Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
The Internet

Americans Giving Up Social Life for the Web 299

Stony Stevenson writes "A survey into how the Web affects American adults has found that surfing the net has become an obsession for many, with the majority of U.S. adults feeling they cannot go for a week without going online and one in three giving up friends and sex for the Web. The survey asked 1,011 American adults how long they would feel OK without going on the Web and found that 15 percent said just a day or less, 21 percent said a couple of days and another 19 percent said a few days. It also found that 20 percent said they spend less time having sex because they are online."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Americans Giving Up Social Life for the Web

Comments Filter:
  • Obsessed? (Score:5, Funny)

    by quokkapox ( 847798 ) <> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:24AM (#20677747)

    I'm not obsessed with reading Slashdot. I just happened to log in here in the middle of the night to get the first post, after having lots of sex.

    Alright, I lied. Stroke my ego, mod me funny.

  • Less sex? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:24AM (#20677749)

    It also found that 20 percent said they spend less time having sex because they are online.
    Those must be the /.ers.
  • by Lehk228 ( 705449 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:25AM (#20677759) Journal
    i find it very relaxing to "unplug" for a while. when i go on vacation there are usually wifi services available, i don't use them even if i do bring my laptop, it distracts from the whole "vacation" part of going on vacation. if i wanted to spend the day reading news and chatting with friends i would save a few hundred bucks and stay HOME to do it.
    • by metlin ( 258108 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:31AM (#20677789) Journal
      Do outdoorsy stuff. Go hiking, camping or just go climb a mountain.

      And if you do this regularly, you realize just how relaxing it is to not be connected to anything. In fact, I make it a point on some weekends to not answer my cellphone (in fact, I just put it away) or check my emails.

      Works wonders.
      • by Trailwalker ( 648636 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @05:54AM (#20678599)
        One of the joys of long distance backpacking is the six months or more without radio, tv, phones, newspapers, etc.

        You discover that most of what occurs in the world, or what is reported, has no effect on your happiness or wellbeing.

        Even better, you discover that most possessions are superfluous, you can be very happy with the items that can be crammed into a few cubic feet.

        Thoreau was right, man is possessed by his possessions. And, to update it a bit, by his gadgets.
        • by nwbvt ( 768631 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @07:57AM (#20679051)

          Unfortunately, unlike Thoreau, some of us have real jobs that we can't just up and leave for 6 months or more.

          Seriously, how do you guys that do that kind of stuff get that time off? I agree some long vacation separated from society may well be fun, but the most time I can get off is a few weeks around Christmas.

          • Dont blame the job (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Sentri ( 910293 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @09:00AM (#20679455) Homepage
            This is one of the big problems with most people. Don't take this as offensive it is not your fault at all, it is the fault of the media conglomerates and the capitalist ethic worldwide.

            Your situation, in which you have a "real job", is probably more complicated than just that, even those people with real jobs can just up and walk away provided they have certain other obligations they haven't undertaken. Let us take a look at two potential life paths.

            High-School, University and a part time job, "real job" to pay off student loans, car loan (because you need a nice new car to go with your job), credit card, credit card bills after you have bought that plasma TV (on special!!!), house loan with payments that you will have for the next 50 years.

            With this particular plan you are never out from under debt or other long term commitments, you can't take 6 months off because that would mean missing credit card payments, car payments and house payments. This is the average Joe choice; this is the bane of smart people everywhere who haven't got a grasp on money. They start this job out of University (55k a year! wow, that's so much money!) then they start spending, they earn a little more, they spend a little more, they never clear their debts. This person, these people in fact, are everywhere

            High-School, University, 6 Months overseas on a working holiday, real job, paying off student loans and credit card from trip overseas, rent a property, don't buy too much junk, travel once a year till you are ready to give up your real job for a few months to do some real travelling or just settle down and get that new car (no one really cares if you have been driving that rust bucket since you were 17) the house and settle into the life everyone else is already stuck in if you want to.

            Those student loans alone will be ok for you to travel with hanging over your head so long as you don't add a credit card and the rest to them. I am in the "Real job" stage of this plan, I spent 6 months working in Canada, I am about to go on a few weeks backpacking trip through SE Asia. When I get tired of this job, I will drive my rust bucket home to the place I rent and pack all my stuff up, drive it to my parents house and leave it under a tarp till I get back from wherever I end up.

