SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for fyngyrz
When people hear "Appalachia," stereotypes and even slurs often immediately jump to mind, words like "backwards," "ignorant," "hillbilly" or "yokel." But Appalachian attitudes about technology's role in daily life are extremely sophisticated—and turn out to be both insightful and useful in a technology-centric society.
[...] In a recent study, my colleagues and I used focus groups and interviews to explore how people use technology in rural Appalachia. These open-ended methods allow participants to discuss their experiences and opinions in their own terms. For instance, most technology surveys don't ask people why they don't own the latest phone or computer—they just assume people would if they could.
Those studies miss key insights our research was able to identify and explore. When we gave people a chance to tell their own stories about technology, we most often heard about two themes.
The first, which we called "resistance," appeared in people's doubts about the concept that more technology is always better. They also carefully considered whether the potential usefulness of new technologies was worth the privacy sacrifices inherently required to use them.
People also described their intentional choices about how much technology to use and for what purposes—as well as intentional choices not to use technology in some situations. We called this theme "navigation."
Source: https://theconversation.com/resisting-technology-appalachian-style-94245
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @11:28AM (7 children)
Thanks for the rant, but you obviously don't know what I was talking about nor did you click the link. I thought that the link going to "political dictionary" is hint enough that the phrase shouldn't be taken literally, but since I was wrong, I'll quote it here:
And to address the rant itself, yeah, the people don't understand that most people in the nation do not live either in major cities or on the west coast. In fact, less than a quarter [census.gov] of US population lives in the 10 largest cities, and only an 80% minority [census.gov] lives in urban areas, with the 20% majority being in rural areas.
In other words, TMB, you're talking baseless, misleading shit again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @11:43AM (4 children)
You'll just get a reply complaining that "urban area" is too broadly defined, which may have some merit to it.
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2012/03/us-urban-population-what-does-urban-really-mean/1589/ [citylab.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @12:01PM (3 children)
True. But even if we limit the definition of "urban" to cities with 50,000+ people, that still covers ~70% of US population.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 05 2018, @12:57PM (2 children)
There's a world of difference between a city with 50K people and one with several million. You should get out more.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @04:20PM (1 child)
There is a world of difference between a town of 50k and a rural area. You should be more precise in your argument, and avoid using ad hominems, as they are a logical fallacy. The defined terminology supports the argument against you. Perhaps you should rephrase your argument.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 05 2018, @09:28PM
My argument is that the defined terminology is poorly defined. The defined terminology cannot logically be used to refute that argument. Logical support of its methodology could but that's not what you've attempted because you know it can't be done.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @11:50AM
The teacher walked up in front of the classroom. "Alright, class, let's begin today's lesson." he said jubilantly. The young children were all nervous, given that it was the first day of school after a long summer break. The teacher planned to show each student a close, hands-on demonstration of the subject matter so that they could comprehend it in its entirety, and as such, he walked up to a girl sitting in the front row to begin his lesson in earnest.
The teacher reached the first student and thoroughly taught her the subject matter. After he was done with his demonstration, he walked to the next student. And then the next. And then the next. By this time, the students would begin screaming whenever he walked towards another amongst them. The most likely reason for this screaming was that they were excited about the lesson; that was the conclusion the teacher had arrived at, and the one that pleased him the most. The students' eagerness to learn both satisfied the man and made him profoundly energetic. He efficiently did his demonstration for all 26 students. The lesson had concluded just in time for the bell to ring.
"Alright, class, the lesson is over. I hope you all understand the topic completely now. If you have any questions, you can come see me again at any time. You are dismissed." the teacher said, while wearing an angelic smile on his face. The man then removed the barricade in front of the door and departed. The students neither said anything nor moved even an inch. Silence permeated the room. Impenetrable silence.
Naked and unmoving, the children slowly rotted away before they were inevitably discarded. Indeed, these students fully understood men's rights.
(Score: 1) by DeVilla on Friday April 06 2018, @03:32AM
Based on that, I live in an "urban cluster". We're a small town (but we call it a city) that you can cross on bike in under 10 minutes. If you stand on the right hill you can probably see all the grain elevators in town at once. Not sure you'd see all the water towers from any one place. One of them is kinda squat and behind a tree covered hill by the highway.
But hey, I'm one of 80% of the urbanites in the nation. Guess we need a Starbucks now.