Virtual Addiction
If the dangers of working, living and playing on the Net have been overstated by political moralists and the media, our dirty little secret is that this is a compulsive culture. Many people do have trouble from time to time balancing e-mail, IM, gaming, coding, IRC-chatting, arguing, shopping, trading, even moderating, with the demands and balance of real life.
The Net is a magnet for brainy, even addictive obsessives, an outlet for their curiousity and creativity that is often much more appealing than home, school or work. So Dr. David Greenfield's book maybe handy help for "Netheads, cyberfreaks, and those who love them," as he puts it.
Greenfield knows what he's talking about. He writes about the intrinsically compulsive elements of life online for shoppers, gamblers, sex-chatters, auctioneers, gamers and kids. He doesn't present the Net as a dangerous menace, just a place so diverse, challenging and compelling that many of the people who go online regularly sometimes struggle with finding the right balance between life online and off. The book is really about balance and perspective, always useful to think about. And there are few college kids or tech workers who don't know somebody who's dealing with this issue in one form or another, if they aren't themselves. The perils of cyberlife are real, if wildly overstated by a phobic society.
Greenfield wrote this book (out in paperback for $12 bucks) because he found his own time online was getting too intense. He describes himself as a "true cyberfreak with technophilic tendencies," and offers useful information about warning signs and remedies. He also believes the Net is going to become much more addictive as it becomes even more interesting and ubiquitous.
Greenfield believes that multimedia stimulation, ease of access, twenty-four-hour availability, lack of boundaries, loss of time, disinhibition, stimulating and creative content are all factors that can contribute to compulsive, even addictive Net use.
"The line from my perspective," he writes, "is when it interferes with your life significantly." If somebody enjoys being online six or eight hours a day and they still lead a healthy and balanced life, there's no problem. But, he says, he isn't certain that anybody can spend most or all of their spare time online and still have a truly balanced life.
This book is sensible. Greenfield's style is easy and straightforward, and the book could be valuable for employers, peers, colleagues and friends concerned about themselves and other people who sometimes struggle with balance and perspective in a culture that is compelling not because it's dangerous but because it's so damned interesting.
You can purchase this book at FatBrain.
Thing is, some people today have "broadband" access at home (I do), and the most compelling feature isn't the speed, it's the fact that you are _always_ online. There is zero resistance to checking something out on the web (if nothing else, just to reload /. to see if any new items have popped up), mail is received at all times, and friends are just one ICQ window away.
Add to that that I work a lot on the machine, and that the most comfortable chair in my apartement is by the desk, and one interpretation could be that I'm using the net 18 hours a day, every day.
So how much _am_ I using the net? Do I count only when I do a volitional act to access the net (like using a browser to check a wab page), whenever my computer accesses the web (autochecking for mail), or whenever I'm sitting at my desk? Am I using the net if I'm composing a mail on the hotmail site, but not when writing the same letter in gvim (even if I intend to send the finished text as mail)?
Deciding when you are using something too much is kind of hard when it quits being a separate activity and blends seamlessly into everyday life.
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Why should addictions interfere with your life? What if your "addiction" -is- your life? If my addiction is my life, then how can it be interfering with my life? What do you mean by life?
If I'm not on the fast track to getting rich and have a wife, kids, dog, suburban, boat and ranch home does that mean I don't have a life? If I choose to spend my time coding instead of persuing those things then is my "coding addiction" interfering with my life? If I'm already married and I choose to start spending all of my time on IRC instead of with my wife, did I make a lifestyle change or did I let an addiction "ruin my life"?
Who is to say what is normal?
Is anyones life not good enough?
Sigs are awesome huh?
Sounds a lot like the problems people have had for years with cable television--the exception being that I can't watch TV at work and pretend to be productive.
I don't know if interesting is the key. I mean, right now I have work to do and instead I'm reading Jon Katz, waiting for a LinuxToday article to load so I can read idiots' responses to Dennis Powell flamebait and waiting for SpamCop to let me click. Is any of that really more interesting than work?
To the degree that Net activity is interesting, it's not such a wake. What galls me is when I realize I've just blown 2 hours clicking through a flamewar on list, updating KDE from CVS or talking on IRC with teenagers. Is that really more interesting or fun than if I had read a book, gone for a run or watched SportCenter?
I think what makes the Net "addictive" is the easy and quick feedback you get. It's just too easy to do one more little thing.
As a rule, statements like this have an effect on me opposite than what was intended. It suggests to me that the speaker has little or no familiarity with other cultures and imagines the flaws of members of his own culture to be unique rather than universal. American liberals have a particular fondness for such formulations -- it's a (far more common) variation on the stereotypical jingoistic, parochial American.
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
I can quit /. for good anytime.
I've already quit it six or seven times already.
The brief litany the reviewer provides of what's available on the web - sex, gambling, shopping - reveals no new arenas of obsessive/compulsive behavior. Of course, for people with problems in these arenas, the internet holds compelling benefits - most notably instant access, the perception of privacy/anonymity. There is nothing more unique about the internet, as regards these behaviors, than that.
So what exactly is the use or point of a book addressing these copiously documented and discussed topics in the particular context of the internet? None, as far as I can tell, except providing some shrink with a vehicle to cash in on his own lack of self-control and a newsy pop-culture topic. Here: read my book on obsessive internet behavior and save yourself 12 bucks: If your gaming/gambling/porno-pandering/chatting/ and/or shopping is interfering with your life and relationships, slow down or stop. If you can't stop, seek counselling. The end.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries