Acknowledging that this is how people generally use the word “technology”, I’d rather reserve that word for things that are involved in tekhne, i.e. tools, machines, devices, programs, components, factories, methods, etc.; things one uses to produce. I think you’re centrally talking about networks and services. Richard M Stallman calls them “disservices”, as in “Facebook provides an online social networking disservice”. That it’s even possible to seemingly unwillingly more or less ruin oneself using a thing, is evidence that one isn’t centrally relating to the thing as a technology at all.
Originally titled “Do a cost-benefit analysis of your internet usage”, but this makes it sounds like analyzing different internet service provider plans. “Social media usage” is too narrow. I’m open to suggestions.
“participation in networks”? IDK. Is “social media” too narrow? I intuitively include LW, blogs, forums, email, as social media. Youtube is a mix; I consider it social media when I’m using it as pica for talking to a person, and I endorse most of my other Youtube use (e.g. videos of natural phenomena, or documentaries, or clever inventions). But yeah I could imagine being seriously attention-sniped in some other unendorsed way.
“attention service usage”? “consumption service usage”? That’s not really clear, though it does have a precise meaning that I think is what you’re trying to point at: services (i.e. computer programs running somewhere else that do some computing task for you) which are attention / consumption based (i.e. the thing you’re getting from the service is something you’re going to just directly experience, as opposed to running it through some more computation). Services which are attention-based seem like the central type of technology that induces attention-sniping incentives. (Though it’s not sufficient, e.g. Wikipedia.)
Acknowledging that this is how people generally use the word “technology”, I’d rather reserve that word for things that are involved in tekhne, i.e. tools, machines, devices, programs, components, factories, methods, etc.; things one uses to produce. I think you’re centrally talking about networks and services. Richard M Stallman calls them “disservices”, as in “Facebook provides an online social networking disservice”. That it’s even possible to seemingly unwillingly more or less ruin oneself using a thing, is evidence that one isn’t centrally relating to the thing as a technology at all.
Originally titled “Do a cost-benefit analysis of your internet usage”, but this makes it sounds like analyzing different internet service provider plans. “Social media usage” is too narrow. I’m open to suggestions.
“participation in networks”? IDK. Is “social media” too narrow? I intuitively include LW, blogs, forums, email, as social media. Youtube is a mix; I consider it social media when I’m using it as pica for talking to a person, and I endorse most of my other Youtube use (e.g. videos of natural phenomena, or documentaries, or clever inventions). But yeah I could imagine being seriously attention-sniped in some other unendorsed way.
“attention service usage”? “consumption service usage”? That’s not really clear, though it does have a precise meaning that I think is what you’re trying to point at: services (i.e. computer programs running somewhere else that do some computing task for you) which are attention / consumption based (i.e. the thing you’re getting from the service is something you’re going to just directly experience, as opposed to running it through some more computation). Services which are attention-based seem like the central type of technology that induces attention-sniping incentives. (Though it’s not sufficient, e.g. Wikipedia.)