>>47557196 >older generations always so against technology? We aren't, really. But we do demand a benefit from change. So often the only outcome is change rather than improvement. We've seen enough of that. Don't forget that we were the early adopters of transistors in the '50s. That was a definite improvement even if the quality was a bit iffy. We pioneered the optcal discs you have now discarded. We bought into the Personal Computer in the '70s. Just about everything you use today was started before you were born. Where would you be now without us?
They're not. Their against change. They don't like learning new things and they don't want the world around them to change so fast. They're perfectly fine with the technology that they grew to know. You will be exactly like that in 50 years.
>>47557707 >You will be exactly like that in 50 years I might be wrong, but I don't believe this is necessarily true. Our generation (and I say that as a guy who's only barely in it) has a small advantage over previous generations in that rapid technological advancement has become commonplace.
People in their 20's and 30's now have seen the greatest technological leaps in the history of mankind, and they've seen a bunch of them.
>>47557196 anyone will judge harshy or be against something they don't understand or don't want to understand. The older people didn't grow up with this. but they have a point, most of technology is stupid and a major waste of time. But that doesn't mean technology is a bad thing, just misused.
>>47557814 You can't avoid that this little thing happens called "perspective." The young get caught up in minutia.
I'm 39. Do you think I spend my time caring about what the inside of my case looks like? No. "The SATA cables HAVE to be routed a certain way! It's over 9000 times better!" LOL. Keep telling yourself that.
>>47557422 >But we do demand a benefit from change.
I'm only 29 but I agree with this. Every time a website updates it gets worse. Most of the time when software gets updated it gets worse. Most new tech is consumerist bullshit like the iWatch or a new phone that is 1% faster than last year's model but is still 100x more fragile than a flip phone.
>>47557707 >You will be exactly like that in 50 years. 50 years? todays generation already is like that. look at /g/ and how they talk about how awesome the 90s was. It's not just /g/, it's todays generation with people in their 20s. you know that old man we used to roll our eyes at when he complained about todays kids? we've become that old man.
>>47558081 I get what you're saying, but I think the big difference there is that while /g/ bitches & moans about new software/hardware, people here still (reluctantly) take the plunge and learn to use new technologies when they have to. Older people will just complain about the changes while making no effort to familiarize themselves.
>>47558222 I gotta agree with this, and in the year 2050-2060 when all of /g/ is old. the new young generation will be talking about how great it would be if we all were dead. the irony is just baffling.
>>47557609 this meme is stupid. you really think that if it hadn't have happened it never would have? people learn from history not theory. you should be grateful it happened before the world was ready to sustain that high demand.
Taking a look at how user privacy is being violated, how everything is moving towards cloud and the internet is centered almost exclusively around mobile, you realize some day we'll be the 'old people' against technology, right?
>>47557196 I find the worst offenders to be under 30 and over 50.
Under 30: grew up with technology being a certain way, didn't live through enough changes to learn that change is a fact of life. See "cloud is a jew scam", "I need removable storage on my phone", etc.
Older than 50: didn't grow up with tech, mind hardened before it learned to adapt to technical change.
Mid 30s master race, fuck all of you little snot nosed brats who don't appreciate and don't understand where we are today and how we got here. Obligatory rage face for emphasis.
It doesn't matter what era you live in, technology (and its associated perceived and actual affordances) is nearly all that meaningfully changes our behavior as a species. Accumulated knowledge and information in a culture or population pales in comparison. These developments in technology change what we do, how we live, how we interact, and how we experience existence.
There are always those who embrace advancements and those that don't like what it does, are stuck in their ways and refuse to advance, don't see any use in it, don't care for it, whatever. The former is almost always what wins out, for better and worse. When it's for the worse, it doesn't matter who has the foresight to see it, once it as begun it must run its course. The we mourn for losses and grievances or celebrate it, and the cycle repeats.
That's all a fancy way of saying people are apt to be myopic and dense when it comes to thinking beyond the immediate. Newer generations are just born in it, that's the way it is, that's all it is, and they accept it because they rarely know any better.
>>47558614 If you want to control your computing, then you should have your own dedicated server. If you're happy that other people who don't care for you hold your data, then you get what you deserve.
>>47558634 >thinks "security" is a binary condition >thinks mission critical systems should be housed in the basement of a combustible building guarded by a secretary, maintained by a solo IT guy 45 minutes away, and served by a shitty cable modem rather than mirrored across datacenters and fed by redundant backbone connections monitored 24/7 by a team of dedicated employees
>>47558634 That's my point. Many people have websites without security needs and so they can go and host it the cheapest poorfag way they desire. Dedicated servers cost real money but hosting services cost pocket change.
