My old person trait is that I think ‘ghosting’ is completely unacceptable and you owe the other person a face-to-face conversation.
I think that a basic lifestyle should be affordable for a basic person
My old person trait is that instructions do not need to be videos.
I prefer written guides to video guides.
Video has some clear advantages when showing off a 3D space and otherwise, but I dislike pausing them over and over. Especially if my hands are covered in oil and grease, a paper version is superior to a screen.
I refuse to use subscription software. If I can’t buy it outright, I either use an alternative or take to seas.
I love software like Lightburn where you just pay a set amount for so many years of updates and support and when it runs out you can choose to leave it like that or buy more updates and support for a smaller fee.
My old person trait is that when I purchase a printer, I should be able to use whatever is the cheapest compatible ink without the printer treating me like I’m smuggling unicorn blood out of Narnia
my old person trait is that you should keep your internet identity completely separate from your real one
I don’t have notification enabled on most of my apps. I will check on them when I want, but I hate seeing or hearing notifications because they are distracting me. If something is urgent, call me, otherwise it can wait.
My old person trait is I shouldn’t have to scan a QR code for the menu at a sit-down where I’m dropping $100 on entrées. Give me a dang physical copy of the menu!
And then the QR code does not link to a menu but an app instead. So you need to install an app and allow weird permissions not related to the ordering of food for said app just to see that it only displays a static website in a Chrome custom tab.
I find it annoying too and for about 9 months I had a cracked camera on my phone so no QR worked for me, most places had a physical copy when I couldn’t or I just had to leave. Now I don’t like being difficult, but I wish I still had that excuse. I just don’t like it.
In regards to OP’s comment about ghosting, I just want to ask, are you a man? Because women all-too-often have to deal with men who can’t take no for an answer, and some of those men go from mad to violent very quickly. You might say “well, no man should act that way, they should be able to hear ‘I don’t want to see you anymore’ and just accept it and move on” but the fact is they are not all able to do that. So should women do the respectful thing and stop ghosting, even though some of them definitely WILL end up being yelled at/attacked/killed?
(I know my example doesn’t cover all situations involving ghosting, like for instance if the ghoster is a man. If you want to modify your claim to be ‘ghosting is unacceptable, except in cases where having a face-to-face conversation could put someone in danger’ then I guess I’d agree with that statement. It’s just that it’s really hard to know which person will be dangerous when they are turned down.)
I agree, ghosting is necessary in many situations. Am a guy, have reluctantly ghosted both men and women (from a casual friend / professional point of view, rather than romantic) not because I think I’ll be yelled at (or worse) but if the vibe is wrong, it’s self protection - I don’t want to engage with them, full stop.
deleted by creator
Yeah, at the very least scratch the “face to face”. I’d be more inclined to agree if a message or a call is acceptable, but some guys you really, really don’t want to see in person a second time.
Face to face is not only unnecessary, but often counter-productive. You aren’t likely to just already be at the same place, so one or both of you must travel to the agreed upon meeting place, just to deliver the bad news. It also often forces an unwanted and pointless conversation, and draws out what may be a painful subject for both people. And this assumes that it goes well- others have mentioned the risk of violence, extreme emotional distress, etc.
I (generally) oppose ghosting, but it can be done remotely.
I’ll offer the other side of the coin just to give more food for thoughts, but I will also add that unlike OP I believe a phone call or a polite text would be enough: Should someone ghost in the name of safety, when a dangerous person would still look for you in person anyway or should they consider the feelings of someone they don’t like just because they don’t know they are a decent human being?
I understand where you’re coming from, but a phone call or a message will keep you safe from a beating or being yelled at, homeboy starts yelling? Block the number. If you ghost someone they might still get really angry and look for you in person, maybe I’m ignorant and stupid but I don’t see a lot of extra safety in ghosting unless we assume that to tell someone you’re not interested you have to do it in person.
If you ghost someone there is a chance you avoid their anger, a chance. But there’s also 100% certainty that you’re going to hurt someone’s feelings. Not to mention I do believe that’s not the only cause, there’s definitely people that ghost because they just don’t care about the other person.
There’s a wide spectrum of responses people can have to a breakup. Anger to the point of violence is naturally low in most modern societies, but it does exist.
When you have that breakup moment in person, you force a lot of emotions to flood them all at once. Often, they thought things were going well. This creates a strong sense of rejection, hurts their self-esteem, and puts them immediately on the defensive. It can also trigger a fight-or-flight response, and manifest as anger.
Ghosting flattens the curve. Over the course of days or weeks, the ghostee more gradually recognizes and comes to terms with the fact that the ghoster is no longer interested in them. This often happens without there being a flashpoint moment to set them off.
It’s still rude, but I absolutely see the value in it
I don’t see the difference in safety between ghosting and sending a text saying “This isn’t going to work out, you’re just not the one for me”
Not replying / blocking them after is fine. That’s not really ghosting anymore.
In fact, I’d suggest the safety improved from texting that, since the majority wouldn’t bother trying to reach you using other methods, whereas with no reply at all, they may try to reach you some other way like in person.
