Forum Replies Created
ChrisSunami wrote >>
I want to be clear, I am NOT saying a relationship found online is necessarily shallow. And in the case of the hall camaraderie, you’re absolutely correct –not sharing a phone doesn’t mean we didn’t bond.
But then again, I never meant to argue that technology is making life worse –just that I’m not convinced by the argument that it’s created this shining new era.
At any rate, what I was really thinking about with the “shallow” reference was how even though Facebook allows me to keep in contact with a wide variety of people, my connections with those people are extremely superficial. Back in the days of actual letter writing, I had a much deeper connection with a much smaller group of people.
Okay, that’s fair. Sorry I misunderstood your point.
I do certainly have friends who I only keep it touch with by passively reading their Twitter/Facebook posts. However, without the internet I would be more likely to lose touch with them completely, not become closer to them. I spend as much time, probably more, conversing with my close friends than I would otherwise (though rarely through email), and those casual friendships come more at the expense of TV time than friend time. It’s not that the close group of a few friends has been replaced by the large group of distant friends; for me it’s a matter of having both.
joev wrote >> Fair Warning: You might want to check historic data on levels of atmospheric oxygen before you travel willy-nilly to other epochs.
I’m fairly sure that oxygen levels were higher in the Mesozoic than they are today. I don’t think that would have caused any major problems, though the weather might be uncomfortably hot and humid (for me). I’d probably need to move to Australia/Antarctica, which was similar to today’s Alaska.
I don’t disagree with that at all (or at least the idea that it was a highpoint). I still think that’s different than a time in which I’d want to live. A lot of good stuff was happening in the 90s, but it was also a time in which a mid-level sitcom star coming out of the closet was breaking news for months. In which HIV/AIDS only beginning to be treatable. In which, at least at the beginning of the decade, Apartheid was still in effect. While the US might be down from the peak of the 1990s, I still think the world is a generally better place than it was then. If anything, a lot of the darkness we see in the world is because we are more aware of it than we were fifteen years ago.
ChrisSunami wrote >>
Sure, you can find a romantic partner on eHarmony, have a debate on Columbus Underground, or keep in touch with long lost friends via Facebook. But people actually did all those things prior to invention of the internet as well. The internet has made all those things more convenient, but more convenient, in many cases, is also more shallow. Maybe that’s not true for anyone else out there, but I’ve certainly found it to be true for me.
How exactly did people find romantic partners on eHarmony and debate on Columbus Underground before the internet? ;-p
Seriously though, I don’t understand how exactly initially meeting someone online makes the relationship shallower than if you meet in person. Maybe, maybe, a relationship/friendship that only exists online, that has no in-person component could be considered less deep than an in-person relationship (though I don’t know that that is always the case), but most online meetings lead to physical meetings, at which point the relationship can be as deep or shallow as it would be however the two people discovered each other.
Of course, I say this as a guy who met his girlfriend over Twitter, so I’m not going to pretend to be unbiased ;-)
As with the phone story, I feel like this is more a case of generational bias/familiarity. I’m sure the upperclassmen really did get a sense of camaraderie from the shared phone, but I imagine that your generation had hall camaraderie as well, it was just formed in a different way. Plus you had the added ability to have private conversations. Just because something is formed differently doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have the same function. You see the same kind of things in the natural world. Fish, ichthyosaurs, and dolphins all reached the same basic shape in very different ways. Just because I meet someone online instead of at a bar doesn’t mean both relationships won’t evolve dorsal fins.
Erm, okay that fell apart a bit at the end ;-)
Tenzo wrote >>
But any time is a great time to be alive. I don’t think technology has made things great. It’s not like I’m sitting around thinking life sucks because I dont have a hoover board yet.
Of course other times can be great times to be alive. I never said that it would be awful to live at another time, or that I couldn’t pick out aspects of the past that I would love to be a part of. I just think that, of all the points in human history so far, I can’t name another time in which I’d rather live.
