731
Git gud
(media.piefed.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
731 points (99.5% liked)
People Twitter
9232 readers
1915 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I have a vague memory of reading an article years ago (can't find it now) about how pre-industeializarion, the average number of people an individual interacted with and knew wa much smaller.
We used to live in small villages. Houses would contain extended families. You'd probably know your neighbors pretty well. You'd know the people you went to church with. It was not uncommon for someone to be born in a village and live their until their death without ever leaving that village.
Whenever I hear people talk about how humans NEED social connection I'm reminded of that. My college graduating class was perhaps more people than several generations of my ancestors interacted with. There's a strong argument that we have hyper-optinizsd socialization today. Constantly connected to dozens of people we know and millions that we don't. Stimulation, novelty, and distraction enough to last more lifetimes than I can imagine.
Perhaps in this modern age, the person most difficult to engage with and the most important, is the self.
On a lot of days, I speak to 0 people.
I'd be willing to bet those people that never left their village would have had many deep connections within the village and would interact with at least a few people on a daily basis. We may tend to know many more people these days, but the connections tend to be shallow and/or infrequent.