Controversal take: humans don’t have maximize productivity in every moment of their lives. It’s perfectly acceptable for someone to spend their spare time making in depth videos if that is something they enjoy doing.
Every moment of every day does not need to be spent maximizing productivity, otherwise what are doing on Lemmy instead of cataloging beetles?
There’s so much black and white thinking here, and maybe my previous comment is partly to blame too…
“Documenting beetles” can be exactly what you do in your spare time because you enjoy it, without productivity being your goal. You can do it just so. It’s nothing unusual.
The point of the OP is that some people have a lot of focus and curiosity that makes them fixate on solving stuff even if it seems mind-numbing to outsiders, and that a lot of that mind-numbing stuff-solving can actually be incredibly valuable for others, expanding our understanding of the world, etc. It does feel wasteful that such energy ends up spent on something that has way smaller or entirely nonexistent benefit for others.
I should have said this in my comments sooner, while the thread was still active, but here it goes anyway: we still absolutely need this sort of meticulous, “mind-numbing” work. Wikipedia is probably the best and most prominent example of such an effort that is run basically just on people’s free time and curiosity and willpower.
This also isn’t meant to say that playing video games should be avoided completely. I joked about my “utilitarianism calculator” in an another comment, but hopefully it’s obvious it’s an exaggeration. OP specifically talks of people who spend exorbitant amounts of time and effort optimising how to play a game, they’re not just enjoying it and relaxing with it as is otherwise normal for games and sports and similar activities. So it’s basically just the same sort of work as documenting beetles, but without the eventual benefits…
I get your point but I question the value of a hobbyists research vs that of a scientists. Documenting beetles as a hobby may mean jotting down their shape and color while a scientist would dissect the thing and index their internal organs. Not saying a hobbyist wont do that, but it will be restrictive to do so. It may require education or special equipment and in the end, will still be less credible work unless published in the same scientific fashion scientists are accustomed to. Fact is, we don’t mind coloring outside the lines in a hobby. I may be wrong here but the areas hobbyists can usefully contribute to are few, so we opt to studying digital worlds instead.
Science has already done as much beetle documentation as one can do without a bunch of resources, though. You wouldn’t be advancing it, just redoing it for fun. There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s also nothing wrong with playing video games for fun.
So what’s the issue about that again?
Controversial take: advancing science is better than spending weeks optimising how to play video games for children.
Controversal take: humans don’t have maximize productivity in every moment of their lives. It’s perfectly acceptable for someone to spend their spare time making in depth videos if that is something they enjoy doing.
Every moment of every day does not need to be spent maximizing productivity, otherwise what are doing on Lemmy instead of cataloging beetles?
There’s so much black and white thinking here, and maybe my previous comment is partly to blame too…
“Documenting beetles” can be exactly what you do in your spare time because you enjoy it, without productivity being your goal. You can do it just so. It’s nothing unusual.
The point of the OP is that some people have a lot of focus and curiosity that makes them fixate on solving stuff even if it seems mind-numbing to outsiders, and that a lot of that mind-numbing stuff-solving can actually be incredibly valuable for others, expanding our understanding of the world, etc. It does feel wasteful that such energy ends up spent on something that has way smaller or entirely nonexistent benefit for others.
I should have said this in my comments sooner, while the thread was still active, but here it goes anyway: we still absolutely need this sort of meticulous, “mind-numbing” work. Wikipedia is probably the best and most prominent example of such an effort that is run basically just on people’s free time and curiosity and willpower.
This also isn’t meant to say that playing video games should be avoided completely. I joked about my “utilitarianism calculator” in an another comment, but hopefully it’s obvious it’s an exaggeration. OP specifically talks of people who spend exorbitant amounts of time and effort optimising how to play a game, they’re not just enjoying it and relaxing with it as is otherwise normal for games and sports and similar activities. So it’s basically just the same sort of work as documenting beetles, but without the eventual benefits…
If we absolutely need this work we should pay somebody to do it. Also set up some quality requirements and guarantees of the task being completed.
I get your point but I question the value of a hobbyists research vs that of a scientists. Documenting beetles as a hobby may mean jotting down their shape and color while a scientist would dissect the thing and index their internal organs. Not saying a hobbyist wont do that, but it will be restrictive to do so. It may require education or special equipment and in the end, will still be less credible work unless published in the same scientific fashion scientists are accustomed to. Fact is, we don’t mind coloring outside the lines in a hobby. I may be wrong here but the areas hobbyists can usefully contribute to are few, so we opt to studying digital worlds instead.
NOOOOO MY HOBBY OF STARING AT A SCREEN FOR 4 HOURS IN A ROW IS GOOD
Science has already done as much beetle documentation as one can do without a bunch of resources, though. You wouldn’t be advancing it, just redoing it for fun. There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s also nothing wrong with playing video games for fun.
Beetle documentation was just one example
Replicating science is actually pretty important, and there’s no way a “civilized” area has the same beetles in 2025 as in 1820.
Spend time becoming a scientist instead of optimising how to play Sonic, get the resources for further beetle documentation, bam!
Why?
Because my utilitarian calculator says so.
I also don’t think it follows. A person who does nothing but play video games isn’t going to magically go and advance science.