>>47558708 I think that guy means "on-premise server" when he says dedicated server
You can get managed dedicated servers in a data center, it's very common. But "I only trust if I can run my grimy fingers across the heatsink I installed all by myself with Arctic Silver 3" is a common sentiment with unemployed neckbeards
Christ, I'm only 20 years old and I already hate most of the tech developments of this decade. I don't pretend to be a 90's kid, because I'm not. I'm a 2000's kid, if anything.
I will never stop using a desktop or optical discs. I will never use this "cloud" business (except if I absolutely have to, for example, school-related things), and I will never buy a buttonless slab smartphone (flip phone masterrace).
I shudder to think of what the world of technology will look even 10 years from now, and how I will be then.
>>47558735 Anyone who actually knows anything about psychology, neurology, evolutionary models describing observed heuristics, or just has a basic will to think about the world around them, realizes preferring situations that are perceivedly less ambiguous and directly controllable, is very common and rooted in what's likely a hardwired basis. And beyond that, if you look at the bigger picture, it's not wrong. There's a reason our logic and preferences are apt to work like this.
It really is tiresome. Everything about your statement indicates a sense of stupidity and narrow mindedness that's been noted, highlighted, evaluated, and for obvious reasons, criticized, going back further than even the ancient Greeks. Because your behavior stems from the same evolutionary basis, and the same mental shortcuts. People with half a brain, since the beginning, have wanted to pull you apart and figure out what makes you tick simply because you're so damn common and destructive, it's ll anyone can do to not be driven mad and to find peace.
Unfortunately life has never beat you down to a point where you were forced to look inwards with any sense of honesty. I suggest you do so, your tendency to spout platitudes and scoff at anything you don't like, without providing a substantial argument or showing any indication of intelligent thought, is frankly pretty embarrassing.
>>47558792 Oldfag here. It's been around since the dawn of computing. What happened was that in the 80s, and 90s computer hardware, storage technology, and content creation habits advanced much more rapidly than global networks, but in the 2000s that began to change when broadband became the default. The evolution of high quality virtualization technology also pushed things along.
What you're seeing with this "cloud" business is not new, but a permanent, fundamental shift back to a state much closer in spirit to the way networked computing originally worked. The idea of having everyone hoard hundreds of megabytes and heaps of optical disks and using sneakernet to move large amounts of data is a distinctly 90s condition that we will likely not see again for a long time, if ever. The only thing I can see bringing that back is if some new use of computing is invented that generates impossibly huge amounts of data in a way that makes it impractical or unnecessary to move across the internet, is only useful locally for a limited period of time, and for which version control and redundancy are irrelevant or infeasible.
Don't get butthurt because sales guys in the 00s started to call it something that it wasn't known as before. Your childhood was the anomaly, it's time for you to grow up and accept what we've always known was normal.
>>47559085 You talk exactly like a 2nd year undergraduate. I remember what that felt like, I know no amount of common sense can penetrate your 19-20 year old brain, and therefore there is no point in my trying to force things along. You'll grow up eventually and understand why I'm right.
>>47559174 I wouldn't say so. What computing is and entails is a far cry from the old days of some limited terminal interfacing with a central computer. Almost everything in that equation has changed, and it's unlikely to return there in a true sense.
Also, a good deal of the world doesn't even have decent internet infrastructure and for a lot of tasks it simply isn't viable. People have had a taste of decently high powered consumer grade hardware under their own control, and local computing. A good sector of the population isn't going to let it go, I know I certainly won't.
>>47559265 Cloud computing is just like the days of old. What's changed is the user interfaces of the system. In cloud computing, the computing isn't processed on the client computer and also, the data is not stored in the client computer. In cloud storage, the data is stored on remote (cloud) computers.
>>47559265 >What computing is and entails is a far cry from the old days of some limited terminal interfacing with a central computer
What do you think computing "is and entails"? Most businesses and consumers have demonstrated that they disagree with you.
As far as third world countries go, they're already making great use of low powered mobile computing and wireless networking (speaking of other things 20something neckbeards have the most ridiculously hostile attitudes towards). A good sector of Mali isn't interested in how fast they can recompile the kernel for their gantoo.
>>47557196 With every increase in complexity comes further reliance on the world at large.
You just have to look at the evolution of trust required for your life to others over the years.
>Farm with simple tools You feed your family through hard work and verbal history. If your tools break, you chop down a tree and fix them. You know everything you need to know to live, and are capable of providing it both for yourself and how to teach it to future generations.
>Farm with Machinery While improving performance you have lost a bit of yourself to needing the assistance of others if your engine breaks down. You don't have the ability to fix all of your tools if they break, and you're not 100% sure on how they physically function. You and your family MUST depend on others for the gains you have come to expect from machinery, and you are unable to teach your children to do the same.
