> now that we ourselves have become a resource to extract.

This has nothing to do with what you quoted.

Smartphones and their effects are orthogonal to your point. Before smartphones if you were at home you were alone, isolated, and bored, so you went out and met your friends. With smartphones you are always connected to your friends or others and it seems that it reduces the psychological need to meet in person (it's no longer the only option).

▲

lm28469 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

That's overly simplistic, people don't go out because they slack 24/7 in front of a screen, not because they're connecting with their friends through their smartphones. From my limited experience 70+ years old spend the whole day in front of youtube/facebook/alternative tv channels mostly watching infotainment that's at best brainrot and very often full blown conspiracy theories / propaganda. Boomers are even worse than teenagers when it comes to that, they're the most gullible and easily screen addicted demographic out there

▲

mytailorisrich 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

The simplistic and beside the point claim is that this is all "we ourselves have become a resource to extract". This is both not new and not key, and more of a political rant.

Before smartphone there was TV and cable TV. Young people spent time in front of the TV but TV is passive and does not allow you to connect with others.

Old people spent their time in front of the TV, before that they spent time by the radio, etc.

The youngest boomers are in their 60s now (and people in their 70s are boomers) so not sure if your really mean "boomers"...

	▲	lm28469 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, and they read books before radio was a thing, what's your point ? Books are exactly the same as tiktok brainrot ? That's obviously not true That tiktok is "active" hence it's objectively better than TV ? Why ? And through what mechanism ?