Yeah, except for those who'd suddenly be without electronic medical assistance. There are definite downsides to the digital era, but to act as if there's been no benefit is laughable at best and dangerously ignorant of the past at worst.
People adapt to whatever the new norm is, and sort of fall back to whatever their bio-chemical baseline is. When things are in the process of getting worse or better, it'll push them one way or another. But once it settles again, so too do they.
The point being that happiness generally has more to do with internal bio-chemistry than whatever the new norm is.
This, and the parent comment:
> If you’re planning to be alive in 20 years, you’re better off making sure you have a work ethic and skills that generate value, than obsessing over any sort of wealth-hoarding instrument at all, because it is the only true protection against change.
You see, the problem is that they both read like correct statements, which is rather worrying.
I guess this is the thing that people are having a hard time coming to terms with - we no longer live in the real world.
All of these surveillance-advertising tech giants, all of these financial instruments, all of these media-induced bad feelings and ideological trends, everything that defines our contemporary era - none if it is real.
If it all simply stopped, wiped out from a solar flare - for most of us here, nothing "real" would change. We'd all sit for a moment looking at dead black rectangles, then we'd have to go and find something else to do. My bet is that we'd all be happier for it.