Fórum o neduhoch digitálneho veku :: Remember, remember, the velvet November


node:	Fórum o neduhoch digitálneho veku
template:	8514432
parent:	Compz & Net
owner:	Pham Nuwen
created:	21.06.2018 - 13:14:04
updated:	22.06.2018 - 14:30:27

cwbe coordinatez:
101
63540
8514408

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA

permissions
you:	r,
system:	public
net:	yes

al-caid	0
Pham Nuwen	0
k	0
maaca	0
andread	0
evad	0
dno	0
sob	0
rzelnik	1
yank	1
mrjn	1
didaktikskal...	1
〰	1
dixi____	1
atarihuana	1
krokobox gomont	1
pht	1
berlin monroe	2
aufhebung	2
Tomáš, to ...	2
unsane	2
WooDy	3
christiana	3
teflon	3
total trash	4
maniac	4
Faun	5
ode	5
leather glov...	5
pstmn	5
Sjorring	5
smrtak	5
dd	6
soc	6
urza	6
dragulievic	6
supermario	6
muna	7
wunna	7
himself[Lock...	7
timko	7
MIJ	7
slimaque	7
lubomier.sk	7
vrq	7
blondava mrha	8
calmo	8
mamaralo	8
dashaa	8
_	9
Catherine Mo...	10
sioux	10
Toth	10
vlnka	10
kybu	12
pikseliahky	12
peal	12
snifferko	13
Huto	13
ID 1085352	13
killya	14
2pug	14
epxd	14
Milka	14
omg, zas kabal?	14
dita	14
zdienka	15
DFH	17
darmozrac	17
Burnout	17
barzyako	17
espinozino	17
jamajka	19

Fórum ktorého cieľom je agregácia správ a vedeckých článkov o neduhoch digitálneho veku ako napr.

- kyberšikana (cyber-bullying)
- závislosť na počítačoch, smartphonoch, sociálnych sieťach atď.
- digitálna demencia, digitálna anorexia atď.
- vplyv používania digitálnych technológií na fyzické (napr. deformacia muskulatúry, poškodenie zraku atď.) či psychické (depresie, štiepenie osobnosti, samovražedné sklony) zdravie jednotlivca

Mnohé z informácií z tohto fóra pravdepodobne využijem pri mojej profesúre v oblasti Digitálneho Vzdelávania. Z tohto dôvodu sú obzvlášť vítané príspevky tématizujúce vyššie vymenované neduhy vo vzťahu k deťom, adolescentom resp. študentom.

Vďaka za pomoc

Link 1: https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/cyberbullying-inquiry

Link 2: https://cyberpsychology.eu/

00000101000635400851440808670796

After smartphone : Towards a new digital education artefact

Abstract

"Non-moderate smartphone usage may induce diverse pathological states and behaviors which may potentially result in an array of syndromes and illnesses. Digital devices built for education rather than consumption and entertainment should not neglect intricacies of human physiology, ergonomy and cognition. For this reason, we present first four properties of an idealized “digital primer” artefact which could maximize the human and cultural potential of a normal elementary school pupil by means of holistic, semi-supervised interaction. Properties addressed and defined in this article are: “speech-based”, “narrative”, “circa-temporal” and “habit-disrupting”."

Publisher: Revue Enfance, Presses Universitaires de France
https://doi.org/10.3917/enf2.193.0345
Autor: ja

0000010100063540085144080867079608670909

open-access?

000001010006354008514408086707960867090908671131

ehm, neviem ci mozem a asi to budem musiet po urcitej dole dat dole ale zatial je camera ready verzia* toho paperu k dispo aj tu:
https://kastalia.medienhaus.udk-berlin.de/community/data/5221.enfance_camera_ready.pdf

* t.j. obsahovo sa to nelisi od toho co bolo odpublikovane

0000010100063540085144080867079608670830

abstrakt vyzera dobre, aj myslienka

(skoda ze neviem po francuzsky)

000001010006354008514408086707960867083008671129

Je to po anglicky.

