What is Digg?149 Comments
- sarixe, on 04/28/2008, -5/+65what's ruining our kids is the education system's deterioration, not technology's growth.
- inactive, on 04/28/2008, -18/+70No it isn't. Idiots.
- Aitese, on 04/28/2008, -0/+41"Technology is moulding a generation of children unable to think for themselves"
Digg put this on the front page and told me it was important...so now it's important to me. - fr3ddie, on 04/28/2008, -3/+41I blame the parents.
- Hangly, on 04/28/2008, -2/+36Is the article about me? I don't can't concentrate long enough to
- feoren, on 04/28/2008, -2/+30FTA: “When those teenagers kicked that goth girl to death in the park recently,” she says, “was it like a computer game for them? The buzz of the moment? Were they thinking of her as a person with feelings, with parents and siblings? Were they thinking of the implications for themselves the next day?”
Of course, because before computer games, nobody did any horrible acts to another human without considering them as a person with feelings and a family, and without thinking about the consequences. Let's all point at some random act of violence (even though violent crime incidents have been becoming more rare even as computer games have been becoming more prevalent) and blame it on something new and scary! What a crock of *****. - MattBD, on 04/28/2008, -2/+20I do think people who've been exposed to things like the Internet from an early age think differently, but I don't see how that's a bad thing.
To me, there's very little point in knowing things like who was King of England at a certain time, when you can easily find out by Googling it. Also, being in touch with people online from all around the world means you're less likely to be prejudiced.
Like everything else, technology can be a good or a bad thing, it's just a matter of how it's used. - inactive, on 04/28/2008, -2/+19That's ***** unreadable.
I want news, not a novel. - Soriven, on 04/28/2008, -11/+25changing? yes
ruining? probably not - wush, on 04/28/2008, -1/+14gee, it sure is surprising that everyone on digg.com is aggressively dismissive towards this
- mikephimikephi, on 04/28/2008, -6/+19no
- NinjaPirateDude, on 04/28/2008, -4/+16it is actually making me learn things faster and clearer than any previous generation of my family, so no.
- Neil22, on 04/28/2008, -1/+12Is there any tangible evidence in this long winded narcissistic biography? (She’s in a magenta minidress a full seven inches above the knee, I reckon, and it’s covered in pink sequins. As she walks forward on dizzyingly high platform shoes, she wobbles slightly. Her Sugar Plum Fairy dress is flashing and shimmering in the arc lights. She sits to one side, settling down deep into the seat, legs stretched out.) Cute.
- dazparkour, on 04/28/2008, -1/+12I know you were trying to be funny, but I burried you for using a lower case "i" and "ur" because you damage my argument that technology may have it's issues, but is mostly good.
- Aitese, on 04/28/2008, -1/+12It worries me that people are reading this story...finding my comment funny and disagreeing while in the rather unfashionable "Upcoming" section is a story about a possible serial killer that targets males between the ages of 19 and 30 (perfect Digg demographic) that the Digg algorithm has decided is not important to Digg folk (as of writing, that story has 134 diggs, this one has 91...yet is on the front page)
So we're all sitting here discussing this while a computer has decided for you that your imminent death probably is of no interest to you. - insomniacal, on 04/28/2008, -0/+11The article takes a long time to get to the chase, so here's the meat:
Here is her hypothesis. A natural brain chemical called dopamine is involved in all forms of addiction. Dopamine contributes to feelings of wellbeing on attaining a goal, especially when gratification repeatedly deferred is finally delivered. Falling levels of dopamine accompany the opposite situations, when gratification has been frustrated (for example, waiting for a phone call that never comes).
The area of the brain crucial to the dopamine hits is called the nucleus accumbens, which is associated with the prefrontal cortex, an area at the front of the brain. An under-functioning prefrontal cortex is linked with types of behaviour marked by total absorption in the here and now, and an inability to consider past and future implications. According to Greenfield, excessive dopamine can reduce the activity of brain cells in the prefrontal cortex, leading to its partial shutdown. She is speculating that the intense subjective “here and now” feeling, prompted and accompanied by dopamine “rewards” in computer play, creates a euphoric, self-centred ego boost, the pleasure of which can lead to craving and addiction.