>Farm with computers Great machines working in the IoT provide you with lots of crops. However, you don't even have a clue how it works, you can't explain it to your children, and not a damn thing you can do to repair it yourself. In fact, you are forced to continuously upgrade to keep your parts serviceable.
You and your family are at the mercy of something you don't understand that you can't repair and can't explain. >Recipe for happiness
>>47559318 Everyone get a load of this luddite, he thinks "tools" means "an object you can hold in your hands"
>I refuse to drive a car with electronically controlled fuel injection even though it's infinitely better, if I can't fix it with muh trusty hammer I'm at the mercy of some chinky-dinky treacherous yellow men in a place I can't even pronounce
I used to just want to wait for them to die but my worst fear is the new generations after will essentially say something like, "well, if they didn't have to learn, neither should I!" or "tech is supposed to be easy nowadays and you don't have to learn!" and we will never be able to get out of it
>Bernard's knows day but not month >Albert KNOWS Bernard doesn't know it >May, June, eliminated because if it was one of those two months, Albert couldn't be sure Bernard doesn't know it because there's only one 19th and one 18th >Bernard now knows the date because he was given the day >Albert now knowing the date means if has to be July 16th because he couldn't tell what day if it was august two August dates apart
>>47557196 Because they group in a simpler world where everyone got on fine without the inconvenience of over 'convenience'. I for one identify with the 'older' generation. I still don't have a smartphone and plan on holding out until vendors force them on people (probably soon). Might be the first 27 year old to own a Jitterbug here soon
I agree and not just because I'm in the master race demographic, I was shocked to learn recently that the kids of today know less about tech than us, how does that even happen, they've lived their lives on computers and they don't even understand them
>>47557196 I don't know. I think I'm coming to realize why though. I noticed as I get older, the more I feel threatened by newer technology. Then again, I feel as though consumer tech is getting crappier and crappier. We're getting better features in some areas, but completely losing sight of the original purpose.
>>47559689 Not him, but: 1) Since A knows B doesn't know the date, then it can't be May or June 2) Since B now knows it is not May or June, then he knows the date. The unique days of the month left between July and August are the 15th, 16th, and 17th, in that they only appear in one of the two. So the correct days are narrowed down to July 16th, August 15th, or August 17th. 3) Since A knows the date after B says he knows the date, then it must be July 16th. This is because if the month was August, then there would have been two possible dates in the month it could be, namely the 15th and 17th. So A wouldn't have known the day yet. But since A knew the date after hearing B knew the date, then A must have known it was July, because July had only one valid day in it. Thus the birthday is on July 16th.
>new tech is released >seems pointless but kids love it, having never seen anything like it before >can do everything and more on existing tech It might be true for the first few dozen or so cycles but eventually this dissolves into simple ignorance about the tech in question. It'll happen to you too.
>>47559895 Maybe it will be a good thing, in that people become accustomed to not knowing the inner workings of tech and not feeling the need to act like they know it, so and legislative decisions around it can be deferred to a group that does.
I don't really "understand" them either; very few individuals have a comprehensive enough understanding of technology that they could explain, accurately and in complete detail, how every little thing works from the physics involved in the chips all the way up to the UI/UX, and all the network protocols at every layer. But we learned to adapt as CLI gave way to GUI and as copying to a floppy disk and twisting a little plastic handle gave way to seamless background syncs on a touchscreen.
But I'm still shocked at the hostility to amazing things like being able to replicate, over the airwaves, all the settings and content from old your pocket supercomputer onto the new one you bought at the corner store by tapping a few icons when you dropped your old one in the toilet.
Apparently if you can't fix it by bashing it with a wrench, it's the ENEMY OF YOUR FREEDOM
>>47559979 >Streaming music services are cancerous advertising delivery vehicles
No one is forcing you to parasite stream stuff over EDGE because you live in a 3rd world country and you're too dumb to cache the files before you head outside and too poor to pay for your own content. If you don't like music, you can always scream REEEE while rocking yourself gently to comfort yourself in the face of inexorable change.
>>47559964 >But I'm still shocked at the hostility to amazing things like being able to replicate, over the airwaves, all the settings and content from old your pocket supercomputer onto the new one you bought at the corner store by tapping a few icons when you dropped your old one in the toilet. Thats right, lockstep with the other morons who trade security and privacy for ease of use.Muh contacts! Fucking disgusting.
>>47560055 I'm from a music family. Half my extended family is in performing, composing, teaching, or managing, on both the classical and popular side. It's likely you've heard at least one of them if you listen to more intellectually oriented radio programs, which I doubt but who knows.
