Laziness VS Convenience

[Raiser]

Where would you draw the line between laziness and convenience? Or are they the same?

Take the remote controller for example: to the respective device, it's been made possible so that you can change settings, volume, channels, tracks, and more to electronic devices.
I would imagine that when such an invention came along, the vast majority of consumers thought it was truly innovative and extremely helpful.

However, many people find that up-and-coming technological advancements will only have a negative impact on peoples' lives, or more specifically, their health and/or social lives.
Such advancements could include things like robots and automated machines.

Robots. Often imagined of as synthetic humans or WALL-E looking machines. Almost if not all robotic innovations (as seen on YouTube or the news) seem to be aiming to replace human necessity in certain actions.
For example: a robot designed as a servant- sure it's innovative, but it could assume the traditional everyday functions of it's respective owner, and granted that some people do not exercise on a regular basis, this would definitely have a negative effect on their health.

Computers and the internet. I widely debatable topic, but I'll leave a few keywords here: gaming, downloading movies, e-mail.
Has this technology encouraged people to stay barred into their homes? Or has it had more of a positive impact?

Where would you draw the line?

 

[Veho]

I guess it's all about what you do with the time and energy you save by using the new technology. If you use that time to lie around and get fat, then it's laziness. If you use it to do something productive, or creative, or fun, if spend it with friends, family, on sports, hobbies, what have you, and especially to do more of what you were doing by hand before the tech became available, then it's convenience.

 

[KingdomBlade]

No one is forcing anyone to use the technology. Sure, they're there, but it's only to be used if you choose to use them.

 

[Tonitonichopchop]

No one is forcing anyone to use the technology. Sure, they're there, but it's only to be used if you choose to use them.

This. If I wanted, I could use a car or a motor bike to get places, but I choose to walk most of the time. If people become unhealthy/lazy as a result of technology, it's their own fault.

 

[prowler]

Could you pass me the remote?

Remote is barely out of reach

 

[Sora de Eclaune]

There's no line, only a blurry patch in the middle.

 

[Ace]

There's no line, only a blurry patch in the middle.

Then where do smartphones fall?

 

[Sora de Eclaune]

There's no line, only a blurry patch in the middle.

Then where do smartphones fall?

They fall within a separate place called failure.

 

[nryn99]

by reading the first post. i remembered wall-e. int the ship where 2 people talking to each other through the screen. even though they were just beside each other.

i agree with what veho said.

facebook.

 

[Vulpes Abnocto]

Then where do smartphones fall?

Most often? In the toilet.

Back on topic: I'm too lazy to actually write up an answer to this thread.
And I find that to be quite convenient.

 

[Scott-105]

Then where do smartphones fall?

Most often? In the toilet.

Back on topic: I'm too lazy to actually write up an answer to this thread.
And I find that to be quite convenient.

Best. Comment. Ever.

Personally, I think remotes and the like are acceptable. But robots that would be butlers/servants? Not needed. I don't see why you'd need them to replace doing simple things. That's just lazy.