconut palm runs out of coconuts, so I'd choose the searchable medium.

I grew up reading and watching science fiction. I was eagerly anticipating the current technology long before most people even knew it was possible. Then, too, I guess I'm one of the few people around who don't find having a lot of choices to be a problem.

"Lots of choices" is a problem which hasn't been looked at carefully enough!
Two choices, that's when it's hard. You know what I mean.

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

Thoughts?

With the exceptions of the internet, healthcare and food production I am not a big fan of technology. I like the internet because of things like Wikipedia and the ability to find information easily and meet people. I also like jet travel.

I loathe television, mobile phones, cars, advertising, plastic goods, fake wood, machined stone ware, most (not all) video games, gas ovens, Ipods... Many things.

I prefer board games. Usually of an evenign I like to read or write, talk, play board games, or go for a meal or to the theatre. If there is a paticularly good film, I like the cinema. I don't believe technology has made us happier.

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.
I think it has the potential to, but that our ideas about technology are still largely based in the industrial revolution. We think of machines as long-term investments to improve labour costs - a way of making goods and services turn out a better profit for the hour. This is still true today: with Email and Cell phones, your boss is at you 24 hours a day; with internet banking and shopping, you reduce the need to hire sales reps; with cheap flights, you're buying and selling across the globe; online advertising lets your customers earn your money for you, and so on.

Technology could make us happier by allowing us to get from A to B quickly, talk to who we want to whenever we want to, distribute media quickly and effectively and be creative and share in others' creativity, to name just a few. But we still have to deal with the economic consequences of this improved freedom, and that means being worked harder for less.

It's not technology that affects our happiness, it's how we use it. That's where the happiness factor comes in; the ability of a given technology to increase the personal satisfaction we derive from a good, service, or experience is what determines its effect on our happiness. I would say advances in military technology don't particularly impact our happiness, but certainly advances in food production, communications, entertainment or medicine do.

Material objects make me less happy. I've gotten rid of as much 'junk' as I could, and my quality time is spent with family and friends, out on the land. I don't have enough time to laze about 'entertaining myself' with technology. I think such focus on technology as entertainment is inherently alienating and socially destructive.

Technology can make things easier, now and then. The polio vaccine is a good example.

How big an impact has the proliferation of technology really had on our personal happiness?

I'm about the same age now as my parents were when I was born (33). I was idly thinking about what life was like when I was little and comparing it to my life now.

*When I was little, my parents had a decent collection of records, about an even mix of 45s and LPs. Maybe 100 records in total. They played them on a stereo turntable.
*Today, I have a few dozen CDs, a handful of cassette tapes and with iTunes and LimeWire I have access to virtually any song I could ever want. I can play them on my surround sound DVD/CD player or on my computer's stereo speakers.

Am I happier than they, musically?

*When I was little, we had no VCR until I turned about 6. We had all blank VHS tapes to record movies with, and pre-recorded tapes were almost $100 each. We had a handful of movies, mostly copied form tapes my dad encountered at work as an electronics tech.

*Today, I have close to 200 individual DVDs with a vast collection of movies I can download through iTunes, NetFlix or LimeWire. I can watch them on any of the computers in my home or on that surround sound DVD player. I can also get movies on demand through my digital cable service.

Am I more satisfied with my movie options than they?

*When I was little, we had basically 4 VHF channels (from Washington, and we could also get the same network channels from Baltimore with a big enough set of rabbit ears) and a handful of UHF channels, although normally the signal wasn't very strong and so the picture was snowy. All watchable on a 28" console television.

*Today, I have digital cable providing well over 100 channels in half a dozen laguages, all watchable on my 36" widescreen HD LCD tv.

Do I watch 10 times more TV than they do?

*When I was little, we rode around in my dad's 1972 Vega wagon which seated 5 people plus some cargo area in the back.

*Until recently I drove a 4 door 2001 Mitsubishi that seated 5 people and had a big trunk. Now we have a minivan that seats 7 but gobbles fuel like it's going out of style.

Do I enjoy riding in a car more now than when I was little? Do cars go any faster? Are they m ore comfortable?

*When I was little, every telephone was a landline and the handset was connected by a wire to the base. Phone numbers were 7 digits and long distance was expensive and had to be called collect.

*Today, our home phone is cordless but we use our cell phones exclusively anyway. Phone numbers are 10 digits but long distance is no different from calling local.

