ever generational shift comes with this kind of thing lol, when my parents generation grew up, they were considered lazy, now they're the ones giving our generation flak. Its the natural cycle of life baby!
I am a millenial who is hard working. That is rare though. With a very few exceptions most of my friends are unemployed, broke, live with their parents, and have habits they can't afford! Even my friends with their own children tend to be immature and irresponcible!
i find it funny how throughout the video you refer to what the elder generations believe is work, you only reference working in an office. I live in Montana. Here our elder generations see hard work as physical labor. They would see sitting on the computer all day as lazy
What pisses me off is when people say young people are lazy because they don't have jobs. Do you guys fucking realize how hard it is to get a job? And even if you do it's usually part-time. Not to mention that you need to have a college degree AND previous work experience for almost everything. The world has become competitive as hell and most young people I know are driving themselves crazy trying to keep up.
Thats a good thing. People who blindly do things they dont necessarily want to are robots. People should think for themselves more, do what they want, and do it well. If thats selfishness to do what you want for a career, then I am proud to be selfish.
FYI I was born in 1990 am I lazy? yes! but technically I did work/volunteer for the Salvation Army as a Bell Ringer in 2009 and 2010 and was paid $7.25 an hour just ringing a bell, collecting donations(money) in a red kettle and wearing a red apron in blistering cold weather for less than month in total also I voted for the first time in the 2008 Presidential Election I voted for Obama BTW even though I'm lazy but at least I did SOMETHING!!!.
My boss can run circles around me on the mechanical aspects of the machinery at work, but I can do the same to him when it comes to the computer stuff.
I have found out though that in life, who you know is way more important than what you can do unfortunately.
One thing I'm so tired of hearing is adults saying shit like "your generation is the generation to fix everything and make this world a better place." Yeah, you know why? Because all the older generation fucks got to have all the fun in their lives and now look how this world has turned into. Teenagers today are expected to go to college and excell. They aren't even allowed to have fun anymore, well, because everything that was considered "fun" to teens in the 70s/80s is now banned or illegal.
I actually feel bad for the generations 1985+, do you all understand how hard their lives are going to be in the next ten years, when they're all in college, raising a family, paying bills, everything will be so much harder than it is now. I'm only 15 and I'm scared for how hard my generation's lives will be when we all are trying to raise a family.
in sweden 25% of the young pepol are unemploeyd however thise guys can do most adults work 250% faster more afficent and better yet thire stuck in the 90s thinking older better
wait so her dad brag about being able to multiplying double digits in his head? where i come from everybody can do that! doesent american kids kearn that in school or what? not being a smartass or something but that is nothing to brag about.
I'm a millennial and it angers me so much when people view us as lazy. If we go back to the calculator example Ana gave, for example, we are ENCOURAGED to use calculators all throughout high school. Just because we may have a different work ethic than previous generations, it does not necessarily mean we are lazy. Our generation is simply the product of failed social policies brought upon us from previous generations.
Honestly as much as I think every generation romanticizes the past. I think my younger generation is lazy. I'm lazy, most of my friends are lazy, we do work but only because we have to. There is no respect for work ethic amongst my peers.
dont confuse easier access to everything including money and knowledge as younger generations as lazy. that blame needs to be on the parents because they set the entire tone of how children develop. I get tired of hearing that bull shit. I could say older generations do everything the long and hard way, do i call them all retards for it? no. Times change, get over it.
of course the newer generations of north americans are lazier than our predecessors, we don't need to work as hard when there are millions of children in sweatshops abroad doing the intense labour for us
The younger generation of today is statistically less productive and feel more entitled. Facts are, it is the older generation that created the computer and used it as a productivity tool... the younger generation uses the computer as a gaming machine. The older generation made it to the Moon and back several times... the younger generation have yet to make it out of low Earth orbit. The older generation have Elvis Presley and the Beatles, the younger generation have Kim Kardashian.
@nsx1com where are you getting these statistics? if the younger generations feels like they are more disenfranchised and have less opportunity, that would be because they are correct.
Obviously millenials didnt get rich during the tech bubble, they were children. But as a millenial and now current software engineer, i can tell you the older folks in my department may work harder, but accomplish half as much... because they are terrible at technology... and require us to babysit them.
@LiekABaus - It appears you live in a very tiny bubble. 1st, you can not read... I made a statement, then backed it up with fact... then you ask where I am getting the statistics? Are you not aware that we have not been back to the Moon in decades? 2nd, I can't speak to your tiny little department, but stereotyping surely is not dead in your mind. Generally speaking, knowing how to work an iPhone or iPod does not make you more productive... please leave the real work to the experts.
@nsx1com your statement of the younger generation being statistically less productive and feeling more entitled was not backed up by fact. We havent been to the moon again because the older generation desires tax cuts over funding for manned space exploration.
And please goto apple and tell some of the brightest engineers in the world that knowing how to work an iphone or ipod doesnt make them more productive. Simply put, if you cant use modern tech, you sure as hell cant design it.
@LiekABaus - Refer to the content following "Facts are". Those are the facts. Your "tax cuts" comment shows your ignorance. 1) 100's of billions were continued to be spent on Space Shuttle, Space Station, space exploration, etc., and 2) post-Moon era tax rates went up... educate yourself. Your "Apple" comment is hilarious. In 1982, Steve Jobs began developing the Macintosh... um, hello, that was the older generation. The last I looked, people do not "work" with iPhones and iPods.
@595o - Please... don't be ridiculous... Steve Jobs never NEEDED to look for a job. That "LSD-tripping hippie who dresses in rags" that you speak of... he changed the world for the better.
@nsx1com Typical non-sequitur. You know why we weren't at the moon for quite some time? Because it stopped being interesting, and manned space travel costs a fortune more than unmanned.
@595o - You are the one whose argument is irrelevant... 1) if the Moon was no longer "interesting", then NASA would have stopped sending spacecraft there... but they didn't... 2) up until this last year, a fortune WAS still being spent on "manned" space travel... the Space Shuttle and Space Station. In fact, those two programs cost WAY more than going to the Moon.
@sc0pl355 - The Moon may seem uninteresting to you, but to intelligent visionaries the Moon is very interesting. You may say there is nothing there but rocks, but scientists, engineers, commercial entrepreneurs, space advocates, etc. still need to answer questions like: is there water; can it be made habitable; addressing fundamental questions about the history of Earth, the solar system and the universe; to test technologies to reduce the risks of future missions to Mars; and so on.
@sc0pl355 - I don't believe you have any scope of "cost"... plus, you are admittedly "uninterested"... so your cost benefit analysis (I kid) does not surprise me.
@nsx1com I have plenty scope of cost. It costs a lot of money to go there and there's nothing there but rocks. in order to find out any more, we'd have to fly a shitload of equipment up there to do it. It isn't worth the potential cost especially since things are relatively rosy down here.
@sc0pl355 - Allow me to educate you on costs. 1) NASA annual budget = ~$100 billion, 2) estimated 4-man journey to the Moon = $35 billion (there is proposals of less than $7 billion.) 3) at $35 billion over several years, it is a small portion of the NASA's budget, and 4) it is tiny compared to what Congress allocates to the defense department over the same period (~$4 trillion). That's ~0.9%. But in your mind, it's just a rock... so, never mind... things are relatively rosy down here.
@nsx1com "1) NASA annual budget = ~$100 billion, 2) estimated 4-man journey to the Moon = $35 billion"
So they have to spend a little over 1/3rd of their budget to get 4 people to the moon?
The defense department is actively engaged in things on earth where we live. There's nothing going on in space that concerns us. We might as well build habitable self-sustainable space stations than try to do stuff on the moon.
@sc0pl355 - You really don't get it do you? NASA's "annual" budget is ~$100B. You're not foolish enough to think it only takes 1 yr to get to the Moon do you? It took nearly 10 yrs to get to the Moon the first time... current plan is 8 yrs. And some of those wonderful things the Defense Dept. is doing here on Earth is making the rich defense contractors wealthier. There is no comparison... $35B is a drop in the bucket compared to what the defense contractors make in 8 yrs.
@shaochiavang I know what they do, but unless they discovered a rock that cures cancer or an alien life form, I think we can live without their research.
@nsx1com Pat yourself on the back more, should I go on about how aids is on the downhill, people going hungry is an increasingly rare thing, that whole racism thing isn't too common anymore... but hey i'll stop there because Im not insecure about how incompetent my generation is.
@leslucas - AIDS drugs are developed by older, experienced researchers... there is more hunger in the world than ever (if you were older, you would know that)... racism is as common as ever (again, if you were older, you would know that)... finally, it is good to know how secure you are about how incompetent your generation is.
@nsx1com Wow, I don't even know what to say to that. I base my information off of scientific fact and world studies done by world renowned scientists instead of... uh... being old enough to remember how it was back in the day? I love the condescending attitude though, it greatly illustrates the superiority complex older people have.
PS: Do you feel the need to delve into personal insults? Starting to wonder if you're just playing devils advocate and not "Older" at all.
