I'm old enough to remember everything being present in the real world. The only books you had to read were the ones that existed around you in the real world. There were radio waves for music and TV but people still purchased disks and videocassettes to own it, because radio and TV were ethereal. Videogames were cartridges that you bought, and so on. People had collections of books, disks, videocassettes, DVDs, game cartridges. And then the internet arrived and you could get everything for free in digital packages without having anything physical.
I support that owning those physical books and disks and games was a more enjoyable experience than having the same information virtually, as in you spent more time enjoying the things you owned and they are more nostalgic for you than ethereal digital stuff. You'll care more for a manga that you read in physical form than the same thing scanned online, even if you pay for it in like a Kindle.
Therefore I assume you can derive more pleasure and have a more memorable experience through interaction with real things compared to merely digital things and, since real stuff is expensive while digital is free, in a way a fraction of that pleasure and meaning can be garnered through dedicated devices and that's the main appeal of such devices be it for music, games, books etc.

>>105883741 (OP)

>>105883755

>>105883900
Welcome to London

I thank you for bumping the thread but really this is not about "I want to go back" but about ways of finding enjoyment in an ethereal world of things that don't exist

>>105883900
what are these frenchmen so riled up about?

>>105884590
I know what you mean, but I don't think it's about "real" things. It's more that owning digital copies allowed us to amass more media than we need. More than we can physically consume.

I remember the days of owning a few physical copies of films and games, always appreciating them but wanting more. Now when you have thousands of games in your library, unlimited streaming/piracy at the click of a button, download 10,000 books in one torrent, none of it feels special any more.

Physical things were limited, tv-radio was limited to what was broadcast at the time you were watching, that's why they felt special.

>>105883741 (OP)
boomer ahh moment

>>105884816
I understand what you're saying but in a way having a dedicated offline device is a form of self limitation because you have to curate your collection, select what you want, carry it around, and just listen and nothing else, or just read the books. In a way having separate physical things add limits to digital abundance that you don't have when everything comes from the same source.
I had a 1Gb mp3 player in the days of dumb phones and I had to really choose what's going in there and I always would listen to almost everything that I chose because I was committed to that; like renting some movies or a games for the weekend.

>>105883741 (OP)
nice blog faggot

>>105883741 (OP)
>owning a lot of physical objects that represent information is good because, uuuuuh, uuhh, it just is okay
>i want to fill my house with a shitload of clutter instead of having the information digitally, taking up virtually no space
you have been memed
i read a lot (on my ereader). I know a lot of people that buy a lot of books because of muh smell and muh turning a real page; but none of that really matters and is just deemed comfy by association. Having text (information) digitally makes 100x more sense than accruing a bunch of thinly sliced dead trees in your house. But I guess people don't like when they can't just buy an object and use it to appear intelligent / present a certain aesthetic. God forbid people would actually have to read the words instead of going on "book hauls" buying a bunch of books they will never read

>>105885620
>Having text (information) digitally makes 100x more sense than accruing a bunch of thinly sliced dead trees in your house.
You know what makes the most sense? Having that information dd'ed to your brain directly via some electronic interface.

>>105885838
If that was a thnig you would be a retard to not use it, if the experience was good (i.e. pacing was not ruined by having it streamed too quickly to your head)
If I could stream documentation into my brain, and retain it exactly as if I had read it normally, that would be amazing. Novels would probably still be better the "ordinary" way, just like movies don't get better by playing them at 10x speed

>>105885865
>just like movies don't get better by playing them at 10x speed
But think about the time you save! You can watch so much more movies. I never watch anything below 2.5x.

>>105885175
Hey! This isn't a frat house or a dorm room. This is /g/ and we respect one another here.

>>105883741 (OP)
I got my PhD thesis bound the other week because my supervisor insists every one of his students give him a hardback copy for his collection and I was surprised how satisfying it was to actually hold a properly nicely bound version of it in my hands. I put off doing it thinking what's the point but now I'm glad I did and I got a copy of it.

