"If I told you, 'I went into my backyard, I made this pill. It's amazing. It's free. If you take it, it'll actually improve your health, make you feel better, improve your performance at work, improve your grades, boost your immunity,' you'd be like, 'Sign me up. I'll take that tomorrow.'" It turns out that's what social connection is. Just a little connection can go a long way in keeping us healthy.
People you don't know are boring. Most people are full of surprises, unique insights, traits, and perspectives, if given enough time in the right setting. An increasing rarity at this point.
Free in terms of monetary costs but not free in terms of absolute costs for example time and emotional depletion.
For some people they see social connections as more risks that they can possibly lose something and be hurt if things don't work out or they are rejected.
And in general social connections require some type of mutual benefit so it is necessary to "give" as you "get".
Then another layer are that social connections in general need a reason. Is it a club, hobby, job, etc. which takes time and energy.
These "costs" are not universal and vary from person to person.
All these things can be overcome, but it is also important to look at the other side because the reason that people prefer just buying a pill to fix their problems is that the above mentioned costs for them are greater than the price of alternatives like medication, social media, gaming, etc.
Surely there have been relationships in your life that were net positive? Was your mother caring and loving when you were young? Did you ever have a best friend? Ever been in love?
The easiest way to have a positive relationship is to just be the good friend you’d want for yourself. The thoughtful lover you’d want to be with, the sort of sibling you wish you had.
Doing these things costs you nothing. You might even find some positive emotions when you do them.
Hear me out: shorter work week (4 day week), work life balance, and living where there is more density and public transit to reduce social friction. Humans are social creatures, they must have time and opportunity to be social.
We've done the line go up thing, and it isn't working out great. Maybe we could try something else?
Practically almost all people got highly manipulated into having no hobby's or interests in their free time. They will find no use for a 4 day week not will they see any advantages.
"We've tried nothing and we're all out of options." The data on 4 Day Week trials has been positive in almost all cases [1], across many countries, same with remote work. We should try it if we care, I just don't think we care at a system level.
Like rapidly declining fertility rates, there is enough will to complain, no will to change anything (imho, based on observations and the data). Maybe things need to get worse before they get better, I think we're just arguing over how bad the situation will need to get before change is made (structural demographics, socioeconomics, etc).
It’s eye-opening to watch management ignore incredibly obvious methodological errors that clearly render the entire PowerPoint they’re looking at so suspect that it’s worthless. And it happens just about constantly.
They’re either dumber than a slightly-bright 8th grade science student, or simply don’t care about the substance of trying to make decisions based on good data, but just the appearance, the theater, of doing so. Either way, outcome’s the same.
Whatever you do, don’t point it out. They will not listen, because they don’t care.
If you had to guess, how much of that time is used on social media apps?
Even playing videogames is a better hobby than doom-scrolling, or going for a walk/run, that's free. Maybe reading a book? I have friends who plow through 2-3 books a week, all from the local library. Cooking?
I don't think people are as poor as you indicate. Everyone just takes their gramme of soma whenever they can.
Yes, there are examples of things people can do for free
But what they want to do may be different
For instance it's very difficult to do any kind of creative craft if you don't have a budget. Woodworking, metalworking, or anything like that
Even videogames is kind of expensive, you need a console or computer and then games can be pricey as well
And yes, people may genuinely prefer to watch videos about working on cars rather than reading a book, when they would really rather be working on their own car but can't afford to
Fwiw, my local library rents newly-released video games, and you can get a Nintendo Switch cheaply.
I know a LOT of poor people who fix their own cars, so I don't buy that argument much at all.
I asked about TikTok and doom-scrolling, not watching youtube to educate yourself. People spend HOURS on that mess every day. And costs them a phone every 2-ish years and a service plan, so that isn't even remotely free.
