Interesting how I never considered this option. It never even hit my horizon. I'm actually in the process of increasing speed since faster speed equals faster access and better productivity. Right? After reading this article, I suspect I'm wrong.
Thinking about how easy it is to get distracted when I'm online 100% of the time, no access is probably a good choice. It's going to hurt but this is something I'm going to try. Good article.
Yeah, I found this article since my girlfriend's internet got cut off once her roommate who was paying for it moved out—she never got around to setting it up again, and now that I've observed her habits change during this period, I was pretty impressed! I'm definitely considering trying this out for a bit, as I find I have more than enough time in the office on the web, and it's a pretty good excuse to get out and about.
I've found that it was too easy for my co-workers to ping me on things that can wait until the next day or stuff I can't do anything about until I get to work. I've asked them to call me if there's an issue that I have to fix. So far I've gotten zero calls and it's been over a year. If ever it becomes an issue I've got internet access within 5 mins from me. I suspect it's the same situation for most people.
Some people are alcoholics. They can't exist near an open can of beer without their life going to shambles. But most people aren't and don't have the urge to binge drink.
I'm not sure how this is any different. The author of this article is an Internetaholic, therefore I should cut my tether to the Internet? And what of my LTE connection?
But Facebook is a problem. Social media has its place somewhere in society but Facebook in particular is definitely a problem, for a multitude of reasons.
As a digital nomad for the past several months, Facebook has been crucial in keeping in touch with friends and family back home, but also a perfect platform for staying in contact with new friends I make on my travels :-)
I am an immigrant. I've been living mostly away from home for 10 years. I have people (friends, relatives, family, people that I know and love) that are easily reachable on Facebook. I deleted my facebook account and realized that I can still reach all the people I want to reach if I had really wanted to. Stuff that is "on Facebook" seems optional to me. When the only way I know them is their Facebook profile then I'm fucked. Now I learned to ask people for their email addresses, I personally think it will live far longer than Facebook.
Sorry, I can no longer edit my comment, so I am adding another comment here. I'm in no way criticizing your way of communication. I think Facebook is an excellent communication tool.
However, to me, there is something special about emails that makes them a much personal way to communicate. When I send an email to a friend, I feel like I made a personal connection. I feel I like the person a lot more when I write an email to them and get an email back. When I commented on/liked a facebook status, it just feels like it's some shit I have to do when I am bored. Since I deleted my facebook, it turns out that there are very few friends/acquaintances that I added on Facebook that I feel like I need to connect on a personal level. That's very strange.
I'm a few months into the no-facebook game and it certainly is strange to realize how vacant most of our interactions on the platform were.
In some ways it feels like I've never been this lonely before. It makes me realize just how superficial most of my connections really were. I moved around a lot and had a sizable group of friends I would interact with on facebook, but now that it's gone... only three of them still make the effort to text or call me at least once a week to catch up. Sure, I have more friends who are simply indisposed and busy, but because they have social media they don't seek much interaction outside of it and so we don't talk.
It honestly hurts and the last two nights I've actually broken into long crying fits over how lonely I feel, because I feel like I don't connect with anyone, even the people I do talk to. I know facebook wasn't providing that level of connection I desired, but I realized it had tricked me into thinking it did. I realized that in the past, when I felt this kind of loneliness-induced depression creeping up, I would get on social media just to look at other human beings and remind me I'm not on a rock by myself and other people are dealing with the same emotions. Decent short-term solution for getting rid of the symptoms, but it did nothing to address the problem itself.
Incentivised social media like Facebook is really not healthy for the developing psyche. It's shaped the way I think and feel, and what triggers my brain's reward systems, and now I'm suffering for it.
I'll list two because I've been on HN too long today already.
1) Facebook is part of an initiative to lay down internet infrastructure in Africa, with the catch being that access to Facebook, Google, et al. is heavily subsidized. They are attempting to trap an entire continent on their platform, with subsidized tax money, knowingly simultaneously creating the most advanced social monitoring tool ever to exist. The CIA already has "social unrest" prediction mechanisms and, regardless of what some people involved think they're doing it for, this tool will be used to enslave the continent, continue preventing its people from achieving economic parity with the West, and provide better data for three-letter agencies to use in their sociopolitical and economic targeting (targeted propaganda, red herring social issues, media blackouts, even full-scale political coups)
2) They have better data than anyone else with respect to gauging addicting user behavior, and instead of taking the Nintendo approach ("Why don't you take a break and play outside?") they actively exploit these behavioral patterns to increase user engagement. 1/4 of the world's population exists on an insulating platform that does not have their interests in mind. They are unwittingly paving Facebook a permanent highway over our social systems. This creates negatively-reinforcing social vacuums and a massive chilling and normalization effect. But even worse than this normalization is the ideological reinforcement and mass hyper-emotional response that tends to result from an network of humans all checking their emotional response against others in a social vacuum. To make things even worse, Facebook capitalizes here as well and exploits users' emotional response mechanisms.
Here's a paper from a few years ago exploring this concept. I wanted to find a more recent article that was quite good but I couldn't locate it with a quick search:
The article I wanted to find mentioned one of the ways Facebook would exploit peoples' emotions to provoke their addictive behavior:
Facebook knows John spends about 10 minutes going through his feed at a time. During work hours, this number is 3 minutes. Right when Facebook thinks John might be about to put his phone away, they will suddenly show him a post from a friend he likes. He might stick around a little longer and comment. He scrolls a little more just because he is used to the behavior, and when Facebook thinks he is about to leave again they show him a post from someone he doesn't like. Bonus points if Facebook has determined the post is positive in nature. This triggers a negative emotional response in John and he scrolls a while longer, looking for a post that will give him another dopamine rush and return his "happiness" to him.
It's disgusting. It's predatory. It's abusive. It's no different than the CIA knowingly spreading crack and fentanyl to control the population and create pockets of crime that call for increased enforcement.
I am really curious about this last technique you mentioned (predicting when the user might be about to put their phone away and intervening at that moment with enticing content). If you remember any clues that might lead to it, or find it again, please post. Thanks!
GeoHot talked about FB in a few interviews how they used machine learning entirely for the purposes of tricking people into using FB more, which is why he quit working there.
I still couldn't find it and it really bugs me. If I do, I'll shoot you a PM.
In my search, I did come across this[0] and it concerned me. Seems like Facebook is expanding the ability of its users to enforce the chilling effect by allowing them to report "mentally unhealthy" posts so the users can be targeted for behavioral modification and automatic reporting to mental health agencies, as opposed to say, just messaging their friend directly and saying, "Hey, you OK man? You seem a bit sad."
They are also using ML to do the same thing, automatically. Just further separating us in the name of bringing us together.
One big difference is that alcohol was not engineered to be addictive. Whereas at Facebook and many other companies there are a lot of smart people continuously trying to improve metrics like DAU, UAM, response frequency, etc. And they do it with no apparent regard for the impact on users' lives. Heck, many game companies proudly advertise how they are the most addictive thing you can get right now.
Well okay sure, but engineered or not, alcohol is very addictive. There are probably more addictive substances, but alcohol really is up there on that list. You could probably engineer a better addictive substance, but not one nearly as pervasive in global culture.
There's something truly unique about alcohol that isn't true of any other addictive substance on the planet.
pervasiveness is a factor. If you think of the addiction as an "infection" then relapse/reinfection is a lot easier when the reinfection vectors are pervasive.
> There's something truly unique about alcohol that isn't true of any other addictive substance on the planet.
Alcohol is a viable a substitute for carbohydrates for feeding nerve cells. Ethanol -> acetate -> ATP. Some research was published a few years ago about how the brains of heavy drinkers switch to running on acetate....
