I enjoyed this panel immensely, but the camera's or cellphone's microphone collected a lot of noise from the audience that made it difficult for me to hear what people on the panel were saying. Often there was a loud glass clinking sound (maybe with ice in it?) that blocked out some words, along with audience laughter, shouting out, and even their movements. An external mic, preferably stereo (but not essential), placed on the stage would make a huge improvement. Several wired, affordable mics exist, or more expensive but more convenient wireless models. Still, thank you for this recording!
27:30 You can use curiosity (ask questions to learn more) and honesty (about your concerns and thoughts) so that you're applying compassion with good judgment.
"When I spoke at TED in 1996, reporting on my studies of the early virtual communities, I said, "Those who make the most of their lives on the screen come to it in a spirit of self-reflection." And that's what I'm calling for here, now: reflection and, more than that, a conversation about where our current use of technology may be taking us, what it might be costing us. We're smitten with technology. And we're afraid, like young lovers, that too much talking might spoil the romance. But it's time to talk. We grew up with digital technology and so we see it as all grown up. But it's not, it's early days. There's plenty of time for us to reconsider how we use it, how we build it. I'm not suggesting that we turn away from our devices, just that we develop a more self-aware relationship with them, with each other and with ourselves." Sherry Turkle, Connected, But Alone? (2012)
It would have been so good to of had at least just a few people who did not totally agree with all your points or who might have at least provided some disagreement and constructive debate around this discussion. It really felt like it was not welcome to in anyway have an opposing points even if fairly slight but just a different point of view.It really felt like it became a group think exercise and the kind of things you were crticising about group think or cancel culture in general.It felt like everyone was there to agree with each other basically and it came across as a bunch of griping people who just can't wait to criticise Gen z.I think there are alot of things to debate but this was just "lets all agree with each other debate"...but then maybe it was not meant to be a debate or discussion but merely a place to express common grievances ?
I haven't listened/ watched yet (I'm on my way to work) but I'm interested because I often admire Jonathan Haidt. The first thought that came into my head upon seeing this title was the difference between UK humour and US humor (at least in the format I see). The UK panel shows that constantly entertain me are astonishingly "politically incorrect" but rarely offensive, maybe in part because of the heterogeneity of the participants (old, young, thin, fat, able, disabled, etc).
Everyone is on the side of cancel culture theses days. So this is a breath of fresh air. A lot of liberals have group think as well. So your saying things that your side has already done. Remember don’t throw stones at glass houses.
It seems like it's on users to recognize the different qualities of different types of sources on social media. You can't trust an anonymous source...Although an anonymous source can give you verifiable information, AND a pseudonymous source could be trusted to a certain extent. Users need to adapt to the landscape rather than trying to control the landscape with heavy regulation.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m05kZ2GDKXg/mqdefault.jpg)
![โฮ่ง! (SUGOI) - LYKN [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nFp4zjAARFs/mqdefault.jpg)
I enjoyed this panel immensely, but the camera's or cellphone's microphone collected a lot of noise from the audience that made it difficult for me to hear what people on the panel were saying. Often there was a loud glass clinking sound (maybe with ice in it?) that blocked out some words, along with audience laughter, shouting out, and even their movements.
An external mic, preferably stereo (but not essential), placed on the stage would make a huge improvement. Several wired, affordable mics exist, or more expensive but more convenient wireless models.
Still, thank you for this recording!
I've read more than 3 books by Haidt, this is a reminder to read it again.
27:30 You can use curiosity (ask questions to learn more) and honesty (about your concerns and thoughts) so that you're applying compassion with good judgment.
very pog
Really really worth a watch- A+
"When I spoke at TED in 1996, reporting on my studies of the early virtual communities, I said, "Those who make the most of their lives on the screen come to it in a spirit of self-reflection." And that's what I'm calling for here, now: reflection and, more than that, a conversation about where our current use of technology may be taking us, what it might be costing us. We're smitten with technology. And we're afraid, like young lovers, that too much talking might spoil the romance. But it's time to talk. We grew up with digital technology and so we see it as all grown up. But it's not, it's early days. There's plenty of time for us to reconsider how we use it, how we build it. I'm not suggesting that we turn away from our devices, just that we develop a more self-aware relationship with them, with each other and with ourselves."
Sherry Turkle, Connected, But Alone? (2012)
very unique podcast. Was an interesting watch
It would have been so good to of had at least just a few people who did not totally agree with all your points or who might have at least provided some disagreement and constructive debate around this discussion.
It really felt like it was not welcome to in anyway have an opposing points even if fairly slight but just a different point of view.It really felt like it became a group think exercise and the kind of things you were crticising about group think or cancel culture in general.It felt like everyone was there to agree with each other basically and it came across as a bunch of griping people who just can't wait to criticise Gen z.I think there are alot of things to debate but this was just "lets all agree with each other debate"...but then maybe it was not meant to be a debate or discussion but merely a place to express common grievances ?
I haven't listened/ watched yet (I'm on my way to work) but I'm interested because I often admire Jonathan Haidt.
The first thought that came into my head upon seeing this title was the difference between UK humour and US humor (at least in the format I see). The UK panel shows that constantly entertain me are astonishingly "politically incorrect" but rarely offensive, maybe in part because of the heterogeneity of the participants (old, young, thin, fat, able, disabled, etc).
Everyone is on the side of cancel culture theses days. So this is a breath of fresh air. A lot of liberals have group think as well. So your saying things that your side has already done. Remember don’t throw stones at glass houses.
It seems like it's on users to recognize the different qualities of different types of sources on social media. You can't trust an anonymous source...Although an anonymous source can give you verifiable information, AND a pseudonymous source could be trusted to a certain extent. Users need to adapt to the landscape rather than trying to control the landscape with heavy regulation.