Slashdot Mirror


Tech Tools Fostering "Mini Generation Gaps"

Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times has an interesting report on the iGeneration, born in the '90s and this decade, comparing them to the Net Generation, born in the 1980s. The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration — conceivably their younger siblings — spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks. 'People two, three or four years apart are having completely different experiences with technology,' says Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project. 'College students scratch their heads at what their high school siblings are doing, and they scratch their heads at their younger siblings. It has sped up generational differences.' Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, says that the iGeneration, unlike their older peers, expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with, and don't have the patience for anything less. 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen." Read below for another intra-generational wrinkle.
Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking. Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television; while people in their early 20s can handle only six, and those in their 30s about five and a half. "That versatility is great when they're killing time, but will a younger generation be as focused at school and work as their forebears?" writes Brad Smith. "I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to," says Vicky Rideout, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

72 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess I'm Net generation. Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.
    Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.

    As for multi-tasking; Again, not a generation issue, as task switching just interrupts. Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.

    1. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.

      Exactly. I was born in the early 1970s and I've used the Net and electronic communications in general since the early-to-mid 1980s. I use text messages. I used to pay much more attention to the TV than I do now.

      These distinctions, I think, are artificial at best, and at worst, stereotyping.

    2. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by fast+turtle · · Score: 5, Funny

      Get Off My Lawn Kids

      Having been classified as ADHD in the early 70's it's so nice to finally get my revenge now that everyone has been infected with the damn Attention Deficit Syndrome. Those who don't learn to focus and develop short term memory are bound to fail and I can sincerely state "Welcome to my World" - sukkers.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    3. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by c_forq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter

      What? Sometimes twitter is the best tool for the job. I was born in the mid-80's, and have found twitter to be a great tool for meeting friends at the pub. It is more effective than a facebook update or mass text.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    4. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by RobertM1968 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed... my own experience is this article is nonsense and not indicative of such as a whole.

      I've been using computers since 1979 (at the schools I went to), started programming in BASIC back then, worked my way up. I'd been using BBS's since the first computer I owned - which was an IBM PC Portable (an IBM XT in a suitcase sized case with amber screen). I was in the first bunch of people to actually use the Internet (I used OS/2 almost exclusively, and we had actual Internet access long before Windows - while Windows users were suckered... I mean stuck with AOL or NetCom). Nowadays, besides the "Net Generation" stuff, I regularly text, IM, use Facebook, read blogs, etc - along with all of the other "iGeneration" stuff. And accessing all my stuff from my phone (TMo G1) when I am not in front of the computer... email, visual voicemail, IM, chat, text messaging, web, Facebook, etc.

      So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well... I doubt there is any real divide as indicated by the article. But I could be wrong... most of my friends are very tech savvy - but even so, I doubt the "divide" is anything to speak of. Even my mom text messages and such.

    5. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...You are on Slashdot. You are not the norm. The fact you are even on this site shows that you are more inclined to use a computer than other people your age.

      As for TV, the quality of programming has gone downhill, even news shows are nothing more than glorified tabloids. Networks that used to have interesting programming has shifted to more crap. Discovery is more about blowing stuff up than explaining science, the History channel seems to be nothing more than WWII and explosions.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by icebike · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I guess I'm Net generation. Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.
      Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.

      For work issues, I don't even answer email immediately, because I have no intention of serving as a brain trust for people who will not think. I let them age. The more I get from a single source the more I let them age.

      For recreational use, I still prefer an email for anything other than the "What time will you arrive" question via text.

      Thinking carefully, I can not come up with a single person I care to follow on twitter, but it is nice for breaking news issues if you are a news junkie.

      I think we are breeding the first generation of the BORG. People who can't think and can't act without first checking in with the collective.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    7. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by RDW · · Score: 5, Interesting

      'Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.'

      I wonder how many of the other supposed differences are really down to the younger generation being, well, younger? A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call, which is handy if you're on a limited budget with a PAYG phone. A school or college age kid may have a wider social network than an older person in a full-time job, so online networking tools could be more useful. There be may less tendency to veg out in front of passive TV entertainment like an exhausted wage slave if you're out enjoying yourself all the time. Multitasking could be less difficult for a younger brain, etc. Of course, these are just the senile ramblings of an ageing mind, so take them with a pinch of salt. And get off my lawn.

    8. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by vlm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Networks that used to have interesting programming has shifted to more crap. Discovery is more about blowing stuff up than explaining science, the History channel seems to be nothing more than WWII and explosions.