            These are choices you can make, they aren't the only choice, but they are always a choice. Buying a home ties you to it for a long time, a credit card debt is something you can't escape. I'm not preaching that my way is the only way, or that it is the way for you. I am just making the point that a "real job" isn't what is stopping you from jetting off for 6 months, it's your personal life-cruft that is doing it.

            (I live in Australia where tertiary education debt is all government based and repayable on a "when you earn enough" basis, ymmv in US. Also, my real job is as a C# Developer)
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward
              You forgot:

              Three: High School, University and a part time job, then a real STABLE job IN CIVIL SERVICE (NOT the private sector) in a city you happen to like, a nice car because you LIKE nice cars, a house because you can afford the mortgage and its cost grows at a MUCH SLOWER RATE than apartment rent AND YOU OWN IT, thirty years of steadily increasing pay and vacation time, and a fully-funded retirement at 65. Along the way, you marry, raise children, and become a pillar of your community. You die a conten
      • by StarvingSE ( 875139 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @07:06AM (#20678855)
        I regularly have days that I either don't answer the cell phone. I also don't drop everything I am currently doing every time the cell phone rings. However, I now have the reputation of "never answering my cell phone." I am the geek amongst my friends, yet I also get made fun of for my attempts to not be ruled by my devices.

        I don't think "true blue" geeks are the only, or even the biggest offenders, of sacrificing social life for tech... more often than not I'm sitting at the bar and I'll be the only one not texting.

        I also do the most things outdoors - I do lot's of backpacking/camping/cycling yet it's like pulling teeth trying to get my "non-geek" friends to join me in these activities.
        • by orthancstone ( 665890 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @11:09AM (#20681171)
          I tend to think the reason for your observations is that geeks are used to this life. We've been surfing the web since before most people had a good reason to own a personal computer; we're not over impressed with our ability to send an IM to a buddy while sitting in a dark movie theater.

          From my experience, a lot of the people who spend more time sending text messages or hanging out on social networks are people that were perfectly social before it was all taken online. With the addition tech out there, they think that they are expanding on their social capabilities. Problem is, they are really NOT doing that and, in some cases, they are being more anti-social.

          This is going to come full circle some day. Eventually people are going to realize that all the great tech they've relied on to do this cool crap was actually only stymieing their social lives. I mean, really, if you are sending 50 text messages to someone, you either fail to grasp that there is an easier way (talk to the person) or you are doing it at a time when you shouldn't be anyway (in which case you'll eventually be punished). I await the days when a cell phone becomes a phone again rather than a device for doing everything except communicating when necessary.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Seumas ( 6865 )
        Yeah, there's nothing more relaxing than being stuck out in nature dealing with a lack of bathroom facilities, a bunch of bugs and mosquitoes and constantly wondering if things are fine at work or if someone needs your help or if your own company that you run on the side is in good hands and not having the technological resources strapped on you to deal with them should you be needed.

        Thanks, but I think I'll stick with my laptop, cell phone and city landscape. Nature is ass and unplugging is highly overrate
    • Internet addiction, as much as people joke about it, is pretty real. I've found myself glued to the computer in every free moment and foregoing food just to get a little more time in to read something or do that one last check to see if anyone responded to my posts or emailed me.

      It was mostly an information addiction, there's this instant satisfaction for anything you want to know. Being away from the computer is kind of like being crippled because I have to remember things that I might normally just look
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by SL Baur ( 19540 )

        More interesting than sex? Definitely.
        I was going to ask you what on the internet would qualify that statement, but on second thought, never mind. Let's not go there.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Kuvter ( 882697 )
      Similarly, I recently went camping with a few friends. I called a friend when I got up there to tell her what's going on and they kept yelling at me "No Phone Zone." I ended up turning it off and didn't turn it back on till I got home the next day 24 hours later. It was so refreshing. I'll definitely have to go on more tech-free vacations like that.
    • when i go on vacation there are usually wifi services available
      Wifey services > wifi services. Believe me. :D
  • by swalker42 ( 944794 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:26AM (#20677775)
    From TFA:

    ... giving up friends and sex for the Web ...
    It wasn't that long ago that users of the Internet had no friends or sex
  • by EmbeddedJanitor ( 597831 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:28AM (#20677779)
    A survey run at the same time in a sex shop showed that most Americans have not time for the internet because they're having sex.
  • Dear Sirs. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dr. Eggman ( 932300 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:31AM (#20677791)
    Dear Sirs of this fine periodical, I wish to inform you of a social blight that has crept up upon our society! Our investigations reveal that the majority of Americans do not think they could withstand a single week without their radioelectronical talking box! Once of thrice interviews with willing persons revealed that they had neglected good social manners with there friends and even avoided full filling their marital duty in favor of box-communique! What hath God wrought, indeed,Samuel Morse, and what hath God wrought now?
  • Sample bias (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Prysorra ( 1040518 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:31AM (#20677793)

    (_) Yes

    (_) No

    (_) Wasn't asked the question because the surveyor assumes the answer is yes.