@leslucas - You poor baby... seems you are good at "delving into personal insults", but not really able to handle it yourself... if you can not take the heat in the kitchen, well, you know... If you truly need "information off of scientific fact and world studies done by world renowned scientists", simply do a Google search... there is plenty of data available supporting my comments.
@595o - In 1985, I worked in the engineering department of a large aerospace company... we were using PCs for everything. Macs and DOS machines. Even the admins had PCs in lieu of typewriters. But a year earlier... not as much. The explosion started in 1984, and by 1985, PCs were widely used.
Kids these days expect to be given everything. In school when they fail the tests are made easier so they can pass. I say this as a member of the millennial generation.
Ask a millennial the difference between "then" and "than". Ask a millennial which "there" to use. Also, they're not working on the internet all night--they're playing. But, this isn't true of them all.
@sc0pl355 That's true, but effort is kind of the point isn't it? We still need people to do things like farming - which is back breaking labor - and we have made strides in technology to make that easier. But it's still hard and we'd rather pay migrant workers really shitty amounts of money to do it. They say if the technological structure broke down we (mostly) wouldn't be able to survive as our ancestors did Still depending on which years your talking about they only lived to be about 30 so...
@futurestoryteller Farming *was* backbreaking labor. Now we have tools to do the work with less effort. The name of the game is to do more with less effort.
Also, millennials have less to work hard for than baby boomers. We live in a time where the fruit of hard work is almost non-existent to most people. How many people right now actually own their house or their car? If they have a mortgage or car note, they don't own those things. Then there's crushing debt and rampant credential inflation.
@sc0pl355 Laziness has as much to do with the amount of effort put forth as it does with the amount of work that's done. If we could build robots to build more robots, to work for us; like that big ship in Wall*E, we will have accomplished all necessary work, that wouldn't mean it wasn't characterized by - or related to - laziness. Pointing out that people don't have to work *as* hard *and* actually do have less doesn't help much either.
@futurestoryteller Well people have less because there's less work and the 'job creators' have concentrated the lion's share of the profits toward themselves thanks to trickle down economics. It has nothing to do with working hard because the people that don't have much work several column shifts harder than the people that do have. Work =/= success
@sc0pl355 Once again I must point out that smart and lazy are not mutually exclusive. Neither is lazy and efficient. This (apparent) paradox was already demonstrated in the above example.
@futurestoryteller well getting things done isn't being lazy. In fact, I would say that not being willing to learn newer, better, ways of doing things is lazy. Laziness is the unwillingness to do work not finding better ways to get work done. I never said that smart or lazy were mutually exclusive. I said that it ISN'T lazy to be smart. Actually, using your brain to get the best results is harder to do than acting like a mule.
@sc0pl355 "I said that it ISN'T lazy to be smart."
So.... what? Was someone arguing with you about that? "Actually, using your brain to get the best results is harder to do than acting like a mule."
Tell that to the mules. You opinion on laziness is just that - an opinion - and not a definition. A smart guy, who isn't strong, thinks he works harder than the strong guy, because he has to think. The strong guy, who isn't smart, thinks he works harder than the smart guy, because he has to work
@sc0pl355 "Look dude, my first job out of high school was working as a day laborer. I can tell you right now that job was infinitely easier than what I do now."
Hmm. I'm sure you do think that. That's a highly personal opinion.
Yup, you were. You were saying that the present generation is lazy because they use more effective ways of doing things. Nevermind how much work they actually do or how productive they actually are. Fuck the fact that a lot of people these days have two jobs or work 12-18 hour days or the fact that ANYBODY can move a box from point a to point b but only a few people actually think enough to use a tool to move TEN boxes instead.
@sc0pl355 Look. Remember the button from Lost (if you watched that show) remember how Desmond described it. "Press it every 108 minutes - save the world." Imagine if it were actually like that. Setting aside the fact that with only one person there you would be incapable of getting sleep. Saving the world = maximum productivity. But how much effort does it take to type in a sequence and press a button? - Calm down, it's an analogy. The point is, productivity does not equal effort.
@futurestoryteller dude, for starters I'm saying that present day workers work longer hours *AND* are more productive.
Secondly, I never watched Lost. I stopped watching TV like five years ago because I'm too fucking busy working.
Thirdly, present day workers are more productive with the SAME amount of effort as the older generations. That's what you don't seem to understand. Being a baby boomer was fucking easy street compared to today especially since even getting a job was much easier.
@sc0pl355 1. That doesn't mean they're putting more effort into their work that's what *you* don't seem to understand. If you make technology to make things easier, stuff is easier to do; it's that simple.
2. Good for you. You sound jaded - lighten up.
3. "present day workers are more productive with the SAME amount of effort as the older generations."
I'd really like to know how you could possibly know that... And we're talking about the amount of effort put in once the job is already there.
@futurestoryteller 1) Quote me saying that they used more effort. I said that they put in the same amount of effort and achieve greater results.
2) I'm not the jaded one here. It's just funny that you're on here talking about TV while calling millennials lazy.
3) Let's see, we build things faster and better than they were built 20 years ago. We move things faster and more efficiently than they were 20 years ago. Nobody's job has really become that much easier in the last 20 years.
2. I am a millennial dumbass. And the fact that you would imply that people who watch tv - at all - are lazy, proves your lack of argumentative skills and pension for silly stereotypes. Not to mention how jaded you *clearly* are.
3. HAHA! That doesn't prove anything. Where's your 'effort meter' Mr. Scientist? You have no validation of anything you're saying. You just want to be right.
@futurestoryteller 1) You said "That doesn't mean they're putting more effort into their work " Not me, you.
2) TV's not work and it doesn't accomplish anything.
3) Hmm, Let's see, people spend the same amount of time at work as they did 20 years ago, if not more. The tools that people use today existed 20 years ago. Same tools, same hours = same effort. The difference is that our PLANNING and PREPARATION is more effective today. You're the one that just wants to be right.
2. Says; the guy who has been in a Youtube comments debate with me for at least two days.
3. That completely defeats what you're saying. You're trying to say that accomplishing more automatically makes you less lazy regardless of the amount of activity actually involved. If that's not what you're saying - as far as *I* can tell you've been arguing with me for nothing. And there really are only *so many* hours in a day... So no. It's not me.
@futurestoryteller 1) You were implying that *I* made that claim, which I didn't by making that statement.
2) You'd be surprised by what else I did over the weekend. It only takes a minute to make a reply. Try again.
3) Nope. I'm saying that they have similar tools and they accomplish more. This isn't a 400 year time frame we're talking about. It's 20, which isn't that long. And yes, it's you.
@sc0pl355 1. But you have said some times that it takes less effort to get things done, which would imply a bit of extra laziness by our generation by default.
2. Hmm. No, no I wouldn't. "TV's not work and it doesn't accomplish anything." Yeah. *NOTHING* about the amount of time it takes. Try again.
3. Once again. You prove you're a stupid jackass. You went from 'the tools are better - there's less work' to 'the tools are the same - people work more' who wants to be right now'?
@futurestoryteller 1) It isn't lazy to do things the more efficient way, that's smart. Using a handtruck to move boxes instead of your back isn't being lazy, it is being smart. Lazy is sitting on your ass and letting someone else move the box while you don't work.
2) A debate accomplishes something.
3) I switched to talking about contruction. In construction, the tools are largely the same and have been for a long time. In my job, the tools are easier to use and more efficient. Smart, not lazy
@futurestoryteller 1) Actually, if you waste your energy and resources doing things inefficiently, then that is not smart. If you are doing work, then you are not being lazy. Lazy is an unwillingness to do work. That's the very definition of the word. We have different words for a reason.
2) Of course they accomplish something. They are a direct exchange of ideas and a means of building a consensus.
3) My point never wavered either. There are just several facets to it, which you overlooked.
@futurestoryteller ALSO, I never made a statement as to what generation you're from. All I said was that it was funny that you were complaining about people being lazy while you're using a very NON-work related subject with unrealistic factors to make a point that doesn't fit the realities behind work ethic. Seriously, Baby Boomers came from the same generation that produced Hippies. Can't tell me that they worked any harder than anyone else. Human nature doesn't change that fast.
@futurestoryteller Look, case in point, I'm a graphic artist that works for a prinshop. We use high-end, high volume laser printers to print our jobs out instead of using an offset printing press. It's not 'lazy' to use a laser as opposed to an offset press. It's smart and efficient because we don't have time or money to fuck around with making plates or remaking plates if there is an error. I can go from concept to fully illustrated book in your hands in 4 hours vs a day or two the old way.
@sc0pl355 Look, your job sounds easy to me. But whatever - actors think their jobs are hard (usually) but this is what Dean Martin had to say about it: "I can't stand an actor or actress who tells me acting is hard work. It's easy work. Anyone who says it isn't never had to stand on his feet all day dealing blackjack."
A lot of people that bring things in to be printed think my job's easy too until I have to redo everything from scratch because they did it the wrong way and won't print correctly. What they forget is that I can do my job while they can't.
My job is a lot more like the blackjack part of your example than the acting part. Most actors these days are just being themselves while reciting lines.
