Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.usage.english > #1145565 > unrolled thread

[OT] You've never had it so bad

Back to article view | Back to alt.usage.english

Contents

  [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-17 14:31 +0100
    Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-17 18:01 +0200
      Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-17 17:10 +0000
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 13:59 -0400
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-06-17 19:09 +0000
            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 15:43 -0400
              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 21:54 +0100
                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 17:28 -0400
                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 23:00 +0100
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-18 13:48 +0000
            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 19:56 -0400
              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-19 06:51 +0100
                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-06-19 16:47 +1000
                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-06-20 03:26 +0200
                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 23:37 -0400
                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-20 07:06 +0100
                    Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-20 07:08 +0100
                    Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-06-21 05:33 +0200
                      Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-21 06:08 +0100
                        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-21 08:27 +0200
                        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2026-06-21 12:49 +0100
                          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-22 06:30 +0100
                        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-06-21 19:05 +0100
                          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-06-22 07:42 +1000
                            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-22 06:27 +0100
                          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-06-22 12:37 +0100
                            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-23 08:33 +0200
                              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-23 10:04 +0000
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-06-23 20:32 +1000
                              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-23 13:36 +0100
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-06-23 15:26 +0100
                                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-24 01:16 +0200
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-06-23 15:29 +0100
                                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-23 16:34 +0100
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2026-06-23 14:03 -0700
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2026-06-24 09:41 +0100
                                  Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-24 10:54 +0200
                                    Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2026-06-25 11:59 +0100
                              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-06-24 04:44 +0530
                                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-24 12:29 +0200
                        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-06-22 14:13 +0200
                          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-06-22 13:16 +0000
                            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-06-22 16:03 +0100
            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-06-19 09:05 +0200
              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-06-19 17:31 +1000
      Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-06-17 17:30 +0000
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-17 21:15 +0200
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-06-18 14:26 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-06-18 22:00 +0100
      Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-18 06:48 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-18 06:51 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-18 08:28 +0200
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-18 08:06 +0100
    Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 12:26 -0700
      Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-06-18 09:26 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-06-18 10:59 +0200
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> - 2026-06-18 09:13 +0000
            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com> - 2026-06-18 12:49 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-06-18 20:49 +1000
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-06-22 16:07 +0100
        Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-19 13:26 +0200
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Julian <julianlzb87@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 13:17 +0100
          Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-06-22 13:52 +0100
            Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-06-22 22:05 +0100
              Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-06-23 06:58 +0100
                Re: [OT] You've never had it so bad Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-06-24 05:45 +0200

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#1145565 — [OT] You've never had it so bad

"Dissatisfaction with modern technology and its trappings - including 
AI, subscriptions, data tracking, and algorithm-driven apps - is having 
an impact, with nearly half of Gen Z[ed] adults in the US (aged 18-29) 
would rather live in the past than the present day.

This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -

<https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>


(It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
more technology.)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145566

Den 17.06.2026 kl. 15.31 skrev Hibou:

> This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
> bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
> policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
> live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
> than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -
> 
> <https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>
> 
> 
> (It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
> more technology.)

No, they don't want to live in the past. They want the world to be like 
it was. That means dismantling all the evil technologies.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145567

Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> posted:

> Den 17.06.2026 kl. 15.31 skrev Hibou:
> 
> > This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
> > bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
> > policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
> > live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
> > than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -
> > 
> > <https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>
> > 
> > 
> > (It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
> > more technology.)
> 
> No, they don't want to live in the past. They want the world to be like 
> it was. That means dismantling all the evil technologies.
> 
Not to mention all the social changes. Many Trump supporters want the USA to be
as it was in the 1950s, when blacks and women and "allies" knew their place.