    And people wonder why teen virginity rates are so low. No one has the heart to ask the fat kid.
  • Eeerie feeling that the population sample for the survey consisted of only Slashdotterz..mmmm.
  • Huzzah! (Score:3, Funny)

    by sqrt(2) ( 786011 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:32AM (#20677801) Journal
    Finally, vindication!
  • Media for the Masses (Score:5, Interesting)

    by badinsults ( 1152183 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:33AM (#20677803) Homepage

    I don't think this should surprise anyone. People feel dependent on mass entertainment and have a difficult time thinking what it would be like without it. It is almost like an addiction. I must admit I feel the same way most of the time. One should also note that people still connect to other people on the internet through messenger services and sites like Facebook, so it is perhaps better than other forms of media like TV or video games.

    However, it is relatively easy to break from the cycle. If people force themselves away from their computers and cell phones, it is incredibly easy to get back into social life. I find that times when I visit my family or when I go out hiking/camping, there is no empty void when I am away from technology. People (including myself) stop socializing because it is easier to spend time alone in front of a computer than to entertain others. It becomes surprisingly easy to find ways to socialize when you are bored.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by 0xC2 ( 896799 )
      I would venture to guess that a good number of Gen-Xers were conceived in the company of Johnny Carson and Ed McMahon, to the tune of Doc S. And the Tonight show band. Don't believe me, ask your Dad. God, I miss those guys...
    • by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:54AM (#20678427)
      It is that we get set in our ways and fear change. Whatever it is you do on a daily basis is what you are used to. It is not a comforting thought to think about changing that, especially for no reason. This is especially in relation to free time/entertainment. Yes, people who like goofing around on the net will be annoyed if you take that away. Ask a person who loves to watch movies how they'd feel about having their TV taken away, or a person who loves to cycle about having their bike taken away, and so on.

      This is especially true in a nice, modern, stable country as thankfully we have a lot of time we can spend on what we like. When all your more basic needs are taken care of, you can spend the rest of your time on entertaining yourself. All that we are seeing is that more people are using computers for entertainment. I'd be willing to bet that TV is still the biggest (last I checked Nielsen said households on average watched more than 4 hours a night) but computers are growing.

      Another factor may simply be introverts getting to do more of what they want. America has a bit of a skewed perspective that being extroverted is "good" and "normal" and being introverted is "bad" and "unhealthy". That's really not the case. Some people just thrive on getting to know lots of other people. They love meeting and interacting with any and everyone. Others don't, they are much more reserved and have smaller friends circles. They aren't interested in, or comfortable with, trying to meet every person that comes along.

      Well as far as all the psychological research I've ever read has been able to determine, there's nothing better or worse about either state. It is just different. Introverts don't need to be forced to try and socialize with everyone, extroverts don't need to be forced to sit alone and not talk to anyone. People need to be able to do what makes them happy. There's no reason why one person can't be happy spending most of their time alone or with a small circle of friends while another is happy going to social gatherings and meeting new people every day.
  • Depends... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Max Romantschuk ( 132276 ) <> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:34AM (#20677813) Homepage
    It's funny. I don't mind being without net access at our summer cottage, for example. But if my connection is down at home I quickly get frustrated.

    Then again, I need net access for most everyday tasks these days: Banking, bus schedules, general communication, (and soon IPTV service). Network access is quickly becoming like electricity, or running water.

    Spending sleepless nights playing WoW on the other hand, is a whole 'nother ballgame.
    • by misleb ( 129952 )

      It's funny. I don't mind being without net access at our summer cottage, for example. But if my connection is down at home I quickly get frustrated.

      Indeed, it is context dependent. If I'm at home, I'd certainly feel strange not getting online for a day or two. If nothing else, I need the internet to inform me about things to do outside the home. But if I'm out of town or camping or something, I don't give the 'net a second thought. Well, I might think about work or something like that, but not the "web."