> Costs them a phone every 2-ish years and a service plan, so that isn't even remotely free
This doesn't seem relevant, honestly. People more or less need a phone to function in society nowadays, it's not really optional and it becomes more and more required all the time. So owning a phone and having a plan for it is more or less a sunk cost for almost everyone already
I suspect you will quibble about this, phones aren't actually required, people could live without them.. but more and more you cannot participate in society without one. More and more you need mobile 2FA to interact with your banking, government services etc. Hell some restaurants you can't even see the menu without a phone to view QR codes on. Owning a phone is "optional" but the cost of not having one is high enough that it is basically ridiculous to suggest people should save money by not having one
So if we take that a phone and plan is already a baseline, it's not really an extra expense for people to scroll feeds
Meanwhile a hobby that requires access to specialized tools is an extra expense, and sometimes a big one
Most poor people I've ever known (including myself, years ago) fix their own cars out of necessity because it's cheaper than going to a mechanic, not as a hobby
You said:
> And yes, people may genuinely prefer to watch videos about working on cars rather than reading a book, when they would really rather be working on their own car but can't afford to
And then said:
> Most poor people I've ever known (including myself, years ago) fix their own cars out of necessity because it's cheaper than going to a mechanic, not as a hobby
These seem at odds with each other.
People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money, not because they don't have any.
I'm not trying to argue with you in the sense that one of us absolutely right and the other is not, I just can't see it.
There is a difference between "working on your car" as a hobby versus "working on your car" out of necessity because you need a working vehicle to get to work, get groceries, etc
Working on a car as a hobby is generally expensive, buying nice parts and building something awesome to drive. Maybe drive on a track, even.
Poor people working on a car are usually doing it out of necessity to keep it running.
> People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money, not because they don't have any.
I mostly disagree. Yes, financial literacy is a problem, but most poor people are poor because necessities like rent, groceries, a vehicle, insurance, etc are all expensive and they do not have in-demand skills to earn significantly more income than their expenses
"People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money" is an attitude that goes hand in hand with statements like "If people just stopped buying their daily coffee they wouldn't be poor"
But actually poor people can't afford a daily coffee in the first place
I did my amateur radio license in Canada about 15 years ago, which involves also getting to know the older members of the local radio club. Their attitudes were quite incredible - very normal working class dudes with tens of thousands a year to spend on any serious hobby. (Like spending thousands on amplifiers, then thousands shipping them to pacific islands and up mountains etc.) They would also have cottages with arrays of recreational vehicles of different sorts and so on.
You can also see this in the pinball community as there is an age boundary when it drops off entirely.
It is amazing how quickly the normal expected standard of life in north america has taken a nosedive while the property values have exploded. Europe is even worse.
There's two dimensions to consider here: many hobbies require monetary investment, and many hobbies require quite a bit of space
You basically cannot have woodworking for instance as your hobby if you live in a small apartment
Yes, maybe there's some kind of Maker-space you can go to, but there may not be. That also just creates a barrier to entry because now you need to deal with a membership to the space, travel time, etc. And you still need space at home to store finished projects too!
So people are pretty restricted in the activities they actually can do if they don't have money or space to do things
It’d be nice to have at least one actual day off every week instead of a day of catching up on all the must-do personal and family work that you had to defer during the work week and then another day that’s half more of that and half fretting that the work week is about to start again and you haven’t gotten any relaxation in.
Definitely should be a balance between individualism and collectivism. Covid drove us all the way to one extreme, and now some people seem to crave the opposite.
But it is also interesting to see that there seems to be a wide spectrum in office cultures post Covid. Some jobs still feel like they are in the thick of it, while others are back to 5 days (or even more if you work for one of Elon's companies)
The whole remote vs in office in somewhat a tired argument, so lets move a level up to power structures: old folks in power, both government and corporate. ~2M people in the US 55+ die every year, ~5k per day. ~4M people turn 18. ~4.1M Boomers are retiring per year, ~11k per day. This demographic transition is the opportunity to move the zeitgeist around social interaction to improve outcomes for the human at scale (imho). Like bankruptcy, change happens slowly, and then all of a sudden.
Work must get done, but re-evaluating what work looks like in the service of the human (because why are we even living if it is just to work) should be a priority if loneliness is killing us (and more time at work is not the solution imho). It's just a job, you are just a replaceable cog, most people just need a check, and coworkers are not your friends (in most cases). Collectivism is coming together as a community, not for a meaningless job and org.
(n=1, I structured my life so I can take only remote jobs, so I can be close geographically to the people who matter to me, enrich my life, and I want to spend time with, but this does not scale [or rather, we should figure out how to make it scale: https://paulgraham.com/ds.html])
>living where there is more density and public transit to reduce social friction.
Anecdata, most people seem to move out to less dense and more private parts of the country as they get older and accrue more agency in their lives. I imagine they get tired of people.
If we're suggesting utopian ideas that won't happen in the US, I'd personally love if we had the ability to turn our jobs part time like they do in the Netherlands.
