The sentiment is valuable but screens <-> family comparison bleeds too much into the polarization camp for shock value. "Time spent doing X" as opposed to Y will always have shock value. We sleep too much. Too much time reading on the toilet.

My main pushback is solitude. I don't actually want to timemaxx family interaction or any human interaction. I don't want to be the only one on the planet either, we need one another. But a life well-lived includes deep experiences in solitude if you ask me.

EDIT: and another thing! human interaction here focuses entirely on the living and the related. Why? Human connection can span all of humanity. And it should.

Don't be so hard on yourself. Yes, valid observation and time to curtail it a bit. But I think the 'stare at a screen' thing is a bit oversimplified. A computer is a medium of connection, mostly to other humans, or at least indirectly to human's work, art, etc.. So it's mostly using a tool for 'connection.' With anything, moderation is good, even moderating the moderation. But you're not staring at a brick. Don't oversimplify it.

My father spent more time in the office than with his family. My ancestors spent more time in the field than with family. My distant ancestors probably spent significant family time hunting together.

Is there any way to make the profession a family affair again?

I like computers more than many members of my family, so...

This reminds me of Tim Urban's excellent post The Tail End[1] he wrote a few years ago.

He calculates that when a person reaches age 18, they have spent more than 90% of their in-person parent time. As a parent and a son, that hits pretty hard.

Obviously, YMMV.

[1]:https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/12/the-tail-end.html

Shouldn’t the title actually be “Will you have spent more of your life AT WORK than with your family”.

For white-collar jobs typically translates to, computer = work.

Why is this front page? This is just a strangely framed ambiguous question. Here's more of the same: Will you have spent more of your life sleeping than with your family? Will you have spent more of your life walking than with your family? Will you have spent more of your time working than with your family? Will you have spent more of your time blinking than with your family?

Yes, thankfully so. Computers probably got me out of my teens alive.

Valid point. Using a screen for your daily work is one side. Another is sitting with family members together who are staring on a screen like zombies. I guess it’s the latter part that the author claims to be different than 10 years ago. I feel it.

I am taking an opportunity to learn how to make an iOS widget that can display dynamic text or an image from a URL.

It's because my dad always forgets exactly when and what channel his (our) sports team play. He has a phone but push notifications, texts, opening an app or website is too much friction, ultimately, for someone that can read yahoo, check email, and make calls, but not good with texting.

Anyway, a widget is the most immediate visual cue I could think of aside from a push notification but pushes are too fleeting. The idea is my dad just has to "swipe" to see today's games and I can curate it exactly to our teams and whether or not he can see it on the TV or needs to open streaming service X and so on.

---

Is this a good use of my time connecting with my dad? Is it better to call him instead of touching the keyboard? Should I be talking to him now rather than about him?

You could say the same thing about differeng hobbies or tools. Ive held a hammer multiple times longer than I could hold any person. Ive spent unknown number of hours in a garage or barn working on various mechanics.

Time with family is valuable, but so is time doing other things. You don't need everyone involved in everything 24/7.

You can do so many different things with a computer. If you spend hours watching AI generated YouTube shorts instead of playing outside with your kids, then yeah, that's too bad.

But if you spend all those hours building a retro/modern sim city game pair programming with your 12yo, designing the artwork, crafting the story arc, writing the music, finding and fixing bugs, building new levels -- you don't need to regret that you weren't idling around at the park all that time.

Given that I got my first computer at 12, given all the screen time with video games and programming in my youth + my day-job in software I absolutely guarantee I've clocked more hours on a computer than "with my family". I'm OK with that.

Computers have consolidated work, media, and entertainment all within the same "box" and even a good deal of close friend interactions are now mediated "on the screen".

I'm certain early hunter/gatherers would've been equally as shocked seeing factory workers "leave the home" and "constantly meet strangers".

Different praxis for different eras.

I should hope so. You can't play Dark Souls on my family.

And before that it was TV. And before that newspapers.

This is breathless polemic.

I could say that we spend more time at work than with our family - ~40h. Why are computers worse?

I had a similar thought in the shower today: will the last conversation I have be with a person or an AI?

If you think of your screen is a big glowy box of noise that fails to contribute to a good, meaningful life, that's a problem! Put better things on your screen.

That's a big advantage of remote work. I can pause for a couple of minutes, interact with my kids, and come back.

I think a better way to ask this question is if I was entertained by a computer more than by the company of friends/family.

Of course I spend more time looking at a screen - it's my job description. It's never been different in the past. But outside of work, that's a different story.

Is this really that weird, considering labor now involves mostly looking at a screen? In other words, is the total amount of time we see family really going down vs say the 1800s, when people used to work many more hours.

Will you have spent more time working a deadend job than with your family?

"Can you stack your family?" - Michael Falk, The Onion

Quality > Quantity

If I am luchky, yes!

Yes, certainly, first because passion for computer can more often than not predate being able to co-make a family. Then like any work, current societies make far easier to get room to work with computers than any other kind of activity one might want to engage into. Finally, other humans don't want to spend none stop time in company of the single same individual, no matter how much they might love them: they need space for there own personal development. Computers will respond tirelessly to any human wanting to interact with them H24, and don't have any extra psychological and sociological need to fulfill.

So on sheer level of time spent on computer, other humans don't stand a chance. Time spend on something doesn't tell much about how much we feel emotionally positively connected with this thing though.

My life has been more aligned with computers, and I prefer it that way. Computers don't lie, they don't pressure you. At least they respond honestly to my input, almost all the time. Everything outside of computers was awful. So I like everything that involves computers. The internet let me read and learn so much, which made computers good for me. There are downsides, like YouTube and some communities, but overall, I enjoy building things with computers and making them work.

On the other hand, the world outside computers was mostly bad—people who deceived me when I was just starting out, fraudulent contracts, and all the physical pain I went through in manual labor. Looking at it from the other side, people with real-world capital tend to have good relationships and good people around them. But for those without that capital, the world inside a computer can actually feel more real than the outside.

I've come to realize that trustworthy colleagues and respectful relationships largely depend on social status. And it feels like I don't really belong there.

Computers don't get angry when I can't do something. They don't ask me to meet some standard, and they don't get frustrated when I fail to meet it. I can learn at my own pace, doing what I want. In the past, I had to reach out to people online and exchange emails during that process, but now even that's been replaced by AI giving me answers.

For me, computers aren't a cheap substitute for human relationships. They're the infrastructure that gave me the autonomy, knowledge, and productive capability I never got from the real world.

A shelter and a prison can look the same from the outside. But I chose to be here, because this world inside the computer has been less painful than what I experienced outside.

When code fails, at least I can investigate why it failed. People, on the other hand, can twist the same words depending on relationships and power, and exclude you without ever explaining why.

That's why I like computers. At least when I turn on my computer, work on something, and see it run, I feel a sense of accomplishment, whether it's AI generated or hand written code.

Honestly, I'm not sure if having my own home or meeting someone compatible would change anything.

You can't think of it as computers vs. family, but work vs. family. And working with computers is a pretty decent job to have in this day and age.

Date format in the blog has an error. D M Y doesn't have a comma.

the computer lets me stay home and work with my family around, so it's not all doom and gloom... 50 years ago I'd be in the office ~40 hours a week and commuting for another 5