[Zancarius]

I would posit that those people are unlikely to be sufficiently motivated to spend time learning or doing something more constructive anyway regardless of the Internet and nothing is likely to change that. While the Internet has certainly lowered the bar of entry with regards to "entertain me," it has done the same to information access at large.

[Sagat]

There are a number of alarming studies (as some other poster said, take a look at N. Carr's book) that show that screen time, especially in our formative years can have dramatically negative effects on brain development. So it's possible that some people who ended up zombified by the internet could actually have had significant lives. There are plenty of people whose otherwise adjusted lives have spiralled into failure due to drugs, so why couldn't the same thing happen with other dopamine releasing activities? I think the fact that people have literally died from screen overuse lends credence to the idea that there is some danger to integrating computers in every part of our lives and it's not necessarily our fault if we fall into the depths of online time-wasting.

In any case, I don't really like the idea that those people would been useless anyway as if it were in their nature to be unmotivated. Maybe I'm a bit naive but I believe good nurture can offset much of the problems of nature.

[Zancarius]

> ...especially in our formative years can have dramatically negative effects on brain development.

I personally believe it is a parent's responsibility to monitor their children and ensure that they have the best chance they can get at adequate cognitive development, even if that means monitoring their use of "screen time."

When I was young (and no doubt many of you), it was cartoons. Now it's Internet or game-related stuff.

> In any case, I don't really like the idea that those people would been useless anyway as if it were in their nature to be unmotivated.

I didn't suggest they're useless. I stated they were unmotivated and that such lack of motivation is unlikely to change no matter what the distraction. 20 years ago, it might have been soap operas. Today it's the Internet. Removing any distraction in particular for someone with a great deal if idle time who is unlikely to be motivated to "learn" something isn't going to change their motivation. That was essentially the crux of my point.

> I think the fact that people have literally died from screen overuse lends credence to the idea that there is some danger to integrating computers...

And what about those of us who use them daily with (seemingly) no ill effects, because it's what we do for a living and for much of our hobbyist use? Of the circumstances I'm aware of where people have died from sitting in front of a computer too long, it's been due in part to video game abuse. Playing StarCraft for 48+ hours in a single stretch without eating or drinking is the sign of an addiction, not necessarily the fault of StarCraft itself.

I think this effectively boils down to the fact that the problem is not with technology. The problem is with people.

[a3voices]

I wonder how much the ubiquity of the Internet contributes to the Flynn effect.