> There's something truly unique about alcohol that isn't true of any other addictive substance on the planet.
Except nicotine, sugar, caffeine, etc.
Honestly I'd say your argument is a much better fit for sugar.
I'm saying this as someone who went off it for a few years, and now back on it, trying to quit.
Tremendously addictive, and it's EVERYWHERE.
Birthday? Cake. Meeting up with friends? Drinks. Easter? Candy. Date? Chocolate. Did something good? Reward with cookies.
I sound like I'm on some bandwagon, but I'm not trying to argue that honey or agave or anything else is better, but there's very little sugar naturally in any real food, and we can't escape it.
Alcohol is at most gatherings, but it really isn't nearly as pervasive.
Sure, that is naturally occuring, and I wouldn't advise eating too much of it either, but at least the ratio is offset by a lot of fiber (and water), so you get somewhat full.
But I get your point, it shouldn't really be about what's naturally occuring, but how it affects your body. I stay away from fruit as well.
The problem with sugar is, IMO, glycemic index. With glucose being an index of 100, no sugar being an index of 0, and something that takes a moderate amount of time to convert from starches/etc to sugar being 50, things that are higher than 50-60 tend to spike your blood sugar and cause insulin to scavenge the sugar out and store it in fat. Doing that often causes things like insulin resistance and obesity as you get hungry again when your blood sugar drops.
Fruits have a surprisingly low glycemic index because they aren't processed and you have to get through fiber and digest the cells before having access to all of the sugar. I've changed my diet to avoid sugar and notice that I very rarely feel actively hungry/crashy vs. before, and most fruit is just fine.
A perhaps better measure is glycemic load, which takes mass into account. 400 calories of frosted flakes is about 100g. 400 calories of watermelon is 1.3kg. Watermelon's glycemic index is worse, but at reasonable serving sizes, fruits generally end up being way better.
You also cherry picked, figuratively speaking. More literally, you didn't pick the cherries at an index of 22. There are a lot of fruits in the 20s to 40s. I tend to stay away from both pineapple and watermelon.
Somehow I've never really had a sweet tooth at all. I usually decline sweet foods when people are handing around cake or cookies, or only accept to be polite and take a small slice. But get some nice savoury food near me and I'll scarf it all down. For some reason umami is to me what sugar is to others.
I'm the same way. I call it a salty tooth. I couldn't care less about desserts, but if someone offers me some smelly camembert, or bread and olive tapenade, or a bonito rice ball, you better watch out because it's all going into my mouth.
By the way, if you're looking for a way to get a clean break from sugar, following the paleo induction plan "Whole30" has worked well for me. The initial withdrawal symptoms are not fun, but the limited time span and the clarity of the program made it relatively easy to do.
Feel free to email if you want to discuss. I'm so glad to be off it again; I feel healthier and my mood is so much more positive and even.
I didn't have any trouble quitting last time, but having a family and more commitments now makes it tougher to completely revamp your habits.
What I find most fascinating is how I can look outside myself and notice how my rational brain time and time again gets disregarded by impulse, while knowing what I know. It's like observing someone else.
I have clear memories and notes over how (as you describe) my mood was better and I felt healthier, yet an immediate impulse with a fleeting effect takes priority, while knowing it will only prolong the problem.
I read this in a drug information pamphlet a long time ago; basically it said that cocaine and heroin both bind to a different set of receptors to the other, but alcohol binds to both. Which is what makes it uniquely addictive. Its obviously not as strong as either of those drugs but combines the nature of both.
What you're both implying is that, unless something is EVERYONE'S problem, no one should share their experiences. The author constantly makes the case that maybe this is too extreme for you, and you can choose not to do it. But for a lot of us here, as is clear from the activity on this thread, this IS a problem, and I'm glad the author made the post.
I do think that a lot of people are very dependent on the internet in this way—and that there's very few things in life that we find to be indispensable to ever be disconnected from—air, sustenance, light, and... internet?
The fact that many find it to be so inconceivable to go from having the internet 24/7 to having the internet for your entire workday and any time you spend in a public place with internet, really points out how psychologically dependent we've collectively become on the web.
An alcohol manufacturer rarely has an army of designers, data scientists and engineers working non-stop to make their product more addictive and measuring their success on engagement growth.
I would be utterly shocked if most of the big ones didn't, and I'd be even more shocked if they (along with tobacco companies) had helped to develop techniques now taken for granted in the digital world.
> An alcohol manufacturer rarely has an army of designers, data scientists and engineers working non-stop to make their product more addictive and measuring their success on engagement growth.
They have at least the first two, and tobacco companies have, or historically have had, all three. Job titles are slightly different, but basic functions are the same.
This is just not true. Go visit a vineyard, distillery, or a brewery. People may be trying to improve the quality of the product, but they are not relentlessly trying to increase "user drinking minutes" or any metric like that. They do try to sell more of their product, but their main goal is getting better reviews, wider distribution, and more customers, not stuffing people like foie gras geese.
> . Go visit a vineyard, distillery, or a brewery. People may be trying to improve the quality of the product, but they are not relentlessly trying to increase "user drinking minutes" or any metric like that.
Yes, that's exactly what the marketing arms of the firms involved, and the advertising agencies they employ, are trying to do. (There's some actual product-development involvement there, too; light and ultra-light beers were invented pretty much exactly to maximize user drinking minutes.)
That's really only true for big companies like Ab-Inbev. You aren't going to see any of that at your mom and pop vineyard or craft microbrewery. You also don't see much of that pathological, exploitive behaviour in 1 person indie game shops either, however.
Yes, and tons of indie developers are beholden to big publishers like Sony and Microsoft. That doesn't change the fact that there are plenty of properly independent folks.
Also, I am not aware of the craft microbreweries owned by the big companies engaging in the sort of abusive behaviours that the main brands engage in, are you?
As others have pointed out, alcohol/tobacco manufacturers do in fact have these.
However because addiction is a known factor in their industry, I think they are kept somewhat in check, if only for legal reasons. I don't think Internet companies have any such qualms, so I would agree that they basically are trying to 'weaponize' this addiction.
I was wondering this too after reading the "call to action" -- do I get to keep my data plan? (Did the author keep his?) I assume the answer is supposed to be no, but that might be good to note explicitly as this wouldn't be nearly as life-changing if taken a little too literally. (Not to be too nitpicky -- the article makes great points!)
I find for myself that using my iPhone's porn filter to block timesuck sites like Reddit, Facebook, and ironically, this one—is a nice middle ground, where most of the time it's too inconvenient for me to go through deactivating the filters, but I can when I want to do something related to the service (like administering this hacker news post). Coupled with not having the native apps installed, it makes for a decent first step in reducing dependence.
My general heuristic is that anything with an infinite feed is designed to suck you in—so avoid apps that provide them, as much as is feasible for your lifestyle.
I think this blog post is entirely too idealistic about the benefits of turning off the Internet, but I don't think comparing excessive Internet use and Alcoholism is appropriate.
Having personally been on the fringe of "high functioning" alcoholism on a few occasions, I don't think the comparison works. Alcoholism is inherently negative. Drinking alcohol in moderation may not be extremely harmful, but is still not necessarily great. While I certainly won't tell anyone how to live their life, cutting out alcohol use is still a "good" thing. Even if it's not a problem for you. Edit: I also still drink periodically because I enjoy it.
Internet use is not inherently negative. "Addiction" to the Internet may not be great, but is not necessarily all bad. The tricky thing about Internet use is that it's generally not something with negative social connotations. So even if someone is "binge consuming", one is not likely to feel negative social pressure because of it.
