I sit in front of a screen for ___ of my waking time.
Displaying poll results.31060 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8470 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 6357 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 20 comments
Just enough (Score:3)
I sit in a chair just enough to keep organized, but not enough to hate it.
When I'm not sitting in a chair I'm getting the (company) truck stuck in the snow, troubleshooting a radio, or stopping for wildlife that is trying to become wilddead by standing in the middle of the road eating salt. On Thursday we had to snowmobile to the top of a mountain to clean off the solar panels on a radio tower.
Therefore, when I AM stuck in the office (shop) at my desk, I tend to enjoy it.
Re:Just enough (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Just enough (Score:4, Insightful)
...stopping for wildlife
You're doing it wrong. Vultures need to eat too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
stopping for wildlife that is trying to become wilddead by standing in the middle of the road eating salt.
You stop for wildlife.
Try living in Soviet Australia.
Wildlife stops you.
Seriously, cows and kangaroos will destroy cars, solid well built Land Cruisers will be lucky to stay running after hitting a roo, the average tin foil SUV has no chance.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you're talking about an old land cruiser or the land cruiser is something else entirely over there I think we vary wildly on the term "well built".
I'll agree the average SUV has no chance as they're now essentially tall cars. An Expedition or an eco-boost F-150 with a nice big tubular steel rack(we call them moose racks here) on the front would do nicely though. You can pick him off the grill and toss him right into the back. Cow will dent it good depending on speed but you should still be able to dr
Re: (Score:2)
He's talking about Toyota's Serious Business utility 4x4, not their posh SUV full of luxury doodads sold under the same name in other markets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In australia they have! :P
The old 80's land cruisers were beasts. You could keep them running through some pretty bad scrapes with a roll of rubber, a roll of duct tape, half a dozen pipe clamps and a hammer.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're talking about an old land cruiser or the land cruiser is something else entirely over there I think we vary wildly on the term "well built".
75 and 86 series Land Cruisers will run forever, fecking indestructable.
Haven't seen the new land cruisers but I haven't heard of them being turned into a "soft roader" SUV, that's what Toyota released the Kluger for.
We call the bull bars, and roos are a lot heavier than you realies (plus the ability to jump can easily put them above the bull bar and into your windscreen.
Also the F-xxx series of "tru
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they're made different there, but if you need something thats going to go as long as possible on zero maintenance in the way of a truck here you buy Ford. The old 80's F-150 series is nearly as unkillable as a land cruiser and just as easy to fix.
Additionally I don't know what the hell you think "North America" is but its easily possible to drive for days and still be a day+ drive away from anything like civilization. You're thinking of europe I imagine... You guys have us beat for things that want to
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't mean anything like civilisation. I meant you can drive for 10 hours at and encounter anything.
Not a town.
Not a petrol station.
Not even another person.
Also, the US has tiny sections as tough as Australia, Australia has large swaths of the country like those tiny sections. 90% of Australia population lives on the cost for very good reasons. If you think the topography of the US is anythi
Re:Nullarbor Plains (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I had to check, but while the F-150 isn't the single most popular truck, Ford is the largest selling truck brand in the world.
Also you blatantly stated North America, don't go limiting yourself to the U.S. now. I live in Canada, we are bigger than you and have the same population. We also have more mountains, and we have tundra, some desert and more. Our population is also even more concentrated than yours. When I say anything like civilization I mean anything as mundane as a road. Forget other people, gas
Re:Just enough (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, I should mention in addition that they are both ridiculously over priced. I wouldn't buy the daily in a million years. I can buy an F-150 and mod it for about 5k and a couple of days in a welding shop to nearly double the load capacity and its tow capacity is already over double. For 55k USD(thats starting with a truck that has ALL of the electronic toys etc) total the truck is done and the cab is a hundred times more comfortable. At 15L/100KM for normal city use on the V8 model is nearly double the fuel economy but you'd need two Daily's to match it, at which point the fuel economy becomes a very moot point, because one Daily costs nearly the same. The Eurocargo matches it but the 2 wheel version is 70k USD. 15k buys you a lot of gas, and you're still not as comfortable as you are in the F-150.
It looks like a great little thing for cities as I said, but its got no place in the real country.
Re: (Score:2)
I ran over an empty plastic bucket with my little Japanese sports car once, it did more damage than all three of the deer you hit combined...