00000101000635400851440808670796086708300867112908671175

haha moja blbost, sorry

00000101000635400851440808666104

https://www.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/vdt11/i_am_neal_stephenson_author_geek_and_now_sword/c53nsh5?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

question: Do you still use Linux and/or Emacs? If not, why?
Neal: No but I'll probably start again. I can't get work done on my laptop any more because it's too easy to switch over to internet-based distractions. I am thinking of setting up a laptop that would basically give me emacs and nothing else. Shopping for them is painful though. I want one with a solid state drive, and most manufacturers seem to want to translate that into "this customer is a sucker with a lot of money."

00000101000635400851440808663488

https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/02/07/digital-minimalism-phone-social-media-addiction

"It's definitely gotten worse. A big part of this is that the user experience of social media was re-engineered so that it would foster more compulsive use. So Facebook 10 years ago is an experience that's very different than Facebook today. Ten years ago, you were looking at your friends' profiles. Today, it's this unending stream of rich rewards, likes, @ tags and @ comments, that are coming at you all day long, that you have to keep compulsively checking."

...

"What one woman told me that during the first week, she was so used to checking her phone for new information, that after she took all of the apps off for this declutter, she found herself compulsively checking the weather app. So who was the last thing that was left out there that you could click on and maybe get some new information. But after about 10 days, 14 days, that went away. And most people reported by the time they got to the 30 days, they had really lost their taste for having this low-quality, always-on digital stream being a part of their life."

0000010100063540085144080866348808664689

Something's in the air. I think people are finally getting fed up with how much of their humanity they're losing to always staring at these screens. And so my more optimistic prediction is that we have become so tired of how enslaved we've become, that we are going to revolt.

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504

odkedy tlacia tie stories, tak mam prakticky prazdny news feed a tak to preskrolujem za 10 sekund miesto par minut...

inak to, ze je niekto takto zaseknuty je skor jeho problem. casto ide o kombinaciu nudy a dojebanej psychiky.

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840

"inak to, ze je niekto takto zaseknuty je skor jeho problem. casto ide o kombinaciu nudy a dojebanej psychiky."

casto ta dojebana psychika vznika hlavne kvoli social media. ked si dieta a fb/ig/twitter su pre teba "normalna" vec a netusis ake by to bolo bez nich (narozdiel od starsej generacie), tak ta psychika v podstate nema sancu sa normalne vyvinut.

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846

vzdy sa najde dovod preco to je chyba niekoho ineho a nie vlastna volba

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850

u deti tam ta volba casto ani nie je. u dospelych je to samozrejme o volbe.

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840086638460866385008663852

iba pokial veris, ze to takto funguje. preco si dospely moze zvolit, ze "prestane skrolovat fejsbucik" a dieta nie? resp. dieta, ktore sa vyvinulo s fejsbucikom...

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663856

kym som napisal prispevok nizsie, tak si trochu poeditoval ten svoj, tak odpoved na to, preco si myslim, ze dieta nema sancu samo vyliezt z dopaminovej pasce facebooku a dospely ano je ta, ze dospely ma vacsi obraz sveta a vie si vybrat aj z dalsich zazitkov/pribehov, ktore chce prezivat narozdiel od scrollovania a citania cudzich pribehov. dieta tento "nadhlad" nema a casto fb/yt/ig su jeho "realnym" svetom.

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385608663859

porovnavat dieta priamo sa neda, preto som to doplnil. v tomto to necham pri tom, ze si rozhodne nemyslim, ze by bolo nezvratne poznacene pouzivanim toho co si uviedol. v niektorych pripadoch moze ist aj o pozitivnejsie ladene komunity nez take 1990's petrzalske sidlisko...

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663853

dieta nepozna ine alternativy, ak vyrasta v tom, tu mas telefon a hraj sa.

dospely ma s cim porovnat (ako ktory teda), takze ma vacsiu moznost (a nezavislost) si zvolit. vyvoj dietata spociva v tom, ze kopiruje chovanie ludi okolo seba (hlavne rodicov, ale aj ostatnych). pokial u nich vidi cumenie do telefonu, da sa povedat, ze nema sancu sa tomu ubranit (na biologickej rovine).