So I ultimately agree that he shouldn't be touting no Internet as a solution for all people, but I can't get behind the Alcoholism comparison.
> Drinking alcohol in moderation may not be extremely harmful, but is still not necessarily great. While I certainly won't tell anyone how to live their life, cutting out alcohol use is still a "good" thing. Even if it's not a problem for you.
I just don't know about that, even though I know you're trying to be fair and reasonable. Even ignoring the reported possible health benefits of alcohol in moderation, if it's slightly bad for your physical health it can still be a net positive in your life.
My point is mostly focused on the extremes. I realize that I brought up the moderation bit and the true benefit/harm of moderate alcohol use is up for debate.
But if you look at extreme overuse of alcohol, there is nothing good about it. Pretty cut and dry.
Extreme "overuse" of the Internet - may have negatives attached, but is still in that "debatable" territory. True impact (positive or negative) depends on what the person is spending their time on, depends on the nature of their work and personal relationships, depends on what they have access to away from home, etc. etc. Even the definition of "extreme" or "overuse" is entirely relative and depends on the specifics of the situation.
I also don't drink[0], but when I did I saw it as a positive thing as it got me outside and I was able to socialise with people when I was drinking. That was all just a state of mind though - there isn't anything magical in alcohol that makes you more confident (other than removing
Since I've quit I've made many new friends and my relationships with them are much deeper than any of my previous 'drinking buddies'.
[0] I occasionally drink kvass which has very small amount of alcohol (usually <1%). It is more natural (not pasteurised and filtered like most alcoholic drinks), so I wouldn't be surprised if it also has the same or greater health benefits.
It's not just an increase in confidence or ability to socialize, and there's no inherent reason why friendships need to be shallow or dependent on alcohol like the phrase "drinking buddies" implies. Alcohol causes euphoria, plain and simple. I don't see any reason why responsible moderate use can't result in a net utility gain over the potential health decrease. I'm thinking along the same lines as other dietary treats (like candy or comfort food) that are probably not part of any theoretical "ideal" diet but which can still make people happy.
I have to disagree that internet addiction is not something without highly negative social connotations. There is a significant number of people who fall into poor social circumstances via too much exposure to internet. There are a lot of internet communities out there that amplify deviant and antisocial behavior in people who spend way too much time on the internet. I agree that it's a different beast than a substance addiction, but there's no way you can simply dismiss binge internet user issues. Though my point may seem anecdotal, a lot of people have friends who were a lot better socially adjusted before they started letting the internet change their perspective and priorities.
That's fair, and to be clear I'm not entirely dismissing the issues related to binge Internet use. I do think this can be a very real problem that has very real consequences. I'm mostly unable to accept the alcohol comparison.
Some alcoholics are genetically predisposed to addiction and some are just using it to cope with something traumatic. Some basement dwellers (predisposed) gravitate towards depraved social forums and some well adjusted people are radicalized by political memes on Facebook.
There are many things for which use normal use is ok, even beneficial. E.g., alcohol, gambling, work, food, and sex. But for some people those become addictions. They are not inherently negative, but they can be abused.
If there is a distinction between those things and internet use, you haven't made it clear.
While I certainly won't tell anyone how to live their life, cutting out alcohol use is still a "good" thing.
See, I'm not so sure about that. I spent probably 7-8 years without alcohol. It was never that I drank often, but my ex really had issues with it along with mental health issues. Part of making a good environment for him was to keep alcohol out of the house, and I couldn't really afford to be that impaired.
After we broke up, I started drinking casually. Its been years, and I still don't drink much, but it is a unique occasional enjoyment. I neither have pressure to drink nor real consequences from it - after all, I'd be spending the money on other entertainment anyway.
It was much harder to not be part of social media networks, honestly. No one cares if I drink, but folks will simply not talk to others if they don't share the social network.
I think the problem is that apparently many people default to some level of potential "internetaholicity"; it explains the insane success of something like FB after all. People take time to recognize the various Skinner Boxes and develop the kind of sophistication so many on a site like HN take for granted. MMORPG's, Mobile F2P Skinner Boxes, and messaging programs really are going right to the core of human behavior.
How many of us didn't at least go through a phase of abusive use around the internet, or games, or something like that? When you add that having an FB account and the like is often seen as ultimately normal, it starts to add a lot of pressure for some people. As someone who has always hated something like FB, it's been disturbing to see it sink hooks into so many.
That said, I saw it coming because when I was a teenager I was hooked on mIrc for a while!
SO no... don't cut your tether, you're either naturally immune or like me developed an immune system. You should recognize though, that plenty of people aren't going to have such a successful outcome playing with that particular fire.
It should, but English lacks a suffix for "addicted to...", so people have taken the "-holic" of "alcoholic" and reinterpreted it to fill that void. The genie is out of the bottle now, so to speak, and we will probably continue to use "-holic" for all forms of addiction as long as English is spoken.
I think comparing it to alcohol is incorrect. It's more analogous to cigarettes. You start and it's very hard to stop. You increase your intake and it's very hard to even reduce it. Honestly, I think the internet is much more addictive than cigarettes and more comparable to very hard, addictive drugs.
I did something similar when I was in college to fix my bad grades - I didn't have a laptop or a computer at home, and didn't own a smartphone. I did all my school related work at labs in college, and this made me much more productive at home - instead of mindlessly surfing the internet, I actually did the school work. As a result, my grades shot up to summa cum laude levels and there is a distinct step function between my freshman/sophomore year grades and the junior/senior year grades. Unfortunately, living with a girlfriend who adores Netflix, I am back into my procrastinating self when I am at home.
If your girlfriend is at all receptive to it, maybe you can try to move things in that direction—sounds like you appreciated a bunch of aspects of that lifestyle!
The title is not the greatest, but the article mostly talks about how the guy is living his life more fulfillingly, not a micro-optimization of productivity.
Yeah, I guess, but it seems like there's a conflation of the idea of getting stuff done and being fulfilled. Playing games online (or just sitting around and chatting with my wife, for that matter) doesn't really serve to help me get anything done but I derive enjoyment from it.
I get this, I really do. I wish I could dump the Internet for some of my home life. But unfortunately my home life is polluted by work. I'm a web developer who maintains an entity with multiple domains. One of them is a 24/7 uptime service. So I'd love to follow this advice, but I don't think it is applicable to many viewers at HN, as many of us need to follow our job.
What good advice would any viewer give to a life I just described? How could anyone (I) separate the Internet from a home life when being off that grid for a weekend could cause catastrophic failure without the dev leader their to fix it?
I struggle with some demons when it comes to the internet, mostly in terms of distractions and time wasting. Alcohol problems run in my family, and while I have no problems with it now or in the past, I find my addictive tendencies come out in regards to the internet and its content.
I've learned that I am very sensitive to physical spaces in my life, and I have made an effort to set "space boundaries" for myself to help with my tendencies. For example, I got rid of my desktop computer, replaced it with a laptop, and got rid of my desk in my room. It was calling me every day to sit down and use my computer for hours on end. It's been that way since childhood - the habit is deeply ingrained.
Now, I use my room for relaxation and I try to keep it that way. I'm not perfect, but when I have to work from home I make sure I don't do it in my room. I sit at the dining room table most times, and that has become a "work space" for me. I've trained myself to not work in my room, and, while I still use my computer and the internet in there, I only use it for personal things.
This solution is still in flux for me. So far it has been successful in turning my room into a relaxation space, which was a real lack in my life before. I hope that helps!
Also, more/better automation and fallbacks, an employee to cover all these extra shifts you're working, or trade out time with a colleague where you cover for each other which brings you back to having two dev leaders.