But I can get out of the way of most things with only 2000lbs of plastic and steel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the vehicle I suppose. I had an older Cadillac that I hit deer with on four separate occasions. Two of those times I was traveling at over 50 mph. One of those collisions broke a little plastic tab off of the grill. Of the other three, the worst damage to the car was some fur and blood stuck in the bumper. I don't think too many cars/trucks would fair very well against a cow. But the deer I hit were 120+ lbs. So I would guess that's comparable to a kangaroo.
Kangaroos easily get up to 90 KG (about 200 of your archaic lbs's), almost twice that of the average deer and the smaller ones that are around 50 KG have the ability to jump right over bull bars (steel tubing on the front of the car) and bonnets (hoods) and smash straight through the windscreen. This is why anyone with half a brain drives very, very slowly at night in the Australian bush. Roo's are really cows that can jump and move very fast.
But I completely agree the choice of car matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Construction standards in vehicles have changed a bit.
For the better. The whole point is that the car crumples to absorb the impact, protecting the occupants. That's also why the sign posts are thin, they're supposed to snap easily when hit.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds to me like you've got a chance to have some pre-seasoned road kill for dinner.
I STAND in front of TWO screens (Score:3, Insightful)
I STAND in front of TWO screens, you insensitive clod
60-80% but I wish it were 0% (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you commenting on slashdot instead of going out and playing music on your guitar out there? It doesn't make sense you are complaining about it when you are obviously engaging in a voluntary activity (reading Slashdot and commenting is voluntary). I do however agree with you that we could use more time to spend time without "technology" (no running naked, clothes are required technology that you must use all time).
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you commenting on slashdot instead of going out and playing music on your guitar out there?
I was taking a break from sending out resumes to try to get out of my crappy job where I have to sit in front of a computer having a constant exercise in futility in front of a computer all day. :)
Re: (Score:3)
Why are you commenting on slashdot instead of going out and playing music on your guitar out there?
I was taking a break from sending out resumes to try to get out of my crappy job where I have to sit in front of a computer having a constant exercise in futility in front of a computer all day. :)
AH, I see... you keep practising on futility for free now and aiming for a place where you can do it for a weekly check.
You may want to alternate it with other exercises of futility, like:
1. have an idea,
2. work hard to get it alive
3. ???
4. cash on it
(somebody told me this is the "American dream". Looks to me like a big bunch - over 300 mils - of sleep-walkers there).
Re: (Score:2)
somebody told me this is the "American dream"
Dreaming is far easier than achieving.
Re: (Score:2)
somebody told me this is the "American dream"
Dreaming is far easier than achieving.
Especially when trying to achieve is an exercise of futility.
Re: (Score:2)
"Why are you commenting on slashdot instead of going out and playing music on your guitar out there?"
Well, here at least it is winter, and currently 10 F, (-12 C) which is part of the problem. I do spend less time in front of a screen in the summer, except when at work. There the ratio is always about 75% screen time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, I have computers and TVs in pretty much every room of the house, tablets for bathrooms....when I'm home, I'm pretty much in front of a screen at all times, and they are all on so I see and at least hear them in the background as I move about the house.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you should try sitting behind the computer ..
Re: (Score:3)
It's warmer back there!
Re: (Score:2)
Using clothes all the time may impede on a few important biological activities that ensure the continuation of the species (despite how Hollywood portrays the act, clothes only get in the way) and shut down some of the largest Internet business models. Hygiene would also be difficult.
And streaking is just so much fun anyway :-P
Re: (Score:2)
And streaking is just so much fun anyway :-P
Heh... I dare you... try to do it this time of the year in Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah you see, it's Summer in Australia. No such problem here.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah you see, it's Summer in Australia. No such problem here.
Summer who? Ah, Summer Scorcher, isn't it?.... well there may be some benefits in streaking... I mean, one way not to care if your pants are on fire.
But it's still not a problem free proposition: even letting aside the outback bushes (and forests, and properties... as NASA can confirm) , at 49 C [smh.com.au] when the street asphalt melts [abc.net.au] (watch approx 0:34)... I imagine your very own bush and birdie will suffer some serious burns.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everywhere is getting quite that hot. We have a balmy 39C forecast for Thursday. The rest of the week is supposed to be a 'mild' 28C.
Re:60-80% but I wish it were 0% (Score:5, Insightful)
This is something I don't understand. People whine and complain that they sit in front of a screen too much time. At the same time, they do nothing about it.