@sc0pl355 The point was that a lot of people think their job is hard. Then someone else comes along and complains that they're just bitching because their job is easy. If you want to talk about construction. I do know almost no one who would accuse that job of being easy. But even then... there's always somebody. Generally people like to think they work hard no matter what, because it's about them 'damn it'.
@futurestoryteller "Generally people like to think they work hard no matter what, because it's about them 'damn it'."
That's fine. The thing is that there are lots of things that make a job difficult so everyone is entitled to complain to a point. Like I said, my first job out of high school was working as a laborer. My second job was as a traveling salesman. They were both hard (and dangerous) occupations. My present job is also difficult because so much relies on me doing my part well.
@sc0pl355 I suppose I should also point out that TV has potential benefits that you're ignoring just because you're too ashamed of sounding like you're 'glorifying laziness'... And I've noticed someone (or several people, possibly) marking a significant number of your comments as spam. This isn't me, so it looks like someone else might disagree with you. They just don't feel like engaging or something.
@futurestoryteller "And I've noticed someone (or several people, possibly) marking a significant number of your comments as spam."
Yeah, there are lots of cowards in this world that don't have the intelligence to make a counter-argument or the integrity to move along. I don't concern myself with such small-mindedness. You can see my comments, that's all that matters.
@sc0pl355 Anyway. You're missing the point of the analogy I used entirely. There's nothing wrong with being efficient there's nothing wrong with being productive. There's no implication on my part that the advancement of technology for convenience is not a good thing. But there's also no question that the less endurance used to accomplish tasks the more comfortable - and easier - the work. Laziness has a negative connotation but that's because it's usually used to refer to someone willfully lazy
@sc0pl355 "It is wrong to say that people that are being efficient or productive are being lazy. Laziness is the opposite of efficiency or productivity."
NO! It *isn't* that's the *point*. You're such an absolutist it's fucking silly as hell.
1 unwilling to work or use energy : I'm very lazy by nature | he was too lazy to cook.
• characterized by lack of effort or activity : lazy summer days.
• showing a lack of effort or care : lazy writing.
• (of a river) slow-moving.
Being efficient is not having an unwillingness to work or use energy, it is an unwillingness to do UNNECESSARY work or WASTE energy while gaining desired results.
@sc0pl355 You are implying that there is some kind of connection between two words that have none. 'Characterized by a lack of effort *or* activity.' Not '*and* activity'. If you keep ignoring me, I'll just have to consider the matter settled. If one day we are able to snap our fingers and get whatever we want it would be productive, efficient, and lazy. You're choosing to ignore one of the cons of advancing technology.
@futurestoryteller "'Characterized by a lack of effort *or* activity.' Not '*and* activity'"
Operating a device takes effort. It is also undertaking an activity. If I'm using a forklift to move an 800 lb pallet of bricks, operating the forklift takes effort and the act of using the forklift is an activity. If I'm designing the architecture to a skyscraper. The mathmatics involved would take effort to do correctly and undertaking that task is an activity.
@futurestoryteller I don't see how you can rest your case to the fact that there are no cons to advancing technology. We are thinking creatures. It is in our nature to use our resources to better accomplish things. The lest physical work we do, the more MENTAL work we must undertake. Before we used technology, we domesticated animals or enslaved other people. Technological advancement has allowed our species to span the globe and live longer as well as better.
@sc0pl355 By your own definition laziness in the workforce is the alleviation of work to someone else. But somehow this becomes not lazy when that alleviation comes from a device. The very fact that work is easier to do means that people aren't working as hard at the same things by default. Good or bad that's the way it is.
@futurestoryteller "By your own definition laziness in the workforce is the alleviation of work to someone else. But somehow this becomes not lazy when that alleviation comes from a device."
That's because the device isn't operating itself. You're operating it. Even your own hands and feet are tools to be used to accomplish things. If the device were, say, a completely autonomous robot that's capable of operating itself and taking voice commands, then you wouldn't be the operator anymore.
@sc0pl355 And the more effort we put into alleviating work for ourselves, as intelligent as it is, the more comfortable the work we're making for ourselves; the less effort we have to put into the same activity in the long run. We're making these advancements for the sole purpose of making things easier on us.
@futurestoryteller "We're making these advancements for the sole purpose of making things easier on us."
We're making these advancements as a means of being more productive and getting more done. getting stuff done is the whole fucking point to WORK. If you're not getting stuff done, you're not working, you're just wasting your time.
@sc0pl355 You can try twisting it any way you want. You're forcing me to go in circles because you can't accept the simple fact that the easier things are, the lazier we all become. That's why we're all sticks flab compared to the cavemen of old: Progress. It's certainly a lack of activity that brought on that societal (and genetic) change. You're just to busy convincing yourself that you 'work hard' to believe it.
But things aren't really getting that much easier. Technologically speaking, we are still very primitive. We are more intelligent than we were a few generations ago. We are better prepared. But compared to the potential we have, it is a drop in the bucket.
"That's why we're all sticks flab compared to the cavemen of old: Progress"
Yeah, we're also much MUCH healthier and live longer with less pain and fear of death.
@futurestoryteller "None of which has anything to do with how much effort or activity we put into our daily lives."
Well, if you're not healthy, in a lot of pain or worried that you're going to get eaten by a predator, you won't be very productive.
Also, go somewhere where the people don't have advanced technology, what are they doing? Oh, that's right, probably laying around all day doing nothing, hunting for a couple hours or gathering a small harvest to feed their tribe.
@futurestoryteller "You're just to busy convincing yourself that you 'work hard' to believe it."
Let's see, I went to work at 9:00 am and at a little after 11:00 PM and I'm just getting home, barely ate a thing all day and am totally stressed out. Don't fucking tell me I was being lazy. I know what lazy feels like. It certainly doesn't feel like an aching back and an oncoming headache.
@sc0pl355 Maybe you should try being more efficient - in your daily routine? That way you don't feel like shit when you get home.
I really am done arguing. You can read into it if you want, I don't care, but honestly, I was simply getting tired of this anyway. But certainly after reading that there are *'no'* cons to advancing technology; I came to realize, I never should have considered any kind of debate with you in the first place.
@futurestoryteller "Maybe you should try being more efficient - in your daily routine? "
There are limits to all things. It still takes time to do my job and to do it correctly requires a lot of concentration to undertake because a mistake can mean more lost time in the RIP.
"But certainly after reading that there are *'no'* cons to advancing technology"
There are no cons to advancing technology. That's like claiming that there are cons to human evolution. Fine, go live in a cave then.
@sc0pl355@sc0pl355 Because that's idiotic. Of course there are cons to advancing technology. If you say that there are absolutely NO cons to advancing technology well, I have to assume you aren't a rational person... Then I realized; I'm in a debate with someone working in graphic design. Not a doctor, a lawyer or a scientist. You're unreasonable. And you're clearly wasting my time.
In what way? I explained my point and instead of addressing it, you just call me unreasonable without providing a shred of evidence to support your statement.
"Not a doctor, a lawyer or a scientist."
Uh huh. Right NOW I'm a Graphic Artist. I have a buddy that has a masters and used to work for the government and right NOW he works as a DJ. I'm not defined by my occupation.
@sc0pl355 How about the fact that the more technology we produce to subdue people, the easier it is for a government to enslave its people? How about when criminals or terrorists get their hands on advanced weaponry they can carry out their actions more quickly, more dangerously? How about the fact that drugs are probably effecting our immune system's ability to *evolve* naturally. Making us dependent. We ARE basically dependent on technology.
@futurestoryteller "the easier it is for a government to enslave its people?"
It has always been easy for people to be enslaved. The level of freedom that we enjoy today is FAR GREATER than what we had 100 years ago.
"they can carry out their actions more quickly, more dangerously?"
This is an emotional argument. People kill people all the time. It is our nature. The battle of Seki-ga-hara had over 30,000 casualties, it was three days long and fought with feudal-japanese weaponry.
@sc0pl355 Once again; your ignorance defies belief. Where we are now has absolutely nothing to do with potential risks. I'm really sick of your denials.
@futurestoryteller "Where we are now has absolutely nothing to do with potential risks."
You watch too much "Day After Tomorrow".
I don't view your list of cons as necessarily bad things or relevant. People will always kill each other. It is our nature. That is a human problem, not a technology problem.
People have been enslaving each other for thousands of years. It is in our nature. That is a human problem, not a technology problem.
Technology is a tool. It doesn't kill people. People do.
@futurestoryteller Wow dude, why are you so mad? Can't handle the truth?
Advancements in medical science can potentially counter a lot of the negative effects of drug use. It is important to note that drugs have been around for thousands of years.
It is also a fact that we can develop a resistance to drugs and alcohol in time. Both of those are basically toxins that we purposefully ingest or imbibe. I can't see why not. We developed resistances to solar radiation, cold weather and so on.
@sc0pl355 This is really basic shit. - And now you're patronizing ME? Maybe I didn't want to hand you an answer to a fucking obvious question. There are pros and cons to *almost* everything. If you can't see that; maybe you really are a fucking idiot.
"I didn't want to hand you an answer to a fucking obvious question."
But it isn't obvious. Whether or not something has a 'con' is subjective. Whether or not someone is lazy or works hard or has big boobs is also subjective.