Either the business is successful and you can hire another 2nd leader; or can merge with a competitor to gain the 2nd leader and more resources of some sort (you have too many customers too little infra, so look for a company with underutilized infra). Or it's actually not that successful and is using your life 24/7 as life support for itself and it's past time to cut it loose.
What the author suggests is highly impractical, and makes adopting this way of life all the more challenging.
I suggest for people who have a serious problem, to try out time-managers and site-blockers.
When I was going through a highly unproductive phase, I used ColdTurkey. The software's not too good and if you're really craving for a fix, you'll find a way to get past it. But, for the regular procrastinator it does wonders for productivity.
Don't be rash and cut out one of the most important utilities there is just because you're having some issues.
I think the view that the internet is "one of the most important utilities there is" is seriously influenced by what most of us do for a living. The fact is that it's mostly used for idle, time-killing entertainment and gossip. I've been so tempted to cut my home service but like others have mentioned it would be a really hard sell to the rest of the family.
The author suggests that if you assume that not having an internet connection at home is highly impractical, you should take a moment to really think about whether you're assuming too much.
I agree. As for me, I'm a remote worker but I rent a desk in a coworking space, which means I can use their high speed internet for hours every day. That's a lot of time to acquire information and do chores.
So the consequence of not having internet at home would be, basically, that I'm offline between 7 PM and 9 AM, or whatever. When I've lived without internet before, I've spent a couple of hours on weekend days in cafes checking my websites.
It's not necessarily a horrible austerity. For me, I've always experienced an offline home as very relaxing, nice, and peaceful. (Of course there are many factors which can make it impractical, e.g. family.)
> The author suggests that if you assume that not having an internet connection at home is highly impractical, you should take a moment to really think about whether you're assuming too much.
Perhaps it is my young age, but all the people I know are effectively lepers if they're not, atleast, connected to the internet.
I was rash in assuming everyone was similar. Now that I think of it, there are older people that wouldn't miss a beat if they took time away from the internet.
I keep my internet off most of the day (via kernel firewall). Have a command that gives me a few minutes of internet so I can look up docs, then shuts everything back down.
If you're on a Mac then i can recommend Dash app for offline docs libraries.
For me it's completely different experience to code offline (very enjoyable). More thinking involved - less Google/SO.
A famous author once made the following observation - When faced with the option of either doing more exercise or less eating for losing weight, take the option which requires you to a) spend less time and b) not add anything new to your life (i.e. the cognitive overhead).
Apparently, people who tried to eat less were also more successful in losing weight.
Cutting off home internet is the option of less eating. Seems more drastic, but is actually more tuned to how our brains work.
Your suggestion is similar to doing more exercise. It can also work, but it is just a whole lot more work and cognitive overhead.
Besides, its not like the author is asking people to go off the grid.
To be fair, the amount of exercise you need to overcome even small amounts of excessive eating can be disproportionately difficult and time consuming—but while the example may have some logistic holes, I still generally agree with your idea :)
I think you give the average person a bit more credit in their self control than they perhaps deserve—lots of people have issues with addiction to the internet, based on typical Netflix binge habits or the infamous Reddit timesink.
I don't have a source for it - if you're interested enough, you're welcome to verify it independently, but supposedly a fifth of the country no longer has wired internet anymore.
My ISP (Chunghwa telecom) delivers such terrible service that my life basically works this way.
I spend much more time in the office, because the Internet connection works. But that makes me use office time to live my online life, instead of doing company work.
Oh man, oh man, this is so close to my experience. I went lo-fi since the beginning of 2017. Real testimonials of a drug/facebook/internet addict who has the problem out of control here.
I killed my Facebook account 3 months ago, and switched to a dumb phone (from a Pixel phone ;-) since the beginning of the year. Now I'm rocking a webOS phone and no IM account except for hangouts which I check on my computer when I want. I no longer reach my pocket to check for message or anything when I enjoy my meal or go travel somewhere. There is no push or anything I can play when I wake up in the middle of the night to keep me up. Also, looking up and navigating to places by instinct sucks, and is fun at the same time. I no longer have any idea how highly rated any place is before I walk in, and I had plenty of surprises since then. Just last weekend I traveled somewhere and interacted with the locals because the only place in town was closed - I wouldn't have if I had a smartphone to "OK Google." Without the smartphone, I now carry a big, beaten up mirrorless camera in by bag, so I am more or less have to do more "proper" photography now, instead of disposable instagram stuff to get likes (this I have to credit the Pixel, it was an incredible camera for how thin it is). Learning photography with a camera is super fun, although the end result seems to be the same.
I'm an immigrant. Other than the Trump stuff my liberal friends were talking about here, there was another alternative flow of stressful/irrelevant celebrities news from my home country. I realized that without Facebook, I actually extremely rarely check or care what's going on, about who is fucking who and who is getting fat. The amount of stuff getting in my brain is dramatically reduced. I thought I would miss Facebook, and it turned out I don't. The benefits far, far exceeded the negatives.
Without Facebook and a constant smartphone influence to consume, I write way more, about what I like and what actually matters to me, not to get likes from my friends and to appear intelligent. I get downvotes from Hacker News when I say something stupid, which I don't get from Facebook. It's alright :) I honestly feel I learn everyday.
I get so much better sleep, way less stress and I have so much free time since then. It was like an enlightenment for me to be taking control of my life. I will try to cut back the internet also as the author suggested. Now excuse me, I have to get back to work on my writing.
Sometimes things just get ingrained as impulse and habit. I tried a lot of things before finally deactivating Facebook. Downgraded to a dumbphone briefly but it just wasn't feasible with work - especially the hotspot for when I'm on call. Tried scheduled site blockers like Freedom.io but the problem is I know how they all work so it was easy enough for me to disable them for a second. Tried blocking news sources that were usually associated with political-rant-shares but the algorithm just keeps roping you back in.
I generally try to stay off the web after work unless there's something I NEED to do after hours (right now I'm just finishing a database upgrade) and that easy enough. Killing Facebook ended up being the real cure for me. Any other sites I check I'm generally done after about 15 minutes...for the day. Facebook is just constant though. It's just such an easy go-to. Like the author of this post, I find myself reading books a lot more (for a really interesting read, check out The Undoing Project btw).
I see some other comments on here being critical of the decision but the real key is just identifying an acknowledging when you have a real, legitimate time sink problem. When you do and you can get to the bottom of it, it's like a weight off of your shoulders. Some people are better at moderation than others. Others are much better at quitting cold turkey.
When you really identify how much time you're wasting per day / week of something that's in short supply, especially when there are things you keep wishing you could find time for...the decision to do something like this gets really...really easy.
That's missing the point though. This is not about the inconvenience of certain gestures, this is about the constant stream of notifications raining down on you.
How can you stay in tech and make products that are relevant to the market and be such a tech Luddite? It is like RMS or all those people on slashdot who boo everything new. Nobody who is anybody doing anything interesting listens to windbags who don't understand the current market. The world is going to move past you, leaving you and your skills increasingly irrelevant.
I don't understand how people who work in an industry that changes so fast can be such luddites...
I mean yes I get it... blah blah blah Facebook is making us all go to hell in a hand basket and back when I was a kid we all played in the freeway instead of used our smartphones or whatever but seriously. Change is constant. Fight it and become obsolete.
I really like the idea. But I think the author needs to be super transparent to his audience and be honest about when he re-enables his internet connection. Otherwise it is just socialmediaing the audience with nice pictures of his "life", building a façade that is not truthful.
Cute. Kind of like a paleo diet. Check back in in 2018, let me know how that's going for you.