>>105885620
You try studying by handwriting notes vs. typing by touch on your phone and then revising your notes on paper vs. on phone and tell me it's the same experience
Paper notebooks will never die
Convenience of storage is not everything, you still have a monkey's brain, you still need to look at trees from time to time and touch grass and feel the warmth of the sun, or you get in mouse utopia territory.

>>105885076
You will never be a real human bean.

>>105885620
Well, hello Mr. Fancy Pants. It just so happens that a used paperback costs LESS than a digital copy nowadays. And Amazon or whoever can just decide you don't really own your ebooks and erase them. You vill be happy!

bump gonna reply soon

>>105883741 (OP)
>books and other things that can be consumed directly with your hands and eyes
Sure
>media that is consumed digitally anyway
Fuck off.

>>105883741 (OP)
I buy real books because I hate reading on a screen. Games and movies are better just accessable on a hard drive than on a cart or disc. I have mine all on a 10tb hd.

>>105883741 (OP)
Personally I found it very liberating to get rid of all my vhs and cassette tapes, cds and dvds, old games consoles, pc game boxes, etc. I had amassed a huge amount of this stuff and it freed up a lot of physical and mental space. I do get pangs of regret from time to time when I see something I used to own listed for an inflated price on ebay or something.

I'm poor and don't want to pay for things I can get for free, even if the physical version is better. I don't buy my games, my books, my music, or any other media anymore. Money is for food and bills

>>105887510
I almost exclusively borrow books from my local library through overdrive, so it literally costs me nothing.

This is rose tinted faggotry imo. Being able to watch any movie I want when I want is superior to shuffling around 3 DVDs.

>>105883741 (OP)
I believe what you are looking for is grounding
Everything feels false when it's all abstract and only accessible to vision and hearing

>>105883741 (OP)
I'm also old enough to remember cassettes and cartridges and I don't miss those things at all. I'm glad we moved on to digital media. It makes storing and interacting with my books, movies and games much easier and cheaper. This ease of access and storage is what gives me mental satisfaction, as oppossed to fiddling around with clunky tapes that take up valuable physical space. If your memory of those obsolete media were accurate, you would remember that interacting with that crap was actually frustrating.

>soillennial whine thread #8473838
why don’t you just fuck off and watch your marvel slop on bluray surrounded by your funko pops and your “furbabies”, faggots.

>m-member when McDonalds had the good lead painted toys?
>m-member when Pizza Hut was for families and stuff and we could play in a poop-stained pee smelling play area?
>m-member sharing terrible headphones and listening to the same album on repeat?
>m-member when videogames were aliased low poly blobs?
>m-member when you bought consoomer slop and could look at da packaging and make collections of da packaging and clutter your mom’s house with boxes

>>105889801
>I believe what you are looking for is grounding
>Everything feels false when it's all abstract and only accessible to vision and hearing
The solution to that is touching grass. Music played from a tape is just as abstract and "false" as 0's and 1's on a computer.

>>105885081
I think this anon gets it. Having too much choice has a debilitating effect. Recently, I took care of my parents' cat while they were away. I had no PC there, so my entertainment options were kind of artificially limited. Ended up playing some PS2 vidya from my childhood and it was fun. But when I'm on my PC, I never really play video games because it's far too easy to alt-tab and get distracted with some bullshit.

Another aspect is how kids are growing up with nothing to be inspired by
In the past you would browse your family and friends's library of favorite books, movies, games, magazines, photo albums, and that would be their personality imprinting into you
But now no one is browsing through other people's digital stuff. No one knows about that book you read online or the Beatles album your uncle loves to stream. All kids are growing up in the same digital skibidi ghetto caring only about what's viral in the moment.
But at least the closest kids in your family might give a go on the library of a dedicated music player, ebook reader, console
I think about that a lot as a parent. As a kid I treasure hunted relatives living rooms for cool stuff. The first book I ever read was The Little Prince that my mom had as a teenager and I found on my grandparents' home. My aunt had The Beatles, and my grandfather had Queen. My younger cousins also discovered stuff I left at my parents home. The Hobbit, some comic books, Sega Genesis. But no one's finding out anything now. You die, you leave only obsolete technology, you pictures are also trapped, and it is as if you never existed. No one will know about the things you enjoy and everything you like ceases to exist the moment you leave the room or is not talking about it.