I love writing software. I 'like' my job, but the 40h / wk 9-5 can be a drag. As I get older and more financially secure, I'd love the ability to cut my working days down to 2-3d / wk. My father has a job he works 2d / wk remote, and I'm not even sure he wants to retire anymore. Why would he?
If I had a coding job I could work a couple days a week remote? I'm not sure I'd ever retire either.
That's a much better option than the "working/retired" binary. I'm sure there's opportunities out there for that, but they seem to be few and far between.
Honestly, my plan is to establish myself as a valuable contributor, then transition to a part time contractor / consultant.
The danger once you become fully financially independent is that neither you or companies are willing to compromise on your working terms and you retire by default.
I'm sure I could happily work on saas or open source projects the rest of my life, but it would be nice if I could trade some of that energy and enthusiasm in on work that pays consistently.
> The danger once you become fully financially independent is that neither you or companies are willing to compromise on your working terms and you retire by default.
Never share your situation and security. Your plan is sound otherwise, just say "I need more time for family" or whatever will trigger the response that gets you this outcome. As long as they need you, they'll accommodate.
That'll make us less lonely? To be clear, I treat my coworkers with respect and kindness, but I don't put myself in a position where I get close to them or look to them for support or my emotional well being.
They are perfectly fine people, but I have no desire to become comfortable enough with them that I feel less lonely. That implies some sort of intimacy, where I rely on or confide in them, it's being vulnerable really, and I keep my work life professional and my personal life private.
I hope this is sarcasm. I would hypothesize people at the office rarely are the reference group one would enjoy spending time with. Just give people more days off regularly so they would have time to socialize with whom they actually have something to connect them.
Always funny to see the kind of prestige the Surgeon General has in the US, and the weight that statements like this carry (like the one on smoking, too). Here in NL I can't think of anyone in a similar position. (I'm not knocking it at all, to be clear)
Most people probably know the Surgeon General as that guy who always slaps his warning message that nobody reads on beer bottles, cigarette packs, etc.
I find HN more depressing than other social media. It's more focused on money, more anonymous (which isn't necessarily bad, but harder to connect with people), but mostly it's by far the most arrogant. I became a lot happier when I stopped showing up here regularly.
In my case a local makerspace to play board games. I've made a few friends that I hang out with outside the space -- sometimes I host events in my home, sometimes we go out to get dinner or whatever.
Literally pick any half-organized activity. They’ll be posted all over the Web (sorry, you will probably need a Facebook account), your city’s website may have lists of organizations, and there are probably some fliers posted at the library (and the library may run a few gatherings themselves!)
Our (the states) reliance on car central culture is killing us in more ways than one.
I grew up in the suburbs and you could easily go a week without substantially interacting with people.
Jump in your metal capsule, drive 7 mins to Walmart, walk quietly across the huge parking lot, get your item and return home.
Contrasted with dense urban city with public transit, you will serendipitously bump into people and be forced to interact more with society, even if it is just exchanging pleasantries.
This is killing ourselves socially, not to mention how much cars cause physical death.
I assure you that living in the city you can easily go about your business for a week or more without talking to anyone if you so choose. People who don't know each other don't interact with each other in the city.
I loved living in a city more than I like driving around the suburbs, but suburbs exist and you can't wave a magic wand and turn them into cities. Being mad at cars isn't a solution, they're necessary for how much of the country is laid out.
That 'dense urban landscape' basically does not exist outside of NYC in the US. I'm not sure I'd choose it as a forever home anyway.
For me personally, when looking for a 'forever home' I'm starting to look at smaller college towns. They often have a walkable core around the college, you have access to continuing education opportunities and a college library.
While yes, living around a gaggle of college age kids can be tiring as you get older, a local university fosters a lot of intellectual vibrancy that you wouldn't get without it. You can always hang out with the older folks who teach the classes and serve the college age population.
I only wish that is true, beyond the one close friend I made. There are gaps in my social skillset and mentality that makes it difficult for me to achieve.
Just sign to a gym. Not the pumping iron ones. Sign up to a martial arts gym, a dance studio, an art school. Anything that is more of a social activity, and that YOU LIKE. If you find a group of people that share the same niche interest that you genuinely have, you make friends. My personal advice to the engineer type of guys, is go to a BJJ gym if you want to practice something that is extremely challenging both physically and intellectually. The number of techniques is virtually infinite, and you can become good by simply memorizing more tech than your average jock. So, to make male friends (but not only that) go to a BJJ gym. If you want to meet girls, go to a dance studio. Both skills will be really valuable in terms of physical and mental health throughout your life, apart from the friends you'll make.