I mean, I get it, you have to rebalance, which sometimes calls for going overboard. Just don't get too excited about it being the One True Way. 50 years from now?
his suggestion to hide my modem would just drive my phone data use through the roof :(
I remember the days before the internet and mobile phones. They weren't better (well, apart from being young and fit and knowing I was immortal, obviously). We like these things for a reason.
Implementing this exact solution probably won't work for most people, but I found the idea of digital fasting a productive one. Try some less extreme variation of this like getting a dumb phone or switching to a paper magazine for your general interest reading for sometime. I found I built better habits offline that also translated online.
I was about to say "what, streaming services aren't good enough for you?" Then realized you can't stream without home internet >_<. Ah well, I bet you can buy cheap CDs and rip them :)
I wish there were better ways to regulate your own access. It's easy enough to make good decisions about where you spend your time when you're in a good frame of mind, but it's almost impossible to do that every minute of every day. It's a bit like eating I think. It's not too hard to buy healthy food when you're at the grocery store, but it's hard to say no to a plate of cookies every time you walk past when they're sitting on your table.
I wish there were good software solutions, like a way to schedule a blacklist of websites on your phone and computer that you simply couldn't get around. Almost everything I've seen is set up to block access for children, or is easily bypassed. I feel like it's an area that could be a huge benefit to a lot of people.
Completely killing your home internet is extreme. I'd have to change careers, hobbies, and it would even interfere with friendships. But there's no reason why it has to be all or nothing.
I tried living totally without internet access, and while I felt a lot better overall, I eventually had to give in. Nowadays phone books aren't usually delivered to homes anymore, so if you want to get in touch with a store or find a doctor's office, you need internet to search for it. Since I wasn't driving at the time, I couldn't just head out to an internet cafe when it was something important.
For similar reasons, I've had trouble detangling from Facebook. 10 years ago, if a friend was getting married they'd send out announcements -- now they just "announce" it on Facebook, and if you don't log in that week, you don't find out about it.
So part of the reason it's hard to disconnect is because the previous methods of staying in touch have atrophied in favor of these new, more toxic systems.
Nevertheless, I'm trying a couple of things (with varied success -- I really do much better cold turkey):
- Trying to reward myself with internet time after I score enough points in Habitica (aka HabitRPG)
- Trying to turn off the modem at a certain time of night like 10 pm (I find I sleep better too -- might be coincidence but I've noticed the difference many times)
Ultimately what would help me would be a pay-per-use internet plan versus an "always on" internet plan. If I know that my plan fee increased after 20 hours / month, I'd have access when I needed it, but then I'd have to "save up" for special occasions like streaming a show. As of yet I haven't found an external limit that doesn't also make life too logistically challenging.
I lived without internet for a while too and had the same experience. There's benefits, but it's not practical long term.
Pay-per-use would is an interesting idea, but if you live with other people it gets a little more complicated.
The best tool I've found is an app called Self Control. It puts rules into your hosts file and either blacklists certain websites or blocks all of them and whitelists the ones you want. It uses an external timeserver so you can't get around it by changing your computer clock, and it runs regular checks to make sure you don't just edit your hosts file yourself. It's really pretty good. And in theory you could set up scripts that would start up certain blocks at a scheduled time every day. The one huge problem though is that it's Mac only.
I don't think there's a way to completely fix the issue externally, but having some powerful tools for limiting yourself would go a long way in making it easier.
Yes I agree with you and I think, for people with our type of needs, a more sensible approach would be to switch from smart to dumb phone, in fact I have been thinking about that for a while now.
Part of learning self-discipline is learning what triggers or facilitates undesired behavior and modifying one's environment to increase desired behavior. This can include limiting internet access, such as removing home internet, or switching to a dumb phone. This isn't weakness; it's learning about oneself and working with what you have. Certainly, there are ways to increase will-power, but relying purely on will-power can be difficult for many people.
I didn't say it was "weakness". I meant it seemed like unnecessarily crippling oneself. It might be valuable for many people to investigate why they can't stop themselves from overusing their smartphones. Sure if they end up realizing that they can't manage to stop themselves, it would make sense to change the environment, but why give up without even trying? This really seems like the opposite of learning self-discipline.
I didn't mean to imply that you said it was a weakness, though I did think some may consider it as such ("what, you don't have enough self-control to limit your smartphone usage?"). I'm addressing the fact that self-control is not limitless (even if developed and increased) and that if one's goal is to be more productive, one should feel free to use the tools available to them, which include both modifying one's environment and increasing self-control. And of course any modifications have to fit in with how you want to live your life. If it's crippling, it's not a useful modification. Having a dumbphone may be crippling to some, and liberating to others.
You seem to have dismissed the former entirely with "that doesn't seem sensible to me at all", and here leave it as only a last resort. I don't believe that's a useful way to view it. Use the tools you have available to modify your behavior.
You don't need "infinite" willpower. You might even need very little once you've changed into a default mode of using your phone less. By the way it's still unclear whether ego-depletion is a real phenomenon AFAIK.
I'm noticing that for me, simply disrupting the pattern does wonders. A background process that re-bans websites via localhost redirect in my hosts file every few hours does wonders, for example.
A bad habit I can fall into as easily as breathing is a problem.
A bad habit I have to indulge in some effort to perform, puts me in the position of needing willpower to indulge in it!
That would be throwing out the good with the bad. The phone isn't just an internet portal, it's a music player, a navigation system, an audiobook player, a book reader, etc.
Yep. I've deleted Facebook and it's reduced my time wasting. I still pull my phone out, swipe left, swipe right, realize there's nothing for me to do and then put my phone away. (I have most notifications turned to minimal/off)
But LOVE my audio books and podcasts and google maps and digital note pad and dictionary and wikipedia... And never feel guilty about those things.
Maybe a dongle/phone you can connect to, but don't use?
Fun (semi-related) story, I once had someone steal my mac power cable on a bus ride from Quito to Banos, Tungurahua in Ecuador http://bit.ly/2olVpLT and had to install putty on an internet computer from 2003 to get into a server to reboot a process. That was when I realized that Internet access was no longer a luxury for me.
HN is my only fix. It's simple: delete the FB, twitter, Google, etc. Done! And when the browser opens it goes directly to work related pages. It's all about starting on the right foot.
A less extreme idea embedded in here, that I'd like to try, is writing things down that you'd like research instead of impulsively Googling stuff. I think this wil have at least two benefits. 1. This will prevent you from impulsively interrupting what you're doing (like work or eating dinner)
2. Will filter out things you don't actually care about. When you sit down to go through your research list, you might discover you don't actually care about half of them thus saving you time and effort.
I really wish I could do that, but the problem is that note-taking/text-entry on current smartphones (i.e. the only item you're likely to have with you at all time) is such a dreg.
How do you solve that, by carrying a notebook and pen with you everywhere?
I know Google Keep and use it, but I'm talking about physical text input. Virtual keyboards for non-daily-vocab are awful, and devices with physical keyboards are getting rare, plus they're not getting better -- I've tried multiple Blackberry models, what a disapointment, it's hard to believe they had such a following for so long. I miss my Nokia E70 and Droid 3 :-/
And before someone weighs in with the inevitable "but virtual keyboards are totally cool, bro": I get it, they can be quick, but no they're not. Not when you switch between languages, not when you use a lot of technical or uncommon terms, and not when you appreciate a low typo-oops-correction rate.
This is a great idea, maybe not just "what I want to research" but write out exactly what I want to accomplish before I turn on the computer. For example, pay electric bill, move money to savings, send an email to dad. etc. I can't really imagine not being able to pay bills online, I am trying to reduce the physical mail I get/have to deal with. I would never want to go back to writing checks and putting them in the mail.