>>105890185
If you need an artificial limit imposed on you to be able to focus on one thing at a time then the problem is you. Learn some fucking self-discipline. Also what kind of shitty boring games do you play that you have the urge to tab out of them? Play better games.

>>105890430
You think you have focus but in the long run you don't and you enjoyed and remembered less things. You can't power through those societal forces with edgy attutude. The average person has less and less attention span in every measurable way each year and companies profiting from attention are changing because of it.
That anon is likely to have more self discipline than you.

>>105890466
>That anon is likely to have more self discipline than you.
I doubt it. He literally admitted to be paralyzed by too much choice and needing an external limit on what he consooms. I'm able to turn off my laptop and sit down for a few hours and focus my attention on a single book without any external factors forcing me to. Feels good, man.

>The average person has less and less attention span in every measurable way each year
Yeah that's exactly my point. So what the fuck are you coming at me for when I tell someone to get himself in order and learn to focus his attention? Sounds more like you are one of those drones with a 30 second attention span and unwilling to improve yourself and you got irrationally angry at me for telling people to get their shit together because you felt called out.

>>105890466
>Because normies get dumber that means everyone gets dumber
Yeah, no. I'm not a goycattle that consooms all day. But great for you with that defeatist mentality

>>105890430
i have ADD, i don't stand a chance. i'm actually kinda pissed i went camping literally as 4chan was hacked (like in the morning before leaving i refreshed the index and got a strange notice about some new board, but left before looking into it), then got back with less than a day before i came back. i am destined to be here wasting my life.

>>105890590
(pissed in the sense that i wonder what i could have done without the availability of 4chan, not that i went camping, and to be clear, it was to an island with no cell service)

>>105890597
You'd just have been wasting your time in another way, anon

>>105890639
yea, but it would have been nice to get into something else for a change

>>105890590
>i have ADD, i don't stand a chance.
Shut the fuck up with your first world problems. I have brain damage from getting kicked in the head and I have trouble remembering and focusing, but I don't use that as an excuse to become a consooming drone. I actually invest conscious effort to improve my memory and concentration. Be more like me, you weak-minded faggot.

>i am destined to be here wasting my life.
What a disgusting attitude. I'm so glad I'm not like you.

>>105890659

OP is not perfect but has a point, this is just how the dopamine system works.
It's not the physicality, if you were rich and could get literally everything physically it would still make you feel disinterested after a while.
If you find that you can't focus, life seems pointless etc and have the time try living like how a kid on a generous allowance in the 90s would live, it will make you feel more present and able to enjoy simple stuff after some struggle in the first weeks.

so kids grow up in houses with no books dvds or radios in it? Just phones tablets and TVs

>>105883741 (OP)
>>105884590
I tend to agree, but without digital books, and the ability to search for specific words, doing research would be incredibly harder.

>>105883741 (OP)
The Internet scares you, the American consumerist cuck.
It exposes how, indeed, ethereal your life is.
Make you feel anxious you can't adapt to the new fabrics of reality, which is more abstract than ever.
Meanwhile, no one is even taking away your old posessions.
Things that you own end up owning you -- some unknown b-movie according to some unknown novel.

>Therefore I assume you can derive more pleasure and have a more memorable experience through interaction with real things compared to merely digital things
I agree with this but this is only part of the problem for me.
The problem imo is that ease of access led to rapid consumption of products without truly enjoying them. On the other ease of access to internet, not only in computers but also in your phone now is to blame too. Multitasking killed our ability to enjoy things. You see people with multiple screens playing video games while they watch a tv show or a movie while also scrolling through social media in their phones. When was the last time you listened to music without doing something else too?
How about people with massive backlogs treating video games like a job? When I was a kid I had some games and most of them I knew like the back of my hand and I didn't care about anything else.
And now we are constantly bombed with information trying to manipulate just to consum.