"There are pros and cons to *almost* everything."
@sc0pl355 That's not to say that there's really anything good about laziness, but that's the paradox. Look, I may have been a bit harsh with you. But the whole 'smart-ass' thing bothers me, especially when people are making assumptions out of nowhere. But you're certainly no Saaduk92. If I had said "Cars can be dangerous; for the environment, and people die in accidents every day." He'd go: "SO YOU'RE SAYING WE SHOULD BURN ALL CARS!"
At least I get the feeling you're trying to pay attention.
I'm in the "millennial" era of children, and I have to say, if the resources are there, why not use them? I'm pretty sure that people who did work like that didn't do it for the challenge of it, but because it needed to get done. If it can get done in an easier and faster way, why not do it like that? Spell check (Which keeps coming up for some reason) does greatly help my spelling, but I typically remember later what the correct spelling is. It helps improve my grammar overall, permanently.
@metalsusa1 Generation X'ers perfected that technology and took it to its logical peak while baby boomers got as far as 8-track players before running out of ideas.
No, it's a nonsensical technophobic assumption based on contempt.
You stated that technology is allowing us to become "lazier", then, by definition, you would want us to not use any technology at all. Unless it's a hypocritical thing where you only deem it acceptable in areas that you pick and choose.
One of the reasons this is ironic is it shows that you clearly don't know what that phrase even means. So you're trying to *sound* smart by using it - and failing miserably as a result.
And you didn't show me anything, because you're an idiot, and that's what I was telling you, because it's clearly true. You rendered any argument you 'had' obsolete, when you decided to counter 'my' arguments that were never made, or even implied. - They're imaginary.
An ad hominem is a personal attack rather then addressing the argument. You did so by calling me a "stupid fuck".
This was once I pointed out your moronic logic which assumed that technological advancement made humanity lazy. Following that idiocy I mentioned that we should repeal ALL technology as only then would your ideaologue remain consistent.
Since then you've bitched and avoided the point to save face. How embarrassing.
@Saaduk92 "Ad Hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it"
"Gratuitous verbal abuse or "name-calling" itself is not an ad hominem"
I didn't say; "fuck what you said because you're an idiot" (though I suppose that *would* actually be valid) Instead: What you *said* leads me to the conclusion that you are an idiot. Besides. You have to present an argument for an ad hominem fallacy to take place.
@futurestoryteller Look, as much as I don't like Saaduk, you did use an Ad Hominem attack against him when he said so. You said: "You are really a stupid fuck - and trust me - I didn't see that coming." without addressing what he said as a means of ending the debate. That's an Ad Hominem attack
He fucking called you and idiot WHILE addressing what you actually said. Calling someone a name by itself isn't an Ad Hominem attack. Calling them a name as a substitute for countering what they said is
@sc0pl355 It wasn't a substitute what he said has no relevance. If he said "The sky is pink." in the same context I still would have called him a stupid fuck, because the 'argument' is proof that that's what he is.
@futurestoryteller I didn't see your explanation in your comment to him. Only afterwards. in the instance that you made your insult, you used an ad hominem attack. Just deal.
Nice strawman. I noted what you wrote (as in, ignoring the hypocrisy and idiocy behind your statements and failing to back them up) and then called you an idiot because that's what you are.
You, on the other hand, just called me a "stupid fuck" because I displayed just how incredibly stupid your statements were.
@Saaduk92 So you ignore (or are otherwise ignorant of) your own straw man. And if I call you an idiot it's because it's an ad hominem, even though it's obvious that you are - in fact - a stupid fuck (based on the straw man). But if you call *me* an idiot, my pointing that out to *you* is somehow wrong because my statements are 'incredibly stupid', congratulations you win both the irony, and hypocrisy award of the day. Do not pass 'GO' do not collect $200
@Saaduk92 Since your argument is unrelated to the point I was making, being fallacious in it's own way - as a rather alarmingly idiotic straw man; I see no point in pretending you're a person to be taken seriously. No matter how many 'fancy' words and phrases you *think* you have in your wheelhouse
Nonsense. You wrote that we should "realize that technology allows people to be slightly lazier every generation". BASED ON YOUR WORDS I wrote that if technology equates with supposed laziness then you advocate us going backwards to become more "active".
You then realised how stupid you sounded and have done your best to avoid addressing the point since.
Only a degenerate like yourself would consider the term "ad hominem" fancy.
@Saaduk92 You're stupid pal. Let it go. I've been debating this sc0pl355 guy plenty. So you can't pretend I'm ignoring you because you make a good point - because you don't. You're a retard.
Your comments to sc0pl355 are still fairly stupid. They assume that more technology equates to more laziness because your premise is predicated on thinking that laziness can only be determined by how much physical strength is used to accomplish something.
Troll? Since when is pointing out your idiocy considered trolling? Do people not know what it means anymore?
ever generational shift comes with this kind of thing lol, when my parents generation grew up, they were considered lazy, now they're the ones giving our generation flak. Its the natural cycle of life baby!
BigRickDouglas1 2 weeks ago
I am a millenial who is hard working. That is rare though. With a very few exceptions most of my friends are unemployed, broke, live with their parents, and have habits they can't afford! Even my friends with their own children tend to be immature and irresponcible!
pir8prod 3 weeks ago
i find it funny how throughout the video you refer to what the elder generations believe is work, you only reference working in an office. I live in Montana. Here our elder generations see hard work as physical labor. They would see sitting on the computer all day as lazy
jerhaire 3 weeks ago
Hey !! you guys have classsss , when ever you need to use the word fuck to express yourself, you loose a lot of build up class.
curt34203 3 weeks ago
The people who criticize us forget the generation that raised us.
MrUberAnarchist 1 month ago
What pisses me off is when people say young people are lazy because they don't have jobs. Do you guys fucking realize how hard it is to get a job? And even if you do it's usually part-time. Not to mention that you need to have a college degree AND previous work experience for almost everything. The world has become competitive as hell and most young people I know are driving themselves crazy trying to keep up.
Tuuliska 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@Tuuliska I have never had a hard time getting a job. Been employed since i was 16!!!
pir8prod 3 weeks ago
I am most certainly lazy.
ToyletGnome 1 month ago
@AGDGFGDGDGDFGDFGD
Thats a good thing. People who blindly do things they dont necessarily want to are robots. People should think for themselves more, do what they want, and do it well. If thats selfishness to do what you want for a career, then I am proud to be selfish.
dudesonman4200 1 month ago
FYI I was born in 1990 am I lazy? yes! but technically I did work/volunteer for the Salvation Army as a Bell Ringer in 2009 and 2010 and was paid $7.25 an hour just ringing a bell, collecting donations(money) in a red kettle and wearing a red apron in blistering cold weather for less than month in total also I voted for the first time in the 2008 Presidential Election I voted for Obama BTW even though I'm lazy but at least I did SOMETHING!!!.
CeNationNGU010 1 month ago
I had a discussion of this topic with my friends the other day! Gen X is the last great generation!!
mochaguy22 1 month ago
@BarbaraJD I remember Commodore 64s.
My boss can run circles around me on the mechanical aspects of the machinery at work, but I can do the same to him when it comes to the computer stuff.
I have found out though that in life, who you know is way more important than what you can do unfortunately.
DisturbedHavok 1 month ago
One thing I'm so tired of hearing is adults saying shit like "your generation is the generation to fix everything and make this world a better place." Yeah, you know why? Because all the older generation fucks got to have all the fun in their lives and now look how this world has turned into. Teenagers today are expected to go to college and excell. They aren't even allowed to have fun anymore, well, because everything that was considered "fun" to teens in the 70s/80s is now banned or illegal.
Indestructible229 1 month ago
I actually feel bad for the generations 1985+, do you all understand how hard their lives are going to be in the next ten years, when they're all in college, raising a family, paying bills, everything will be so much harder than it is now. I'm only 15 and I'm scared for how hard my generation's lives will be when we all are trying to raise a family.
Indestructible229 1 month ago
in sweden 25% of the young pepol are unemploeyd however thise guys can do most adults work 250% faster more afficent and better yet thire stuck in the 90s thinking older better
deadline93 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
wait so her dad brag about being able to multiplying double digits in his head? where i come from everybody can do that! doesent american kids kearn that in school or what? not being a smartass or something but that is nothing to brag about.
xgraharax 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
I'm a millennial and it angers me so much when people view us as lazy. If we go back to the calculator example Ana gave, for example, we are ENCOURAGED to use calculators all throughout high school. Just because we may have a different work ethic than previous generations, it does not necessarily mean we are lazy. Our generation is simply the product of failed social policies brought upon us from previous generations.
ema93 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos 7
Honestly as much as I think every generation romanticizes the past. I think my younger generation is lazy. I'm lazy, most of my friends are lazy, we do work but only because we have to. There is no respect for work ethic amongst my peers.
jquickri 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
dont confuse easier access to everything including money and knowledge as younger generations as lazy. that blame needs to be on the parents because they set the entire tone of how children develop. I get tired of hearing that bull shit. I could say older generations do everything the long and hard way, do i call them all retards for it? no. Times change, get over it.
