|
|
|
|
|
|
by sameer_sundresh
4637 days ago
|
|
|
Digital hoarding isn't just backing up your family photos; it's compulsively finding, downloading and storing all sorts of content that you have no real use for (movies, music, TV shows, books, software, etc. -- usually in violation of copyright). Most people enjoy commemorating a special moment with a photo, and being able to easily relive that memory a few years later. Smart digital technology makes this cheap and easy. Sure, having the camera out all the time is compulsive. Going through and manually editing, tagging and deleting photos is compulsive too. Most people do neither, but they still want to keep their photo memories safe. |
|
|
It could include that but doesn't require it.
Analogy would be crazy cat lady doesn't have 100 of anything with fin fur or feathers, she's got 100 cats. That doesn't mean crazy home zoo guy in florida with 10 aligators and a tiger isn't any more or less whackier if its messing up their lives just as much.
Also the criteria is not the useful or not, its the impact on life and human happiness. I have a full digital set of all star trek episodes from all TV series... ever... if I lost them I would be pissed for awhile, but I wouldn't cry freak out drive around looking for backups in a panic and get in way over my head technically (which for me would be way more extreme than the guy in the original story). Kinda like some folks without an alcohol problem can drink a couple beers without negatively impacting their lives, but a pretty good working definition of a guy with an alcohol problem is he drinks the same beers and his life totally falls off the rails... the problem is the impact on life not specific ethanol molecules.
Everyone likes your second paragraph. The problem is for some/most people its exclusively a positive activity, and for others the positive comes with epic legendary freakout mode. The problem is the epic freakout mode not liking pix or putting in a reasonable non life impacting effort to curate their pixs.