-- 
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145569

Verily, in article <1781716258-12588@newsgrouper.org>, did 
athel.cb@gmail.com deliver unto us this message:
> 
> Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> posted:
> 
> > Den 17.06.2026 kl. 15.31 skrev Hibou:
> > 
> > > This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
> > > bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
> > > policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
> > > live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
> > > than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -
> > > 
> > > <https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > (It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
> > > more technology.)
> > 
> > No, they don't want to live in the past. They want the world to be like 
> > it was. That means dismantling all the evil technologies.
> > 
> Not to mention all the social changes. Many Trump supporters want the USA to be
> as it was in the 1950s, when blacks and women and "allies" knew their place.

What is your source for this claim? 

The quiz is quite clearly asking about technology. GenZ has an oft-noted 
aversion to tech and craving for authenticity. To imply  that they're 
all a bunch of closet racists who want a more racist world is a smear, 
and "Trump supporters" have nothing to do with anything. They polled 
Zoomers, an age bracket, not a political bracket. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145571

The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
>The quiz is quite clearly asking about technology.

  The chatbot said that in the NBC News Decision Desk Poll powered
  by SurveyMonkey they were asked whether, if given the option,
  they would choose to live in the past, the present, or the future.

  But he said that the full, multi-page questionnaire isn't available
  to him.

  He added that the phrase "discomfort with modern technology"
  was not part of the literal multiple-choice question. Instead,
  that specific framing came from follow-up qualitative interviews
  conducted by NBC News journalists with the poll respondents. 

  When journalists called the participants to ask why they chose
  the past, the young adults explicitly cited a desire to escape
  smartphones, constant internet availability, and the anxieties of
  an algorithm-driven life, favoring the 1980s and 1990s instead.

  Well, I'm such a retrophiliac! I go online to collect photographs
  of my local boroughs showing how they looked decades ago when I
  was young, looking at those old buildings to calm me down. But now
  I do not feel so alone anymore knowing that even people who never
  experienced those demolished buildings want to live in that past too!

  A writer recently reported about his 12-year-old daughter watching,
  "Stand by me" (1986):

|What took me by surprise was my daughter’s fascination. She
|has since watched the movie half a dozen more times, on her own[.]
. . . 
|After first seeing the film, my daughter asked my father, who
|spent his childhood in a small city in the Berkshires, if the
|freedom the film depicts was the freedom he had, if childhood
|once looked and sounded like that. She wondered if this sort
|of unobserved life was as he remembered it, if he might, just
|as these boys did, have set off for days without parental
|concern. He told her, with amusement, that he was, in fact,
|expected to be home for dinner, but beyond that, yes, he
|could roam, without surveillance.

  .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145574

Verily, in article <past-20260617200451@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, did 
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de deliver unto us this message:
>   Well, I'm such a retrophiliac! I go online to collect photographs
>   of my local boroughs showing how they looked decades ago when I
>   was young, looking at those old buildings to calm me down. But now
>   I do not feel so alone anymore knowing that even people who never
>   experienced those demolished buildings want to live in that past too!
> 
>   A writer recently reported about his 12-year-old daughter watching,
>   "Stand by me" (1986):
> 

I've taught several students who've said that they wish they'd lived 
before the invention of AI. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145575

On 17/06/2026 20:43, The True Melissa wrote:
> Verily, in article <past-20260617200451@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, did
> ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de deliver unto us this message:
>>    Well, I'm such a retrophiliac! I go online to collect photographs
>>    of my local boroughs showing how they looked decades ago when I
>>    was young, looking at those old buildings to calm me down. But now
>>    I do not feel so alone anymore knowing that even people who never
>>    experienced those demolished buildings want to live in that past too!
>>
>>    A writer recently reported about his 12-year-old daughter watching,
>>    "Stand by me" (1986):
>>
> 
> I've taught several students who've said that they wish they'd lived
> before the invention of AI.

