65% of Americans Spend More Time With Their PC Than SO

Ant writes "PR Newswire reports that 65 percent of consumers are spending more time with a computer than with their significant other (SO). The "Cyber Stress" study confirmed consumers' growing relationship with technology in their everyday lives. In fact, more than 8 out of 10 Americans (84%) say they are more dependent on their home computer now than they were just three years ago."

Re:Techno-Dystopia

[dr00g911]

(For my part, I'm still not convinced we're not dealing with a slashvertisement.)

Um, the PR Newswire credit was all I needed to know it was a slashvertisement.

Yeah, I work with Ad/PR agencies. Anything on Newswire is bought, paid for then copied & pasted as "news" around the globe. That's the point.

Re:Techno-Dystopia

[dr00g911]

There's a difference between journalism and press releases that are copied and pasted as news, or polished by a "writer" and published in local newspapers or websites like this one to fill space.

They're what are referred to in the industry as advertorials, and they run the gamut from sleazy to benign, but don't be fooled for a moment that you're not looking at full on advertising. Client pays agency, agency writes article, agency broadcasts to PR newswire, Slashdot picks it up (among others).

Not sure what jealousy has to do with anything, it's an issue of trust in the media and making the distinction between journalism and paid flack.

Your eyes were bought by Supportsoft. If you don't have issues with that being framed as news, then please do us all a favor the next time there's an election and stay home.

Re:Techno-Dystopia

[Anonymous Coward]

You + Your wife = 2 people.

1 kid = minus 1 in population
2 kids = same population
3 kids = plus 1 in population

Re:Techno-Dystopia

[dfenstrate]

Try, "All of Western society." Basing large organizations on finance resembles nothing more than using a just in time compiler to me. The amusing thing is that it appears there's no way people are smart enough as a whole to either design or accept a more intelligent solution.

Reading the Wikipedia article on Ponzi shows something quite interesting - he gave people exactly what they wanted, and the only ones to get advantageous results were those who cashed out right before it all fell apart. Just another story of catastrophic market failure; I love how everyone sees these things coming and noone says, "Wait. How do we stop this before it gets too big?"

You're missing a key difference between ponzi schemes and "all of western society"

The participants in a ponzi scheme contribute nothing beyond their initial deposit. The orchestrators of the scheme generate nothing. The participants of capilitalistic western societies create new wealth every single day they go to work.

Now, if you said "socialistic western societies who operate extensive welfare states" you'd be exactly correct. If you avoid large scale wealth transfer between participants that decreases the motivation to work or the necessity thereof, then there's no reason it would ever implode.

Any which way, in terms of western societies collapsing like a ponzi scheme.... I bet France is first. Check out their economy. I might be wrong but I don't think so.