GrowerMD 2 months ago 9
of course the newer generations of north americans are lazier than our predecessors, we don't need to work as hard when there are millions of children in sweatshops abroad doing the intense labour for us
CetraTJ 2 months ago
Looking shit up on Google does not mean you know about technology lol. I bet most people in would not even survive a class in digital logic.
HispanicIsNotARace1 2 months ago
Americans are like Germans - they think their only purpose in life is to work, buy a house, have children and die. That is not life, that is work.
NeccoWecco 2 months ago 2
Old people had it a lot harder. We have it easy, we just have to except that.
Pondebong 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
The younger generation of today is statistically less productive and feel more entitled. Facts are, it is the older generation that created the computer and used it as a productivity tool... the younger generation uses the computer as a gaming machine. The older generation made it to the Moon and back several times... the younger generation have yet to make it out of low Earth orbit. The older generation have Elvis Presley and the Beatles, the younger generation have Kim Kardashian.
nsx1com 2 months ago
@nsx1com where are you getting these statistics? if the younger generations feels like they are more disenfranchised and have less opportunity, that would be because they are correct.
Obviously millenials didnt get rich during the tech bubble, they were children. But as a millenial and now current software engineer, i can tell you the older folks in my department may work harder, but accomplish half as much... because they are terrible at technology... and require us to babysit them.
LiekABaus 2 months ago 2
@LiekABaus - It appears you live in a very tiny bubble. 1st, you can not read... I made a statement, then backed it up with fact... then you ask where I am getting the statistics? Are you not aware that we have not been back to the Moon in decades? 2nd, I can't speak to your tiny little department, but stereotyping surely is not dead in your mind. Generally speaking, knowing how to work an iPhone or iPod does not make you more productive... please leave the real work to the experts.
nsx1com 2 months ago
@nsx1com your statement of the younger generation being statistically less productive and feeling more entitled was not backed up by fact. We havent been to the moon again because the older generation desires tax cuts over funding for manned space exploration.
And please goto apple and tell some of the brightest engineers in the world that knowing how to work an iphone or ipod doesnt make them more productive. Simply put, if you cant use modern tech, you sure as hell cant design it.
LiekABaus 1 month ago
@LiekABaus - Refer to the content following "Facts are". Those are the facts. Your "tax cuts" comment shows your ignorance. 1) 100's of billions were continued to be spent on Space Shuttle, Space Station, space exploration, etc., and 2) post-Moon era tax rates went up... educate yourself. Your "Apple" comment is hilarious. In 1982, Steve Jobs began developing the Macintosh... um, hello, that was the older generation. The last I looked, people do not "work" with iPhones and iPods.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@nsx1com Steve Jobs? The LSD-tripping hippie who dresses in rags? Back in my days he wouldn't haven gotten any job anywhere.
595o 1 month ago
@595o - Please... don't be ridiculous... Steve Jobs never NEEDED to look for a job. That "LSD-tripping hippie who dresses in rags" that you speak of... he changed the world for the better.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@595o When was your 'day'? He got his first job (Working at HP) in the early 70's.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@nsx1com Typical non-sequitur. You know why we weren't at the moon for quite some time? Because it stopped being interesting, and manned space travel costs a fortune more than unmanned.
595o 1 month ago
@595o - You are the one whose argument is irrelevant... 1) if the Moon was no longer "interesting", then NASA would have stopped sending spacecraft there... but they didn't... 2) up until this last year, a fortune WAS still being spent on "manned" space travel... the Space Shuttle and Space Station. In fact, those two programs cost WAY more than going to the Moon.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@nsx1com The moon is uninteresting. There's nothing there but rocks.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 - The Moon may seem uninteresting to you, but to intelligent visionaries the Moon is very interesting. You may say there is nothing there but rocks, but scientists, engineers, commercial entrepreneurs, space advocates, etc. still need to answer questions like: is there water; can it be made habitable; addressing fundamental questions about the history of Earth, the solar system and the universe; to test technologies to reduce the risks of future missions to Mars; and so on.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@nsx1com Bah, it costs too much to go to the moon for any of those questions to have merit.
I wouldn't consider the moon to be habitable since there's no air and it is constantly pelted by meteors at high velocity.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 - I don't believe you have any scope of "cost"... plus, you are admittedly "uninterested"... so your cost benefit analysis (I kid) does not surprise me.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@nsx1com I have plenty scope of cost. It costs a lot of money to go there and there's nothing there but rocks. in order to find out any more, we'd have to fly a shitload of equipment up there to do it. It isn't worth the potential cost especially since things are relatively rosy down here.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 - Allow me to educate you on costs. 1) NASA annual budget = ~$100 billion, 2) estimated 4-man journey to the Moon = $35 billion (there is proposals of less than $7 billion.) 3) at $35 billion over several years, it is a small portion of the NASA's budget, and 4) it is tiny compared to what Congress allocates to the defense department over the same period (~$4 trillion). That's ~0.9%. But in your mind, it's just a rock... so, never mind... things are relatively rosy down here.
nsx1com 1 month ago
@nsx1com "1) NASA annual budget = ~$100 billion, 2) estimated 4-man journey to the Moon = $35 billion"
So they have to spend a little over 1/3rd of their budget to get 4 people to the moon?
The defense department is actively engaged in things on earth where we live. There's nothing going on in space that concerns us. We might as well build habitable self-sustainable space stations than try to do stuff on the moon.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 - You really don't get it do you? NASA's "annual" budget is ~$100B. You're not foolish enough to think it only takes 1 yr to get to the Moon do you? It took nearly 10 yrs to get to the Moon the first time... current plan is 8 yrs. And some of those wonderful things the Defense Dept. is doing here on Earth is making the rich defense contractors wealthier. There is no comparison... $35B is a drop in the bucket compared to what the defense contractors make in 8 yrs.
nsx1com 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nsx1com "current plan is 8 yrs."
And you think it is a good use of resources to make a trip that takes EIGHT YEARS to plan and prepare for to go see some rocks?
Dude, I know what I want to cut from the budget already.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355
You don't know what you're talking about.
shaochiavang 1 month ago
@shaochiavang Really? Well, why don't you enlighten me since you're such a fucking expert?
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355
You're an idoit. NASA just doesnt go to the moon to " visit " it. They do scientific research.
shaochiavang 1 month ago
@shaochiavang I know what they do, but unless they discovered a rock that cures cancer or an alien life form, I think we can live without their research.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355
But NASA has provided us with many things with their researches..
shaochiavang 1 month ago
@nsx1com Pat yourself on the back more, should I go on about how aids is on the downhill, people going hungry is an increasingly rare thing, that whole racism thing isn't too common anymore... but hey i'll stop there because Im not insecure about how incompetent my generation is.
leslucas 2 months ago
@leslucas - AIDS drugs are developed by older, experienced researchers... there is more hunger in the world than ever (if you were older, you would know that)... racism is as common as ever (again, if you were older, you would know that)... finally, it is good to know how secure you are about how incompetent your generation is.
nsx1com 2 months ago
@nsx1com Wow, I don't even know what to say to that. I base my information off of scientific fact and world studies done by world renowned scientists instead of... uh... being old enough to remember how it was back in the day? I love the condescending attitude though, it greatly illustrates the superiority complex older people have.
PS: Do you feel the need to delve into personal insults? Starting to wonder if you're just playing devils advocate and not "Older" at all.
leslucas 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@leslucas - You poor baby... seems you are good at "delving into personal insults", but not really able to handle it yourself... if you can not take the heat in the kitchen, well, you know... If you truly need "information off of scientific fact and world studies done by world renowned scientists", simply do a Google search... there is plenty of data available supporting my comments.
nsx1com 2 months ago
@nsx1com
"the younger generation uses the computer as a gaming machine."
Um, no.
mecher3k 2 months ago
@mecher3k - wow... now that is a winning strategy if I ever saw one... hahaha
nsx1com 2 months ago
@nsx1com
The average gamer is over 20, quite a bit over actually.
mecher3k 2 months ago
@nsx1com The PC certainly wasn't a productivity tool until the mid- to late 80s.
595o 1 month ago
@595o - In 1985, I worked in the engineering department of a large aerospace company... we were using PCs for everything. Macs and DOS machines. Even the admins had PCs in lieu of typewriters. But a year earlier... not as much. The explosion started in 1984, and by 1985, PCs were widely used.
nsx1com 1 month ago
Kids these days expect to be given everything. In school when they fail the tests are made easier so they can pass. I say this as a member of the millennial generation.
AlicexMarilyn 2 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
Always with the complaints about "those damn kids"....
TheCreeperhunter 2 months ago
There is a fine old saying: work smart, not hard. Perhaps we the millennials tend to take this to heart more than previous generations
squiggyflop 2 months ago
Ask a millennial the difference between "then" and "than". Ask a millennial which "there" to use. Also, they're not working on the internet all night--they're playing. But, this isn't true of them all.
