I keep catching myself thinking or using the excuse I have no time, but I mostly spend my time on the internet or watching TV. Some nights I do the dishes or actually go for a walk, go grocery shopping, but mostly I'm just hanging on, making sure I'm ready for he next day. I'm freaking addicted to information and the internet, which leave me feeling frantic. I forgo sleeping for the internet and it brings me little pleasure. I wish I could stop, but like this morning I was sitting on the couch with nothing to do and I had to go get my phone which I've probably wasted 20 minutes on. It doesn't seem like much time but I could have gone to get toilet paper from the store which I sort of could use right now. I'd like to hear this lost from someone older, who was in the 80s or 90s and hear their perspective. I know my parents at least are hooked into the internet entertainment machine like I am and they didn't use to be. Was there more time? Was it better?
There was the same amount of time, but it was allocated differently.
There were phone calls. If somebody calls you on the phone, you stop doing what you're doing and talk to them.
Apart from that, time was scheduled in larger chunks, with fever context switches. You watch a movie start to finish, not a bunch of 2 minute Youtube videos. You spend an evening printing photos in the dark room rather than two seconds on Instagram. You go to a chess club and play with somebody sitting across the table.
So generally you do one thing at a time for longer stretches, and have to plan those activities in advance.
Yes to all your points. With respect to watching TVs and movies, you also had to basically be in front of the TV at the right time for at least part of that period--I don't think I had a VCR until 1988 or so. I tried to watch the evening news as I didn't get a daily newspaper.
Shopping was mostly physical shopping other than a few catalogs. I remember going into the city once a month or so to go to bookstores etc.
Bills were all a matter of writing physical checks once a week or so.
I also had a shareware software business during that period. So one of my weekly tasks was stuffing floppies into floppy mailer envelopes. (They could choose 3.5" or 5.25" formats with or without printed docs.)
ADDED: I should say that I spent a fair amount of time on BBS's prior to Usenet/Web.
What wouldn't I give to have such attention span! I can't even watch a movie these days (months? um, years?). Yesterday I alt-tabbed to chrome and opened HN while hearing the movie that I was in the middle of watching. Yes, I have a PC connected to my TV! What is wrong with me?!
I want to be able to read a non-technical book fully and I can't and I'm very unhappy about this whole situation.
>> What wouldn't I give to have such attention span!
It's surprisingly easy when forced. I moved apartment a few years ago to a small seaside town (mostly retirees and a few locally run shops). We had an old CRT style TV with very few channels. For the first two weeks we had no internet. It was pretty interesting how our differently we would spend the day. My friend and I would take walks around town or the beach, go surfing for a few hours, cook instead of ordering takeout, and then spend the rest of the time hanging out in the living room. The TV was on but we were mostly just chatting. Switch to two weeks later when we got internet. We spent much more time in our rooms on our computers playing video games or watching Netflix. We would still surf a couple of times a week but besides that we would only hangout for an hour or two in the evening if there was a good movie on TV. As frustrating as it was at times not having internet access I would say I was much happier during those first 2 weeks and with so few options for things to do my attention span was automatically much better.
You can't focus on a task probably because they're all rubbish. The movie you're watching is rubbish, the website on your chrome only mildly interesting and HN the usual predictable progressive groupthink. They're all mildly entertaining: not anywhere near interesting.
Find something more interesting and it will keep you hooked. Book suggestion btw, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_Tailor_Soldier_Spy
If you can, try reading The Shallows by Nicholas Carr. It's not perfect, but it will get you thinking about how and why your attention span got to be the way it is. It will also give you hope, because you'll realize that it's totally within your power to change it (and rather quickly, too).
Your message started with "What wouldn't I give to have such attention span!", and it turns out that you don't need to give all that much. Getting started is difficult, though.
If you do start down this path, consider reading Deep Work by Cal Newport to give you some ideas about how you can use the focus and concentration abilities you're building. Again, it's not perfect, but if you take the book as a list of suggestions rather than a strict prescription of what you should do, you'll probably find that you can adapt its lessons to make your life better.
Realize that it is a skill that can be trained. The current environment does encourages short attention spans. Working on your attention span needs to be deliberately. First understand your current ability. What is the longest show you can watch without feeling the need to engage in a different activity? How many pages you can read in a book before becoming distracted?