Volunteer work. I volunteer with one group (and have been doing this for almost 8 years now). I can't believe how many friends I have just from this one activity.
Neighbors. Just start talking to them. Have them over. We do this for football (NFL) games or just for dinner.
Surprisingly (or maybe not). Kpop concerts. My wife is very into this music scene. She has definitely made friends she keeps in touch with (friends she met at the concert). I went to one and I couldn't believe how many fans went alone and formed their own groups at the concert to watch/dance. And this is for all ages (I saw 80 year olds down to the teenagers). Edit: I should note that the concerts she has been to did not cost an arm and a leg.
Not just US albeit about US we have interesting data.
I've read that the average american adult went from spending 11 hours per week with friends and family few decades ago to 4+ in 2010s, and sub 3 after covid.
Loneliness is the big sickness of our modern IT times.
That's a term that I use, for the type of social structure that most societies have[0]. Bit different from what he's written.
It's not just a problem for young folks. Older folks are having huge problems with loneliness.
I won't speak to how it affects our physical well-being, but it sure does affect our mental well-being, and our mental health can definitely inform our physical health.
I'm always an advocate of engaging in volunteer or nonprofit work. It definitely has its issues, but does wonders for loneliness.
Most of the folks that hang out here, have extremely valuable skills, that could do wonders for NPOs.
> The reason for anxiety and pessimism is because people are feeling more lonely.
Might anxiety cause loneliness? Seems pretty logical.
> More than half the people in America feel lonely, and the numbers are actually the greatest among the young people, young boys and girls. And this not only has implications in mental health, but it also has implications in physical health. It increases the risk for heart disease and premature death. Vivek also mentions that loneliness is a mental health issue.
The issue has come up before: Mightn't bad physical health, and especially bad mental health, cause loneliness?
It's certainly plausible that causation happens in both directions; I expect there's more than zero of that. But which direction is the bigger one? I have no idea. And if someone wants to say this with the authority of the Surgeon General, I want them to bring citations that actually prove causality.
I'm not just introverted, I am rather extreme ... to the point where I've wondered if I might have schizoid personality disorder (characterized by apathy towards forming close personal relationships).
I don't dislike being around people, I'm no misantrhope, but when I do engage in social activities I'm usually literally bed-ridden for a day or two after. I'm not even exaggerating. It is a level of fatigue that is reminiscent of the symptoms of clinical depression (but it's not depression because the cause and effect is well observed over 40 years of trying to figure myself out). When this happens I have zero motivation, zero energy, zero desire to do anything but sit on my fat unproductive lazy ass and be a complete vegetable and this will last for a day two depending on the intensity of the social interaction (if I go on vacation and disrupt my routine for a couple of weeks, I'm looking at upwards of a week to recover).
Introverts commonly describe the need "re-charge" after social interaction, and that's clearly what this is. It's just dialled up to 11 for me.
And this happens even if I had a great time with people that I really care about. Even date night with my wife will do this to me.
Every time I hear about the loneliness epidemic I wonder how universally applicable this is: to what degree are introverts susceptible to the negative effects of loneliness? To what degree do other introverts feel lonely? And are some people (like me) just wired so differently in the brain that we're "immune" to loneliness.
I mean I've gone months without talking to a single other human being. The data suggests that I should have all sorts of symptoms as a result, including "cabin fever" etc. But I've never experienced that. I certainly don't feel depressed when this happens. If anything I'm more productive and energetic and happy versus when I'm interacting with people regularly. I'm not even sure that I know what loneliness feels like or if I'm capable of experiencing it.
This is very personal and subjective. I'm mostly writing it just to see if other introverts feel the same or differently. If the "epidemic" is an "extrovert's epidemic" or I'm just, for lack of a better term, completely fucked in the head with an actual mental disorder that prevents me from ever feeling the slightest desire to connect with others, even following prolonged periods of isolation.
That's very interesting and I wonder if it is related to your physical fitness? Social interaction and going out does require more from your body and I wonder if this is something you can train for like you train your muscles
I've never experienced that impact from interacting with other people, but I have described myself as being "wired to be alone."