They'd freak if they were allowed 50 years in a time machine
and then find they didn't have a phone. :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145576

Verily, in article <110v1id$255ep$2@dont-email.me>, did julianlzb87
@gmail.com deliver unto us this message:
> 
> On 17/06/2026 20:43, The True Melissa wrote:
> > Verily, in article <past-20260617200451@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, did
> > ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de deliver unto us this message:
> >>    Well, I'm such a retrophiliac! I go online to collect photographs
> >>    of my local boroughs showing how they looked decades ago when I
> >>    was young, looking at those old buildings to calm me down. But now
> >>    I do not feel so alone anymore knowing that even people who never
> >>    experienced those demolished buildings want to live in that past too!
> >>
> >>    A writer recently reported about his 12-year-old daughter watching,
> >>    "Stand by me" (1986):
> >>
> > 
> > I've taught several students who've said that they wish they'd lived
> > before the invention of AI.
> 
> They'd freak if they were allowed 50 years in a time machine
> and then find they didn't have a phone. :)

Maybe. They don't fully realize what it would actually be like.

Then again, Gen Z is the cohort which calls doing without entertainment 
"rawdogging" and competes to see how long they can do it. They're an 
interesting cohort. They're the first in history to be more averse to 
new inventions than their elders. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145577

On 17/06/2026 22:28, The True Melissa wrote:
> Verily, in article <110v1id$255ep$2@dont-email.me>, did julianlzb87
> @gmail.com deliver unto us this message:
>>
>> On 17/06/2026 20:43, The True Melissa wrote:
>>> Verily, in article <past-20260617200451@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, did
>>> ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de deliver unto us this message:
>>>>     Well, I'm such a retrophiliac! I go online to collect photographs
>>>>     of my local boroughs showing how they looked decades ago when I
>>>>     was young, looking at those old buildings to calm me down. But now
>>>>     I do not feel so alone anymore knowing that even people who never
>>>>     experienced those demolished buildings want to live in that past too!
>>>>
>>>>     A writer recently reported about his 12-year-old daughter watching,
>>>>     "Stand by me" (1986):
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've taught several students who've said that they wish they'd lived
>>> before the invention of AI.
>>
>> They'd freak if they were allowed 50 years in a time machine
>> and then find they didn't have a phone. :)
> 
> Maybe. They don't fully realize what it would actually be like.
> 
> Then again, Gen Z is the cohort which calls doing without entertainment
> "rawdogging" and competes to see how long they can do it. They're an
> interesting cohort. They're the first in history to be more averse to
> new inventions than their elders.

They're the first to have the inventors say how dangerous their products
are and they'll never have a job. None of which, IMO, is true.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145605

The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> posted:

> Verily, in article <1781716258-12588@newsgrouper.org>, did 
> athel.cb@gmail.com deliver unto us this message:
> > 
> > Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> posted:
> > 
> > > Den 17.06.2026 kl. 15.31 skrev Hibou:
> > > 
> > > > This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
> > > > bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
> > > > policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
> > > > live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
> > > > than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -
> > > > 
> > > > <https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > (It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
> > > > more technology.)
> > > 
> > > No, they don't want to live in the past. They want the world to be like 
> > > it was. That means dismantling all the evil technologies.
> > > 
> > Not to mention all the social changes. Many Trump supporters want the USA to be
> > as it was in the 1950s, when blacks and women and "allies" knew their place.
> 
> What is your source for this claim? 

Try this: https://thedispatch.com/article/maga-republicans-1950s-nostalgia/
That wasn't my actual source, but one that I quickly found in response to
your challenge. It took a whole 5 seconds to find.
> 
> The quiz is quite clearly asking about technology. GenZ has an oft-noted 
> aversion to tech and craving for authenticity. To imply  that they're 
> all a bunch of closet racists who want a more racist world is a smear, 

I didn't imply that. I made a comment about one group of people who hanker
after the simplicities of the 1950s. No implication about anyone else.

> and "Trump supporters" have nothing to do with anything. They polled 
> Zoomers, an age bracket, not a political bracket. 
> 
I fear that I may have touched a raw nerve. I hadn't realized we had any Magats
in this group.