I, for one, wake up, play with my kid, take him and my wife out for a walk, then play some games until I go to work, where I eyeball monitors for 9 hours. I then come home in the dead of the night, play some more games, go to bed and start all over. During week-ends it's 50% of my waking time, the rest I spend with my family and friends.
Sometimes (read: rarely) I wish there were no screens to look at, and sometimes (read: rarely) I wish I didn't have to sleep at all, so I could spend more time in front of those screens. Apart from those moments, I am satisfied with what I do. It's my choice to live this life. When I'll stop liking it, I'll do something about it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is something I don't understand.
May be you didn't try hard enough?
Contrary to what some like to preach, people are not given equal opportunities and different people have different situations. For some, staring at the screen all day is the best thing they can do (afford?).
I know that some whine just because they like whining, but you shouldn't judge without knowing their situation. (The exception can be made for people who check their facebook/email at a dinner table. I fucking hate those.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming you sleep 8 hours, there are 112 hours left in the day.
How is Pluto this time of year?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:60-80% but I wish it were 0% (Score:5, Interesting)
Look mate, I live in a shitty Eastern European country. Our opportunities here are 10 times crappier and less (as both amount and quality) than Western Europe has to offer, let alone USA.
I'm sorry that I have to rephrase so that all "I don't get it" audience would understand. But.
You have to stare at a screen for 10 hours a day; you hate it; you want to change that but can't? Why? Not because you lack opportunities, not because you can't do anything about it, but for two main reasons:
1. You got used to it. You got used to this life style you dislike and prefer to sit and whine rather than go through the pain of changing it.
2. It brings you a certain comfort. Something you can't let go. Fast Internet, life in a big city, whatever. Something you somehow wouldn't give up.
A rather extreme example: sell all your fucking belongings, move to the middle of nowhere, buy a tiny piece of land there, start growing fruits and vegetables, live off the fat of the land. There, 0% spent in front of a screen. But that means giving up Facebook (oh, the horror!), cable (you can't live without) and... and... ehmehgehrd! Slashdot! What would YOU do with no Slashdot???
That's what it is. The life you hate enables the life you love.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is something I don't understand.
Not everyone has the resources to live their life as they choose, those people are probably spending 60-80% of their time in front of a computer to earn money to eat or pay medical bills.
Just because you were lucky enough to have a good life, doesn't mean everyone is.
What I don't understand is how people see their sample size of one, and draw a line of obviousness through it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. I certainly don't have the resources. I also spend time in front of a computer to eat, pay medical bills, rent and take care of my family. But the willingness to change should cover the possibility of having to make some sacrifices. That's what it's all about. Are those people who whine ready to make sacrifices? I'd say not. They would prefer to change their lifestyle with no sacrifice, by magically snapping fingers or casting a spell. That's not how life works. When the specter of sacrifice comes
Re: (Score:2)
I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
Can anyone explain what this dude tries to say?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but the more kids you have, the less options you have. Being alone and having to take care of yourself only is the setup with the most options.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's like the urban development of a city. Everyone who sets out to found a city has the best of intentions. It starts out clean, orderly and well organized but gradually atrophies. Suddenly, scum bags move into town and there are red light districts, neon signs, traffic jams, political fighting and the life gets interesting
FTFY.
That's not to say that's bad to have a place to retreat when you get tired of interesting (like a place you where you can't hear the orgasms of your neighbours over the ones of your GF du-jour); especially if you answered "Over 25" at a prev /. poll on "what age you get your first mobile phone".
Re:60-80% but I wish it were 0% (Score:5, Insightful)
It's totally meaningless to me because sitting in front of a screen is both work and play, intellectually challenging and vegetative, social and non-social, in short many things that can be both fun and not fun and can be suited to fit my mood. It's like asking me how much of my waking hours I spend wearing pants and how I feel about them. Well, that rather depends on what I actually do not that I happen to wear pants while doing it. Or actually no this is a silly analogy, yes to more pants-less activities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
might be close to 100% (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nearing 100% here, too.
Work, play: mostly computer screen, sometimes TV.
Travel on the MTR: they have "news" broadcasts (which is basically advertisements with intermittent news items, where the news is often cut off for more ads). Even in the stations there are big video screens playing ads nowadays, across the tracks, in perfect view of waiting passengers.
