The other tricky thing is, even a single lapse in forgetting to turn the phone off, or bringing it with you is enough to undo all vigilance ever. I don't see it as feasibly, especially for people that are anxious or distracted by something more important on their mind.
You know, it really says something about our industry that our preeminent modern accomplishment requires everyone to choose, blindly and unaware, among effective social nonexistence, espionage-grade opsec, or the kind of radical transparency that no one but maybe a performance artist would even have contemplated just a few years ago.
Yeah, I know this can get brought out a lot in these circumstances, but remember how everyone thought Richard Stallman / rms was crazy for being so disconnected from the Internet? Somehow that doesn't seem the case anymore.
Keep in mind, when you consider that, that Stallman is also almost entirely disconnected from the world, as well. Granted, that's by choice, and it seems to suit him. But it casts a great deal of doubt on the value of his perspective, especially his perspective on those people who choose otherwise.
It's sort of infuriating, if I'm honest. He has a lot of insight with regard to, for example, the extent to which Facebook abuses people who use it. But the best he can muster by way of response is "Well, don't do that, then, and if you do, then to hell with you." Which is, to say the least, not helpful.
Edit: And on further reflection, the insight he does have is hardly unique. The more I consider what I've heard and read him to say, the less I find myself able to see what he actually has to add to the kind of nuanced conversation which needs to take place on this subject.
Further edit: So your response, while of value, kind of misses the point I set out to make, in that Stallman's situation falls neatly into the "effective social nonexistence" category. The question I'm asking is larger, and more along the lines of: How the hell did we let our industry become something of which Facebook is the exemplar, and is this really something with which we're okay?
Eh. He and you have different lifestyles. I also can't fathom there lifestyles of the shepherds back home that go without human contact for months at a time, but they have a lifestyle.
Just because you don't want to switch your lifestyle, or we trade convenience for exposure, doesn't mean that stalman's lifestyle is wrong.
It's just different choice, and we are comparing apples to oranges here.
He satisfies himself with contempt for those who find it not so easy as he has to choose the life he's chosen. I won't be satisfied until we have a world which makes no such choice necessary. Hardly apples to oranges; more apples to orchards.
As it happens, I recently attempted to open a conversation on this subject with the man himself, in a public forum. I was polite, if uncompromising. He was profane, and preferred to have a minion disconnect my microphone rather than address the point I raised. Many people in the hours that followed found it worth their while to seek me out and thank me for making the attempt. Perhaps more thanked him for his response. I hope I may be forgiven for finding that improbable. In any case, he found no reason not to sign my Emacs manual when I approached him not long afterward, so I can at least hope that, however fundamental the differences in our positions on this matter and however unlikely the prospect of fruitful debate, there may remain at least some modicum of mutual respect.
Effective social nonexistence? Come on. As someone who does not use Facebook and Twitter, yet miraculously has an active social life, I find your dichotomy to be false.
That's great. As someone who also does not use Facebook and Twitter, and saw the result this had on the social life he'd enjoyed before they rose to such preeminence in the field of mediating human social interaction, I find your experience to be lacking in universal applicability.
Just so I understand: You're saying you used to have a robust social life, but now somewhat less so, because the people you used to interact with will no longer do so outside of Facebook and Twitter? I don't want to sound harsh, and maybe I'm just too old, but it seems kind of incredible to me. You can't just call them up or E-mail them?
I don't know what you mean by 'robust'. What I'm saying is that I used to have a satisfactory social life - on the order of parties or other similar events call it once a month more or less and "let's get together for beers" or similar on a reasonably regular basis besides - which in essence no longer exists.
I can certainly understand that it seems kind of incredible to you. It seems extremely incredible to me! I still haven't quite got wholly around it. And, yes, I can "just" call people up, or text or email them, and sometimes even get a response. I still occasionally do so, and still occasionally get together with one or two people at a time for a few drinks and to catch up. The problem comes in where you try to organize something on a larger scale, or where someone else does so. It would be technically inaccurate to say that to do so is impossible without using Facebook. But I've certainly found it ineffective to try to set things up via email, which was not the case a couple of years ago.
I would not be surprised to learn that I'm as old as, or older than, you are. Most of the people in my former social circle are somewhat older than I am. I'm pretty sure this isn't just a "people in their twenties" thing.
(Edited to add that I don't understand why you're getting downvoted, and I wish people wouldn't without explaining why they're doing so. Certainly, if it's out of some misguided assumption that I've chosen to put myself and my experience out there without being prepared to address people who express entirely reasonable incredulity and doubt about my veracity, let me take a moment to note that such action on my behalf, while certainly appreciated, is entirely unnecessary.)
Hmm, interesting. Thanks for your perspective. All I can offer is that I've not seen this phenomenon in my own social circle (age:40). I have always considered "You can't have a social life without Facebook" to be pure hyperbole from people who never knew a world without FB.
I suppose we can agree that "it depends" on who your friends are. Oh, and I don't sweat downvotes on HN--any quick way to bury unpopular opinions can be hard to resist for some people.
> I have always considered "You can't have a social life without Facebook" to be pure hyperbole from people who never knew a world without FB.
Oh, don't get me wrong! I don't believe it impossible to have a social life without Facebook, and I hope I don't come across otherwise. But I have found it a great deal harder than seems at all reasonable, quite aside from the fact that it's absurd in the first place to have to develop a new social circle because opting out of Facebook sufficed to estrange me from my old one.