    • by Dunbal ( 464142 )
      It's funny. I don't mind being without net access at our summer cottage

            That's funny because I have no problem getting onto the net at your summer cottage.... oops?
  • by andy753421 ( 850820 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:38AM (#20677835) Homepage
    As a Computer Science student and generally computer person I know that I spend more time online than most of my friends and certainly more than the average American, but I'm not sure about the average slashdotter. On the other hand I've also gone for quite a while without a network connection (on the order of weeks/months) and it's really not as hard as people seem to think it is, although deleting spam when I get back is... For me, using the internet obsessively isn't because I'm 'addicted' to the internet but because most of the time there's just nothing better to do. If I find something more interesting I tend to spend less time online.
    • by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:24AM (#20678079)
      I did my entire undergraduate degree without a net connection in my room. In the UK not all universities have such services as interwebs for students.

      It was of course available in labs.

      Not having internet access meant I spent hundreds of pounds on textbooks, and spent almost every night in my room studying and coding without the distraction of firefox. An interesting side effect of this (seems to be, anyway) is that I differ from my peers in using textbooks first to solve problems, and resorting to the net if I must. I know its unusual because almost everyone I meet, except for one, thinks I'm odd for doing it, and that I will only learn 'old stuff'.

      I question this though. The internet is valuable, but it is not, in spite of what we are so often told, the font of all knowledge. There's still a lot to be gained from books and just talking to other techies over a coffee.
      • by Ajehals ( 947354 )
        All the information that most people want is probably on the net somewhere, the problem is that there is also lots of slightly (or massively) inaccurate, out of date or confused information all around it. I don't think that I have ever (other than when searching for specific unusual errors etc..) been unable to find what I wanted on the net, I have repeatedly found however that the info I did find was useless.

        At least with books everything is in one place and you can be fairly sure that the content is accu
        • I question the accuracy of books. The major problem with books is that once a piece of information is found to be false it is extremely difficult to correct the error. It usually requires a completely new edition of the book to be printed and sold.

          Of course the Internet has it's own problems. Anyone can publish anything and it's difficult to sift through what's credible and what's not. You might say with books you can limit yourself to credible authors and publishers, but you can do that with the Internet a
  • Digitivity? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by e9th ( 652576 ) <> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:41AM (#20677853)
    Digitivity. Great. Another neologism from the virii/boxen crowd.
  • by Jane Q. Public ( 1010737 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:45AM (#20677881)
    I do not know about anybody else, but I am a computer professional and I depend on the Web for my living. I spend a lot of time there. BUT... I would be very hard-pressed to think of any instance where I intentionally gave up significant time with people who I really considered friends for the web. Except when I was working, which is another matter entirely. And if we want to be honest, since I work from home, I would not give up sex for the Web, even when I was working! I have not been getting enough breaks anyway... why would I object?

    I think this is another example of a "survey" that found exactly what it wanted to find, and damn the reality...
    • by Tom ( 822 )

      I would be very hard-pressed to think of any instance where I intentionally gave up significant time with people who I really considered friends for the web.

      The keyword is "intentionally". I've been watching this with my girl for some time now, and we both agree that we lose time together because either or both of us is spending time online. Never intentionally giving up our time for the web, but more "just checking mail" or "I'll be over in a minute, just found something interesting". And that adds up.

      To be fair, though, we also gain a lot of time because of the web, time that would've been spent looking for stuff in the city, or calling up shops, or digging

      • by mgblst ( 80109 )
        Yeah, one of the reasons I don't have net acccess at home.

        The other being that I try to minimise my exposure to companies in the UK, since they are all run by a bunch of thieving and incompetent fools.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by SL Baur ( 19540 )
      Maybe not you in particular, but a single exception does not disprove a general rule.

      About the time I was moving to Tokyo from another part of Japan, there was a(n in) famous poll posted that indicated that salarymen and their wives who lived in metro Tokyo spent less than 5 minutes on average per day talking to each other. I spent enough time talking to people that I took the poll seriously.

      I suspect this survey isn't that much different.