If you think about it, it's not that unusual throughout history. Sailors, cowboys, shepherds, ranchers, prospectors, hunters etc., have been jobs done by those who preferred to be by themselves.
I remember watching a documentary about the first Iditarod. After the winner got to the finish line, there was an extravagant meal and cameras and news reporters. But the poor guy was so used to being alone with his dogs that he wasn't able to eat a thing with all those people around.
I'm in my sixties and can compare my life in seventies with the life of my kids (in late twenties now) and the life of kids nowadays. The obvious difference is that people nowadays don't have to interact with too many different people. They can totally ignore most of the world without any consequences, but this wasn't the case when I grew up. I had the myriad of relatives, cousins etc you had to interact with. In lot of cases this was awkward for me as introverted nerd, but I learned a lot from it. Without this need and practice I can totally see myself being lonely single in later life, not as father of three, grandfather of two, member of several communities etc I am now.
Lets autisticly cut to the chase, this article is 100% about 1 paragraph.
Solution: Social Interaction
What happened about 50 years ago which REDUCED social interaction significantly? There's only 3 answers. All decisions by politicians with a negative consequence to social interaction per year. It will continue to trend worse. Social media, which only got invented recently, has no bearing on this conversation. Sorry, I wont be able to say what these 3 are here. The name of these will only serve to get me labelled *ist. I've got the ism, whatever.
Why is nobody allowed to discuss those 3 answers? Reddit committed suicide is now far behind Linkedin having overtly banned and pushed over 50% of their users off their site. Why is it that these 3 answers are bannable offences, but also not listed in the reddit rules? Well I asked... they dont want to boost these topics by putting them in the rules. So instead you get banned for violating a rule you didnt know was a rule? They unban you like as if they are doing you a favour.
Why is it governments have sunk billions if not trillions into trying to fix this problem... but refuse to look at the 3 answers? Are they willfully blind? Ignorance due to censorship is not an excuse.
You can have quadrillion $ into 'community development' and 'social infrastructure' but you are literally throwing that money into a pit of fire. It hasnt worked for decades... completely insane to keep trying. But taxpayer money grows on trees i guess.
Why do politicians not do the extremely unpopular, stupid to do, yet necessary changes? political suicide sure. In this case, probably assassinated.
Why does it have to become a crisis? Only after its a crisis will people listen to a fix, but we do have a social crisis.
The fundamental reason democracy needs actual free speech and no censorship is because sometimes you gotta say what's unpopular. Sometimes you even need to do it. But when you are in a situation where you even self-censor to avoid theoretical censorship, the discussion never happens.
101 comments
[ 0.20 ms ] story [ 191 ms ] threadFree in terms of monetary costs but not free in terms of absolute costs for example time and emotional depletion.
For some people they see social connections as more risks that they can possibly lose something and be hurt if things don't work out or they are rejected.
And in general social connections require some type of mutual benefit so it is necessary to "give" as you "get".
Then another layer are that social connections in general need a reason. Is it a club, hobby, job, etc. which takes time and energy.
These "costs" are not universal and vary from person to person.
All these things can be overcome, but it is also important to look at the other side because the reason that people prefer just buying a pill to fix their problems is that the above mentioned costs for them are greater than the price of alternatives like medication, social media, gaming, etc.
The easiest way to have a positive relationship is to just be the good friend you’d want for yourself. The thoughtful lover you’d want to be with, the sort of sibling you wish you had.
Doing these things costs you nothing. You might even find some positive emotions when you do them.
We've done the line go up thing, and it isn't working out great. Maybe we could try something else?
Practically almost all people got highly manipulated into having no hobby's or interests in their free time. They will find no use for a 4 day week not will they see any advantages.
Like rapidly declining fertility rates, there is enough will to complain, no will to change anything (imho, based on observations and the data). Maybe things need to get worse before they get better, I think we're just arguing over how bad the situation will need to get before change is made (structural demographics, socioeconomics, etc).
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39992783 (citations)
They’re either dumber than a slightly-bright 8th grade science student, or simply don’t care about the substance of trying to make decisions based on good data, but just the appearance, the theater, of doing so. Either way, outcome’s the same.
Whatever you do, don’t point it out. They will not listen, because they don’t care.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42342203 ("HN: Tokyo government gives workers 4-day workweek to boost fertility, family time")
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/06/asia/tokyo-government-4-day-w... ("CNN: Tokyo government gives workers 4-day workweek to boost fertility, family time")
An astonishing number of people live paycheck to paycheck and basically any hobby costs at least some money
Even playing videogames is a better hobby than doom-scrolling, or going for a walk/run, that's free. Maybe reading a book? I have friends who plow through 2-3 books a week, all from the local library. Cooking?