      How could you have missed the rotting carcass that is now rebranded sifi or whatever, but may as well be called the Ghosts -n- Wrasslin Channel? Also, isn't History the "Jesus" channel now, with about half the documentaries being "biblically inspired" like true stories of the prophets, etc? No, I'm not talking about EWTNor daystar, I mean Disc or TLC or Hist or one of those which seem to be filled with "christian documentaries" some weekdays.

      There is an internet related reason for the decline of quality TV... First, anyone intelligent enough to read wikipedia, or search google, does so instead of watching TV, which explains the ever declining intellectual level of TV, they have to aim at whats left of their audience, primarily fans of the "ow my balls" program. Secondly, all modern documentaries must alternate copying and hating the internet, for example in copying we have horrendous artificial "shakey cam" footage to "make it feel urban and gritty like youtube" alternating with expensive yet useless dramatic historical reenactments because thankfully wikipedia doesn't include much if any video footage.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    9. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by vlm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ... A text message is probably cheaper than a voice call ...

      Well, I can tell you're not in the USA.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    10. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by FuckingNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      glorifying manual labor

      TV = leisure.

      When most people are working in a factory, they want to come home and dream of the stars.

      When most people are in the educated middle class, they play with the stars at work, realise not every day's a Moon landing, and want to come home and dream of actually being able to build something in a weekend that works.

      It's not that leisure is dumbing down per se, it's that work requires you to be less dumb than ever before. Entertainment is a break from that.

    11. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by value_added · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So, if this "old dog can learn new tricks" and my friends have as well...

      The question that I'd like answered is whether the new dogs can learn what the old dogs have learned, or whether they're too enamoured of (or distracted by) gadgets and interfaces so as to believe no such effort is necessary.

    12. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by PyroMosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was born in 79, and while I think the article is exaggerated a bit, I'd say it's basically accurate from my experience.

      I suspect that you're doing something people do all too often: seeing others through the lens other your own worldview, and being unable to imagine otherwise.

      As others have pointed out; your very presence here on Slashdot proves you're not the norm for your, or any generation. People here use alternative OSes, (and know what an OS is, for that matter), terminal services, were on BBSes when they came out, and are generally more "wired" and comfortable with technology in general than the general populace.

      Yes, lots of people are on Facebook. That doesn't prove anything. Facebook is just the new "cool" communication medium that everyone jumped on (last cycle it was MySpace).

      I will cay this, though - While I think the author's data is basically correct, I'm not sure all of the conclusions they draw from their data are correct. For instance, the Pwe study he cites mentions a marked decrease in usage of IMs between teens and 20-somethings. Well, I'm 30. And I know I used IM constantly in high school, and through my early 20s. As I grew older, I used it less and less. Likewise, all my friends who I used to IM with are in the same boat. For us, it wasn't a correlation of generation, but of simple age, and where we are in our lives.

      Teens go to more concerts and play more sports than their 20-something counterparts too. This isn't a function of "generations", but of simple age.

      I actually suspect that if a formal study was done, following folks usage patterns across generations for a long period of time, that you'd see my generation at 20 used IM more than the current crop of 20-year-olds. We didn't have Facebook and Twitter, or even text messages. IM, email, and the phone were basically it for us. So we used IM quite extensively. The average kid today lives much more by his or her cell phone than their PC compared to how my "generation" did.

    13. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by Jurily · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having been classified as ADHD in the early 70's it's so nice to finally get my revenge now that everyone has been infected with the damn Attention Deficit Syndrome.

      Exactly. The things we do in front of the computer now are inherently multitasked. That doesn't mix well with not inherently multitasked things we do, like having a spoken conversation with someone.

      When you browse, code, write an email, etc. all at once, you do the scheduling. When someone starts talking to you, you have two options: a) schedule them in with the rest, and make them believe you're not paying attention (and/or are unable to, hence ADHD), or b) throw your whole state of mind out the window, and listen to their highly informative and productive inane ramblings.

    14. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by Idiomatick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But with a twitter update you can only get together with people that use twitter, there is your flaw...

      (I couldn't help it, sorry

    15. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And subject to time-of-life constraints.

      A high schooler will use IM because they, and all their friends, go to school and come home at the same time - everybody's there - and because they can discuss forbidden topics without it being obvious to parents. A college student or recent grad will be much more interested in the FB/Twitter update experience as they plan their evenings. And someone with a home and kids will appreciate that using a phone as a phone means that your hands are free and your eyes are not occupied - so you can spot when the three-year-old is about to see if daddy's PS3 likes carrots.