      You're also making a big mistake if you think they are referring to
  • Didn't RTFA but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xx01dk ( 191137 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @02:54AM (#20677925) would seem that I am in the minority, considering that due to my lack of friends and/or social acquaintances that I actually spend more time online than I normally would. The wife and I left a close-knit Navy community when we ended our enlistments, and moved to Silicon Valley to take new jobs. Now our closest friends have moved back to the East coast and we both work in a slightly hostile environment where everyone is at least 10 years our senior, or they have kids, or they are just plain unsociable.

    So I find that I increasingly spend more time online than I normally would because all of the people I am now remotely close to are on Teamspeak, Ventrillo, various forums, and (ugh) Myspace. Oh, how I wish it were the other way around, but until we have enough money saved up to get the hell out of here and move to someplace far less materialistic and divisive across social boundaries it looks like we are stuck. At least I don't have to worry about getting laid but then again it's harder and harder to get in the mood when you're drowning in depression.
  • by TheDugong ( 701481 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:01AM (#20677949)
    In a recent survey 99% of the population of OECD countries admitted they would have trouble going for more than a few days without having a conversation, reading the news, watching TV, watching a movie listening to music, making a phone call, reading a book, writing a letter or paying a bill... amongst other things. More following this announcement from out sponsors.
  • Damned intellectuals (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vga_init ( 589198 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:02AM (#20677969) Journal

    "An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex." -Aldous Huxley

    Apparently people are smarter than I thought. Seriously, God forbid anyone chooses to forgo sex or social interaction leading to sex for something they find more interesting. Say, information and knowledge...

    • That must be why prOn is one of the most important online business, the sex without social interaction or intelectual interest has a great future.
      • sex without social interaction or intelectual interest has a great future.

        You read Brave New World? ;)

    • Mr Huxley definitely wasn't getting any.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Stradivarius ( 7490 )
      I don't think it's necessarily as simple as finding something more interesting than sex in absolute terms. I suspect it's more of a marginal-utility effect.

      I've seen previous studies that claimed people often have sex because they are bored, rather than out of a specific desire for sex at that moment. Obviously sometimes you really just want sex, and in those cases I doubt you'll see anyone skipping it in favor of the Internet. But if the internet is just making people less bored, thus causing a reductio
  • Alarmism about the net will last until the next big communication technology comes out.

    Then we get to hear about how telepathy is destroying our society.
    • Depends on how much telepathy we get! If we got technology where you could read people's surface thoughts, society could go downhill pretty quick. Example: Person 1: "How do I look?"; Person 2: "Great!" (Unspoken: Weelll, that skirt makes your ass look big, and that blouse makes your tits look sorta saggy.)

      We'll either get so good at lying personal interaction won't mean anything anymore (Hell, identity won't mean anything anymore), or society will collapse into a flaming pile of rubble.

  • by zir0faive ( 1058414 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:12AM (#20678013) Homepage

    It also found that 20 percent said they spend less time having sex because they are online.
    And the Vatican says... God bless the Internet!
  • by Ethanol-fueled ( 1125189 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:15AM (#20678021) Homepage Journal
    Calvin: "I can't think of anything I'd rather anticipate than have right away, can you?"
    Hobbes: "Death comes to mind..."
  • No true Geek... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HexaByte ( 817350 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:46AM (#20678157)
    It also found that 20 percent said they spend less time having sex because they are online."

    No true geek would ever give up a chance for sex, just for the Internet. That's because REAL Geeks never (or hardly) get any, and won't pass up the chance.

    This is really probably just women using the Internet as an excuse to keep their husbands/significant others at arm's length. "Not tonight Honey, I've gotta Google".

    • by ettlz ( 639203 )

      That's because REAL Geeks never (or hardly) get any
      Pfft! And what of the converse?!
    • Re:No true Geek... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @11:01AM (#20681079) Homepage Journal
      Yeah, sure, geeks would never pass up the chance for sex, because it comes so rarely. If a woman comes up to a geek and says, "Would you like to have sex?" the geek will respond with a resounding "Yes I would!"

      The poorly socialized, autism-spectrum geek never passes up the chance for sex by totally ignoring a woman when she turns her wrists to him, or plays with her hair in front of him. He never blows it by forgetting her name, not making eye contact, or rambling on about the details his favorite obscure subject when she asks him a simple rhetorical question. The geek is perfectly capable of maintaining the long train of social cues and responses that allow a woman to drop her defenses and risk pregnancy, negative social status, and disease for a few moments of pleasure. His black-and-white binary world-view doesn't divide women into the Madonna/whore bifurcation when he sees her talking to another man or finds out details of her past.