I don't think people are as poor as you indicate. Everyone just takes their gramme of soma whenever they can.
But what they want to do may be different
For instance it's very difficult to do any kind of creative craft if you don't have a budget. Woodworking, metalworking, or anything like that
Even videogames is kind of expensive, you need a console or computer and then games can be pricey as well
And yes, people may genuinely prefer to watch videos about working on cars rather than reading a book, when they would really rather be working on their own car but can't afford to
I know a LOT of poor people who fix their own cars, so I don't buy that argument much at all.
I asked about TikTok and doom-scrolling, not watching youtube to educate yourself. People spend HOURS on that mess every day. And costs them a phone every 2-ish years and a service plan, so that isn't even remotely free.
This doesn't seem relevant, honestly. People more or less need a phone to function in society nowadays, it's not really optional and it becomes more and more required all the time. So owning a phone and having a plan for it is more or less a sunk cost for almost everyone already
I suspect you will quibble about this, phones aren't actually required, people could live without them.. but more and more you cannot participate in society without one. More and more you need mobile 2FA to interact with your banking, government services etc. Hell some restaurants you can't even see the menu without a phone to view QR codes on. Owning a phone is "optional" but the cost of not having one is high enough that it is basically ridiculous to suggest people should save money by not having one
So if we take that a phone and plan is already a baseline, it's not really an extra expense for people to scroll feeds
Meanwhile a hobby that requires access to specialized tools is an extra expense, and sometimes a big one
Most poor people I've ever known (including myself, years ago) fix their own cars out of necessity because it's cheaper than going to a mechanic, not as a hobby
You said: > And yes, people may genuinely prefer to watch videos about working on cars rather than reading a book, when they would really rather be working on their own car but can't afford to
And then said: > Most poor people I've ever known (including myself, years ago) fix their own cars out of necessity because it's cheaper than going to a mechanic, not as a hobby
These seem at odds with each other.
People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money, not because they don't have any.
I'm not trying to argue with you in the sense that one of us absolutely right and the other is not, I just can't see it.
Working on a car as a hobby is generally expensive, buying nice parts and building something awesome to drive. Maybe drive on a track, even.
Poor people working on a car are usually doing it out of necessity to keep it running.
> People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money, not because they don't have any.
I mostly disagree. Yes, financial literacy is a problem, but most poor people are poor because necessities like rent, groceries, a vehicle, insurance, etc are all expensive and they do not have in-demand skills to earn significantly more income than their expenses
"People are generally poor because they were never taught how to manage money" is an attitude that goes hand in hand with statements like "If people just stopped buying their daily coffee they wouldn't be poor"
But actually poor people can't afford a daily coffee in the first place
I did my amateur radio license in Canada about 15 years ago, which involves also getting to know the older members of the local radio club. Their attitudes were quite incredible - very normal working class dudes with tens of thousands a year to spend on any serious hobby. (Like spending thousands on amplifiers, then thousands shipping them to pacific islands and up mountains etc.) They would also have cottages with arrays of recreational vehicles of different sorts and so on.
You can also see this in the pinball community as there is an age boundary when it drops off entirely.
It is amazing how quickly the normal expected standard of life in north america has taken a nosedive while the property values have exploded. Europe is even worse.
There's two dimensions to consider here: many hobbies require monetary investment, and many hobbies require quite a bit of space
You basically cannot have woodworking for instance as your hobby if you live in a small apartment
Yes, maybe there's some kind of Maker-space you can go to, but there may not be. That also just creates a barrier to entry because now you need to deal with a membership to the space, travel time, etc. And you still need space at home to store finished projects too!
So people are pretty restricted in the activities they actually can do if they don't have money or space to do things
https://www.theguardian.com/money/article/2024/jul/12/workin...
https://www.hrotoday.com/news/only-5-of-employees-prefer-wor...
https://www.population.fyi/p/singapores-fertility-crisis-cou...
https://stackoverflow.blog/2023/11/27/are-remote-workers-mor...