What lasting effect does this repeated neglect in the prefrontal cortex have on the brain, and hence the mind? “Excessive dopamine hits might reduce activation in the prefrontal cortex, and in so doing tip the balance away from awareness of the significance, the meaning, of our actions,” she says.
So playing games in which I slaughter scores of all-comers with my trusty sword, as in the Tarantino movie Kill Bill, deals not with the significance of beheading and disembowelling of hordes of Japanese villains, but with the process – the action separated from meaning and consequences.
“When those teenagers kicked that goth girl to death in the park recently,” she says, “was it like a computer game for them? The buzz of the moment? Were they thinking of her as a person with feelings, with parents and siblings? Were they thinking of the implications for themselves the next day?”
For the mind to operate fully, Greenfield asserts, the prefrontal cortex must be active, and content must be a high priority. The world and oneself are then redolent with meaning.
How do the young attain unique and enriched identities? “Through the world of focused conversation, nursery rhyme repetition, recitation and rote learning, of reading and writing interspersed with bouts of physical activity in the real world, where there are first-hand and unique adventures to provide a personal narrative, personalised neuronal connections. This is education as we have known it.”
And what if “education as we have known it” fails? It will lead, she predicts, to the ultimate triumph of process over content: the Nobody Scenario. “For the first time in human history, individuality could be obliterated in favour of a passive state, reacting to a flood of incoming sensations – a ‘yuck’ and ‘wow’ mentality characterised by a premium on momentary experience as the landscape of the brain shifts into one where personalised brain connectivity is either not functional or absent altogether.” - uselessexpert, on 04/28/2008, -0/+10I couldn't read the whole article, but I can say in some ways that technology makes us a bit lazy.
I can remember when all I had to carry was my "beeper". Someone would beep me and I would call them back. It was a bitch carrying so many quarters around. At that time I would remember just about every friend and family members' phone numbers.
Today.... I can't remember one third of all the numbers I use to remember...for what? I have a Blackberry...
Eventhough I love all of the things my Blackberry can afford me to do, I think it has slowed down/hinder my memorizing skills...
So in a way I can agree with the author...
But in the end, parents need to know when to cut their kids off from too much video games, internet, cell phones, etc....
There is a time and a place for everything, and thats where parents need to cut technology in the butt...
I hate when I see a family sitting down for a meal at a restaurant and the husband and wife are talking and the kids are just in another world playing away on their PSPs or listening to their IPods.... THAT'S WRONG!!! - zentehflash, on 04/28/2008, -3/+12We're preparing them for the singularity, it's called proactive.
- wexmajor, on 04/28/2008, -1/+10What a ***** idiot. I'm gonna gorge on some mushrooms until I grow to roughly twice my original size and stomp her to death.
- davecor, on 04/28/2008, -3/+12200 years ago it was easy to make a stupid mistake and kill yourself. We no longer live in such a risky world, so evolution is no longer rewarding the smart genes.
Also technology allows you to survive without really sharpening your mind. - badenglishihave, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9It's interesting that you'd mention that... I'd say the biggest problem technology has brought is an increased reliance on technology for learning when it is really up to good teachers. A teacher who genuinely knows how to get kids to learn is worth more than any computer system.
- dazparkour, on 04/28/2008, -2/+10Half and half.
Children have access to a wealth of information and capabilities they never had before.
They can communicate with people that can afford it in less than a second, regardless of where they live on the planet.
On the other hand, they are becoming quite antisocial. I'm sorry, it's true, I know this will be an unpopular sentiment on Digg.
Email and text messages are fine for conveying a short message very quickly, emails are even good for permanent and convenient storage of quite complex documents.
On the other hand, MySpace is not talking to people. Facebook is not talking to people. MSN is not talking to people. This is not really socializing, even if you call it social networking.
I'm not that old.