-- 
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145622

On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 13:48:10 GMT, athel.cb@gmail.com
<user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> wrote:

>
>The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> posted:
>
>> Verily, in article <1781716258-12588@newsgrouper.org>, did 
>> athel.cb@gmail.com deliver unto us this message:
>> > 
>> > Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> posted:
>> > 
>> > > Den 17.06.2026 kl. 15.31 skrev Hibou:
>> > > 
>> > > > This is from an NBC News survey of 3,009 people in the Gen Z[ed] 
>> > > > bracket, who were quizzed on issues covering climate change and gun 
>> > > > policy to personal finances and religion. The data showed 14% wanting to 
>> > > > live 50 or more years in the past, with 33% percent keen to live less 
>> > > > than 50 years in the past, given the choice" -
>> > > > 
>> > > > <https://www.techradar.com/tech/too-many-subscriptions-worse-products-ai-hurtful-algorithms-spy-devices-nearly-half-of-gen-z-want-to-live-in-the-past-due-to-the-trappings-of-modern-tech>
>> > > > 
>> > > > 
>> > > > (It would appear that the solution to technology is a time machine, i.e. 
>> > > > more technology.)
>> > > 
>> > > No, they don't want to live in the past. They want the world to be like 
>> > > it was. That means dismantling all the evil technologies.
>> > > 
>> > Not to mention all the social changes. Many Trump supporters want the USA to be
>> > as it was in the 1950s, when blacks and women and "allies" knew their place.
>> 
>> What is your source for this claim? 
>
>Try this: https://thedispatch.com/article/maga-republicans-1950s-nostalgia/
>That wasn't my actual source, but one that I quickly found in response to
>your challenge. It took a whole 5 seconds to find.
>> 
>> The quiz is quite clearly asking about technology. GenZ has an oft-noted 
>> aversion to tech and craving for authenticity. To imply  that they're 
>> all a bunch of closet racists who want a more racist world is a smear, 
>
>I didn't imply that. I made a comment about one group of people who hanker
>after the simplicities of the 1950s. No implication about anyone else.
>
>> and "Trump supporters" have nothing to do with anything. They polled 
>> Zoomers, an age bracket, not a political bracket. 
>> 
>I fear that I may have touched a raw nerve. I hadn't realized we had any Magats
>in this group.

The group in question is made up of Americans between the ages of 14
and 29.   That's a pretty large range to use to make any conclusions,
and not a range I think have any real concept of life in the 1950's.

It includes Americans who are high-school age and have very little
concept of what life was like in the 1950s other than the anecdotal
tales imparted to them by their grandparents. Their own parents
weren't alive in the 1950s and unable to relate any real picture of
the times.  

The typical anecdotal tales from their grandparents would be either
how deprived they were or how free they were in the 1950s.  The "free"
versions would account for Gen Z'er's desire to have lived in that
era.

Gen Z'ers would also be in their 20s.  (An age group where I have
frequent contact with two Gen Z grandsons)  Again, very little - if
any - exposure to life in the 1950s other than anecdotal.

What they do hear about life in the 1950s they generally regard as
"quaint", but not particuarly attractive to them.  Sometimes they are
envious how cheap something was in the 1950s, but I have to remind
them an item that cost $1.00 then wasn't the bargain it sounds like.
When a teen made $1.00 an hour, it was an hour's labor to buy that
item.  

The future, though, is something they see as technologically advanced
from a present that is already technologically advanced.  It's a
generation where they've never been separated from the ability to
contact anyone else or find any useful information at the touch of a
button...instant access to anything they want to know or do.  It's
understandable that they think the future can only make it better or
easier.

Old gits like me look at the future with some - or a lot - of
trepidation about what is to come because we are more aware of world
affairs, politics, and the shit-storm that could come to be if we
continue the same path we are on now.