The whole remote vs in office in somewhat a tired argument, so lets move a level up to power structures: old folks in power, both government and corporate. ~2M people in the US 55+ die every year, ~5k per day. ~4M people turn 18. ~4.1M Boomers are retiring per year, ~11k per day. This demographic transition is the opportunity to move the zeitgeist around social interaction to improve outcomes for the human at scale (imho). Like bankruptcy, change happens slowly, and then all of a sudden.
Work must get done, but re-evaluating what work looks like in the service of the human (because why are we even living if it is just to work) should be a priority if loneliness is killing us (and more time at work is not the solution imho). It's just a job, you are just a replaceable cog, most people just need a check, and coworkers are not your friends (in most cases). Collectivism is coming together as a community, not for a meaningless job and org.
(n=1, I structured my life so I can take only remote jobs, so I can be close geographically to the people who matter to me, enrich my life, and I want to spend time with, but this does not scale [or rather, we should figure out how to make it scale: https://paulgraham.com/ds.html])
Anecdata, most people seem to move out to less dense and more private parts of the country as they get older and accrue more agency in their lives. I imagine they get tired of people.
I love writing software. I 'like' my job, but the 40h / wk 9-5 can be a drag. As I get older and more financially secure, I'd love the ability to cut my working days down to 2-3d / wk. My father has a job he works 2d / wk remote, and I'm not even sure he wants to retire anymore. Why would he?
If I had a coding job I could work a couple days a week remote? I'm not sure I'd ever retire either.
The danger once you become fully financially independent is that neither you or companies are willing to compromise on your working terms and you retire by default.
I'm sure I could happily work on saas or open source projects the rest of my life, but it would be nice if I could trade some of that energy and enthusiasm in on work that pays consistently.
Never share your situation and security. Your plan is sound otherwise, just say "I need more time for family" or whatever will trigger the response that gets you this outcome. As long as they need you, they'll accommodate.
https://www.amazon.com/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-De...
Ugh!
It's more about treating others with kindness and respect.
As if reddit (and similar left leaning spaces) aren't filled with "doomers" and "clowns".
He's the head of one of the US government's eight uniformed services[0]. Like, in a sense, he's literally a general.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Public_Health_Se...
I grew up in the suburbs and you could easily go a week without substantially interacting with people.
Jump in your metal capsule, drive 7 mins to Walmart, walk quietly across the huge parking lot, get your item and return home.
Contrasted with dense urban city with public transit, you will serendipitously bump into people and be forced to interact more with society, even if it is just exchanging pleasantries.
This is killing ourselves socially, not to mention how much cars cause physical death.
The kids who populate these cul-de-sacs will never know what stood
Beneath their cookie-cutter houses, fields and streams and woods
They'll sit in cars and wait for mom to drive them out of this boring neighborhood
- Defiance, Ohio; “Oh! Susquehanna”
For me personally, when looking for a 'forever home' I'm starting to look at smaller college towns. They often have a walkable core around the college, you have access to continuing education opportunities and a college library.
While yes, living around a gaggle of college age kids can be tiring as you get older, a local university fosters a lot of intellectual vibrancy that you wouldn't get without it. You can always hang out with the older folks who teach the classes and serve the college age population.
Neighbors. Just start talking to them. Have them over. We do this for football (NFL) games or just for dinner.
Surprisingly (or maybe not). Kpop concerts. My wife is very into this music scene. She has definitely made friends she keeps in touch with (friends she met at the concert). I went to one and I couldn't believe how many fans went alone and formed their own groups at the concert to watch/dance. And this is for all ages (I saw 80 year olds down to the teenagers). Edit: I should note that the concerts she has been to did not cost an arm and a leg.
So it shall continue.
I've read that the average american adult went from spending 11 hours per week with friends and family few decades ago to 4+ in 2010s, and sub 3 after covid.
Loneliness is the big sickness of our modern IT times.
That's a term that I use, for the type of social structure that most societies have[0]. Bit different from what he's written.
It's not just a problem for young folks. Older folks are having huge problems with loneliness.
I won't speak to how it affects our physical well-being, but it sure does affect our mental well-being, and our mental health can definitely inform our physical health.
I'm always an advocate of engaging in volunteer or nonprofit work. It definitely has its issues, but does wonders for loneliness.
Most of the folks that hang out here, have extremely valuable skills, that could do wonders for NPOs.
[0] https://littlegreenviper.com/infrastructure/#social_inf
Might anxiety cause loneliness? Seems pretty logical.