Do I spend more time on the phone? Do I enjoy it more?

*When I was a kid we had a ColecoVision video game console. It was nicer than the Atari but with a more limited selection of game catrtridges. The controller was a paddle joystick with 2 buttons, with a numeric keypad for interacting with menus. I had 2 controllers for it. Sound was blips and bleeps with primitive music, and the graphics were only something like 300x250.

*Today, I have a PS2, an XBox and a GameCube. Each of them uses DVDs as the game media, have a vast selection of titles, and have controllers with more buttons on them than I have fingers. Each system can have up to 4 controllers plugged in (PS2 needs a multitap) and games are saved on memory cards. The graphics are close to photorealistic and the sound is lifelike.

Do I play console games more now than when I was a kid? Do I enjoy it more?

*When I was a kid there was no Internet. If we needed an address we had to have a phone book or dial the Operator. If we wanted to order something by mail we had to have a catalog and an order form, and send a check or money order. If we wanted to look up information we had to go to the library.

*Today I can look up any piece of informatino I want, or order virtually any product I want in a matter of minutes online, and pay for it using any form of payment I choose except cash.

Do I buy that much more stuff from home?

I have to be honest here... Not one single question above would I answer with a yes. I enjoy the benefits of all this tech but to be honest it doesn't seem world better than what we had when I was little, even though quantitatively the comparison is unimaginable.

I had a Commodore 128 computer when I was a teenager. It has a 1 or 2 MHz processor (Depending on what mode it was in) with no hard drive, 128KB of RAM, 2 floppy drives, a 1200bps modem and a monitor that displayed 640x480 even though the computer could never produce images of that resolution.

My computer at home today has a 2.7GHz processor (that's almost 3 THOUSAND times faster than the old one) with a 120GB hard drive, a DVD RAM, 4GB of RAM (that's 4 MILLION times more memory capacity) a 100MBps Ethernet connection (that's a thousand times faster than the old modem) and my monitor can display anything my video card can throw at it (which is currently 1280 x 980 widescreen).

My games now are a LOT more complex and visually impressive than the old one, yet the price of the equipment in total is about the same as it was, and to be honest, sometimes I miss my old games on that C128.

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

Thoughts?

WOW...you're old...

Material objects make me less happy. I've gotten rid of as much 'junk' as I could, and my quality time is spent with family and friends, out on the land. I don't have enough time to laze about 'entertaining myself' with technology. I think such focus on technology as entertainment is inherently alienating and socially destructive.

pfft...get back to your drum circle, Hippie...:p

Material objects make me less happy. I've gotten rid of as much 'junk' as I could, and my quality time is spent with family and friends, out on the land. I don't have enough time to laze about 'entertaining myself' with technology. I think such focus on technology as entertainment is inherently alienating and socially destructive.

You DO have 8000+ posts on an internet forum though :p

But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.
I'm the same age as you, and I think technology makes me more happy.

But, I've also avoided the technology I think would make me less happy. For example, I do not own, nor have I ever owned, a cell phone.

I don't have enough time to laze about 'entertaining myself' with technology.
Such time spent alone is the highlight of my day.
I think such focus on technology as entertainment is inherently alienating and socially destructive.
Since I don't think society is a thing, I don't see how this 'socially desctructive' aspect is a problem.

I'm not sure what you mean by alienating, though. From what am I being alienated?

So maybe technology is a wonderful thing as far as its uses. It makes us safer, yes. It can make us live longer, yes. It can help us to learn more easily, yes. But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.

Thoughts?

"No matter how fast, shiney, and powerful technology gets, it's never enough."

is technology making us safer? some can argue that a gun makes us safer, yet gun technology really hasn't changed.

some can argue CCTV made us safer while others argue about 'Big Brother'.

more deaths are tied in with Technology than deaths not tied in with technology. so this point can be argued.

It can make us live longer.
again a relative term. sure we live longer, but how many meds are now being found to be hazardous to our health?

how much does one spend on the tech to keep us living? is quantity better than quality?

how many people now have to spend time to excercise because they now ride a car/bus/train or have machines that do their work for them?

Technology allowed us to cook foods faster, and now we find that alot of 'fast foods' are not healthy for us.

It can help us to learn more easily.
yet we have to now learn more because of technology.


But does it make us more happy? I don't think so anymore.
I agree. people who rely on 'stuff' to make them happy won't be truely happy.