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385308663857

pokial tomu veris, ze to tak je, tak sa neda argumentovat.

ja zase verim tomu, ze clovek si na lepsie zvykne lahko. ja som tiez vyrastal s pocitacom a uz som 15 rokov nonstop zafloodovany contentom a nie je lahke najst mieru kedy je to este prinosne a kedy uz nie. a prave fyzicke nepohodlie a neefektivita su z dovody preco nemam/nepouzivam smartphone.

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840086638460866385008663852086638530866385708664551

samozrejme, ze sa da argumentovat aj ked verim niecomu inemu ako ty.

ani jeden nemame patent na pravdu, od toho su tu argumenty, aby sme sa posunuli dopredu v nazoroch.

nemam chut tu o tom moc debatovat, ale ak ta to zaujima tak zakladne info:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_learning
https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/monkey_see_monkey_do_model_behavior_in_early_childhood

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663853086638570866455108664561

viac nez o posunutie svojich nazorov ti ide o posunutie mojich nazorov.

ale nic si z toho nerob, je to celkom bezne.

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385308663857086645510866456108664604

nie, ide mi o vymenu informacii a idealne posunutie nazorov oboch stran. preto nemam zaujem pokracovat, lebo to beries ako winner/loser debate a to pre mna nie je ciel.

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840086638460866385008663852086638530866385708664551086645610866460408664606

moju informaciu o tom, ze sa to da volovo prekonat si sa rozhodol neprijat. tak neviem co este chces.

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663853086638570866455108664561086646040866460608664632

jednak lebo je to v rozpore s tym, ako sa vyvija a funguje ludsky mozog (k comu som ti poslal zdroje) a jednak si to nicim nepodlozil.

je to dostatocne preskumana oblast a moderny digitalny svet je budovany na zneuziti tychto slabin:
http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/dopamine-smartphones-battle-time/
https://www.theskimm.com/live-smarter/health/social-media-addiction
https://medium.com/@Reece_Robertson/why-youre-addicted-to-social-media-dopamine-technology-inequality-c2cca07ed3ee
https://www.sciencefocus.com/future-technology/trapped-the-secret-ways-social-media-is-built-to-be-addictive-and-what-you-can-do-to-fight-back/

ty tvrdis, ze ludia sa mozu rozhodnut s tym prestat. to jednoducho nie je pravda. urcite je iste percento ludi, ktori to spravit mozu (zvacsa dospeli ludia), ale pre vacsinu deti to jednoducho mozne nie je, kvoli tomu, ako funguje ich mozog. nie je to o slobodnom rozhodnuti o nic viac ako to, ci sa ti budu pacit chlapci alebo dievcata. socialne media zneuzivaju sposob akym mozog funguje na to, aby si bol na tychto mediach zavisly.

dokazes sa z fb zmazat ty? ano.
ja? most likely yes.
nahodne vybraty dnesny teenager? i don't think so.

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385308663857086645510866456108664604086646060866463208664634

keby to bolo sucastou mojho socialneho zivota, tak by som to nemohol spravit ani ja. neviem preco by si mal ktokolvek mazat svoj socialny zivot, len preto, ze ty veris, ze je to vsetko bububu evil master plan.

don't blame the tools, man.

ale uz stacilo, ja ta presvedcit nepotrebujem. ked chces verit, ze je to tak, tak tomu ver.

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840086638460866385008663852086638530866385708664551086645610866460408664606086646320866463408664652

myslim, ze ja nie som ten, ktory ignoruje argumenty/fakty.

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663853086638570866455108664561086646040866460608664632086646340866465208664653

https://kyberia.sk/id/8664561

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385308663857086645510866456108664604086646060866463208664634086646520866465308665341

https://www.irozhlas.cz/zivotni-styl/spolecnost/neurolog-stransky-mozek-rozhovor-facebook-twitter-socialni-site-dopamin-lajk_1904210700_och

000001010006354008514408086634880866350408663840086638460866385008663852086638530866385708664551086645610866460408664606086646320866463408664652086646530866534108665346

pokial "kvoli" socialnym sietam rastie uzkost a depresie, tak urcite na ovela vyssej urovni, nez hormonalnej. s dopaminom a inymi hormonmi sa stretavas vsade, lebo je to zaklad fungovania mozgu a celeho organizmu. je to akoby si ratal kvapnutie do vane.