    16. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Funny

      But it got a lot worse after Blair Witch... oh, how I wish I could get that hour and half of my life back.

    17. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by tengu1sd · · Score: 3, Funny
      >>> When someone starts talking to you, you have two options: a) schedule them in with the rest, and make them believe you're not paying attention (and/or are unable to, hence ADHD), or b) throw your whole state of mind out the window, and listen to their highly informative and productive inane ramblings.

      It's called marriage.

    18. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by X0563511 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have to admit, annoying as it is, the situational awareness fostered by this (you can only smack into an obstacle so much before you start paying attention) is not a bad thing to have.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    19. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by shiftless · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What does modding cars have to do with science? Well to fully understand how an engine works and how to extract the most power out of it you have to know a hell of a lot of science, across a broad range of disciplines. "Pimp My Ride" doesn't really qualify of course.

    20. Re:Bullshit level: High - Storm likely. by soupforare · · Score: 2, Funny

      The few British cameramen I know can't hold steady until *after* they've had their few pints for breakfast.

      --
      --- Do you believe in the day?
  2. Let me get out my violin... by Pluvius · · Score: 5, Funny

    They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone

    And they're going to be quickly disappointed.

    Rob

    1. Re:Let me get out my violin... by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A failure to out grow the "Are We There Yet" syndrome.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Let me get out my violin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone

      And they're going to be quickly disappointed.

      Rob

      Dammit, we are tired of waiting for quick disappointment! We demand INSTANT disappointment!

    3. Re:Let me get out my violin... by sohp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's OK, they'll get their comeuppance when they go into the workforce and find management also expects instantaneous access to them -- 24/7/365.

    4. Re:Let me get out my violin... by Grundlefleck · · Score: 5, Informative

      Dammit, we are tired of waiting for quick disappointment! We demand INSTANT disappointment!

      I've been providing this to women for years!

      --
      I accept I know nothing. Insulting my ignorance is wasted on me.
  3. One _chooses_ to stagnate, in large part by sznupi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm from the beginning of the 80s...and not only that, I'm from a country that was under Soviet influence. Meaning "radio, telephone and TV" for a few decades; few generations knew nothing else. Till the first half of 90s I knew nothing else.

    And yet, when reading TFS, I have a strong impression its description of people born in the 90s and 00s fits nicely to me. I guess in large part because I fully realize "our times were better" is only BS meant to make oneself feel better about youth that has passed or is passing away. And it causes harm by unreasonably valuing the past above present, which is almost universally better. You only have to embrace it (well, I do pick what I want; but the time of introduction doesn't play big role)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:One _chooses_ to stagnate, in large part by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Informative

      Some people keep learning and changing as they get older. The vast majority do not... they stick with what they learned when they were kids, habits and so on, and that's that. You're an aberration ;)

    2. Re:One _chooses_ to stagnate, in large part by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Same here. Born in the USSR in mid-80s, and I've first seen a PC (which was also the first programmable computer to me) in 1995. Cellphones came a lot later, too - I've only got a personal one in 2000. Internet? Don't recall now, but it was late 90s, and even then it was dial-up, payed per-minute, with rather insane prices, which effectively rules out many things (e.g. IM).

      And yet, I don't watch TV, I prefer SMS to voice calls (both sending and receiving), and I use IM more often than email.

      Then again, my motivation is different than the one claimed in TFA ("expecting immediate response"); for SMS, for example, it's quite the opposite - it doesn't require the person receiving them to pay immediate attention, but lets them respond at leisure. I appreciate when people are considerate of my time like that, and try to be considerate of theirs. And with IM, it's just more convenient, UI-wise, for short messages on no particular topic, compared to email, but also doesn't require immediate reply (as evidenced by the fact that any decent IM network these days lets one send messages to offline users; hey, even MSN/Live learned that trick!).

      I also agree with your reasoning as to why you prefer all those things in general. Progress is good; why wouldn't I embrace it?

    3. Re:One _chooses_ to stagnate, in large part by bkk_diesel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And yet, I don't watch TV, I prefer SMS to voice calls (both sending and receiving), and I use IM more often than email.

      Then again, my motivation is different than the one claimed in TFA ("expecting immediate response"); for SMS, for example, it's quite the opposite - it doesn't require the person receiving them to pay immediate attention, but lets them respond at leisure. I appreciate when people are considerate of my time like that, and try to be considerate of theirs.

