This Perfect Little God Damn Digital Life.....

[Flashermac]

If I were born 100 years earlier, I'd have had another war instead of the one I did. I'd have been fighting on the losing side again. Maybe there is some sort of karma after all.

[baa99]

I've often thought that I was born one hundred year late, as far as the time in history that I would have fit in. If that were the case, I would have WWI to look forward to.

 

... and TB, polio, and leprosy.

[Mekong]

I find that as a failure of manners. Not slavery to teck. And his mother is to blame for not teaching him correctly.

 

 

 

I always offer reasonable debate. I am pretty sure if you look at all my serious posts, I am never reactionary or rude unless being rude to. I always back up my posts if I see a reply or a question and am not afraid to change my mind. (Many others here however...)

 

 

I agree that it shows a lack of manners but the person in question left home over 25 years ago so I don't see how one could blame his lack of Social Manners on his Mother since back then mobile technology was not available at it is in todays society. In fact my own mother, who is now in her late 70's, uses Social Networking to keep up to date with her children, grandchildren and great grandchildren plus she uses skype, we all flew the nest when young and are all rather spread out.

 

Religiously I call my Mother on Skype every Sunday at 6PM UK time, if anything is urgent or an emergency then I call her mobile, but she looks forward to hearing from me once a week at a pre arranged time. Same as her use of Social Networking, she has told all of the family that she is not intereseted of seeing Photos of her family half dressed at some club or read inane updates about what they had for dinner that evening, and will only check her Social Network site for 30 minutes top per day at a specific time.

 

Now to me that is the positive side of Social Networking / VOIP communications etc, with self moderation it is a great tool and a way to keep in touch, but I do find that more and more people are becoming addicted to such and "Can Not Live Without it" Syndrome is kicking in.

 

I do know that you enjoy a fine Cigar and maybe a Glass of Cognac to go along with it, which for 45 minutes per day sat outside with company who enjoy the same thing is a pleasent experience and one of your pleasures in life, something I would never resent anybody for. But if you were to smoke 10 cigars per day and also drink a bottle of Cognac a day then it is not a pleasure but an addiction.

 

As I previosly stated back in my late teens I was a Junkie / Drug addict, I tell you it is no fun waking up one day and finding your best mate and Uni friend dead due to an overdose, I was 19 at the time, nearly 30 years ago and that memory is always in my mind and will with me forever,ever since that fateful day I have been clean. We had known each other since we were about 5 years old and he was the closest person to a Brother I ever had. Even to this day I am an alcoholic which has cost me a lot, not just in fiscal terms but failed marriages stop start career etc, but at least now I can admit it, every morning when I look at myself in the Bathroom Mirror I tell myself "MEKONG DON'T FUCK UP AGAIN" it is an ongoing battle which I will win, Alcoholism is more in the mind than a physical dependance, I am not teetotal but to go back to my previous analogy One Cigar and a Glass of Cognac per day is you being in control, 10 Cigars and a Bottle of Cognac per day is an addiction, it is all about moderation and IMHO many people today especially the younger generation are becoming addicted to Social Networking etc hence the reason why I agree in principle with the basis of the article and can understand where the author is coming from.

 

 

Mr C

 

I do recognise the fact that you can get into a debate without being insulting or throwing out personal insults, you are entitled to your own opinion and as long as it is put across politely I will listen, and the same as yourself if someone puts up better reasoning than me I am also prepared to change my stance. From what I have read online, I know never belive everything you read, More people are now loosing there jobs due to posts made on Social Network Sites than are due to Alcohol or Narcotic dependancy. As I said it took me a close personal loss to get over one addiction and everyday I am still fighting the other so due to personal experience can understand where the author is coming from.

 

Again, thanks for your reasonable response there has been too much mud slinging or "Bun Throwing" on this forum over the past 12 months that many people have lost interest and gone elsewhere, the board seems to be geting back to its own self again.

 

Cheers

Kong

[dean]

... and TB, polio, and leprosy.

Everything you quoted involves medical progress in the last 100 years. I don't see a doctor now and haven't had a family doctor since high school, so I doubt if any disease from 100 years ago would have affected me. Now, you have to woory about world diseases, like the bird flu, because of trans atlantic/pacific flights. I will grant you that the average person 100 years ago didn't live to see 60, but I can go back at least 5 generations and the average age of death of my ancestors is 80 years of age. I would have taken my chances.

[TheCorinthian]

Everything you quoted involves medical progress in the last 100 years. I don't see a doctor now and haven't had a family doctor since high school, so I doubt if any disease from 100 years ago would have affected me. Now, you have to woory about world diseases, like the bird flu, because of trans atlantic/pacific flights. I will grant you that the average person 100 years ago didn't live to see 60, but I can go back at least 5 generations and the average age of death of my ancestors is 80 years of age. I would have taken my chances.

 

Hey Dean, I have trouble with your math. 5 generations at only one child per couple (No aunts uncles, brothers sisters.) would give you only 32 relatives back in time and takes you to the 1820s. So since that is almost certainly not true your forbears only had one child through out time, I would make a good guess that you have literally thousands of members of your family and the average age of death is a LOT younger then you think it is.

 

 

And dont forget, if you had not had the vaccinations you had as a child, the diseases from 100 years ago would have been doing a number on you now.

[dean]

I'm just counting my father, grand father, great grand father and great great grandfather, all on my father's side. My father lived to 89, my grandfather to 84, my great grandfather to 77 and my great great grandfather to 75. I have a lot of relatives from the 1800's and early 1900's that died as children or in child birth. I have the same genes/DNA that my father, grandfather etc. had (as I look almost like a double for my father and can see many resemblances to the others). Not everyone over the last 2 to 300 years died 20-30 years earlier than Americans do now. Its only one example but Benjamin Franklin lived until his mid 80's. I'll take great genes over modern technology every time.

[Coss]

Great genes...

 

 

No... Stunning Genes

[cavanami]

We had a "party line" for a while...nothing to do with Facebook and all that

[Flashermac]

An MD who is into genealogy remarked to me one day that age 50 some 100-plus years ago was like age 70 today. Not just disease, but an unhealthy diet heavy on grease and red meat did them in early too. I have a lot of long-lived women in my ancestry, but not so many men who reached a ripe old age. Pneumonia killed of quite a few of them.