If I had access to a TARDIS, there are all sorts of times and places that I would like to visit, experience, even live in for a while, but if I was offered a one-way trip to another time in human history, I still think I’d want to stay now (the Mesozoic, of course, is still on the table).
I really do need to check out Primeval. It’s been in my Netflix queue for months.
Ah, streaming Netflix, another point in 2011’s favor ;-)
GW_Justice wrote >>
There is a curious lack of reflection on the economy in this thread. Remember that crash a few years ago? The unemployment that is stubbornly refusing to improve much?
A good part of why the 50Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s were remembered as good years was because the unemployment rate was never higher than 5% for the whole decade.
Your fancy electronics donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t help much when you have lost your job and are being evicted from your home.
No, things are not perfect right now, far from it. The thing is though, while the gap between the haves and the have-nots is wider now than it was in the past, while the economy is not exactly at its best, that doesn’t mean that it would be better to be poor at some previous point in history. There’s no era that I can point to as an example of a time in which poverty and unemployment did not exist. I suppose an argument could be made for pre-agricultural humanity, but IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d hardly call that a glory age, and I think itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s safe to call life at that time harder for everyone than it is today. IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m not about to claim that we are living in a utopia (far from it), that we have solved all of our problems, or that 2011 has been a great year for everyone, but I still can’t name a better time period in which to live.
And, yes, bad things might be coming. Generally, I think that we will be able to deal with them, but that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t mean that we can/should ignore them. When I say that I am optimistic about the future, I mean that more in a long-term sense. We have ups and downs, but the general trend is still positive. More people have more rights today than they ever had in the past. More people have freedom today than have ever had it in the past. Not everyone has them, and that does not mean that we can rub our hands together and declare a job well done, but when would be a better time to be alive? Sure, the 1950s had low unemployment. It was a great time to be a straight white conservative male living in America. There were some interesting things happening (the Beats, early television, the beginnings of Rock and Roll), but I would take what we have now over that any day.
Seriously. Other than joev, no one has suggested a better time than today. IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m honestly curious when in history those of you who disagree that this is the best time to be alive think would be better.
How exactly did McDonald’s plan to shrink people down to Lego-size? Granted, I’ve always wanted to be able to walk through a Lego building, but I imagine giant ants would be a problem there.
patient_zero wrote >>
Shazam! Posting dinosaur cereal is all it took? Welcome back, man.
Dinosaurs are pretty much always the answer for me ;-)
Thanks! It’s good to be back.
I do think that this is, generally speaking, the best time to be alive. There are individual elements of the past that might be better (the economy of the late 1990s, the poetry of the 1930s), and certainly this time is better for some people than it is for others, but on the whole I think that the world now is better than any previous point in history.
I do think that technology is a big part of that, and it’s not just the gadgets. In a couple of decades of popular usage, the internet has had the kind of impact that can only really be matched by the rise of trains and the industrial revolution. It has not only altered the ways that we communicate (and, yes, I would argue for the better), but it is also leading to substantial, political changes on a global scale. Yes, these things could happen without the internet, but what might have taken months or years, now only takes days.
But even then, the internet is just one piece of the puzzle. Medicine has made big leaps just since I was a kid. Hell, there’s a common vaccine for chicken pox. That was a standard part of growing up just a decade or so back. That’s not to mention advances with HIV/AIDS, cancer, the fact that we might soon have artificial hearts that don’t even pump, and so on.
Of course that doesn’t mean that everything is perfect. There are plenty of things that I would change about this time, including political and other factors that keep these advances out of the hands of people who need them, but I don’t see those things as being any better in the past. I do generally think that the future is going to be better than the past, and don’t see that changing any time soon. That doesn’t mean that every moment is going to be happy and sunny (the Aughts sure felt less sunny than the ’90s, but I still think it was a better time in many ways), but I still see things progressing going forward.