277 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 300 ms ] threadThinking about how easy it is to get distracted when I'm online 100% of the time, no access is probably a good choice. It's going to hurt but this is something I'm going to try. Good article.
If they are also friends, fine -- make after-work plans face-to-face. Otherwise, talk to them at work tomorrow.
YouTube will load faster, yes.
I'm not sure how this is any different. The author of this article is an Internetaholic, therefore I should cut my tether to the Internet? And what of my LTE connection?
That's really insane man. Take care of yourself. :)
However, to me, there is something special about emails that makes them a much personal way to communicate. When I send an email to a friend, I feel like I made a personal connection. I feel I like the person a lot more when I write an email to them and get an email back. When I commented on/liked a facebook status, it just feels like it's some shit I have to do when I am bored. Since I deleted my facebook, it turns out that there are very few friends/acquaintances that I added on Facebook that I feel like I need to connect on a personal level. That's very strange.
In some ways it feels like I've never been this lonely before. It makes me realize just how superficial most of my connections really were. I moved around a lot and had a sizable group of friends I would interact with on facebook, but now that it's gone... only three of them still make the effort to text or call me at least once a week to catch up. Sure, I have more friends who are simply indisposed and busy, but because they have social media they don't seek much interaction outside of it and so we don't talk.
It honestly hurts and the last two nights I've actually broken into long crying fits over how lonely I feel, because I feel like I don't connect with anyone, even the people I do talk to. I know facebook wasn't providing that level of connection I desired, but I realized it had tricked me into thinking it did. I realized that in the past, when I felt this kind of loneliness-induced depression creeping up, I would get on social media just to look at other human beings and remind me I'm not on a rock by myself and other people are dealing with the same emotions. Decent short-term solution for getting rid of the symptoms, but it did nothing to address the problem itself.
Incentivised social media like Facebook is really not healthy for the developing psyche. It's shaped the way I think and feel, and what triggers my brain's reward systems, and now I'm suffering for it.
There's a GREAT book that I am careful recommending as indeed I think it explores ideas that can be abused easily: Hooked, how to build habit-forming products ( https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hooked-How-Build-Habit-Forming-Prod... )
1) Facebook is part of an initiative to lay down internet infrastructure in Africa, with the catch being that access to Facebook, Google, et al. is heavily subsidized. They are attempting to trap an entire continent on their platform, with subsidized tax money, knowingly simultaneously creating the most advanced social monitoring tool ever to exist. The CIA already has "social unrest" prediction mechanisms and, regardless of what some people involved think they're doing it for, this tool will be used to enslave the continent, continue preventing its people from achieving economic parity with the West, and provide better data for three-letter agencies to use in their sociopolitical and economic targeting (targeted propaganda, red herring social issues, media blackouts, even full-scale political coups)
I have not read this article but I was in a hurry to find a source to give you. I'm hoping the Guardian doesn't let me down here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/01/facebook-free-...
2) They have better data than anyone else with respect to gauging addicting user behavior, and instead of taking the Nintendo approach ("Why don't you take a break and play outside?") they actively exploit these behavioral patterns to increase user engagement. 1/4 of the world's population exists on an insulating platform that does not have their interests in mind. They are unwittingly paving Facebook a permanent highway over our social systems. This creates negatively-reinforcing social vacuums and a massive chilling and normalization effect. But even worse than this normalization is the ideological reinforcement and mass hyper-emotional response that tends to result from an network of humans all checking their emotional response against others in a social vacuum. To make things even worse, Facebook capitalizes here as well and exploits users' emotional response mechanisms.
Here's a paper from a few years ago exploring this concept. I wanted to find a more recent article that was quite good but I couldn't locate it with a quick search:
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full
The article I wanted to find mentioned one of the ways Facebook would exploit peoples' emotions to provoke their addictive behavior:
Facebook knows John spends about 10 minutes going through his feed at a time. During work hours, this number is 3 minutes. Right when Facebook thinks John might be about to put his phone away, they will suddenly show him a post from a friend he likes. He might stick around a little longer and comment. He scrolls a little more just because he is used to the behavior, and when Facebook thinks he is about to leave again they show him a post from someone he doesn't like. Bonus points if Facebook has determined the post is positive in nature. This triggers a negative emotional response in John and he scrolls a while longer, looking for a post that will give him another dopamine rush and return his "happiness" to him.
It's disgusting. It's predatory. It's abusive. It's no different than the CIA knowingly spreading crack and fentanyl to control the population and create pockets of crime that call for increased enforcement.
In my search, I did come across this[0] and it concerned me. Seems like Facebook is expanding the ability of its users to enforce the chilling effect by allowing them to report "mentally unhealthy" posts so the users can be targeted for behavioral modification and automatic reporting to mental health agencies, as opposed to say, just messaging their friend directly and saying, "Hey, you OK man? You seem a bit sad."
They are also using ML to do the same thing, automatically. Just further separating us in the name of bringing us together.
[0] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-facebooks-mac...
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11981496
There's something truly unique about alcohol that isn't true of any other addictive substance on the planet.
I'm not sure about pervasiveness, though. In the US, a lot more people are caffeine dependent. And Facebook's MAU is way higher than alcohol's.
Alcohol is a viable a substitute for carbohydrates for feeding nerve cells. Ethanol -> acetate -> ATP. Some research was published a few years ago about how the brains of heavy drinkers switch to running on acetate....
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-03/joci-eba0301...
Except nicotine, sugar, caffeine, etc.
Honestly I'd say your argument is a much better fit for sugar.
I'm saying this as someone who went off it for a few years, and now back on it, trying to quit.
Tremendously addictive, and it's EVERYWHERE.
Birthday? Cake. Meeting up with friends? Drinks. Easter? Candy. Date? Chocolate. Did something good? Reward with cookies.
I sound like I'm on some bandwagon, but I'm not trying to argue that honey or agave or anything else is better, but there's very little sugar naturally in any real food, and we can't escape it.
Alcohol is at most gatherings, but it really isn't nearly as pervasive.
But I get your point, it shouldn't really be about what's naturally occuring, but how it affects your body. I stay away from fruit as well.
Fruits have a surprisingly low glycemic index because they aren't processed and you have to get through fiber and digest the cells before having access to all of the sugar. I've changed my diet to avoid sugar and notice that I very rarely feel actively hungry/crashy vs. before, and most fruit is just fine.
http://www.glycemicedge.com/glycemic-index-chart/
Apple: 38 Banana: 51 Pineapple: 66 Watermelon: 72
vs.
Ice Cream (premium): 37 Sponge Cake: 46 Frosted Flakes: 55 Snicker's Bar: 55
Fruits really are very high GI compared to regular snack foods. They're relatively healthy for other reasons though.
By the way, if you're looking for a way to get a clean break from sugar, following the paleo induction plan "Whole30" has worked well for me. The initial withdrawal symptoms are not fun, but the limited time span and the clarity of the program made it relatively easy to do.
Feel free to email if you want to discuss. I'm so glad to be off it again; I feel healthier and my mood is so much more positive and even.
I didn't have any trouble quitting last time, but having a family and more commitments now makes it tougher to completely revamp your habits.
What I find most fascinating is how I can look outside myself and notice how my rational brain time and time again gets disregarded by impulse, while knowing what I know. It's like observing someone else.
I have clear memories and notes over how (as you describe) my mood was better and I felt healthier, yet an immediate impulse with a fleeting effect takes priority, while knowing it will only prolong the problem.