      I think this is an important point. A phone call is inherently disruptive, and demands immediate attention from the person you are calling. In my opinion, an SMS is a much more polite way to communicate something less than urgent.

  4. Instant response? I don't think so. by hackwrench · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, says that the iGeneration, unlike their older peers, expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with, and don't have the patience for anything less.

    I thought that one of the benefits of texting was that you don't have to have a response immediately, or even read it immediately.

    1. Re:Instant response? I don't think so. by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Funny

      Indeed. What do they think phone calls are? Speak into the phone and get a reply 5 minutes later?

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  5. Patience by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which all sounds like a polite way of saying that kids these days have been spoiled. Instant gratification, be it through next-day felivery net-based purchases, simplistic video games or instantly downloaded media, means they have no patience.

    Younger people scratch their heads in amazement at the things people of my generation and older have done that required supreme patience, whether learning a complex skill or finely crafting a model. This comes right on the heels of lacking discipline. If you can't see the value or take the time to perfect anything, how will you ever get good at anything except the trivial?

    Oh, and get off my lawn.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:Patience by Jean-Luc+Picard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cool broad assumption and generalizations, bro

    2. Re:Patience by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait, you don't think WoW is simplistic? I thought everyone was mocking WoW these days ...

      And, yes, not being willing to learn the skill of building the model airplane before having fun with it pretty much means "lack of self-discipline", except that's sort of a bad example because there's no actual need to build it yourself these days.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Patience by greg1104 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Playing Pac-Man well requires intense concentration, memory, and plain old fashioned stamina. If you don't find that intellectually stimulating, you have failed to understand the game.

    4. Re:Patience by causality · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You think WOW is "simplistic"?

      Play an old text-based RPG sometime and you'll appreciate being able to just click on something to interact with your environment.

      Copyright laws (blech) require some skill and patience to circumvent.

      They require the skill and patience of one person to break whatever copy protection exists. After that, everyone else can click an HTTP link to a .torrent file.

      Horse was better than foot, car better than horse. Do I lack self discipline because I use a car?

      Assuming you are able-bodied, you certainly would lack discipline if you used your car to travel 200 feet. This directly compares to people who get all impatient and bent out of shape over not instantly receiving an item or a piece of information that's not really urgent.

      Scientists wouldn't know a problem if it bit them.

      The article read more like an editorial to me, like someone's opinion. It did not seem to be a scientific work. If it was supposed to be scientific, they omitted a great deal of data and mentioned nothing of experiments or peer review.

      I am not saying you are a particular example of it, but I am amazed at the black-and-white view people are revealing here. The observation that patience and self-discipline are virtues is not a rejection of technology. Keep your car because it is indeed better than a horse or your feet, but recognize that discipline is a good thing whether or not you have to walk 20 miles. Likewise, it's possible to have high technology and instant-nearly-everything without getting upset about having to occasionally wait for something.

      What this boils down to is that many people are lazy and immature. Because of that, they won't cultivate a strong character or patient endurance unless the situations of their lives force them to do so. If they are deprived of anything, it's the ability to willingly value such things for their own sake and not just for immediately pragmatic reasons. It makes them little more than products of their environment with little self-determination. Some of us recognize that a human being can be quite a bit more than this and lament the way this realization is underappreciated.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    5. Re:Patience by instagib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No patience and no discipline - although I agree with you, this is the same thing our parents remarked about us, and their parents about them. But here's another issue: the cheapness, speed and simplicity of obtaining a prefabricated meal, toy, and most other objects means that learning to DIY seems superfluous. Therefore, the deep gratification of being able to consume or use something you created yourself - in a physical sense - has been lost. IMO these are the first years of human society shifting the search for personal gratification into the "virtual reality" - an old and abused expression, but somehow appropriate. Nerds already did find it there - they are creative in it. But the rest of people - how will it be?

    6. Re:Patience by sootman · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll get off your lawn when my brother gets off mine.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    7. Re:Patience by causality · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "you certainly would lack discipline if you used your car to travel 200 feet" To me, walking is a matter of inclination and timeliness, not (self) discipline.

      I said 200 feet because I consider that an insignificant, negligible distance to walk. Though, I enjoy hiking and walking 5-7 miles is not unusual for me. Perhaps 20 feet would have made the point more clear to you? Maybe 2 feet? Six inches? A point is reached where it's neither timely nor economical to get in your car, fire up the engine, drive, and park. You are capable of seeing my point whether or not you want to dispute that 200 feet was a good figure to use.

