Fair counterpoint, you just played the Luddite card, well done!
Sure, it's a life style choice but placing those sorts of restrictions will also place you at a competitive disadvantage.
IMO it only works if you live in a completely isolated luddite bubble. That reminds me of that Futurama episode đ€Ł
Nooot really ludditism bro â thatâs more like âTech is evil cause it steals jobs, YOU canât use it.â Hence the whole destroying other peopleâs textile machinery and all that.
THIS is more like: I donât like YOUR tech, so IâM not going to use it, or to decide exactly the role itâs going to play in my life. VEEEERY different.
To suggest that everyone MUST use the newest form of every kind of tech as soon it appears is far more absurd, AND far more authoritarian, and much more like ludditism in that way.
If a new tech just out competes/obsoletes you, it's irrelevant whether you like it or not or from whom it comes from.
Sure you can just ignore it's existence but it will still slow you down.
If you're talking about useless tech like home AI assistants or IoT "smart" appliances, I absolutely agree with you.
Dude youâre totally missing my point đđ so please allow me to be clear:
1. To your og point, I donât deny programming skills have significant and broad value in âtodayâs economyâ
2. Nor that, by conventional standards, such skills would be a boon
(Ignoring for the moment obvious counterpoints regarding the utility of specialization, and resulting decrease of previously considered âpragmatic skillsâ within populations of growing economies)
But as to my point: what IS a boon? Wealth? Power? Those donât mean the same thing to everybody. To some, including many who are rich in both, theyâre nothing at all.
And what does it mean to be âslowed downâ? A lot of people say thatâs exactly what they want. Others blame technology for doing exactly that â âtakingâ their time (via maintenance duties, bad habits, etc.) theyâd rather spend on other things.
(And as to the Cynics, like Diogenes, theyâd *reject* such conventional standards, and live âlike dogsâ)
Hence why so many donât hold BTC. They can see the initial cost-to-entry, and despite potential long term profit (via anti-inflationary hodling, etc.) this initial cost of learning and effort would âslow them downâ from the OTHER things theyâd rather be doing.
It has somehow reminded me to a Brave New World. đ€
Similar analogy, altho I was trying to be a little more fair to the âdevelopedâ/futuristic society, which is clearly antagonized for depraved in BNW.
Hence my point was John the âsavageâ could certainly exist in the future â altho to your point, yes, obviously heâd have a hard time existing in both worlds simultaneously.