 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145624

Le 19/06/2026 à 00:56, Tony Cooper a écrit :
> 
> The future, though, is something they [Gen Z] see as technologically advanced
> from a present that is already technologically advanced.  It's a
> generation where they've never been separated from the ability to
> contact anyone else or find any useful information at the touch of a
> button...instant access to anything they want to know or do.  It's
> understandable that they think the future can only make it better or
> easier.
> 
> Old gits like me look at the future with some - or a lot - of
> trepidation about what is to come because we are more aware of world
> affairs, politics, and the shit-storm that could come to be if we
> continue the same path we are on now.


There are some big differences between now and the 1950s. Technology has 
become pervasive, largely incomprehensible, and has fallen into the 
hands of the nastier elements of humanity - hackers, fraudsters, toxic 
governments, and the owners of 'social' media.

The future looks bleak. In the 50s, I suppose the main worry was nuclear 
war. That worry still lurks, the weapons still exist, and we can now add 
to it accelerating climate change, AI, robot soldiers and drones, 
powerful rogue states that seem to be becoming less stable, not more 
(Russia, USA), the occasional pandemic (now that we travel a lot and 
huddle together on cruise ships), and the Kessler syndrome (a chain of 
collisions that destroys essential satellites and causes our systems to 
collapse).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145626

On 19/06/26 15:51, Hibou wrote:

> There are some big differences between now and the 1950s. Technology
> has become pervasive, largely incomprehensible, and has fallen into
> the hands of the nastier elements of humanity - hackers, fraudsters,
> toxic governments, and the owners of 'social' media.

The 1950s was also a time when people started to notice that automation
was about to take off in a big way. The future-gazers predicted that
productivity would increase so much that people had to work far fewer
hours per week, with no drop in salaries and wages. A brighter future
was just around the corner.

What we didn't predict was that the super-rich would find a way to take
the profits of increased productivity and put it into their own pockets,
without doing anything themselves to increase productivity.

-- 
Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145636

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 06:51:36 +0100, Hibou
<vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>Le 19/06/2026 à 00:56, Tony Cooper a écrit :

>> Old gits like me look at the future with some - or a lot - of
>> trepidation about what is to come because we are more aware of world
>> affairs, politics, and the shit-storm that could come to be if we
>> continue the same path we are on now.

Aye, the rhetroic coming from politicians in Western Europe sounds
like a rehash of 1936. 

>
>There are some big differences between now and the 1950s. Technology has 
>become pervasive, largely incomprehensible, and has fallen into the 
>hands of the nastier elements of humanity - hackers, fraudsters, toxic 
>governments, and the owners of 'social' media.

I doubt that technology has become more pervasive, but agree that it
has become more controlling and controllable by the nastier elements
of humanity, though to hackers, fraudsters, toxic governments, and the
owners of 'social' media you could add big business.

No doubt more people have cars now than in the 1950s, but that is
partly because there are more people now than in the 1950s. But if
your car broke down in the bundu far from the nearest dealer, you
could repair it with the tools provided -- and that was technology,
working for the benefit of the buyer. By yesterday I read about a new
Mercedes where you can't even open the bonnet -- it has to be done by
a computer at the dealer. And when the vendor of the operating system
on the computer ends support for it, not even the dealer can open it.
What happens it it breaks down 1000 miles from the nearest dealer?

The IOT revolution hasn't reached me yet (my car is 25 years old) but
that seems to be becoming more pervasive. It's not technology as such,
but the centralised control of it that is becoming more pervasive. The
car owner's toolkit is just as much technology as the dealer's
computer, but at least you didn't need to have an internet connection
to use the screwdriver or a spanner. 




>
>The future looks bleak. In the 50s, I suppose the main worry was nuclear 
>war. That worry still lurks, the weapons still exist, and we can now add 
>to it accelerating climate change, AI, robot soldiers and drones, 
>powerful rogue states that seem to be becoming less stable, not more 
>(Russia, USA), the occasional pandemic (now that we travel a lot and 
>huddle together on cruise ships), and the Kessler syndrome (a chain of 
>collisions that destroys essential satellites and causes our systems to 
>collapse).