Travel on the bus: same problem, though less invasive.
Eating in a restaurant: always TVs on.
Walking in the street: good chance you can see some huge adve
the rest standing in front of a screen (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, without his diligence, Slashdot would be overrun by astroturfers working for Big Desk.
Average, it appears (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, figure 16 hours awake, with a 8-hour workday. The average office worker spends the whole working day in front of a computer, which means all it takes is another 96 minutes of screen time to reach 60%. Between your phone, your home computer and your TV, that's not very hard to hit.
Hangs head in shame. (Score:2)
Let's see. 7 screens of various types if I count my tablet and TV. Tho I rarely, if ever, have them all on at once. Usually just the TV and a laptop.
Now I'm tempted to grab an old 4:3 panel out of the closet to fill in a gap. Don't judge me! It's a disease!
Posted in wrong poll. (Score:2)
"From where I am now I can see...
1 screen, which I'm reading this on
2-3 screens
4-9 screens
10+ screens
Cubicals as far as my tear-filled eyes can focus
Do pixie tubes count?
Glitches in the Matrix"
is the next poll. This one is just about time.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot an option:)
I'm blind and using a braille terminal, you inconsiderate clod
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot an option:)
I'm blind and using a braille terminal, you inconsiderate clod
That option's there. You just didn't see it.
200% to 250% (Score:2)
Well, I do have four screens at work (well, 5 if you count the old Windows XP laptop I have to keep around for access to some servers) and four at home. So when I'm at the computer (work or home), I'm in front of more than 1 screen.
(ok ok, I selected 40-60% partly because I also have 8 to 12 meetings each week).
[John]
We might as well be (Score:2)
Brains in a jar with an ethernet port.
Re: (Score:2)
At work (Score:2)
Then I get seven days off.
Re: (Score:3)
I work 7 12- hour shifts, while there, I stare at 34 monitors for 12 hours at a time.
Where do you get an awesome job like that ?
Re: (Score:2)
7 - 12 hr nights
7- days off
7 - 12 hr days
14 - days off (sometimes 4 - 8 hour days in that week)
So basically two hard weeks on shift, 3 weeks off (already paid) about ten times a year. Everyone does this gig for the shift and the time off. Work a holiday like Christmas? Double time and a half.
It is weird, but a very good gig.
Almost 100%. (Score:2)
I am disabled and lazy. :P
Used to be 60-80 (Score:2)
Then I got a phone, and I found I could do most of my brain dead stuff (including the psudo-brainy stuff like reading mailing lists) on the go and thus be more active. I probably am near above 50%.
Once I find a satisfactory way to type LaTex on it, the percentage could further decrease...
Re:Used to be 60-80 (Score:5, Interesting)
> Then I got a phone...
And upped it to 100%.
Re: Used to be 60-80 (Score:2)
Note the verb, sit :P
too IT industry centric! (Score:5, Interesting)
Gynaecology forum: I sit in front of a vagina ____ of my waking time.
Diner cook forum: I cook in front of hot grits ____ of my waking time.
Ancient literature forum: I think about Grendel Aggregations ____ of my waking time.
Re: (Score:3)
I have never gotten closer to a gynaecologist than sitting in a waiting room(with surprisingly feminine magazines...no hot rods) but I also doubt that they get as much pussy at home as they get at work. So 80% may be a little bit of.
Ok, so maybe 80% at work? Well, there's a lot of paperwork. And tey talk to their patients. And not everything they do requires knicker droppage. So propably more like 20% vagina at work. Less at home.
In contrast we IT people ge
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Gynaecology forum: I sit in front of a vagina ____ of my waking time.
In most professions, the question is usually the opposite, how long they are not sitting in front of a vagina (or whatever their actual non-vagina-related job is.) Ie, "How much of your day is spent doing paperwork?" Or "How much of your day is spent in front of a computer, on the phone, or dealing with staff problems, rather than doing your job, elbows deep in vaginary goodness?"
Re: (Score:2)
What's a Grendel Aggregation? Googling it does not reveal the answer, btw.
Re: (Score:2)
Grendel is a character in the Anglo-Saxon poem 'beowulf'. No clue what a Grendel aggregation is though.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
get over it. (Score:2)
it's called, earning a living. I could me assembling gadgets, machining steel, or standing around an oven baking bread, it's, usually, part of how make a living, getting your news, or chatting with distant friends. Unhappy about living in front of a screen? get over it.