On a related note, I still don’t buy the argument that kids are more self-absorbed today than they were in the past. The difference is that we see their self-absorbtion. Teenagers have been self-absorbed at least since the 1950s, when the modern idea of teenagerdom developed, and will always be self-absorbed. That’s part of being a teenager. I guarantee you that today’s 15 year-old is going to have the same complaints about the kids in 2026 as people made about them, which are the same complaints made about teens in 1994, 1979, 1964, and 1949. I promise you, you won’t find a modern time when teens are considered modest and responsible by all of their elders. You probably never will.
Now, that all said, if someone handed me a one-way ticket to the early Cretaceous, I’d have a hard time turning them down.
Walker wrote >>
It’s identical to the short-lived “Dino Pebbles” from a few decades ago. ;) Mmmmm…..
Posting dinosaur cereal was all part of a plot to get me to come back and post again, wasn’t it? ;-)
Along those lines, I still find myself with the Fruity Marshmallow Krispies jingle stuck in my head on a regular basis.
We met on Twitter*, which gets some awesome looks from people when they ask. :-) Mock it if you will (and I know you will) but Twitter has had an amazingly (and positive) impact on my life.
Looking back, every serious relationship I’ve been in has started online, though not through online dating sites (which I tried, but had little luck with).
*Though we probably wouldn’t have met if it weren’t for people who I met through CU, so some credit should go here.January 2, 2011 3:30 pm at 3:30 pm in reply to: Bagels By Captain Cream Cheese – New in Short North #334163
Walker wrote >>
cyclist II wrote >>
Those Lake Erie prices.
I’d open up for real if I had my own location, the capital to do it, but I am going to stick with pedicabbing for the time being.
You should talk to ECDI, put together a business plan, take out a microloan to start up a food cart (could be bike powered), run it all summer in 2011, build capital, and then look into opening a real location in 2012.
A good bagel cart would definitely see some of my money.
I downloaded the Humble Indie Bundle this week, mostly for Braid. I’m enjoying Braid, but it’s Osmos that’s won my heart.December 23, 2010 6:12 pm at 6:12 pm in reply to: White Castle Closing Clintonville / North Campus Location #419256
That’s sad news. Sometimes you just need White Castle, and there’s not much out there like it (other than other locations, and Krystal if you’re being technical). I feel like White Castle and Graffiti Burger are so different that they’re not really in competition, and it’s nice knowing that they’re both nearby options. While I haven’t had Five Guys, and can’t comment on the food, it wouldn’t add much to the area now that Graffiti Burger is here. Not that that means they won’t open one, I’d just rather something else moved in. That would be a great location for an amazing Indian or Mexican restaurant (he says hopefully).
If nothing else, given that it’s a relatively historic location, I would really like to see the building saved somehow.
Actually, that could be a great location for a White Castle museum.
AnneD wrote >>
I actually really like Edna St. Vincent Milay (although my brother, a poet who is really into language and sound poetry, argues that she doesn’t write poetry. It’s verse. I happen to like verse.)
I also really like e.e. cummings and George Oppen.
*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*
The whole experimental v. traditional war almost caused me to drop out of my grad program, and is the big reason why I didn’t continue to pursue poetry academically. You are basically required (at least at Miami) to pick one side and deride the other. The fact that I enjoyed both experimental and more traditional poetry (though the Mondernists and New York School aren’t exactly rhymed meter either) was an tough position to explain. As soon as I said I liked one thing, it was assumed that I disliked something else.
William Carlos Williams is easily my favorite, with John Ashbery as a close second. Both of them are fairly obvious influences on my own writing ;-)
Third place probably goes to Alice Notley, and then I start to have trouble ranking them.
If we’re talking pre-20th century, then I’m all about Blake and Whitman.
Also, while I think he’s generally better as an organizer of poets, (and awful as a human being), I do think Ezra Pound wrote the best poem in the English language.
In A Station Of The Metro
The apparition of these faces in the crowd ;
Petals on a wet, black bough.