-- 
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145638

On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:26:57 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>
>No doubt more people have cars now than in the 1950s, but that is
>partly because there are more people now than in the 1950s. 

Well, there are more cars per household than in the 1950s.  It was not
at all uncommon for a family to have just one car, and the husband
drove it to work.  Now, more households are at least two-car families.
Also, teens living at home  (in the US) are more likely to also have a
car which means three- and four-car families.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145639

Le 20/06/2026 à 02:26, Steve Hayes a écrit :
> Hibou wrote:
>>
>> There are some big differences between now and the 1950s. Technology has
>> become pervasive, largely incomprehensible, and has fallen into the
>> hands of the nastier elements of humanity - hackers, fraudsters, toxic
>> governments, and the owners of 'social' media.
> 
> I doubt that technology has become more pervasive, but agree that it
> has become more controlling and controllable by the nastier elements
> of humanity, though to hackers, fraudsters, toxic governments, and the
> owners of 'social' media you could add big business.
> 
> No doubt more people have cars now than in the 1950s, but that is
> partly because there are more people now than in the 1950s. But if
> your car broke down in the bundu far from the nearest dealer, you
> could repair it with the tools provided -- and that was technology,
> working for the benefit of the buyer. By yesterday I read about a new
> Mercedes where you can't even open the bonnet -- it has to be done by
> a computer at the dealer. And when the vendor of the operating system
> on the computer ends support for it, not even the dealer can open it.
> What happens it it breaks down 1000 miles from the nearest dealer? [...]


Yes, that's not good. I sometimes wonder what it means to own a product 
such as a car or a phone. Doesn't ownership mean that one has control 
over what happens to the thing one owns, within the limits of the law?

Anyway, can I justify "Technology has become pervasive"? I think so. 
Back in the 1950s, no-one had a mobile phone. Rail and air tickets were 
pieces of paper and card, not QR codes or RFID cards. We paid with coins 
and notes, not bank cards. We found our way about with paper maps, not 
apps…. Many of our systems now depend on satellites - agriculture, 
aviation, emergency services, finance, railways, shipping, road 
transport, and others.

'The economic impact on the UK of a disruption to GNSS' -
<https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/report-the-economic-impact-on-the-uk-of-a-disruption-to-gnss/the-economic-impact-on-the-uk-of-a-disruption-to-gnss-executive-summary#key-findings>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145640

Le 20/06/2026 à 07:06, Hibou a écrit :
> 
> [...] Rail and air tickets were
> pieces of paper and card, not QR codes or RFID cards. [...]


Or apps.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145641

On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 07:06:25 +0100, Hibou
<vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>Le 20/06/2026 à 02:26, Steve Hayes a écrit :
>> Hibou wrote:
>>>
>>> There are some big differences between now and the 1950s. Technology has
>>> become pervasive, largely incomprehensible, and has fallen into the
>>> hands of the nastier elements of humanity - hackers, fraudsters, toxic
>>> governments, and the owners of 'social' media.
>> 
>> I doubt that technology has become more pervasive, but agree that it
>> has become more controlling and controllable by the nastier elements
>> of humanity, though to hackers, fraudsters, toxic governments, and the
>> owners of 'social' media you could add big business.
>> 
>> No doubt more people have cars now than in the 1950s, but that is
>> partly because there are more people now than in the 1950s. But if
>> your car broke down in the bundu far from the nearest dealer, you
>> could repair it with the tools provided -- and that was technology,
>> working for the benefit of the buyer. By yesterday I read about a new
>> Mercedes where you can't even open the bonnet -- it has to be done by
>> a computer at the dealer. And when the vendor of the operating system
>> on the computer ends support for it, not even the dealer can open it.
>> What happens it it breaks down 1000 miles from the nearest dealer? [...]
>
>
>Yes, that's not good. I sometimes wonder what it means to own a product 
>such as a car or a phone. Doesn't ownership mean that one has control 
>over what happens to the thing one owns, within the limits of the law?
>
>Anyway, can I justify "Technology has become pervasive"? I think so. 
>Back in the 1950s, no-one had a mobile phone. Rail and air tickets were 
>pieces of paper and card, not QR codes or RFID cards. We paid with coins 
>and notes, not bank cards. We found our way about with paper maps, not 
>apps…. Many of our systems now depend on satellites - agriculture, 
>aviation, emergency services, finance, railways, shipping, road 
>transport, and others.