      "The observation that patience and self-discipline are virtues is not a rejection of technology." The way you seem to define patience and self discipline make me believe that for you they require a rejection of technology. To most of us, the various technologies merely provide short cuts to desired outcomes.

      You think I require a rejection of technology, despite the fact that I explicitly said otherwise? You realize that you're living in a fantasy land, right? Maybe a fictitious "causality" that exists only in your mind has told you to reject technology. Meanwhile, the real causality (the one you can quote above) just said that we don't have to reject technology, we basically just have to give a damn. It's really amazing how people on this site sometimes think they know my own mind better than I do, that I must not have meant what I explicitly and obviously stated. Which leads us to the next point...

      "What this boils down to is that many people are lazy and immature." or else self righteous?

      No, for I lament the fact that the average person is this way (particularly the immaturity and the superficial society it leads to). If I were happy about this because it makes me look better, that would be self-righteous. Truth is, if it were up to me, people wouldn't be this way. It's like what Bill Hicks said, this country is at about an eighth-grade emotional level, and it shows. It particularly shows when someone comes along and tells me I didn't really say what I obviously just said, merely because he doesn't like what I said. It's pretty weak to try and mischaracterize something because you're unable to either dispute or admit it.

      Now, if you want to make the case that I am self-righteous, first you'll have to dispute the fact that many people are lazy and immature. Once you show that this is false (good luck), you can then propose an ulterior motive for why I said so, such as self-righteousness. If you cannot do that, then you are just calling me names for merely speaking the truth. Otherwise, you can run your mouth all you like, say whatever you want, and it'll be just as empty and meaningless as any other unsubstantiated claim.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  6. No Need to by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to

    Doesn't -every- older generation say that? First it was that comic books were killing novels, next it was MTV killing attention spans, now it is multitasking.

    The thing is, most young people have no real need to focus and concentrate. With the increased importance placed on education, both high schools and colleges are passing more students because you need a degree to be successful. Just think, a hundred years ago a high school education was all most people needed and people could still be successful without it. Today most people need at least some college or vocational training to do almost anything.

    With jobs, it is collective blame, no one person takes the fall usually a small team will take it. There are few occasions where young people really need to focus.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  7. Changing Expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I suspect their expectations will change once they start communicating about things that can't be answered with OMG LOL.

    Regards,
    Jason

  8. It was better in the old days... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I was a child, there was no public Internet. In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.

    I don't miss those days - I think information should be available more or less instantly 24/7 if possible.

    However, the current constant phone texting, Facebook, etc crap is just that, crap. It's electronic substitution for true socializing, and I can't help but feel that when a bunch of people stand around unable to interact with the people in their immediate vicinity because they're texting with someone who couldn't be bothered to actually show up... well, I think there's something wrong with that.

    Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong. I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.

    Call me if the text-aholics of today are still rabidly texting when they're 30.

    1. Re:It was better in the old days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let "true socializing" mean socializing with uninteresting people in your local neighborhood and "false socializing" mean socializing within boundaryless global pools of people who share your interests.

      My brother has met all kinds of people to go off-roading with in his larger than local sphere. That kind of possibility simply wasn't there before instant messaging made everyone seem closer to their shared interests. I'm certainly no authority on socializing, but I don't believe that there's any social sense of being a human being that's lost when you socialize over a text medium vs in person. If anything, it allows us to socialize with more people than ever before.

      Only thing that's not great about it is that we are likely to be more exposed to social networks we do not agree with, which may cause larger conflicts vs smaller isolated instances of ostracization. But that's inherent in the risks of globalization as a whole.

  9. Too true by Icarium · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague. My younger colleagues and siblings seem to have no problems with doing several things at once - but the flip side is they end up doing many things twice simply because they sacrifice focus for versatility. They're so busy trying to do too many things at once that they rarely get anything done properly.

    As for being always in contact, I couldn't care less. I'll usually answer as soon as possible, but I have no qualms when it comes to ignoring calls or messages if I'm busy with something, or simply don't feel like talking to someone. I don't expect people to be available on my schedule and see no reason why I am obligated to be always available when it suits them.

  10. I thought multi-tasking didn't really work by zz5555 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems to me there was a study recently that showed that people were pretty bad at multi-tasking, due to the time lost in context switching. This would seem to indicate that the "iGeneration" would, in general, be poorer workers than their older brethren. Or have the new kids gotten better at the context switching somehow? (Maybe added cores to their brains? :)

  11. The lack of attention span is certainly true! by level_headed_midwest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The instant-gratification bit in the article regarding messages is certainly true, but it goes much further than that. Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it doesn't. They also tend to have the attention span of a gnat. I see a lot of people in this age range at work and I swear that most of them can't sit still for more than 30 seconds before the phone comes out and they're texting away. Some will even just start texting right in the middle of a conversation.