> More than half the people in America feel lonely, and the numbers are actually the greatest among the young people, young boys and girls. And this not only has implications in mental health, but it also has implications in physical health. It increases the risk for heart disease and premature death. Vivek also mentions that loneliness is a mental health issue.
The issue has come up before: Mightn't bad physical health, and especially bad mental health, cause loneliness?
It's certainly plausible that causation happens in both directions; I expect there's more than zero of that. But which direction is the bigger one? I have no idea. And if someone wants to say this with the authority of the Surgeon General, I want them to bring citations that actually prove causality.
I'm not just introverted, I am rather extreme ... to the point where I've wondered if I might have schizoid personality disorder (characterized by apathy towards forming close personal relationships).
I don't dislike being around people, I'm no misantrhope, but when I do engage in social activities I'm usually literally bed-ridden for a day or two after. I'm not even exaggerating. It is a level of fatigue that is reminiscent of the symptoms of clinical depression (but it's not depression because the cause and effect is well observed over 40 years of trying to figure myself out). When this happens I have zero motivation, zero energy, zero desire to do anything but sit on my fat unproductive lazy ass and be a complete vegetable and this will last for a day two depending on the intensity of the social interaction (if I go on vacation and disrupt my routine for a couple of weeks, I'm looking at upwards of a week to recover).
Introverts commonly describe the need "re-charge" after social interaction, and that's clearly what this is. It's just dialled up to 11 for me.
And this happens even if I had a great time with people that I really care about. Even date night with my wife will do this to me.
Every time I hear about the loneliness epidemic I wonder how universally applicable this is: to what degree are introverts susceptible to the negative effects of loneliness? To what degree do other introverts feel lonely? And are some people (like me) just wired so differently in the brain that we're "immune" to loneliness.
I mean I've gone months without talking to a single other human being. The data suggests that I should have all sorts of symptoms as a result, including "cabin fever" etc. But I've never experienced that. I certainly don't feel depressed when this happens. If anything I'm more productive and energetic and happy versus when I'm interacting with people regularly. I'm not even sure that I know what loneliness feels like or if I'm capable of experiencing it.
This is very personal and subjective. I'm mostly writing it just to see if other introverts feel the same or differently. If the "epidemic" is an "extrovert's epidemic" or I'm just, for lack of a better term, completely fucked in the head with an actual mental disorder that prevents me from ever feeling the slightest desire to connect with others, even following prolonged periods of isolation.
If you think about it, it's not that unusual throughout history. Sailors, cowboys, shepherds, ranchers, prospectors, hunters etc., have been jobs done by those who preferred to be by themselves.
I remember watching a documentary about the first Iditarod. After the winner got to the finish line, there was an extravagant meal and cameras and news reporters. But the poor guy was so used to being alone with his dogs that he wasn't able to eat a thing with all those people around.
Solution: Social Interaction
What happened about 50 years ago which REDUCED social interaction significantly? There's only 3 answers. All decisions by politicians with a negative consequence to social interaction per year. It will continue to trend worse. Social media, which only got invented recently, has no bearing on this conversation. Sorry, I wont be able to say what these 3 are here. The name of these will only serve to get me labelled *ist. I've got the ism, whatever.
Why is nobody allowed to discuss those 3 answers? Reddit committed suicide is now far behind Linkedin having overtly banned and pushed over 50% of their users off their site. Why is it that these 3 answers are bannable offences, but also not listed in the reddit rules? Well I asked... they dont want to boost these topics by putting them in the rules. So instead you get banned for violating a rule you didnt know was a rule? They unban you like as if they are doing you a favour.
Why is it governments have sunk billions if not trillions into trying to fix this problem... but refuse to look at the 3 answers? Are they willfully blind? Ignorance due to censorship is not an excuse.
You can have quadrillion $ into 'community development' and 'social infrastructure' but you are literally throwing that money into a pit of fire. It hasnt worked for decades... completely insane to keep trying. But taxpayer money grows on trees i guess.
Why do politicians not do the extremely unpopular, stupid to do, yet necessary changes? political suicide sure. In this case, probably assassinated.
Why does it have to become a crisis? Only after its a crisis will people listen to a fix, but we do have a social crisis.
The fundamental reason democracy needs actual free speech and no censorship is because sometimes you gotta say what's unpopular. Sometimes you even need to do it. But when you are in a situation where you even self-censor to avoid theoretical censorship, the discussion never happens.
This is why we are in this situation.