zlacker

[return to "The Who Cares Era"]
1. 1dom+Kl[view] [source] 2025-05-28 15:20:45
>>NotInO+(OP)
I read the title and it triggered something I've been thinking a lot lately: there's too much for everyone to care about right now. Article didn't really touch on it directly, but:

> something that sounded like every other thing: some dude talking to some other dude about apps that some third dude would half-listen-to at 2x speed while texting a fourth dude about plans for later.

It's not that the dudes don't care, it's that the dudes have 15 other things expected of them, which weren't expected 15 years ago and caring capacity feels like a biological limit. There isn't the required amount of caring available in the average human any more, and caring is needed for standards to be maintained.

15 years ago, the world was in awe that stuxnet, a cyber attack, had impacted the real world. I was in cyber at the time, and the idea that day to day lives of normal people would be impacted in the real world was like Hollywood fiction: unthinkable.

A few weeks ago, I didn't even notice the reason my local big brand store shelves were empty was because of a cyberattack. It was a week later I saw the article explaining it on BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg4zrpk5p7o

I feel like a cynical old man, but I'm sure most here will relate - the age of tech we are living in now is not the one any of us thought we were working to create.

◧◩
2. jasmin+yr[view] [source] 2025-05-28 15:49:59
>>1dom+Kl
This hits harder than I expected. There’s a bleak kind of irony in how tech gave us infinite visibility but shredded our ability to process any of it. Stuxnet was a wake-up call. Now it’s just another push alert we swipe past while ordering oat milk.

The caring bandwidth’s not just saturated—it’s been monetized, splintered, and stuffed with things designed to trigger micro-concern at scale. You’re not a cynical old man. You’re just sober in a system that treats numbness like adaptation.

The worst part? I’m not even surprised the BBC article didn’t trend.

[go to top]