00000101000635400851440808663488086635040866384008663846086638500866385208663853086638570866455108664561086646040866460608664632086646340866465208664653086653410866534608665856

slusna mentalna gymnastika, thumbs up

0000010100063540085144080866348808663504086638400866384608663850086638520866385308663857086645510866456108664604086646060866463208664634086646520866465308665341086653460866585608665864

slusna pasivna agresivita, thumbs down

00000101000635400851440808662301

Battery icons shape perceptions of time and space and define user identities
https://phys.org/news/2019-09-battery-icons-perceptions-space-user.html
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470593119870226

New research from Cass Business School has found that battery icons on mobile phones shape how people view time and space, and how battery conservation practices define user identities.

The study of London commuters found that respondents viewed their daily trip in terms of the time and distance between charging points for mobile technology.

"People no longer think about their destination being 10 km away or 10 stops on the tube. They think about it being 50 per cent of their battery away," said the study's lead author, Dr. Thomas Robinson.

"During interviews respondents discussed how a full battery gauge made them feel positive and as though they could go anywhere or do anything. Anything less than half full, however, induced feelings of profound anxiety and discomfort," he said.

One of the study's respondents described the experience of watching their battery icon throughout the day: "Full would be 'Yeah, ok great', good to go for the day'; 50 per cent I'd be a bit 'Oh God, I had better stop it from updating itself all the time in the background' ... then it would be at 30 per cent and I would be like: 'Now I'm not having fun anymore'," the respondent said.

As mobile phones are now far more than just means of communication—they are maps, digital wallets, entertainment systems, diaries, banking, step and pulse counters etcetera—battery icons are at the heart of social and consumer tasks.

Devices defining identity

Management of battery levels structures people's daily activities—from arguing over who can charge their device next to the bed, to making decisions about where to go shopping in order to access complementary charge stations.

The study found that this reliance means people now identify themselves and others in relation to how they maintain their battery levels.

Respondents who monitor their battery gauges and take measures to keep a high level of charge identify themselves as "control freaks", "quite anal", "planners" and "a bit OCD".

People who regularly allow their phone batteries to run out of charge were identified as "frightfully frustrating", "disorganised" and "inconsiderate".

"We found that people who let their phones batteries run out are viewed by others as out of touch with the social norm of being connected and therefore unable to be competent members of society," Dr. Robinson said.

"Phones have become such a nexus for everything that we are that an inability to effectively manage battery life becomes symbolic of an inability to manage life."

The paper Portable Technology and Multi-Domain Energy Consumption is scheduled for publication in the journal Marketing Theory.

00000101000635400851440808658880

The Problem With Believing What We’re Told
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-problem-with-believing-what-were-told-11567224060

In an age of information overload, it’s important to find ways to resist the brain’s difficulty in separating fact from falsehood

By Gary Marcus and Annie Duke
Aug. 31, 2019 12:01 am ET

In a perfect world, to determine whether an idea or fact is true, we would patiently evaluate how it fits with our own experience, take note of the credibility of the source and be prepared to reconsider if new information emerges. In reality, we are often too busy and distracted to be that careful. And in those cases, we tend to assume that whatever we hear is true.

The psychologist Daniel Gilbert and colleagues documented this phenomenon in a set of studies in the early 1990s. Undergraduates at the University of Texas at Austin were asked to evaluate factual statements such as those in a legal case; some were clearly marked as true and others as false. Given enough time and focus, the students were good at remembering the difference. When they were distracted, however, they were more likely to remember false things as being true—but not the other way around.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
Have you ever believed something as true and later reevaluated?Join the conversation below.

This tendency to assume truth first and ask questions later (if ever) has become a serious problem in our era of information overload, with the rise of so many sources of information that are either unreliable or intentionally misleading. Fortunately, there are ways to combat our bias, once we understand its evolutionary underpinnings.

Before our prehuman ancestors developed language, they formed beliefs mainly about things they experienced with their own senses. If an ancestor of yours saw a tree, there wasn’t much reason for them to question the tree’s existence. We tend to treat language as an extension of our senses, but it is much more open to manipulation.