Work on engaging in those activities a little bit longer then you currently can, and slowly increase the duration. Use a timer to set a limit. This would need to be done with regularity and focus.
I started listening to books, fiction, while I worked. It was the best choice I made it a long time. The only time I can't listen and work is when I am planning or doing architectural work where I need an inner monologue.
I've known that I've had an internet addiction for years. I've tried to break it multiple times but always relapse. Something that makes it hard is that there are real, tangible benefits to spending time online, even just aimless browsing and stumbling into things. I would not be the person I am today if it weren't for certain random links I clicked on at certain times.
The important thing is that I need to always remember that it's an addiction and I need to get it under control. I think limiting myself to a half hour or hour a day would be best.
I've tried to break it multiple times but always relapse.
Possible there is some positive there as well, and it keeps drawing you in. Instead of thinking of it as an addiction, think of it as something you do, that is part positive and part empty. Identify those parts that are positive, and praise yourself for them. Then over time, identify those parts that are empty, and realize, "oh, I can eliminate this."
> I would not be the person I am today if it weren't for certain random links I clicked on at certain times.
I have to imagine you'd say the same thing about whatever hobby you could use to fill this time with. Perhaps your hobby leads to new friends, business opportunities, skills, or other general improvements in your daily life.
Interesting you bring this up. I also felt that maybe <5% of the links I've clicked on have really changed the way I think or led me down a path that ended up changing my path in life. How do you put a price on that? You can't, really.
I was about in the 70s and 80s. Still the same number of hours in the day and internet was largely replaced by reading and TV. I don't know if it was better or worse. I think I prefer the internet. At least you can type stuff into it unlike books and TV.
They have a lot of school homework. Far, far more than I ever had.
They do a lot of arts and crafts, they play games (board games and video games), and one spends quite a bit of time playing the piano. They both are spending more and more time talking with friends either in person or on Facetime or IM.
The video that they do watch is pretty much exclusively on YouTube.
I remember my grandparents trying to make sure they got all their evening chores done so they could sit down age watch Wheel of Fortune when it came on. They didn't have a lot of free time on weeknights, but it was because of how they chose to spend it.
In theory you're right. However, the expectation is someone will respond with ~"Thx, in meeting" unlike a phone where you may just let it go to voicemail, there is no message failed to get though feedback.
So, you get sent a text and people will generally assume you are ignoring them unless you respond.
What I meant was that while I'm sure some people do think that, it's unreasonable. That's the same person who send multiple text messages "are you there?" "where are you?" "I need you" "call me" etc minutes or seconds apart. It hasn't occurred to them that the phone is off or silent or in another room or notifications are off or they've been explicitly muted.
> However, the expectation is someone will respond with ~"Thx, in meeting"
If you check your phone in a meeting, and you don't have a family member in the hospital, you're wrong. It's discourteous in the extreme to check a smartphone (or noodle around on a laptop!) when meeting with others.
We have a rather family friendly attitude at work so the norms are probably a little different. There is no way to know ahead of time if someone is in the hospital. Now someone is stilling there holding the phone and looking at it, taking an extra ~15 seconds to respond is not a big deal. Now, if someone is going to respond in depth the expectation is they will leave.
Also, there are more and less formal meetings, but in a technical meeting checking some point online with a laptop or phone occurs on a regular basis. It seems much more productive than having people just say random things that don't match up with reality.
> Now someone is stilling there holding the phone and looking at it, taking an extra ~15 seconds to respond is not a big deal.
Meetings should be short and to the point: 15-30 minutes should be normal, an hour abnormal. 'I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention' is rude, and so is wasting every other participant's time while context switching back to the meeting.
> Also, there are more and less formal meetings, but in a technical meeting checking some point online with a laptop or phone occurs on a regular basis.
Sure, but people shouldn't be programming, working on their personal blogs, reading reddit, checking HN, catching up on the latest Wikipedia articles, browsing Google News or whatever when they're in a meeting.
Participants in a meeting owe one another their attention.
> OK, in a theoretical world where meetings aren't hours long with no agenda and tons of circular, pointless discussion, I agree.
Well, an agenda is part of the courtesy the meeting convener owes the participants, and a well-run meeting is part of the courtesy the chairman owes the participants.
Meetings are incredibly expensive: everyone owes it to their organisation, one another and themselves to make that expense worth it.