BottleConcreteBlond 2 months ago
@BottleConcreteBlond
English, speak it.
mecher3k 2 months ago
@BottleConcreteBlond "There better at surfing then the old folks because they wear effected by it from childhood." ;-)
595o 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 That's true, but effort is kind of the point isn't it? We still need people to do things like farming - which is back breaking labor - and we have made strides in technology to make that easier. But it's still hard and we'd rather pay migrant workers really shitty amounts of money to do it. They say if the technological structure broke down we (mostly) wouldn't be able to survive as our ancestors did Still depending on which years your talking about they only lived to be about 30 so...
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller Farming *was* backbreaking labor. Now we have tools to do the work with less effort. The name of the game is to do more with less effort.
Also, millennials have less to work hard for than baby boomers. We live in a time where the fruit of hard work is almost non-existent to most people. How many people right now actually own their house or their car? If they have a mortgage or car note, they don't own those things. Then there's crushing debt and rampant credential inflation.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
@sc0pl355 Laziness has as much to do with the amount of effort put forth as it does with the amount of work that's done. If we could build robots to build more robots, to work for us; like that big ship in Wall*E, we will have accomplished all necessary work, that wouldn't mean it wasn't characterized by - or related to - laziness. Pointing out that people don't have to work *as* hard *and* actually do have less doesn't help much either.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller Well people have less because there's less work and the 'job creators' have concentrated the lion's share of the profits toward themselves thanks to trickle down economics. It has nothing to do with working hard because the people that don't have much work several column shifts harder than the people that do have. Work =/= success
It is not lazy to be efficient, it is smart.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
@sc0pl355 Once again I must point out that smart and lazy are not mutually exclusive. Neither is lazy and efficient. This (apparent) paradox was already demonstrated in the above example.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller well getting things done isn't being lazy. In fact, I would say that not being willing to learn newer, better, ways of doing things is lazy. Laziness is the unwillingness to do work not finding better ways to get work done. I never said that smart or lazy were mutually exclusive. I said that it ISN'T lazy to be smart. Actually, using your brain to get the best results is harder to do than acting like a mule.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
@sc0pl355 "I said that it ISN'T lazy to be smart."
So.... what? Was someone arguing with you about that? "Actually, using your brain to get the best results is harder to do than acting like a mule."
Tell that to the mules. You opinion on laziness is just that - an opinion - and not a definition. A smart guy, who isn't strong, thinks he works harder than the strong guy, because he has to think. The strong guy, who isn't smart, thinks he works harder than the smart guy, because he has to work
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller "You opinion on laziness is just that - an opinion - and not a definition."
Really?
Let's see what the definition of lazy is.
lazy |ˈlāzē|
adjective ( lazier , laziest )
1 unwilling to work or use energy
What did I fucking say?
"Laziness is the unwillingness to do work not finding better ways to get work done."
Look dude, my first job out of high school was working as a day laborer. I can tell you right now that job was infinitely easier than what I do now.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sc0pl355 "Look dude, my first job out of high school was working as a day laborer. I can tell you right now that job was infinitely easier than what I do now."
Hmm. I'm sure you do think that. That's a highly personal opinion.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller "Was someone arguing with you about that?"
Yup, you were. You were saying that the present generation is lazy because they use more effective ways of doing things. Nevermind how much work they actually do or how productive they actually are. Fuck the fact that a lot of people these days have two jobs or work 12-18 hour days or the fact that ANYBODY can move a box from point a to point b but only a few people actually think enough to use a tool to move TEN boxes instead.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sc0pl355 "2. Characterized by lack of effort or activity."
"You were saying that the present generation is lazy because they use more effective ways of doing things."
REALLY? I used *those* words?
"ANYBODY can move a box from point a to point b but only a few people actually think enough to use a tool to move TEN boxes instead."
This doesn't even support what you're talking about...
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@sc0pl355 Look. Remember the button from Lost (if you watched that show) remember how Desmond described it. "Press it every 108 minutes - save the world." Imagine if it were actually like that. Setting aside the fact that with only one person there you would be incapable of getting sleep. Saving the world = maximum productivity. But how much effort does it take to type in a sequence and press a button? - Calm down, it's an analogy. The point is, productivity does not equal effort.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller dude, for starters I'm saying that present day workers work longer hours *AND* are more productive.
Secondly, I never watched Lost. I stopped watching TV like five years ago because I'm too fucking busy working.
Thirdly, present day workers are more productive with the SAME amount of effort as the older generations. That's what you don't seem to understand. Being a baby boomer was fucking easy street compared to today especially since even getting a job was much easier.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
@sc0pl355 1. That doesn't mean they're putting more effort into their work that's what *you* don't seem to understand. If you make technology to make things easier, stuff is easier to do; it's that simple.
2. Good for you. You sound jaded - lighten up.
3. "present day workers are more productive with the SAME amount of effort as the older generations."
I'd really like to know how you could possibly know that... And we're talking about the amount of effort put in once the job is already there.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
Comment removed
sc0pl355 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller 1) Quote me saying that they used more effort. I said that they put in the same amount of effort and achieve greater results.
2) I'm not the jaded one here. It's just funny that you're on here talking about TV while calling millennials lazy.
3) Let's see, we build things faster and better than they were built 20 years ago. We move things faster and more efficiently than they were 20 years ago. Nobody's job has really become that much easier in the last 20 years.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 1. Where do you even get that from?
2. I am a millennial dumbass. And the fact that you would imply that people who watch tv - at all - are lazy, proves your lack of argumentative skills and pension for silly stereotypes. Not to mention how jaded you *clearly* are.
3. HAHA! That doesn't prove anything. Where's your 'effort meter' Mr. Scientist? You have no validation of anything you're saying. You just want to be right.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller 1) You said "That doesn't mean they're putting more effort into their work " Not me, you.
2) TV's not work and it doesn't accomplish anything.
3) Hmm, Let's see, people spend the same amount of time at work as they did 20 years ago, if not more. The tools that people use today existed 20 years ago. Same tools, same hours = same effort. The difference is that our PLANNING and PREPARATION is more effective today. You're the one that just wants to be right.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 1. It doesn't. What's your point.
2. Says; the guy who has been in a Youtube comments debate with me for at least two days.
3. That completely defeats what you're saying. You're trying to say that accomplishing more automatically makes you less lazy regardless of the amount of activity actually involved. If that's not what you're saying - as far as *I* can tell you've been arguing with me for nothing. And there really are only *so many* hours in a day... So no. It's not me.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller 1) You were implying that *I* made that claim, which I didn't by making that statement.
2) You'd be surprised by what else I did over the weekend. It only takes a minute to make a reply. Try again.
3) Nope. I'm saying that they have similar tools and they accomplish more. This isn't a 400 year time frame we're talking about. It's 20, which isn't that long. And yes, it's you.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 1. But you have said some times that it takes less effort to get things done, which would imply a bit of extra laziness by our generation by default.
2. Hmm. No, no I wouldn't. "TV's not work and it doesn't accomplish anything." Yeah. *NOTHING* about the amount of time it takes. Try again.
3. Once again. You prove you're a stupid jackass. You went from 'the tools are better - there's less work' to 'the tools are the same - people work more' who wants to be right now'?
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller 1) It isn't lazy to do things the more efficient way, that's smart. Using a handtruck to move boxes instead of your back isn't being lazy, it is being smart. Lazy is sitting on your ass and letting someone else move the box while you don't work.
2) A debate accomplishes something.
3) I switched to talking about contruction. In construction, the tools are largely the same and have been for a long time. In my job, the tools are easier to use and more efficient. Smart, not lazy
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 1. Yeah... no, no it's not. Not that that isn't lazy but, just: no.
2. You haven't had them very often if you actually believe that.
3. You always have some excuse. The fact is my point never wavered. Yours suddenly turned into something else entirely.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller 1) Actually, if you waste your energy and resources doing things inefficiently, then that is not smart. If you are doing work, then you are not being lazy. Lazy is an unwillingness to do work. That's the very definition of the word. We have different words for a reason.
2) Of course they accomplish something. They are a direct exchange of ideas and a means of building a consensus.
3) My point never wavered either. There are just several facets to it, which you overlooked.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller ALSO, I never made a statement as to what generation you're from. All I said was that it was funny that you were complaining about people being lazy while you're using a very NON-work related subject with unrealistic factors to make a point that doesn't fit the realities behind work ethic. Seriously, Baby Boomers came from the same generation that produced Hippies. Can't tell me that they worked any harder than anyone else. Human nature doesn't change that fast.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sc0pl355 " I'm not the jaded one here. It's just funny that you're on here talking about TV while calling millennials lazy."
No, the statement clearly implies an assumption that I'm not a millennial, that there's some type of irony at play. Which there wasn't.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller Look, case in point, I'm a graphic artist that works for a prinshop. We use high-end, high volume laser printers to print our jobs out instead of using an offset printing press. It's not 'lazy' to use a laser as opposed to an offset press. It's smart and efficient because we don't have time or money to fuck around with making plates or remaking plates if there is an error. I can go from concept to fully illustrated book in your hands in 4 hours vs a day or two the old way.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 Look, your job sounds easy to me. But whatever - actors think their jobs are hard (usually) but this is what Dean Martin had to say about it: "I can't stand an actor or actress who tells me acting is hard work. It's easy work. Anyone who says it isn't never had to stand on his feet all day dealing blackjack."