      Nope, you're absolutely right, the alert, knowledgeable, sleuthing geek would never miss an opportunity for sex! He can also spot sarcasm at fifty yards!
  • by Bluesman ( 104513 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @03:46AM (#20678161) Homepage
    "It also found that 20 percent said they spend less time having sex because they are online."

    It didn't say they have LESS sex, just that they spend less TIME doing it. Obviously, the Internet has made them more efficient.

    Probably has to do with the massive hard-ons they can now achieve thanks to e-mail offers. What a truly wonderful age in which we live!
    • by jamesh ( 87723 )

      Probably has to do with the massive hard-ons they can now achieve thanks to e-mail offers. What a truly wonderful age in which we live!

      Maybe some bias has been introduced into the survey because of all the penis pills (which really work!!!) which means you can now have sex with your SO from across the room without leaving your chair! It's not that people won't get off the computer to have sex, it's that they don't need to.
  • An online survey asked "are you online".

    100% answered "yes"...
  • I was off the net while I was working in Indiana for a month & a half this time last year, I had alot of sex & made alot of friends in that time, but I lost the new friends & the ones I'd gone there with by the time the trip was over, not to mention I'm kinda scared a friend I don't know about is going to knock on my door 20 years from now.
  • by Monsterdog ( 985765 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:19AM (#20678283)
    Most people are scum, so i keep my circle of friends trimmed to a minimum -- mostly those who can't run fast enough to escape when I start shooting.

    And I solved the sex issue by putting the computer in the bedroom. It worked out even better than expected because of the special USB attachments. And putting the big LCD screen over the bed? Genius, I think.

    I just need to figure out a way to deal with the shaky mousework.

    • From what you've just detailed, if I was your friend, knowing you have an LCD screen over your bed and a thing for teledildonics, I'd also run if you started talking about shooting.

      Dude, seriously, with your girlfriends is one thing, but on your buddies too?
    • by Joebert ( 946227 )

      It worked out even better than expected because of the special USB attachments.
      I just need to figure out a way to deal with the shaky mousework.

      I think you've mistaken the vibrating buttplug for your mouse.
  • We had a choice. I can go offline now and have sex. I'm outta here.

    When will the sex arrive?
  • ... give up his:

    * tools for employment (from pencil and paper to research materials to Rolodex to telephone)
    * communication devices (telephone, fax, and the postal mail)
    * news (television, newspapers, magazines)
    * records (bank accounts, tax statements, etc)
    * small business
    * entertainment (Barnes & Noble, Solitaire)

    I essentially live online during my waking hours, excepting when I'm out at the gym or out with friends. (I'm young and single. If I had a wife and kids there would be a few hours of forced
  • That's quite correct actually, these days I've got more social life in Second Life than in the first one, although even in SL I'm not that sociable. Then I don't think I could say SL is the problem there -- I never had much social life anyway, so overall I think SL added to it rather than replacing.

  • It was an online survey!
  • by scottsk ( 781208 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @06:49AM (#20678803) Homepage
    Most Americans probably couldn't go a week without driving or using a telephone, either. The Internet is part of our life ecosystem now and a source for information and work. To go from there to drawing grandiose conclusions is to forget the maxim of statistics, correlation doesn't imply causation. If I didn't use the Internet for a week, I wouldn't have a job.
  • Really, its something big. You get in the net, lots of people from lots of different fields of life, interest areas all here in your instant messenger lists. Pick as you like.

    To get that kind of connectivity and interaction level in real life, you need to spend mighty effort in getting to and interacting with people, traveling your butt over.

    Its like a juice. its not 'surfing' that pulls us in - its people. Whether behind a monitor screen or not, they are still people and we all know it.

    i wouldnt t
  • oversimplified (Score:5, Insightful)

    by misanthrope101 ( 253915 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @07:47AM (#20679011)
    The internet is my bookstore, research library, mailbox (letters, anyway), dvd/music store, clothing store, shoestore, toystore, stationery store (fountain pens/ink, moleskine journals), news outlet, travel agent, and god knows what else. People see you "surfing the web" and fail to differentiate between the different activities you're actually engaging in. That's a problem with oversimplification, not with internet use.
  • by zerofoo ( 262795 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @11:42AM (#20681711)
    I can tell you that I spend more time online BECAUSE I am getting less sex.....not the other way around.


Vitamin C deficiency is apauling.