When I was at school, the difference between public schooled children and private schooled children (I went to public school if you care, I hope not) is that private schooled children are more confident public speakers and are more willing to talk about themselves in large groups. This came from a few of my teachers who had taught in both types of schools.
I see this gap widening now with people drifting farther and farther away from real communication, now people are reluctant to phone people and have a real conversation.
Technology is a great tool to augment the skills you use in everyday life, it is not a replacement. - Daedalus81, on 04/28/2008, -0/+8Unless you're Myspace Kid! http://youtube.com/watch?v=g7wWC0tfJZY
- Dohko_Xar, on 04/28/2008, -0/+7another big chunck of kid's education comes from the homes, parents are not doing their job correctly too.
- blast_flame, on 04/28/2008, -8/+15Every generation has people who say that the latest technologies will ruin the youth. It hasn't happened yet. In all reality technology is positive, the average person today is at the very least not worse, probably better than the average throughout history.
- smotpoker, on 04/28/2008, -1/+8Not technology that is ruining people but societal cultivation of negligence and impatience. There is too much emphasis on ends and not enough on means. When combined with many pervasive double-standards people tend to think of themselves or any particular circumstance as an exception
In reality, there are only very few circumstances in which ends truly justify [potentially] harmful means - and they do not consist of impressing your friends/bosses/teachers or trying to get home 5 minutes early, etc. - dazparkour, on 04/28/2008, -1/+8People seem to be digging you down. You are correct.
Only problem is, some people, even with some genetic problems have REAL LIFE things to contribute.
Steven Hawkins is one, genetic problem, real things to contribute because of technology.
I think the trade is worth while. - paulzov, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Dude, wtf are you talking about?
- burkhartmj, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6I agree, this article is utter *****. There's more on how she emphasizes with "eh" than there is even talk of how tech might be ruining our generation, much less evidence.
buried. - kenplaysviola, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6to ... ? To what? I must know! Don't can't leave us hanging!
- tattertech, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Really? Most schools have little to no use of newer technology. If anything, the deteriorating focus on education coupled with slow adoption of technology that could help at least offset the problem (although far from replace a quality teacher) is really the problem.
- 4rp4n3t, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Um, no. RTFA. This is a direct quote, illustrating the author's writing style and lack of any solid evidence to support his claims.
Now, do you realise why I'm laughing at you? - Archcoder, on 04/28/2008, -2/+8'Dem newfangled phones is ruinin' my messenger buisinessin'! Who wants to wait a week to hear from someone when yous can jis talk to 'em over the wire!?
'Is here technolergy is be makin' people lazy an' puttin' hard workin' horse folk outt'a job! How'er the youngin's suppose'd to learn 'em some values if they don't hav'to put in a days worth of honest workin'? - PurpleSfinx, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5That's not technology's fault, that's lazy people's fault. I've got a Wii but I'd much rather go real life bowling than Wii bowling. I mean, real life has better graphics than Wii.
- inactive, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6Many people do think, however, that things such as texting and instant messaging ruin students grammar skills because they regularly use it incorrectly.
- paulzov, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6I'm not making 'our side' look bad, you just didn't understand what I was saying, and chose to make assumptions. I meant conservative, not in the sense as the polar opposite of liberalism, but in the sense of old-fashioned. You assumed it to mean something else, that's your problem. The older generations have been bitching about video games for ages, for no good reason.
Cheers - Nizerifin, on 04/28/2008, -2/+7I like how this is aimed at British women (women.timesonline.co.uk).... one of the more techno-naive groups, yes?
- Myztry, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5A problem with technology is it has become pure consumerism.
Take Microsoft. My first encounter with them was in 1982 with Microsoft Extended Basic that shipped as part of the Tandy Colour Computer. I found that I could use a stock computer to create things. It was fairly well done.
Microsoft made many basic interpreters. It was their core business. They even developed the Commodore Amiga Basic (1988 for me). They just had no idea how to handle dynamically created windows on a multitasking system. And then they go create an Operating System using Windows, based on DOS.