The simple act of repeating a lie can make it seem like truth.
The simple act of repeating a lie can make it seem like truth, as the Temple University psychologist Lynn Hasher and colleagues showed in a pioneering study published in 1977. The researchers asked 40 people to rate the truthfulness of a variety of statements, some true and some false. A number of statements were repeated in multiple rounds of the exercise over time. Test subjects became more likely to believe things as they were repeated, regardless of whether they were true or false. The third time they heard a false statement, they were just as likely to believe it as a true statement that they heard once.

We are even more easily snookered when pictures are included. Participants in a 2012 study, published in the Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, were given statements about celebrities or general knowledge. When pictures were attached, people were more likely to believe the statements, including the fake ones. If, for instance, you show people a picture of a giraffe with a statement saying it is the only mammal that can’t jump, they are more likely to forget about the other animals that can’t jump, such as elephants and hippos.

Related research shows that even adding unimportant details to a statement can have a similar effect. If you add vivid language, lies can spread even more quickly. A 2017 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, by Jay Van Bavel and colleagues at New York University, looked at about a half million social media messages. It found that the presence of moral and emotional words like “hate,” “destroy” or “blame” acted like an accelerant, increasing the chance that a message would spread by about 20% for each additional emotional word. The study also found that most of the sharing was done within political parties rather than across political divides, creating an echo-chamber effect.

Fake news tends to avoid nuance or neutral language and frequently adds layers of emotion and moralizing—all of which makes false items spread much faster than the real thing. A team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology compared the spread of fake news and real news on Twitter in a 2018 study published in the journal Science. Looking at 126,000 tweets of news stories over the previous 11 years, they found that fake news stories were 70% more likely to be retweeted than true stories. Real news took about six times as long to reach a benchmark audience of 1,500 people as fake news did.

Savvy propagandists have long exploited the tendency of the human brain to take shortcuts. But social networks make it far easier, because they feed on a further human vulnerability: our need for approval, affection and positive feedback. Combine human cognitive weakness with social networks, and you have a recipe for chaos.

The good news is that there’s increasing evidence that the needed critical-thinking skills can be taught. In a study published in November in the journal SSRN, Patricia Moravec of Indiana University’s Kelly School of Business and others looked at whether they could improve people’s ability to spot fake news. When first asked to assess the believability of true and false headlines posted on social media, the 68 participants—a mix of Democrats, Republicans and independents—were more likely to believe stories that confirmed their own prior views. But a simple intervention had an effect: asking participants to rate the truthfulness of the headlines. That tiny bit of critical reflection mattered, and it even extended to other articles that the participants hadn’t been asked to rate. The results suggest that just asking yourself, “Is what I just learned true?” could be a valuable habit.

Similar research has shown that just prompting people to consider why their beliefs might not be true leads them to think more accurately. Even young children can learn to be more critical in their assessments of what’s truthful, through curricula such as Philosophy for Children and other programs that emphasize the value of careful questioning and interactive dialogue. Ask students to ponder Plato, and they just might grow up to be more thoughtful and reflective citizens.

Rather than holding our collective breath waiting for social media companies to magically resolve the problem with yet-to-be invented algorithms for filtering out fake news, we need to promote information literacy. Nudging people into critical reflection is becoming ever more important, as malicious actors find more potent ways to use technology and social media to leverage the frailties of the human mind. We can start by recognizing our own cognitive weaknesses and taking responsibility for overcoming them.

—Dr. Marcus is CEO and founder of Robust.AI and the co-author, most recently, of “Rebooting AI,” to be published by Pantheon in September. Ms. Duke is the author of “Thinking in Bets” and co-founder of The Alliance for Decision Education.

dendrite 21.11.2018-22:26:32
dendrite Re[4]: 21.11.2018-22:26:32
dendrite The nightmare videos of childrens' YouTube — and what's wrong with the internet today | James Bridle
dendrite Vecna tema
dendrite Techno-primitivizmus na Kyberii
axone main
axone forumz
axone Science fetish
axone Psychiatria
axone Zle halusky
axone Psychika a vy

login::		password::
	name:: id::