I don’t see the difference in safety between ghosting and sending a text saying “This isn’t going to work out, you’re just not the one for me”
You have obviously never dealt with a dangerous man. Rejection like this (as opposed to ghosting, which just confuses them) angers them. Angering them means they will do some crazy shit up to and including stalking and violence.
It’s shocking, yes, but it’s true. Ghosting is safer because their anger is subdued because it takes them a little while to figure out they’ve been rejected, and when they do, it somehow stings them less than a direct rejection which makes them lash out angrily.
Won’t the same (or worse) anger happen though, if you just ignore them for long enough?
It does seem like the person you replied to had the right idea, to be definite in your relationship position.
If the texting person is the kind of person you describe, a confrontation seems likely to happen sooner or later anyways. Might as well get ahead of it, and not hide from it.
Why are all these people so readily engaged with violent, abusive people in the first place? I’ve never my life met a man or woman so violent that a text message of rejection would cause them to act out aggressively. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but the text message ain’t the problem. Ghosting is cowardice and disrespect incarnate to the rest of the 99% of people they’re interacting with.
There aren’t a lot if you consider your immediate social circle, but social media allows us to reach millions of people and increases our experience database. In all my social circles of maybe a couple hundred people over the last 40 years I have 2 acquaintances that were considered dangerous. One was a husband that fell into meth use, and another was a narcissist boyfriend they couldn’t take no for an answer. My extended social circle ranges from nurses and doctors to hairdressers to real estate agents to retired PD to cancer researchers to the trades to high tech folks and everything in between.
I hate all websites that move things around as they load. If I see a button, that button should stay where it is when I try to click it.
My old person trait is dislike of video-form social media. I consider blaring my phone speakers at max volume disrespectful to those in my surroundings and generally annoying.
Hence why my social media of choice was reddit and is now lemmy+kbin. It’s mostly text posts and images.
My old person trait is I hate short-form videos e.g. Instagram reels and TikTok videos. The back and forth boomer vs millenial vs gen z videos remind me of someone who is talking to themself with different personalities.
Owning physical media > “owning” digital media.
My old person trait is that none of the things mentioned in the linked image happened on accident.
They happened because capitalism doesn’t give a fuck about anything except bleeding as much money as conceivably possible out of each and every human.
-
Apps allow companies to suck more data out of your device than a website, allowing them to sell more of your data and… make more money.
-
Video games needing access to the internet is simply Digital Rights Management and a way to prevent piracy and… make more money. Remember, most companies view something pirated as a “lost sale,” not that you would have never purchased it to begin with. As Gabe Newell once said:
“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem,” he said. “If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable."
-
This one speaks for itself. Being able to be in control of the products you buy is freedom. Having products controlled remotely by a corporation is giving them carte blanche to make more money off of you.
-
Removing accessible customer service means more people will just give up on trying to get their problem solved, effectively allowing the company to steal from people and… shocker… make more money.
I agree, in theory, in respect to ghosting, but we live in a society that teaches us to be isolated, and doesn’t teach interpersonal skills unless the interpersonal skill is “Fuck you, got mine.” (which is, not surprisingly, a thing about making more money.)
In other words, these aren’t old people opinions. These are “I’m not gonna let capitalism absolutely fuck me endlessly” opinions.
At least in Europe I suspect those of us who grew up before neoliberalism took over in the 80s have a different take on the normality of the whole “being treated as a mark to scam money of 24/7” thing…
In terms of piracy, I wonder how much could be prevented by having demos, like Factorio does
Funny how Steam has been making sales and events around demos for a while (called Next Fests) and some games absolutely blow up out of nowhere thanks to them.
Also some people think FF16 having a demo was some weird, oddball marketing move by Square Enix, except they have been making “try now, continue later” demos for games since Bravely Default.
Demos used to be everywhere back in the day! I think they have a huge impact, because it’s a way to try to play a game without dumping all the money on it without knowing what the gameplay is like and if its actually fun.
When I was a kid, DOOM having the first episode of the game available as shareware was huge and I used to walk to my friends place after school and watch him play until he would get bored and let me play for a while.
From an old interview in 1999 with John Carmack about this very subject (emphasis mine):
Carmack: DOOM 2 was explicitly a commercial release. We sort of half heartedly did some shareware distribution with Quake, but I think the industry has almost unanimously decided that the three or so level demo is the best test vehicle.
A lot of people consider themselves to have “finished DOOM” when they just finished the shareware episode.
It’s specifically capitalism driven by GDP. Capitalism is bad but adding GDP is like removing any ethic and moral compass.
Where do I sign up to buy the awards around here?
Kidding…great post, tho
That’s what the emojis are for. Unlike the shitshow most of us just came from, here it doesn’t cost real money to add a tiny picture of 🏅 to a comment.
- Well said, I’m going to save this for when my friends inevitably say something about it and I have to explain why the economy, expessially in the US sucks and why I might eventually leave
Lol
-
I think cars should not be dependent on a touch screen for ANY of it’s functions (or really have one at all). They are more difficult to use than tactile buttons, distracting, and do not receive long term support from the OEM.
What do you do with a 10 year old car that runs but the touch screen nuked due to age, firmware bugs or mechanical damage? Ford isn’t going to be selling replacement units 10 years later and I have yet to see an ‘infotainment’ system that has aftermarket replacement considerations.