But rail and air travel are themselves technology, and rail, in
particular relies on one of the oldest forms or technology -- the
wheel. Paper tickets were printed using printing technology.

The threat is not technology, but the use to which it is put, which is
not technology but sociology. We already have the Big Brother society
envisaged by George Orwell in 1948. The problem is not technology, but
the use of technology to enforce social control.



>
>'The economic impact on the UK of a disruption to GNSS' -
><https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/report-the-economic-impact-on-the-uk-of-a-disruption-to-gnss/the-economic-impact-on-the-uk-of-a-disruption-to-gnss-executive-summary#key-findings>

-- 
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145642

Le 21/06/2026 à 04:33, Steve Hayes a écrit :
> Hibou wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, can I justify "Technology has become pervasive"? I think so.
>> Back in the 1950s, no-one had a mobile phone. Rail and air tickets were
>> pieces of paper and card, not QR codes or RFID cards. We paid with coins
>> and notes, not bank cards. We found our way about with paper maps, not
>> apps…. Many of our systems now depend on satellites - agriculture,
>> aviation, emergency services, finance, railways, shipping, road
>> transport, and others.
> 
> But rail and air travel are themselves technology, and rail, in
> particular relies on one of the oldest forms or technology -- the
> wheel. Paper tickets were printed using printing technology.


That's true. If you look at the whole process, though, technology is 
applied to more steps and has become more complicated. Driving to the 
station in a 2020s car involves a lot of electronics that weren't on a 
1950s bicycle, or even in a 1950s car. The station very likely no longer 
has staff, but mechanical-electronic barriers linked to billing 
computers. The train is electric, controlled by electronics, with 
electronic signalling, tracking, and communications…. It's a long way 
from shovelling coal into an overgrown kettle, and metal signals 
operated by wires and cranks.

> The threat is not technology, but the use to which it is put, which is
> not technology but sociology. We already have the Big Brother society
> envisaged by George Orwell in 1948. The problem is not technology, but
> the use of technology to enforce social control.


I think there are several aspects to the problem. One is dependency: the 
national grid failing as the result of a cyberattack, for instance. 
Another is opaqueness: even experts understand only a fraction of how 
things work. Just fetching a web page, for example, is more complicated 
than one might imagine:

<https://www.catchpoint.com/blog/http-transaction-steps>

And with AI and climate models, we just have to trust the computers. 
This opaqueness facilitates surveillance and control. I've mentioned 
'smart' tellies and how they spy on their users. If the same data had to 
be gathered by a human spy sat on the sofa next to them, people would 
instantly object and send him packing.

It's no wonder that some would like to return to simpler times.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1145644

Den 21.06.2026 kl. 07.08 skrev Hibou:

> And with AI and climate models, we just have to trust the computers. 
> This opaqueness facilitates surveillance and control. I've mentioned 
> 'smart' tellies and how they spy on their users. If the same data had to 
> be gathered by a human spy sat on the sofa next to them, people would 
> instantly object and send him packing.

Our national TV once made an experiment. They asked the assistant in a 
bakery shop to ask people about sensitive personal information after 
each purchase, e.g. social security number, address, phone and so on. 
Nobody wanted to give this information, but people accept that the same 
info is collected automatically - plus a lot more, even more sensitive 
information.

> It's no wonder that some would like to return to simpler times.

ACK

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.usage.english

csiph-web