They dropped their core business of supplying Basic with Operating Systems, and with their dominance, users lost easily access to creating with computers. They didn't want people to create programs. They wanted people to consume them.
Now it's all just consumption. I gave up programming in the 90's. It became expensive, and after programming on the Amiga, Windows 3.1/95 just left a dirty feeling. Windows was such a dirty DOS derived hack, it was sickening!
I'm so disappointed where Microsoft's business 'smarts' took the computing industry, and feel somewhat sorry for those who have never been more than consumers, in an age of consumerism... - inactive, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5No I didn't.
I expected to read a bit of news and instead I got some douche bag's attempt at litterature, which I'm pretty sure was aimed at seducing this ***** idiot.
And I'm 47. - whyufail, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Modern technology is not the cause of this problem. The fact that we now live to work our jobs and die with no time for anything else is the cause of this problem.
- Screwy1138, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I see what you
- noumuon, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4"So what happens in the event of a catastrophe and there is no internet?" i'm fairly certain that in the event of a catastrophe, the trivial knowledge of who was king during a certian period is quite irrelevant. you can google trivial topics, but you can't google intelligence and skills. your musings seem to be quite pointless.
- GiJoeBob, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4That is a horribly written article.
- spikyface, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5"If the purpose of a game, for instance, is to free the princess from the tower, it is the thrill of attaining the goal, the process, that counts. What does not count is the content – the personality of the princess and the narrative as to why and how she is there, as in a storybook"
Complete an utter bollocks! It doesn't matter who she is or what she's achieved for neuro-science, she knows nothing about games
Have you even heard of Silent Hill, or Metal Gear Solid or Homeworld? Games that have such a strong storyline that I've had friends sit there and watch me play JUST to watch the story unfold
Uninformed jackass!
And what exactly do most people use wikipedia for if not for looking up facts? Hell links in e-documents allowing for a juxtaposition of facts that has never existed in paper formats
Shut the hell up and go back to curing Alzheimer's
Leave worrying about technology to people that have a clue - webefools, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6Mr. Loh says "we're all vicitims of modern technology," he also says, "contact with the nature now that's very important. Now in this society you are so busy busy busy busy, not much time to talk to yourself or talk to the nature."
Mr. Loh will you sing to me! - TooSquirrely, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5So what happens in the event of a catastrophe and there is no internet? Are we to be satisfied with a bunch of people who can barely tie their shoes without it? Technology is a tool, but it is becoming a crutch for many kids.
- MattBD, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4Well, if you ask me, skills are more important than facts. Being able to recite the kings and queens of England is just facts, and is of little use outside school for if you're going on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? or in academia. You could argue that encyclopedias are a crutch as they allow people to store facts without knowing them.
By contrast, a skill such as being able to use the Internet, tie your shoes or ride a bike is a skill you have to practise - you can't learn it by rote. A skill is separate from facts, and the article was saying that children were spending less time learning facts. That's good IMHO - there's so much information around now that you can't possibly know it all. It's more important to know how to get it if you need it. - QsheiK, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I didn't bother reading the article, but I have an idea on where the writer is coming from.
What bugs me about these comments though is everyone just goes ahead and starts listing all the great things that technology has done for us, but like everything else, there are valid disadvantages that come with it. Advancements in technology makes the average person lazier than before, and makes the person feel that just because information is so readily available, retention of knowledge no longer becomes important. I know that this is ultimately the person's decision but these days it is becoming easier to take the short way out rather than the long way.
Also, there will always be a large gap between one generation and the next. Sometimes that gap is easily identified, other times, it's extremely difficult, and the prior generation is inclined to pin it down on the most predominant thing that differentiates them from "us". For this generation, it's technology. - jeweledmagic, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I think you've hit the proverbial nail on the head.
- wynja, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I call BS. I'm 28 and I grew up with computers and video games. I spent most of my youth with my computer and friends who also liked computers. I'm highly motivated and successful now. I can't believe this sensationalized BS made it to diggs front page.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 149 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is