    There are really two big problems with their behavior. One is that they are extremely impatient and rush through everything, acting like huge spoiled brats in the process ("what do you mean I have to wait two days for this package to get here! I want it nooooooooooowwwwwwwwww!!!!"). The second is that their tiny attention spans and easy distractability are recipes for disaster if they are ever in a potentially hazardous situation that requires their full attention, such as driving or operating equipment or machinery. I think that their parents had an "epic fail" in allowing them to grow up in this manner.

    --
    Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
    1. Re:The lack of attention span is certainly true! by dangitman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it doesn't.

      Sounds like how teenagers have always been.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:The lack of attention span is certainly true! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but when that behavior holds over into adulthood you have a problem (or rather, people are going to have a big problem with you.)

      That may well be, but we don't know if that is going to be the case, because most of these people haven't reached adulthood yet. I think you're just making assumptions based on teenage/early 20s behavior.

      Don't assume that changing technology will automatically force changes in fundamental human behaviors. Sometimes it does, but in this case I don't think it will.

      I'm saying that the world runs on the principle of hierarchies. They're as much a part of our lives as breathing, and people who are higher up in a given pecking order do not appreciate having underlings attempting to monopolize their time. That's the way it is, and the way it will always be so far as human beings are concerned. That a young person's peer group accepts (or even revels in) this form of instantaneous query/response is irrelevant: those peers don't pay the bills. What those entering the job market are going to find out is that their employers make the rules when it comes to communication, and those aren't going to be anything like the behavior the article refers to. Furthermore, as we gain responsibilities, our time becomes more valuable, we have less free time to devote to casual communication, and we have to prioritize. So do our peers. That's called growing up, really, and has nothing to do with changing social norms.

      So yes, our communications systems are faster and more efficient than ever before, but this in no way changes the fact that some people's time is more valuable than others. Children have virtually unlimited time to socialize, text each other and run up their cellular bills. Those are trying to survive in the real world usually do not.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:The lack of attention span is certainly true! by Animats · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sounds like how teenagers have always been.

      No, the difference is that there's now a whole world of stuff and people out there that will respond to them instantly. Until recently, you could want that, but unless you were rich enough to have servants and had parents who let you give them orders, you couldn't get that.

      This is a step up from five hours a day passively watching TV.

  12. Bogus by dangitman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Firstly, I think the designation of birth decades is completely bogus. Somebody who was born in 1980 is likely to have had a very different technology experience to someone born after 1985, but they are all lumped together. Someone born in 1980 would be 18 by the time the internet started to see mass adoption and computers started to become cheap, while someone born in 1985 would only be 13, and have their formative high-school years ahead of them.

    And talking about the tech habits of people born in the 00s? They aren't old enough to have any entrenched tech habits yet! It will be the next decade that shapes them, not the past one.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  13. !Generations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Generations keep getting shorter and shorter somehow. This is because they're favoured by journalists who can't think of a better way to seem significant, so they have to keep finding more.

    "iGeneration"? "Net Generation"? Come on, give some to...
      - the Latte Generation
      - the 9/11 Generation
      - the Keyless Entry Generation
      - the LOLcat Generation
      - the "Juno" Generation
      - the "Ima Let you Finish" Generation

  14. Multi-tasking? by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They're still doing one thing concurrently with X others. Just because they all have iphones and can switch back and forth between facebook, texting, and music doesn't mean that they've magically gained the ability to do 3 things when we just used to "talk on the phone" with the radio on. They're still using the phone.

    Maybe I'm wierd, but if I am talking to someone, it uses 100% of my wetware. I have to turn off the TV, ignore the computer, and stop having IM conversations. However, I can routinely have IRC open with a flowing conversation, several IM windows open, browse the net, read slashdot, and be watching discovery channel, as long as the vocalization center of my brain is not engaged. That may account for the rise in "multi-tasking" seen across generations as speaking is such an inefficient (in terms of resource usage per task) means of conveying information.

  15. I don't have time to read this... by erroneus · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... would someone just FAX it to me and I'll read it while I'm on the toilet?