Anyway I'm fine with musicians getting paid, and owning CDs, and I have enough money where the cost doesn't merit a second thought. You are welcome not to pay as I'm sure whatever garbage you like doesn't deserve a dime anyway.
>>47560118 Definitions are tricky. I'm not going to give enough detail here to even come close but they were classically trained, they collaborate often with artists who are solidly on the classical side, but their most successful work is more modern and with populist pretensions.
>>47560150 The last CD I bought was a friend's. It's through an indie label but I don't have a problem with big labels other than Sony. Pressed redbook CD is a nice thing to have especially if you have nice gear to listen on, but also because of longevity.
>>47560158 >more modern and with populist pretensions. Ah, sorry if I seemed a bit snippy then. I just assumed you meant classic, but were talking like classic music was somehow more refined than other musics. It just irks me when people assume that classic = must use complicated words.
It's cool your family does that anon. Wish some of my family members did that stuff, but I'm really the only one who played the violin/cello for more than 5 years.
>>47560179 >Pressed redbook CD is a nice thing to have especially if you have nice gear to listen on, but also because of longevity. Buying the FLAC from you're indie artist's bandcamp would have better longevity and wouldn't contribute waste, and also sound equally as good on your "gear"
>>47560186 I'm the one who turned out like you, I wasted my youth on computers and my playing was never more than an after school activity. So when they're talking about their successful exiting lives at holidays, I bore everyone with talk of computer bullshit :(
>>47560242 Computer bullshit is the best. Playing was only an after school activity for me, and even though I still have a violin in my closet, I haven't touched it in years. All my days are spent watching Netflix or posting here.
>>47560400 It's fun but it makes for bad conversation with real people plus it's a god damm sausage fest. Speaking of things kids these days don't appreciate. Apparently women are evil and we must do everything possible to drive them away from tech careers.
Anyway hobbies are important to have, outside of tech.
I know people not even in their thirties who hated stuff like smartphones, netbooks and tablets when they were new. Some people just don't embrace change as easy, or believe it isn't necessary to begin with.
>>47560455 >we must do everything possible to drive them away from tech careers. I'd really like some explanation for this. How does this happen again, and is there any hard basis for it actually occurring to any meaningful degree?
Could it not be less that women are disincentivized or pushed away from technical fields, and more that they're intrinsically just less inclined to begin with? And anything to try to change that is actually forcing conditions more artificial than the perceived problem
>>47560569 There's the casual and overt discrimination that happens on occasion, sometimes it's intentional and other times it's not. It's not always PC to tell jokes or references about stereotypical gendered behavior. In such an environment, the most PC behavior is to be 100% professional while at work.
>>47560569 I'm tired of talking about this issue here on/g/, plus I'm drunk and about to go to sleep. What I'm getting at is the general hostility towards any initiatives that try to attract women and girls to tech careers, now and in the distant future. A disturbingly large number of neckbeards think that tech is supposed to be a "safe space" for weird spergy losers and any icky girls who might want to play aren't invited. That's all.
I hate having to go to bars to meet women. I really fucking hate it. It's too late for my generation but it doesn't have to be for the next one.
>>47560608 I'm full of theobromine and my head is pounding. We're roughly on the same level. Probably.
On one hand, I don't really blame people for being hostile towards initiatives to attract women, minorities, whatever happens to be the trend in the collective social bullshit at the time. Sure, there might be some people that would seek to actively push women out of what they see as their sphere, but they're greatly outnumbered as a whole and these bubbles will always exist to an extent regardless of what the group being alienated is. Couple these moronic ads treating women like braindead children who need "help" (ie parasitically capitalizing on the trend) and the whole thing is just a fucked up pretentious joke.
There is nothing barring women from getting involved. If they want to, they can. If they aren't maybe there's a deeper problem, or maybe they just don't give a shit naturally and we should just accept that, as far as we can tell what natural even is. I'm pretty sick'a hearin' about it, it draws all the wrong people ultimately.
>>47560676 >On one hand I forgot about the other hand. Whatever.
The other hand would roughly be that maybe there is an array of factors that "oppresses" and actively discourages women from these roles. But too fucking bad. Life doesn't always accept what you are and want to do, real change, the kind that isn't pretentious and hollow, stems from these kind of people pushing to get what they want on their own. Not some entities trying to coerce people into it, and artificially engineer the ecology. That's a recipe for how to fuck shit up mindlessly for the sake of it.
Well, that is, if they signed an SLA with you. Otherwise you'll have pretty much the same outcome and your data siphoned off by pretty much anybody. You know, all those layers upon layers of software of virtualization and framework have exploits.
Also have fun getting old.
Thread replies: 128 Thread images: 15
Thread DB ID: 53840
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.