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "your job sounds easy to me."
A lot of people that bring things in to be printed think my job's easy too until I have to redo everything from scratch because they did it the wrong way and won't print correctly. What they forget is that I can do my job while they can't.
My job is a lot more like the blackjack part of your example than the acting part. Most actors these days are just being themselves while reciting lines.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 The point was that a lot of people think their job is hard. Then someone else comes along and complains that they're just bitching because their job is easy. If you want to talk about construction. I do know almost no one who would accuse that job of being easy. But even then... there's always somebody. Generally people like to think they work hard no matter what, because it's about them 'damn it'.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "Generally people like to think they work hard no matter what, because it's about them 'damn it'."
That's fine. The thing is that there are lots of things that make a job difficult so everyone is entitled to complain to a point. Like I said, my first job out of high school was working as a laborer. My second job was as a traveling salesman. They were both hard (and dangerous) occupations. My present job is also difficult because so much relies on me doing my part well.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 I suppose I should also point out that TV has potential benefits that you're ignoring just because you're too ashamed of sounding like you're 'glorifying laziness'... And I've noticed someone (or several people, possibly) marking a significant number of your comments as spam. This isn't me, so it looks like someone else might disagree with you. They just don't feel like engaging or something.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "And I've noticed someone (or several people, possibly) marking a significant number of your comments as spam."
Yeah, there are lots of cowards in this world that don't have the intelligence to make a counter-argument or the integrity to move along. I don't concern myself with such small-mindedness. You can see my comments, that's all that matters.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 Anyway. You're missing the point of the analogy I used entirely. There's nothing wrong with being efficient there's nothing wrong with being productive. There's no implication on my part that the advancement of technology for convenience is not a good thing. But there's also no question that the less endurance used to accomplish tasks the more comfortable - and easier - the work. Laziness has a negative connotation but that's because it's usually used to refer to someone willfully lazy
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "There's nothing wrong with being efficient there's nothing wrong with being productive. "
It is wrong to say that people that are being efficient or productive are being lazy. Laziness is the opposite of efficiency or productivity.
"Laziness has a negative connotation but that's because it's usually used to refer to someone willfully lazy"
Laziness has a negative connotation because it is a word that literally means that a person does not work.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 "It is wrong to say that people that are being efficient or productive are being lazy. Laziness is the opposite of efficiency or productivity."
NO! It *isn't* that's the *point*. You're such an absolutist it's fucking silly as hell.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "NO! It *isn't*"
lazy |ˈlāzē|
adjective ( lazier , laziest )
1 unwilling to work or use energy : I'm very lazy by nature | he was too lazy to cook.
• characterized by lack of effort or activity : lazy summer days.
• showing a lack of effort or care : lazy writing.
• (of a river) slow-moving.
Being efficient is not having an unwillingness to work or use energy, it is an unwillingness to do UNNECESSARY work or WASTE energy while gaining desired results.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 You are implying that there is some kind of connection between two words that have none. 'Characterized by a lack of effort *or* activity.' Not '*and* activity'. If you keep ignoring me, I'll just have to consider the matter settled. If one day we are able to snap our fingers and get whatever we want it would be productive, efficient, and lazy. You're choosing to ignore one of the cons of advancing technology.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "'Characterized by a lack of effort *or* activity.' Not '*and* activity'"
Operating a device takes effort. It is also undertaking an activity. If I'm using a forklift to move an 800 lb pallet of bricks, operating the forklift takes effort and the act of using the forklift is an activity. If I'm designing the architecture to a skyscraper. The mathmatics involved would take effort to do correctly and undertaking that task is an activity.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "If you keep ignoring me, I'll just have to consider the matter settled."
I have not ignored a single thing you said.
"You're choosing to ignore one of the cons of advancing technology."
There are no cons to advancing technology.
"If one day we are able to snap our fingers and get whatever we want it would be productive, efficient, and lazy"
We're nowhere near that technological level and won't be for a very, very long time.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 "There are no cons to advancing technology."
I rest my case.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller I don't see how you can rest your case to the fact that there are no cons to advancing technology. We are thinking creatures. It is in our nature to use our resources to better accomplish things. The lest physical work we do, the more MENTAL work we must undertake. Before we used technology, we domesticated animals or enslaved other people. Technological advancement has allowed our species to span the globe and live longer as well as better.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 By your own definition laziness in the workforce is the alleviation of work to someone else. But somehow this becomes not lazy when that alleviation comes from a device. The very fact that work is easier to do means that people aren't working as hard at the same things by default. Good or bad that's the way it is.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "By your own definition laziness in the workforce is the alleviation of work to someone else. But somehow this becomes not lazy when that alleviation comes from a device."
That's because the device isn't operating itself. You're operating it. Even your own hands and feet are tools to be used to accomplish things. If the device were, say, a completely autonomous robot that's capable of operating itself and taking voice commands, then you wouldn't be the operator anymore.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 And the more effort we put into alleviating work for ourselves, as intelligent as it is, the more comfortable the work we're making for ourselves; the less effort we have to put into the same activity in the long run. We're making these advancements for the sole purpose of making things easier on us.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "We're making these advancements for the sole purpose of making things easier on us."
We're making these advancements as a means of being more productive and getting more done. getting stuff done is the whole fucking point to WORK. If you're not getting stuff done, you're not working, you're just wasting your time.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 You can try twisting it any way you want. You're forcing me to go in circles because you can't accept the simple fact that the easier things are, the lazier we all become. That's why we're all sticks flab compared to the cavemen of old: Progress. It's certainly a lack of activity that brought on that societal (and genetic) change. You're just to busy convincing yourself that you 'work hard' to believe it.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "the easier things are, the lazier we all become."
But things aren't really getting that much easier. Technologically speaking, we are still very primitive. We are more intelligent than we were a few generations ago. We are better prepared. But compared to the potential we have, it is a drop in the bucket.
"That's why we're all sticks flab compared to the cavemen of old: Progress"
Yeah, we're also much MUCH healthier and live longer with less pain and fear of death.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 None of which has anything to do with how much effort or activity we put into our daily lives.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "None of which has anything to do with how much effort or activity we put into our daily lives."
Well, if you're not healthy, in a lot of pain or worried that you're going to get eaten by a predator, you won't be very productive.
Also, go somewhere where the people don't have advanced technology, what are they doing? Oh, that's right, probably laying around all day doing nothing, hunting for a couple hours or gathering a small harvest to feed their tribe.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "You're just to busy convincing yourself that you 'work hard' to believe it."
Let's see, I went to work at 9:00 am and at a little after 11:00 PM and I'm just getting home, barely ate a thing all day and am totally stressed out. Don't fucking tell me I was being lazy. I know what lazy feels like. It certainly doesn't feel like an aching back and an oncoming headache.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 Maybe you should try being more efficient - in your daily routine? That way you don't feel like shit when you get home.
I really am done arguing. You can read into it if you want, I don't care, but honestly, I was simply getting tired of this anyway. But certainly after reading that there are *'no'* cons to advancing technology; I came to realize, I never should have considered any kind of debate with you in the first place.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "Maybe you should try being more efficient - in your daily routine? "
There are limits to all things. It still takes time to do my job and to do it correctly requires a lot of concentration to undertake because a mistake can mean more lost time in the RIP.
"But certainly after reading that there are *'no'* cons to advancing technology"
There are no cons to advancing technology. That's like claiming that there are cons to human evolution. Fine, go live in a cave then.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 @sc0pl355 Because that's idiotic. Of course there are cons to advancing technology. If you say that there are absolutely NO cons to advancing technology well, I have to assume you aren't a rational person... Then I realized; I'm in a debate with someone working in graphic design. Not a doctor, a lawyer or a scientist. You're unreasonable. And you're clearly wasting my time.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "Of course there are cons to advancing technology"
name some?
"You're unreasonable."
In what way? I explained my point and instead of addressing it, you just call me unreasonable without providing a shred of evidence to support your statement.
"Not a doctor, a lawyer or a scientist."
Uh huh. Right NOW I'm a Graphic Artist. I have a buddy that has a masters and used to work for the government and right NOW he works as a DJ. I'm not defined by my occupation.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 How about the fact that the more technology we produce to subdue people, the easier it is for a government to enslave its people? How about when criminals or terrorists get their hands on advanced weaponry they can carry out their actions more quickly, more dangerously? How about the fact that drugs are probably effecting our immune system's ability to *evolve* naturally. Making us dependent. We ARE basically dependent on technology.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "the easier it is for a government to enslave its people?"
It has always been easy for people to be enslaved. The level of freedom that we enjoy today is FAR GREATER than what we had 100 years ago.
"they can carry out their actions more quickly, more dangerously?"
This is an emotional argument. People kill people all the time. It is our nature. The battle of Seki-ga-hara had over 30,000 casualties, it was three days long and fought with feudal-japanese weaponry.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 Once again; your ignorance defies belief. Where we are now has absolutely nothing to do with potential risks. I'm really sick of your denials.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "Where we are now has absolutely nothing to do with potential risks."