>>105893127
It's quite the opposite, ease of access leads to consumerism while my main point is enjoying more and consuming less and cherishing what you own and making the most of a limited supply
You think this is about myself, this is about making an impact on other people's lives like other people made an impact on me growing up. I want others to enjoy my possessions.
I am a parent and I am disgusted at the amount of little smartphone zombies out there. No amount of "just have self discipline bro don't be defeatist" bs will prepare us for what's coming. Giving an online tablet to a child is not the same as letting them browse your shelf of books and movies and records
Those newfangled "new fabrics of reality" are not more abstract, they're just less material but they are much less abstract and less subtle too. People have actually been losing their capacity of thinking beyond the concrete. You can search YouTube videos for elementary school children of the 60s and check out how they communicate their ideas

>>105883741 (OP)
We don't care. We like slop. We have 10+ subscriptions every month. We will own nothing and we will be happy. We like corporations. We like billionaires. We don't need to "own" things. We need to be minimal. Let me guess, you need more? Nice post, Rajesh. Zing! Another millennial down.

>>105889892
This. If you don't subscribe to Netflix, Spotify, Amazon Prime, Disney+, Microsoft 365, and Adobe Creative Cloud, you are a homosexual.

>>105893454
Bro, we can obviously all feel the pain and the longing for the pre-smartphone past. Or pre-internet, for the ones a little bit older or having grown up in a 3rd world shithole. It's 90s america for me, if I had to grow up in a time and place.
But I was lucky to be on exchange in 'Murica circa 2012 (Jesus, did time fly by that fast?), and the two siblings I lived with had a ton of useless shit in their rooms. I don't even know what, and not that there was any idea to it. And they had this Christmas ritual of buying more useless shit for everybody (I just got everyone a money gift card out of my allowance, and a book on top). I mean, it already felt kind of like limitless & tiring consumerism just for the sake of consumerism. Don't get me started on sportsball & endless trips. Not that much of it had to do with internet, it felt, like at all. Actually, judging by David F. Wallace, the TV was probably the beginning of this madness.
A little bit back to the topic, just want to to clarify to you, if I have kids, they don't know about the existence of internet till they turn 18. They are homeschooled, probably mostly by me, and with heavy reliance on self-set goals and interests, with the help of computers. Hopefully, with a library, a garden, a lab, and definitely with no stupid niggers around. I imaging taking "field trips" into the wild to show them how wicked the world is. They will be my fucking experiment in education. And they are certainly not taking any stupid tests to end up on a point on a graph like yours.

>>105894188
>4188
You know, before you all do it, I would like to take a moment and congatulate myself on getting these epic fucking nearly-perfect digits. Yeah, that's me, on the internet, enjoying a little thing.

>>105894218

>>105894188
And that's why you won't have kids, because you live in fantasy world
You'd have to be rich to make that work but also you'd have to be a neet with lots of free time, and you'd have to not care about their performance, their future financial independence etc.
If you ended up having kids like I did you'd quickly learn how everything is a compromise like every parent wants to shield the kids from the real world but are you going to retire at age 30 to raise your kids on a mountaintop monastery?

>>105894619
>are you going to retire at age 30 to raise your kids on a mountaintop monastery?
I mean, hopefully, why not? Yes, I don't like compromises to the point where I would rather have no children. Actually, ideally, it wouldn't be a monastry up the mountain, but a small closed-off community of like-minded people, but that's truly a fucking fantasy now. I mean, am I asking that much, you think? Just a bit of isolation and control over what my kids can have access to?
> you'd have to not care about their performance, their future financial independence etc.
I don't, no. Where the world is now and has long been, and especially considering where it's quickly heading (mostly the unknown), I don't place much trust in the conventional life priorities. Independence of thought will be my top priority, along with criticising everything and anything they see, including me. And if you think "performance" is accomplished by getting some grade on a graph as a requirement, wake up bro. Performance comes from your innate ability and strife for greatness, not a school, not anything that the society is telling you it is.
I realize that you have to do what you have to, having found yourself being a parent already, but do accept that all-or-nothing attitude is not that... unhealthy.
>>105894504
Still feels good.