But there only so much parents can do AND there is this thing called 'sense of belonging' that influence kids to be as much as their peers
The fact that many find it to be so inconceivable to go from having the internet 24/7 to having the internet for your entire workday and any time you spend in a public place with internet, really points out how psychologically dependent we've collectively become on the web.
They have at least the first two, and tobacco companies have, or historically have had, all three. Job titles are slightly different, but basic functions are the same.
Yes, it is.
> . Go visit a vineyard, distillery, or a brewery. People may be trying to improve the quality of the product, but they are not relentlessly trying to increase "user drinking minutes" or any metric like that.
Yes, that's exactly what the marketing arms of the firms involved, and the advertising agencies they employ, are trying to do. (There's some actual product-development involvement there, too; light and ultra-light beers were invented pretty much exactly to maximize user drinking minutes.)
Half the craft microbreweries are owned by Ab-Inbev and the likes.
Also, I am not aware of the craft microbreweries owned by the big companies engaging in the sort of abusive behaviours that the main brands engage in, are you?
Needless to say, it's a complicated picture.
However because addiction is a known factor in their industry, I think they are kept somewhat in check, if only for legal reasons. I don't think Internet companies have any such qualms, so I would agree that they basically are trying to 'weaponize' this addiction.
I was wondering this too after reading the "call to action" -- do I get to keep my data plan? (Did the author keep his?) I assume the answer is supposed to be no, but that might be good to note explicitly as this wouldn't be nearly as life-changing if taken a little too literally. (Not to be too nitpicky -- the article makes great points!)
My general heuristic is that anything with an infinite feed is designed to suck you in—so avoid apps that provide them, as much as is feasible for your lifestyle.
Having personally been on the fringe of "high functioning" alcoholism on a few occasions, I don't think the comparison works. Alcoholism is inherently negative. Drinking alcohol in moderation may not be extremely harmful, but is still not necessarily great. While I certainly won't tell anyone how to live their life, cutting out alcohol use is still a "good" thing. Even if it's not a problem for you. Edit: I also still drink periodically because I enjoy it.
Internet use is not inherently negative. "Addiction" to the Internet may not be great, but is not necessarily all bad. The tricky thing about Internet use is that it's generally not something with negative social connotations. So even if someone is "binge consuming", one is not likely to feel negative social pressure because of it.
So I ultimately agree that he shouldn't be touting no Internet as a solution for all people, but I can't get behind the Alcoholism comparison.
I just don't know about that, even though I know you're trying to be fair and reasonable. Even ignoring the reported possible health benefits of alcohol in moderation, if it's slightly bad for your physical health it can still be a net positive in your life.
But if you look at extreme overuse of alcohol, there is nothing good about it. Pretty cut and dry.
Extreme "overuse" of the Internet - may have negatives attached, but is still in that "debatable" territory. True impact (positive or negative) depends on what the person is spending their time on, depends on the nature of their work and personal relationships, depends on what they have access to away from home, etc. etc. Even the definition of "extreme" or "overuse" is entirely relative and depends on the specifics of the situation.
I also don't drink[0], but when I did I saw it as a positive thing as it got me outside and I was able to socialise with people when I was drinking. That was all just a state of mind though - there isn't anything magical in alcohol that makes you more confident (other than removing
Since I've quit I've made many new friends and my relationships with them are much deeper than any of my previous 'drinking buddies'.
[0] I occasionally drink kvass which has very small amount of alcohol (usually <1%). It is more natural (not pasteurised and filtered like most alcoholic drinks), so I wouldn't be surprised if it also has the same or greater health benefits.
And I've had friends that I've just lost to online games for a long spell.
I'm not convinced that causality is not inverted there.
If there is a distinction between those things and internet use, you haven't made it clear.
See, I'm not so sure about that. I spent probably 7-8 years without alcohol. It was never that I drank often, but my ex really had issues with it along with mental health issues. Part of making a good environment for him was to keep alcohol out of the house, and I couldn't really afford to be that impaired.
After we broke up, I started drinking casually. Its been years, and I still don't drink much, but it is a unique occasional enjoyment. I neither have pressure to drink nor real consequences from it - after all, I'd be spending the money on other entertainment anyway.
It was much harder to not be part of social media networks, honestly. No one cares if I drink, but folks will simply not talk to others if they don't share the social network.
How many of us didn't at least go through a phase of abusive use around the internet, or games, or something like that? When you add that having an FB account and the like is often seen as ultimately normal, it starts to add a lot of pressure for some people. As someone who has always hated something like FB, it's been disturbing to see it sink hooks into so many.
That said, I saw it coming because when I was a teenager I was hooked on mIrc for a while!
SO no... don't cut your tether, you're either naturally immune or like me developed an immune system. You should recognize though, that plenty of people aren't going to have such a successful outcome playing with that particular fire.
Alcohol-ic so Internet-ic
What good advice would any viewer give to a life I just described? How could anyone (I) separate the Internet from a home life when being off that grid for a weekend could cause catastrophic failure without the dev leader their to fix it?
I've learned that I am very sensitive to physical spaces in my life, and I have made an effort to set "space boundaries" for myself to help with my tendencies. For example, I got rid of my desktop computer, replaced it with a laptop, and got rid of my desk in my room. It was calling me every day to sit down and use my computer for hours on end. It's been that way since childhood - the habit is deeply ingrained.
Now, I use my room for relaxation and I try to keep it that way. I'm not perfect, but when I have to work from home I make sure I don't do it in my room. I sit at the dining room table most times, and that has become a "work space" for me. I've trained myself to not work in my room, and, while I still use my computer and the internet in there, I only use it for personal things.
This solution is still in flux for me. So far it has been successful in turning my room into a relaxation space, which was a real lack in my life before. I hope that helps!
Also, more/better automation and fallbacks, an employee to cover all these extra shifts you're working, or trade out time with a colleague where you cover for each other which brings you back to having two dev leaders.
Either the business is successful and you can hire another 2nd leader; or can merge with a competitor to gain the 2nd leader and more resources of some sort (you have too many customers too little infra, so look for a company with underutilized infra). Or it's actually not that successful and is using your life 24/7 as life support for itself and it's past time to cut it loose.
I suggest for people who have a serious problem, to try out time-managers and site-blockers.
When I was going through a highly unproductive phase, I used ColdTurkey. The software's not too good and if you're really craving for a fix, you'll find a way to get past it. But, for the regular procrastinator it does wonders for productivity.
Don't be rash and cut out one of the most important utilities there is just because you're having some issues.
Do be intelligent and work around the issue.
I agree. As for me, I'm a remote worker but I rent a desk in a coworking space, which means I can use their high speed internet for hours every day. That's a lot of time to acquire information and do chores.
So the consequence of not having internet at home would be, basically, that I'm offline between 7 PM and 9 AM, or whatever. When I've lived without internet before, I've spent a couple of hours on weekend days in cafes checking my websites.
It's not necessarily a horrible austerity. For me, I've always experienced an offline home as very relaxing, nice, and peaceful. (Of course there are many factors which can make it impractical, e.g. family.)
Perhaps it is my young age, but all the people I know are effectively lepers if they're not, atleast, connected to the internet.
I was rash in assuming everyone was similar. Now that I think of it, there are older people that wouldn't miss a beat if they took time away from the internet.
- Install a nanny software to block time-sink sites at specific time (chrome nanny was an awesome tool)
- Schedule appointments in advance with your friends/relatives to keep the relationships active
- Enroll in social events to be around with people and work for a cause you care
- Go for group studies/writing workshops/book clubs etc to rekindle your passion of reading/writing
There're a hundred other hacks which you can use to ensure you're productive/social !
Apparently, people who tried to eat less were also more successful in losing weight.