  16. Calling BS by clinko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would like to add this one:

    As a member of the "Net Generation", I feel we have tuned ourselves to calling out Bullshit...
    We have an ability to figure out that some stuff is the result of marketing vs. actual Buzz. That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.

    Examples:
    - Cyber Monday (We know this WAS fake, but stores use it to market now)
    - MySpace Buzz (We knew this was dead years ago)
    - CNN trying to be "hip" (We saw this from a mile away)
    - The ACTUAL relevancy of Twitter vs. what is said on TV (Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncool)
    - 3DTV (A new one from this week due to CES. Seriously, I/We're not feeling it)

    Now we can easily add the phrases "iGeneration" and "Net Generation"

    We know these phrases are bullshit, but get ready to hear more about it.

    1. Re:Calling BS by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But that's true of every generation. Just as each generation thinks it invented sex, each generation thinks it invented the sophistication to call bullshit to marketing techniques.

      The truth is, pitch tuning is a fine art, and most intelligent people see the bullshit in a sales pitch tuned for someone else. The teenagers wonder why their parents fall for X, while the parents watch their kids fall for why. Urban mocks rural for falling for Z, rural scoffs at urban for falling for W. Everyone thinks they are the one independent thinker in a herd of sheep.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Calling BS by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You do realize, don't you, that you have described a skill that, like being able to tell the difference between the Olsen twins, is completely useless?

      Try instead to learn to tell the difference between marketing and buzz versus information of actual value.

      Oh, and hint: Mary-Kate is usually the one looking directly at the camera.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  17. iScrew this! by NoSleepDemon · · Score: 2, Funny

    iSwear, iF iHear another God-damn iPhrase iM going to kill everyone of those iFreaks. It's NOT a podcast, it's a SOUND CLIP you DOWNLOADED onto your MP3 PLAYER. People have jumped onto the iBandWagon the same way Businesses started calling all their services 'Solutions'... So yeah, definitely not a member of the iGeneration, oh how I hate that letter.

  18. Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me? by multiplexo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm 44. I can remember rotary phones, black and white televisions and when it was a big deal when televisions became solid state (with the exception of the CRT) in the mid 1970s, tube testers at grocery and drug stores and going to the library to do research using card catalogs and the Reader's Periodical Guide. Christ, I'm probably going to be processed into Soylent Green soon. Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
    1. Re:Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me? by BrianRoach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow. Thanks for making me feel old.

      The tube-tester-at-the-grocery part really got me, I totally remember those. Imagine asking someone today to open their television or stereo, remove a component, and go test it.

    2. Re:Where does this leave old Gen-X farts like me? by DemonCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Either that or the Sandmen are going to come and get me.

      The young'uns don't even know who the Sandmen are. When I've made jokes about being a grup or going to Carosel most of my 20-something friends need to explained to them.

  19. Re:Instantly communcation indeed by Mikkeles · · Score: 2, Funny

    'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen.

    Well, aren't we special!

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  20. Stop the worries - it's pathetic by el_jake · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For the last 1000 years old farts like myself have had there worries about the youngsters and new technology. Please stop the worries, there is no need to be worried about our fine young generation. Every generation will go one step further up the evolution ladder, and old farts like my self should stop the we-are-so-worried-because-they-do-things-differently crap and go back to our chess boards, old Spiderman magazines or Commodore 64 emulators and just STFU.

    --
    In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep.
  21. Running Facebook and Twitter so they are reliable by xzvf · · Score: 2, Informative

    Gen X is in its peak earning years. 40 somethings are the people maintaining the infrastructure most of this runs on. Corralling the 20 and 30 something worker-bees. We're the ones that started working for the startups of the 80's after they became big and have the institutional knowledge to do things the correct way. Sure there are plenty of hot shot young-uns, but most of the economy is managed and maintained by people in 40's and 50's.

  22. Not even sure this is true by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article makes a couple of leaps and doesn't seem to understand tech.

    First off, the number of tasks in front of the tv. Is this a generation difference OR an age difference? They seem to claim that young people do more tasks because they are exposed to more modern technology at a younger age. HOWEVER this would ONLY be valid if they KEEP doing this as they get older. Else the conclusion must be that as you get older, you do fewer things at the same time.

    And then they claim that instant messaging results in an instant reply. But SMS is NOT instant, voice is. So, if they want an instant reply, why do they send an SMS?

    I think the author of the article tries to hard to make connections.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  23. kids these days..spoiled by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Try, a wooden box on the wall with the speaker on a cord, the mouth piece on the box, and a crank handle to get the operators attention. That was one granny had that, I remember talking on it. My other granny had an icebox, and some dude would trot down the alley with a horse and ice wagon and come in and put a huge chunk of ice in it. We had a rotary at home though, think it was made out of cast iron.