80%, which is too much (Score:3)
It used to be 60% to 80% when I had more of a "life", and spent time doing housework, reading, going for walks, etc.
Now my only breaks are the gym a few times per week, and when I do the bare minimum of cooking and house chores, and a few regular social commitments, particularly church. Apart from that, I just put myself in front of the screen, and stay there.
No porn, btw, just internet news and forums, and work. In the last few years it's become more of the former, and less of the latter.
This is a timely reminder to change my ways.
Crap crap crap... wait... (Score:5, Interesting)
I sit in front of three screens at work for 40%-60% on weekdays... but at home, I stand in front of one more screen for another 10%-20% on weekdays and somewhat more then that on weekends. (Mind you, my use of a standing desk has very little to do with the health benefits... rather, my reasons are more related to the five little rug-rats roaming around my house, who cannot resist playing with anything electronic which comes within their reach.)
Oh yeah... I also have the mini-screen in my pocket, which probably claims my eyes for another 10%-20%. So I would guess-timate (accounting for overlapping usage and substitution usage) that puts me staring at luminescent pixels for around 60%-80% of my waking day.
Holy crap. Why on earth would you ask such an introspective question, forcing me to evaluate how wisely (or not) I'm using my time?!? You sadistic nut! Now I have to find ways to start whittling those numbers back down -- or else, come up with rationalizations for why those numbers are so blasted high!
Wait, wait... perhaps I can claim that the numbers are entirely meaningless, since it's all just guesswork anyway... yeah, that's the ticket...
Whew. Crisis averted. Carry on; nothing to see here.
There's not much time when I'm NOT in front of one (Score:2)
I start the day on my home computer, then watch the TV news. I drive to work, which is one of the few times I'm not staring at a screen, then start working at my work computer. I get home, and watch TV while web-surfing on my laptop or tablet. On the weekend, I go out with my GF, and maybe watch a movie screen, or go to the casino and stare at the gambling machine screen. I was going to take a walk this weekend, but it was 17-25 degrees F, so I didn't. So, except for driving, I'm staring at a screen al
Missing Option: I Stand or Walk. (Score:2)
I sat for 18 years. Now I have a treadmill desk at work. It's done wonders for my legs and posture. I'm not sore and hunched over.
Just a Screen (Score:2)
Also keep in mind that there is a terribly large amount of interesting computation going on all around you, without the aid of digital computers, and maybe it's also worth acknowledging and trying to understand.
Interview Question? (Score:2)
How often do I think in terms of percentages and time spent in front of a screen. I needed to write a friggin program to perform the conversion. Then it was all "what defines a screen"...gimmiabreak...
For us who remember things like hours I spend
8 hours in front of a monitor (on average) for work
3 hours in front of a TV (but not all nights)
1 hour in front of personal PC monitor (on average)
which give me a total of 12 hours out of 24 (50%) or 12 out of 16 (negating sleep time) for @ 75% which is kind of s
Damn screens in cars (Score:2)
I would have had a much lower percentage, but now all my hours on the road are in front of a screen too!
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like that too, preferably broken down by device, application and (if a web browser) website.
Last week I decided to stop reading online newspapers. I realised I was reading them too much, often the first thing I did in the morning, and in many odd moments. I'm going to read a weekly news magazine once a week instead.
More generally, I use my phone too much. Since the summer there's been free wifi on the London Underground, which means there's no longer any place I regularly go where there's no phone si
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Almost All. (Score:4, Insightful)
I wouldn't call looking things up that TV makes you think of being distractable, it's being active instead of passive. It's a good thing, looking up other sides to a news story, doing a quick Wikipedia safari on something that comes up that you don't know about, it's all much more intellectually demanding, and enriching, than just sitting there vegging out in front of the tube.
And man, now I'm old. I'm calling the TV the "tube". I used to look at my grandparents/parents funny when they called the microwave the "radar range". Crap.
Re: (Score:2)
My best computer desk arrangement had my bed just behind my desk with a big honking CRT. During the day I could put my legs up on my bed under my blanket to keep my feet warm. At night, I could spin the CRT around and jump into bed with the keyboard and mouse and play SC supine deep into the night.
I still cringe every time I see someone's computer desk pressed up against an empty wall.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
he is his wife
Re:Not 100% (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You know you're going nowhere with that, right?