Cutting off home internet is the option of less eating. Seems more drastic, but is actually more tuned to how our brains work.
Your suggestion is similar to doing more exercise. It can also work, but it is just a whole lot more work and cognitive overhead.
Besides, its not like the author is asking people to go off the grid.
Or you can just use the Internet responsibly, like an adult.
How old is the author of this article, 16?
killing the home internet is an obvious click bait.
I spend much more time in the office, because the Internet connection works. But that makes me use office time to live my online life, instead of doing company work.
I killed my Facebook account 3 months ago, and switched to a dumb phone (from a Pixel phone ;-) since the beginning of the year. Now I'm rocking a webOS phone and no IM account except for hangouts which I check on my computer when I want. I no longer reach my pocket to check for message or anything when I enjoy my meal or go travel somewhere. There is no push or anything I can play when I wake up in the middle of the night to keep me up. Also, looking up and navigating to places by instinct sucks, and is fun at the same time. I no longer have any idea how highly rated any place is before I walk in, and I had plenty of surprises since then. Just last weekend I traveled somewhere and interacted with the locals because the only place in town was closed - I wouldn't have if I had a smartphone to "OK Google." Without the smartphone, I now carry a big, beaten up mirrorless camera in by bag, so I am more or less have to do more "proper" photography now, instead of disposable instagram stuff to get likes (this I have to credit the Pixel, it was an incredible camera for how thin it is). Learning photography with a camera is super fun, although the end result seems to be the same.
I'm an immigrant. Other than the Trump stuff my liberal friends were talking about here, there was another alternative flow of stressful/irrelevant celebrities news from my home country. I realized that without Facebook, I actually extremely rarely check or care what's going on, about who is fucking who and who is getting fat. The amount of stuff getting in my brain is dramatically reduced. I thought I would miss Facebook, and it turned out I don't. The benefits far, far exceeded the negatives.
Without Facebook and a constant smartphone influence to consume, I write way more, about what I like and what actually matters to me, not to get likes from my friends and to appear intelligent. I get downvotes from Hacker News when I say something stupid, which I don't get from Facebook. It's alright :) I honestly feel I learn everyday.
I get so much better sleep, way less stress and I have so much free time since then. It was like an enlightenment for me to be taking control of my life. I will try to cut back the internet also as the author suggested. Now excuse me, I have to get back to work on my writing.
I generally try to stay off the web after work unless there's something I NEED to do after hours (right now I'm just finishing a database upgrade) and that easy enough. Killing Facebook ended up being the real cure for me. Any other sites I check I'm generally done after about 15 minutes...for the day. Facebook is just constant though. It's just such an easy go-to. Like the author of this post, I find myself reading books a lot more (for a really interesting read, check out The Undoing Project btw).
I see some other comments on here being critical of the decision but the real key is just identifying an acknowledging when you have a real, legitimate time sink problem. When you do and you can get to the bottom of it, it's like a weight off of your shoulders. Some people are better at moderation than others. Others are much better at quitting cold turkey.
When you really identify how much time you're wasting per day / week of something that's in short supply, especially when there are things you keep wishing you could find time for...the decision to do something like this gets really...really easy.
And once you do it, it feels pretty great.
I heard about it on Freakonomics. I will check it out as I have time now ;-)
How can you stay in tech and make products that are relevant to the market and be such a tech Luddite? It is like RMS or all those people on slashdot who boo everything new. Nobody who is anybody doing anything interesting listens to windbags who don't understand the current market. The world is going to move past you, leaving you and your skills increasingly irrelevant.
I don't understand how people who work in an industry that changes so fast can be such luddites...
I mean yes I get it... blah blah blah Facebook is making us all go to hell in a hand basket and back when I was a kid we all played in the freeway instead of used our smartphones or whatever but seriously. Change is constant. Fight it and become obsolete.
Which phones are webOS? I thought that it was essentially dead.
I mean, I get it, you have to rebalance, which sometimes calls for going overboard. Just don't get too excited about it being the One True Way. 50 years from now?
I remember the days before the internet and mobile phones. They weren't better (well, apart from being young and fit and knowing I was immortal, obviously). We like these things for a reason.
I wish there were good software solutions, like a way to schedule a blacklist of websites on your phone and computer that you simply couldn't get around. Almost everything I've seen is set up to block access for children, or is easily bypassed. I feel like it's an area that could be a huge benefit to a lot of people.
Completely killing your home internet is extreme. I'd have to change careers, hobbies, and it would even interfere with friendships. But there's no reason why it has to be all or nothing.
For similar reasons, I've had trouble detangling from Facebook. 10 years ago, if a friend was getting married they'd send out announcements -- now they just "announce" it on Facebook, and if you don't log in that week, you don't find out about it.
So part of the reason it's hard to disconnect is because the previous methods of staying in touch have atrophied in favor of these new, more toxic systems.
Nevertheless, I'm trying a couple of things (with varied success -- I really do much better cold turkey):
- Trying to reward myself with internet time after I score enough points in Habitica (aka HabitRPG)
- Trying to turn off the modem at a certain time of night like 10 pm (I find I sleep better too -- might be coincidence but I've noticed the difference many times)
Ultimately what would help me would be a pay-per-use internet plan versus an "always on" internet plan. If I know that my plan fee increased after 20 hours / month, I'd have access when I needed it, but then I'd have to "save up" for special occasions like streaming a show. As of yet I haven't found an external limit that doesn't also make life too logistically challenging.
Pay-per-use would is an interesting idea, but if you live with other people it gets a little more complicated.
The best tool I've found is an app called Self Control. It puts rules into your hosts file and either blacklists certain websites or blocks all of them and whitelists the ones you want. It uses an external timeserver so you can't get around it by changing your computer clock, and it runs regular checks to make sure you don't just edit your hosts file yourself. It's really pretty good. And in theory you could set up scripts that would start up certain blocks at a scheduled time every day. The one huge problem though is that it's Mac only.
I don't think there's a way to completely fix the issue externally, but having some powerful tools for limiting yourself would go a long way in making it easier.
> You probably don’t, and maybe it’s time to look in the mirror and be honest with yourself.
That's where I stopped reading as obviously this article is not directed at me.
Unless there is a way to troubleshoot and fix remote servers in the middle of the night without internet.
You seem to have dismissed the former entirely with "that doesn't seem sensible to me at all", and here leave it as only a last resort. I don't believe that's a useful way to view it. Use the tools you have available to modify your behavior.
You will need more willpower than what most people have, and so the problem remains.
Now what?
A bad habit I can fall into as easily as breathing is a problem.
A bad habit I have to indulge in some effort to perform, puts me in the position of needing willpower to indulge in it!
Please don't do ad hominem; it is not conducive to a healthy discussion.
But LOVE my audio books and podcasts and google maps and digital note pad and dictionary and wikipedia... And never feel guilty about those things.
But sure, better to get rid of the data connection than the smarts.
Fun (semi-related) story, I once had someone steal my mac power cable on a bus ride from Quito to Banos, Tungurahua in Ecuador http://bit.ly/2olVpLT and had to install putty on an internet computer from 2003 to get into a server to reboot a process. That was when I realized that Internet access was no longer a luxury for me.
Keep two or three parallel lists for different kind of internet use (e.g. research, message a friend, check for news about x, buy y).
Keep writing tools nearby always, even if it's just a pen and a scrap of paper in your pocket.
How do you solve that, by carrying a notebook and pen with you everywhere?
And before someone weighs in with the inevitable "but virtual keyboards are totally cool, bro": I get it, they can be quick, but no they're not. Not when you switch between languages, not when you use a lot of technical or uncommon terms, and not when you appreciate a low typo-oops-correction rate.