
Ted Talk: How craving attention makes you less creative – Joseph Gordon-Levitt - momentmaker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VTsIju1dLI
======
hemmert
Speaking of craving attention- here's my TEDx talk on the same issue:

Protecting our creativity from the side-effects of technology

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6LNjVmcVF68](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6LNjVmcVF68)

~~~
kerkeslager
Please pay attention to my TEDx talk about how craving attention is bad! ;)

I jest. Given I'm creating free content for a website so I can earn worthless
attention points, I'm no better.

~~~
moneytide1
"Earning" attention points is a frame of mind, as the reciever of votes may
look upon themselves as a sort of beneficiary. Being invalidated by the metric
of how many people/machines (digitally) voted against one's content does not
invalidate the idea itself. Write instead for your curious audience of
historians digging through archives over the next few decades. But more
importantly, for those of us that know to wade through digital (or analog)
noise in order to find valuable information worth repeating.

I prioritize reviewing the most downvoted content, because the average
downvote is an overreaction (emotional response). Ignoring the first few "top
voted" responses (or search results, beginning sentences of a news article) is
a shortcut to the more useful content.

"Points" are not good or bad. They are an indicator of traffic (automated or
genuine). They are not worthless.

~~~
kerkeslager
They're worthless to me. I've not gained anything by having them.

~~~
moneytide1
I suppose I shouldn't have said "they are not worthless" after listing reasons
why the point system could be compromised (emotional voting or the vote
dilution of agenda-driven automated bots).

I think it is because you said the word "earn" which I thought may have
reflected the outlook of most digital forum participants (earn implies value).

In a physical space we may evaluate reception of our ideas through nodding,
verbal affirmation, or during our turn of the conversation. I would think it
would be more difficult for a malicious actor to manipulate public opinion
with these classical communication methods.

Perhaps now it is more difficult for quality content to be injected into
society (or for society to think for itself) when most folks may naturally
feel more comfortable consuming content with the largest (potentially
artificial) view, vote, stream, or click count.

Maybe there are entire divisions of allocated cognitive labor designed
exclusively to determine authenticity of traffic, which is unfortunate but
necessary (and will likely not be thorough).

Maybe there are not.

------
santa_boy
I find a lot of people dealing with startups ... employees and founders
(mostly) posting practically everything on social media from going to an
event, launching a product / service, last night's dinner, a picture of every
coffee in the day, a message in the loo and a coworker dozing off ... etc

I always wonder if this is a means of guerrilla marketing, being social,
expressing camaraderie or showing gratitude?

I _think_ of it as social validation and wonder its impact on creativity,
morale, etc (if any at all)

------
Porthos9K
ORIGINAL SOURCE WITH TRANSCRIPTS

[https://www.ted.com/talks/joseph_gordon_levitt_how_craving_a...](https://www.ted.com/talks/joseph_gordon_levitt_how_craving_attention_makes_you_less_creative)

------
Uhuhreally
are there any social media platforms that don't have metrics like follower
counts, karma etc ?

~~~
0-_-0
Sure, there's 4chan

~~~
Porthos9K
4chan is an excellent example of a cure worse than the disease.