    We had the first TV in the 'hood, a 9" philco IIRC, and a buncha neighbors and relatives would come over and sit around and watch TV, not a whole lotta channels though and it all went off at night.

    Lemme see...35 cent indoor movies, that was the only place with air conditioning, nickle cokes, nickle candy bars, and a real five and dime store that had tons of stuff for a nickle or a dime.

    I don't remember all the prices on stuff, but a lot of it, like hamburger 5 lbs for a buck. Lot of cars still under a grand brand new. A portable radio was half a suitcase with heavy batteries in it.

    Oh man, my fav, REAL army navy stores that had all the great stuff, just everything, you could go nuts in there poking through the junk, they had everything including surplus rifles. Dang giant rubber rafts hanging from the ceiling, old torpedoes, tons of neat stuff like that.

    Bicycles were like harleys with no engines., about the same amount of steel.

    Wimminks all still wore real stockings all the time...err..that was major cool.... ;)

    Dang, ain't a year goes by I don't regret losing my baseball cards, comic books, all my early sci fiction paper backs, stuff like that.

    A lot of tech and some aspects of society today are a lot better, a lot isn't though. Leaving keys in the car was common, never locking the door, etc. No school massacres, but we could carry our .22s to school to go shooting after school, etc. It was no big deal at all, stick 'em in your locker.

        Back then, most everything was fixable, and did get fixed, now..not much, it works or it is junk.

    Would I trade..uhh "timezones"? Nope, not a straight swap, but I would if I could pick and choose various things from then and now.

  24. Re:Instantly communcation indeed by Bunji+X · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Interest isn't relevant.
     
    Do they want to learn? (Hopefully) Do the professor have the knowledge? (Hopefully) Do the professor have time to have one-on-one discussions with every singel student? (Unlikely)

    Maybe they will have to get used to not recieving instant gratification, or learn some things the hard way.

    --
    ---
    The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
  25. Discovery channels is way more than blowing things by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Funny

    Discovery is more about blowing stuff up than explaining science, the History channel seems to be nothing more than WWII and explosions.

    Come on Discovery channel is way more than explosions. They got computer generated imagery of dinosaurs, shark bites, more dinosaurs, disgusting food from tribals, some more dinosaurs, disaster videos, and some dinosaurs, some more shark bites and did I mention dinosaurs?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  26. Extrapolated a whole generation from his 2-yr-old by petes_PoV · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Basically he's observed his family members (and some friends children) and assumed therefore that every child does or will behave like that.

    I've got to say, this sort of behaviour just reinforces the common view of psychology as mostly worthless generalisations and unsupported theory.

    WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS?
    Let's see a proper study, using statistically valid numbers of subjects - taken from all races, creeds, famiily backgrounds and nationalities. Then there's be something worth discussing. Until then this is just a "aren't my children are wonderful" monolog. Boring.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  27. Re:Progress is good; why wouldn't I embrace it? by Nethead · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and don't forget:

    D) on a 12 key pad the UI is so bad that it isn't worth the bother to try to send a SMS.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  28. Re:Instantly communcation indeed by wisty · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can see collaborative social media overtaking a lot of traditional education. But telling professors to "use Twitter" will *not* be any use for anyone.

    Getting professors to blog, perhaps giving students a window onto the ongoing process of research (as opposed to the sanitized version they can read in journals) might be a step.

    Did I say getting? Hmm, professors seem to professionally blog more any than anyone else already (except VCs, startup founders, and a few other niche professions).

  29. Generation Interface Module by martijnd · · Score: 2, Funny

    'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen."

    Solution (and I am going to patent this as a business method) : the holding pattern interface

    If an iGeneration member wants to communicate with an oldGeneration member ; they will receive an instant automated reply, followed by automated "i am working on it" reponses until the oldGeneration member finds time to get around to it.

    "Hi [sibling] great to hear from you, busy doing a million things, will talk to you soon" ...
    ".. just let you know that I haven't forgotten about [thing] will talk to you later"

    Customizable, 9000 canned responses (including "I am about to land in Hawaii.. waiting for signal") in 99 different languages.

    Available sometime in the future at iHoldingPattern.com

    Just like real life.

    (Any parent knows that children want everything NOW, whereas us "grownups" try to juggle these demands in between the really important things. Like catching some TV)