If you shouldn't be in the meeting, leave. If you should be, stay. If the meeting should be split up, then advocate for it to be split up. If it should be structured differently, then advocate for it to be structured differently.
> Yeah, that would be nice, but I'm not going to change the world just by thinking so.
Then take action! You are not a passive victim of circumstances: you are an active participant in, among other things, meetings; demand that your fellow-participants behave politely.
I'm frankly shocked that so many people seem to disagree so strongly with my belief that texting in a meeting is rude, discourteous and unprofessional.
I'd like to draw a distinction here between unflattering someone's ego and being disrespectful to that person.
I, personally, don't think I'd be affected by "unflattering". In many circumstances, though, noodling around on a laptop in a meeting is communicating to the presenter that their presentation is unworthy of your time or attention - that is to say, you are disrespecting the presenter.
I think it's a moving scale, though, dependent on the importance of the subject of the meeting and the relationship of the attendees. In a casual meeting between friends, with low-importance subject matter, I would consider undivided attention unnecessary (and therefore exceptionally respectful if given). In a business environment, where the subject is business related, I would consider it necessary (and therefore the opposite is exceptionally disrespectful).
> Many people believe that what is important is getting stuff done, not social status grooming with shows of allegiance in meetings.
It's not about shows of allegiance: it's about being present for your fellow-participants.
> Is there any practical reason, that makes texting rude, discourteous, and unprofessional, besides that it unflatters someone's ego?
Human beings can't multitask: every second you're texting is a second of meeting content you're missing. It is rude, because it says to those speaking, 'what you are saying is not as important as what I am reading or typing.' It is discourteous, because it wastes their time. It is unprofessional, because a professional would do others the politeness of turning down the meeting if he doesn't believe his presence is needed, rather than attending and ignoring.
To a certain degree. When the Chuck Norris infomercial came on after midnight, you knew it was time to go to bed. With the internet there's always something interesting. And around midnight, the people in Europe are up, so you could start chatting with them.
Reading the newspaper and magazines was basically the equivalent before the internet, I think. With the paper you'd eventually run out of stuff to read in a day, but if you had enough magazine subscriptions, you could find something marginally interesting.
I think one difference other than the never-ending aspect of the internet is that when you're reading a newspaper or book you get sleepy when you're supposed to, whereas if you're looking at a screen the blue light keeps you awake longer and all your chores take longer the next day because you have less energy.
I think the blue light issue may be overstated. I used to read paper into the early hours, even after I was tired and sleepy. I still get a "must sleep now" cut off, even when surrounded by screens. It just happens later.
What isn't overstated is information volume. Hacker News and Reddit literally give you more links/features in 24 hours than Byte used to offer once a month. Each item may be shorter - sometimes - but there are many, many more things to read.
When I was programming on my Apple ][ during the 80s, my mom would joke that computer minutes must be a lot longer than real minutes, because when she would call me for dinner, I'd tell her I'd be there in five minutes but instead would lose track of time for twenty minutes.
Now, because of smartphones, it seems everyone is caught in this same time distortion field.
As a result I purposefully try to look at my phone as little as possible.
Think of it this way, if through some sort of Matrix like situation our first experience of the outside world was through a small touchscreen, and then suddenly you took the red pill and were put into a world where you could touch, smell and see in full 360 degrees and feel wind and water and move and climb over things and interact with animals etc...it would blow your mind.
So why are we allowing ourselves to limit our experiences in this way?
>>I'm freaking addicted to information and the internet, which leave me feeling frantic.
You just need to understand you are not missing out on anything by not doing so.
This sort of internet addiction isn't just destroying productivity for grown up adults but studying habits of teenagers and school going kids too.
Try to take it 15 minutes at a time. Try staying away from internet 15 minutes at a time, then the next 15 and so on, I think it should work out perfect well.
You'd probably enjoy Clay Shirky's book "Cognitive Surplus", which really put into perspective for me what this apparent glut of time I had on my hands meant.
I know the feeling. In the last few months, I've wanted to play though some video games so I can "review" them on my blog... but there's not much point since I haven't gotten around to setting up my web server since I reformatted it last month with the new Ubuntu LTS and encrypted it.
What have I been doing instead? Riding my bike around town. Hanging out with friends. Not bad, but I've also taken up watching Youtube for hours every night.
Not bad, but I've also taken up watching Youtube for hours every night.
The key is to not overwhelm yourself and to do something towards your goal. For example, don't try to set up the entire blog in one night, instead do a micro-portion, "oh, I better start downloading the webserver before I watch youtube." Or even, "oh, I better plug my server in and turn it on."
The key is to do something every night, and cut it into pieces small enough that it's doable. If you find yourself putting it off, that means you need to cut it into an even smaller portion.
I prefer to just get a large chunk done for most stuff, because personally the hard part is getting (re)started at all and figuring out where I got to.
I tried to do it all last night: got it installed, db set up, and even a certificate. It didn't feel that overwhelming, and it started to be kind of fun after a while, but something went wrong somewhere just shy of it actually working. I'll try it again sometime.
This could be the story of just about any tech-related project I try to undertake on weekends and evenings. I've found I'm happier just paying money to make some of the problems I was trying to solve go away, giving up on a bunch of others, and just focusing my effort on the handful that remain—which still tend to linger for months or years with many stops and starts before being finished.
It's incredible how much time you can blow on the internet or TV, vs what you can do with it in the real world.
I went for a run last week, and got to marveling how I had run from my front door into the mountains & back, how gradually the time had passed, and how those two hours would have zwip vanished in a forgettable blink had I been online.
I tend to try to think of time as I think of space. If I clutter my space with a bunch of small things, I find that I think myself to be cluttered, and the disorder causes me unease. But if all the small things have their own places, and I keep putting them back when I take them out, it feels orderly, and there is no unease. It's really the same for me with time. If I clutter my time with a bunch of small, meaningless tasks (check facebook, check email, read that article that takes maybe 2 minutes, ..., loop), I find that that, too, causes me unease. But if I set aside time for those things, and only those things, there is no problem. I build things into a routine, as much as possible, and for the rest, I try to schedule the time I think I'll need, so that I can say "I don't need to think about X right now, because I will have time for it later."
I even try to schedule in periods where I do allow myself shallow work, like checking a bunch of things, or sating the information addiction that you and I most certainly share. Right now, I have maybe 50 tabs open between a bunch of aggregated tech/science news sites, and I'll spend maybe 1 minute at most on each one. If I did that just any time of day that I had a period of empty time, it would be just like if I left clutter anywhere that I had empty space. But since I've devoted this time to this task, it's kind of like putting everything you need for a project out on a table, then packing it up neatly when you're done with the project for the day. I know an end to the clutter is in sight, so it doesn't bother me so much.
The hardest part is always trying not to fill empty time meaninglessly. That takes skill, but it can be learned. I find I'm better at it when I've been keeping up with daily meditation in the morning and evening. But even if meditation isn't your thing, you can practice in other ways. For instance, when you are eating dinner, try to only be eating dinner. It seems awkward at first, to sit in silence (especially with a partner present) and just eat, but that fairly quickly goes away. Or, in the mornings, if you have coffee or tea, just drink coffee or tea and sit in silence. I tend to keep a notebook handy, and if something particularly strikes me during the silence, I write it down and let myself come back to it after I've finished my coffee.
I don't think it was any different before the popularity and ease of access of the internet. People assume that others were focusing on longer sessions of focus, but I don't think that's the entire truth. I think as a species, we've always struggled with this anxious itch to move on to the next thing, mere moments after starting the current thing. I think that's why (as you note) a lot of the older generations are turning to using the internet in much the same way as the younger generations.
If I clutter my space with a bunch of small things, I find that I think myself to be cluttered, and the disorder causes me unease
My problem with that is that the mess in my room matches the mess inside my head. Do I feel bad that there are things all over the floor? Nope, it is really comfortable because it matches who I am.
I can understand this - I've been there, and I know plenty of people who are still there. I think you've got your answer in what you've said, though. Your room matches your mind. But it's not just an input/output thing, there's a feedback loop that makes both worse, as either gets worse. Start by making your environment match what you want your mental state to be. Just hold on to that idea for a while. Say, a couple weeks of keeping everything orderly. Then reevaluate your mental state, and see if there's anything that feels like the next natural step. Don't worry about what that will be right now. You might find it's buying an agenda book, and scheduling everything, or you might find that you need to fix your sleep schedule. You may even find that you need to treat your free time as extremely high value, and only do things that you feel genuine ecstatic desire to do. What works for you might be different from any of these things, and you can look at what others do, but what comes next will usually arise naturally from doing what's right now.