The same criticism was leveled at social media, mostly Facebook. Then at mobile phones. Before that, it was aimed at television. In between, it was aimed at games.
The big change is that we've solved boredom. More entertainment content is instantly available than anyone can consume. Humanity has solved "timepass". (That term is used mostly in India [1], but is generally applicable.) A sizable fraction of the population walks around looking at their phone. Once AR glasses catch on, that will get worse.
If you're not bored, you can be lonely, but it doesn't matter as much.
Most Neets do get bored after their 40s in Japan. And right now content seems intent on recycling better content in the past.
There's a kinesthetic appeal to natural movement and action that screens won't just replace yet. Although the loss of that is more than just in entertainment.
Slightly different take: first you get te generation of caution, followed by the generation of all-in. As with any novelty that replaces “something requiring effort” with “something low barrier”, it’s going to result in people that followed the wrong learning curve.
The sci-fi fan in me wonders if this is the faulty sprocket that mis-taught the social skills that lowered Japan’s population numbers.
I think at each step the criticism has been right; and each at step the object of criticism has been more seductive than the last. People just extrapolated the worst case too soon.
The big change is that we've solved boredom. More entertainment content is instantly available than anyone can consume. Humanity has solved "timepass". (That term is used mostly in India [1], but is generally applicable.) A sizable fraction of the population walks around looking at their phone. Once AR glasses catch on, that will get worse.
If you're not bored, you can be lonely, but it doesn't matter as much.
[1] https://ishanmishra.in/50-most-weird-sites-best-funny-websit...