You watch too much "Day After Tomorrow".
I don't view your list of cons as necessarily bad things or relevant. People will always kill each other. It is our nature. That is a human problem, not a technology problem.
People have been enslaving each other for thousands of years. It is in our nature. That is a human problem, not a technology problem.
Technology is a tool. It doesn't kill people. People do.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller "How about the fact that drugs are probably effecting our immune system's ability to *evolve* naturally."
Advancements in medical science can alleviate that or we can evolve a resistance over time. No big deal.
"Making us dependent."
To drugs? I wouldn't know. Most painkillers have little effect on me, so I don't take them. Don't drink either, doesn't do much for me.
"We ARE basically dependent on technology."
You are free to live in a cave if you want, hippy.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 "Advancements in medical science can alleviate that or we can evolve a resistance over time. No big deal."
Idiot. I'm ending this fucking travesty now. Any further comments on your part will be futile.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller Wow dude, why are you so mad? Can't handle the truth?
Advancements in medical science can potentially counter a lot of the negative effects of drug use. It is important to note that drugs have been around for thousands of years.
It is also a fact that we can develop a resistance to drugs and alcohol in time. Both of those are basically toxins that we purposefully ingest or imbibe. I can't see why not. We developed resistances to solar radiation, cold weather and so on.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 This is really basic shit. - And now you're patronizing ME? Maybe I didn't want to hand you an answer to a fucking obvious question. There are pros and cons to *almost* everything. If you can't see that; maybe you really are a fucking idiot.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "And now you're patronizing ME?"
Was I?
"I didn't want to hand you an answer to a fucking obvious question."
But it isn't obvious. Whether or not something has a 'con' is subjective. Whether or not someone is lazy or works hard or has big boobs is also subjective.
"There are pros and cons to *almost* everything."
Don't see any cons to *advancing* technology.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 That's not to say that there's really anything good about laziness, but that's the paradox. Look, I may have been a bit harsh with you. But the whole 'smart-ass' thing bothers me, especially when people are making assumptions out of nowhere. But you're certainly no Saaduk92. If I had said "Cars can be dangerous; for the environment, and people die in accidents every day." He'd go: "SO YOU'RE SAYING WE SHOULD BURN ALL CARS!"
At least I get the feeling you're trying to pay attention.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "the whole 'smart-ass' thing bothers me"
Well, I always say that it is better to be a smart ass than a dumb one.
"At least I get the feeling you're trying to pay attention."
I'll try to *not* take that as much of an insult. ¬_¬
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 How about trying not to be any kind of ass?
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller "How about trying not to be any kind of ass?"
Well, I'm not an ass. This video explains things perfectly.
watch?v=3x3MJkg6PMA
sc0pl355 1 month ago
I'm in the "millennial" era of children, and I have to say, if the resources are there, why not use them? I'm pretty sure that people who did work like that didn't do it for the challenge of it, but because it needed to get done. If it can get done in an easier and faster way, why not do it like that? Spell check (Which keeps coming up for some reason) does greatly help my spelling, but I typically remember later what the correct spelling is. It helps improve my grammar overall, permanently.
bradylawson3636 2 months ago
@bradylawson3636 I take back what I said. Everyone my age is a dumbass.
bradylawson3636 2 months ago
Don't forget the Baby Boomer generation invented the technology to allow "millenniums" to run their mouths about other more productive generations.
metalsusa1 2 months ago
@metalsusa1 Generation X'ers perfected that technology and took it to its logical peak while baby boomers got as far as 8-track players before running out of ideas.
sc0pl355 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
Following that logic we should immediately halt and go back a hundred thousand years because all this progress has supposedly made people "lazy".
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@Saaduk92 Nobody asked you to follow the logic anywhere - it's simply a rational observation.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
No, it's a nonsensical technophobic assumption based on contempt.
You stated that technology is allowing us to become "lazier", then, by definition, you would want us to not use any technology at all. Unless it's a hypocritical thing where you only deem it acceptable in areas that you pick and choose.
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@Saaduk92 You are really a stupid fuck - and trust me - I didn't see that coming.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
Oh, dear. An ad hominem!
Nice to see you're running away from your own statements once I showed you how moronic they were.
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@Saaduk92 "An ad hominem!"
One of the reasons this is ironic is it shows that you clearly don't know what that phrase even means. So you're trying to *sound* smart by using it - and failing miserably as a result.
And you didn't show me anything, because you're an idiot, and that's what I was telling you, because it's clearly true. You rendered any argument you 'had' obsolete, when you decided to counter 'my' arguments that were never made, or even implied. - They're imaginary.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
An ad hominem is a personal attack rather then addressing the argument. You did so by calling me a "stupid fuck".
This was once I pointed out your moronic logic which assumed that technological advancement made humanity lazy. Following that idiocy I mentioned that we should repeal ALL technology as only then would your ideaologue remain consistent.
Since then you've bitched and avoided the point to save face. How embarrassing.
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@Saaduk92 "Ad Hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it"
"Gratuitous verbal abuse or "name-calling" itself is not an ad hominem"
I didn't say; "fuck what you said because you're an idiot" (though I suppose that *would* actually be valid) Instead: What you *said* leads me to the conclusion that you are an idiot. Besides. You have to present an argument for an ad hominem fallacy to take place.
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
That's exactly what you did, idiot. You wrote;
"You are really a stupid fuck - and trust me - I didn't see that? coming."
By definition, that was an ad hominem.
Saaduk92 1 month ago
@Saaduk92 You called me an idiot. You *must* be ignoring my argument and thus using an ad hominem.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller Look, as much as I don't like Saaduk, you did use an Ad Hominem attack against him when he said so. You said: "You are really a stupid fuck - and trust me - I didn't see that coming." without addressing what he said as a means of ending the debate. That's an Ad Hominem attack
He fucking called you and idiot WHILE addressing what you actually said. Calling someone a name by itself isn't an Ad Hominem attack. Calling them a name as a substitute for countering what they said is
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 It wasn't a substitute what he said has no relevance. If he said "The sky is pink." in the same context I still would have called him a stupid fuck, because the 'argument' is proof that that's what he is.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@futurestoryteller It is a substitue when you don't explain *why* it has no relivence.
"If he said "The sky is pink." in the same context"
w w w. taltopia. c o m/ media/ 35/ 35165_r. j p g
Really now?
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@sc0pl355 I have explained why it has no relevance.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller I didn't see your explanation in your comment to him. Only afterwards. in the instance that you made your insult, you used an ad hominem attack. Just deal.
sc0pl355 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller
Nice strawman. I noted what you wrote (as in, ignoring the hypocrisy and idiocy behind your statements and failing to back them up) and then called you an idiot because that's what you are.
You, on the other hand, just called me a "stupid fuck" because I displayed just how incredibly stupid your statements were.
Continue avoiding this, though.
Saaduk92 1 month ago
@Saaduk92 So you ignore (or are otherwise ignorant of) your own straw man. And if I call you an idiot it's because it's an ad hominem, even though it's obvious that you are - in fact - a stupid fuck (based on the straw man). But if you call *me* an idiot, my pointing that out to *you* is somehow wrong because my statements are 'incredibly stupid', congratulations you win both the irony, and hypocrisy award of the day. Do not pass 'GO' do not collect $200
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@Saaduk92 Since your argument is unrelated to the point I was making, being fallacious in it's own way - as a rather alarmingly idiotic straw man; I see no point in pretending you're a person to be taken seriously. No matter how many 'fancy' words and phrases you *think* you have in your wheelhouse
futurestoryteller 2 months ago
@futurestoryteller
Nonsense. You wrote that we should "realize that technology allows people to be slightly lazier every generation". BASED ON YOUR WORDS I wrote that if technology equates with supposed laziness then you advocate us going backwards to become more "active".
You then realised how stupid you sounded and have done your best to avoid addressing the point since.
Only a degenerate like yourself would consider the term "ad hominem" fancy.
Saaduk92 1 month ago
@Saaduk92 You're stupid pal. Let it go. I've been debating this sc0pl355 guy plenty. So you can't pretend I'm ignoring you because you make a good point - because you don't. You're a retard.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller
Nice of you to spew more ad hominems in order to bury the fact that your assertions are moronic.
Back up your point, unless you're going back on it.
Saaduk92 1 month ago
@Saaduk92 You can read through the giant wall of text I've had to throw at the other guy. Which includes why I *know* you're an idiot:
FUCK YOU
Is all I really have to say to your dumbass at this point.
Get off the troll patrol and go back to your life. If you have one.
futurestoryteller 1 month ago
@futurestoryteller
Oh, dear. More ad hominems.
Your comments to sc0pl355 are still fairly stupid. They assume that more technology equates to more laziness because your premise is predicated on thinking that laziness can only be determined by how much physical strength is used to accomplish something.
Troll? Since when is pointing out your idiocy considered trolling? Do people not know what it means anymore?
Saaduk92 1 month ago
@AmericanNohbuddy
> Implying that people are able to survive nowadays without working.
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@Saaduk92
They are LOL.
AmericanNohbuddy