Hiss states that Grand Central is ever-changing: These days, though, there are much sadder sights in the concourse than there used to be: In the mid-1980s, Grand Central became a principal hangout for large numbers of homeless people, as well as for some of those who prey on the homeless. The various means of population displacement are as a result of economic, social, or political factors. Society and culture generally demand a hierarchy, a likely result of our animalistic origins of predator and prey. Though we humans like to think of ourselves as civilized beings, there is always a patronizing quality to some behaviors. If the homeless were targets roughly thirty years ago, then it begs the question as to who are the targets now? Of course,
…show more content…
Most of who we are today is online, or on some digital database, whether it be a JPEGs, texts, or strings of phone calls. Our entire lives are on a digital format: likes, posts, snaps, etc. Though the thought of separating ourselves from the digital realm is nice, the likelihood of people following through in our current environment is low. The mass consumer market is designed to make people stationary. If we were to be active outdoors, then they have to pay attention to where they’re going, and can’t be trawling the Internet for BuzzFeed quizzes, or endless photo streams. Technology introduces video after video, post after post, quiz after quiz. Hundreds of people can contact us through our numbers, Facebook, Instagram, SnapChat, Twitter, Tumblr, Reddit, etc. There is no way to turn the notifications off, except to shut down all these accounts. But that defeats the purpose of connectivity and being wired to this digital collective consciousness. Perish the thought of being an outsider to this brave new world! Even if there was a way to escape the digital realm, the outdoors are still affected by it, and the many sedentary activities we engage in, such as binge watching, don’t change this epidemic. Even with the influence of natural lighting in future technologic innovations, would it really make a difference? The concept of artificial light made to emulate natural light sounds ludicrous, and adds another failure to the human race. Would people still want to go outside, walk through the streets and see the trees sway when they can view virtual simulations of it through stereoscopic sensory technology? No. Despite one health issue being solved, another will surely arise due to the world seeking dynamic equilibrium. The point is: humans have moved indoors. Even if there were a way to make a near-perfect simulation of the outdoors through lighting, air quality, etc., there is no way that humans will abandon technology.
Most of who we are today is online, or on some digital database, whether it be a JPEGs, texts, or strings of phone calls. Our entire lives are on a digital format: likes, posts, snaps, etc. Though the thought of separating ourselves from the digital realm is nice, the likelihood of people following through in our current environment is low. The mass consumer market is designed to make people stationary. If we were to be active outdoors, then they have to pay attention to where they’re going, and can’t be trawling the Internet for BuzzFeed quizzes, or endless photo streams. Technology introduces video after video, post after post, quiz after quiz. Hundreds of people can contact us through our numbers, Facebook, Instagram, SnapChat, Twitter, Tumblr, Reddit, etc. There is no way to turn the notifications off, except to shut down all these accounts. But that defeats the purpose of connectivity and being wired to this digital collective consciousness. Perish the thought of being an outsider to this brave new world! Even if there was a way to escape the digital realm, the outdoors are still affected by it, and the many sedentary activities we engage in, such as binge watching, don’t change this epidemic. Even with the influence of natural lighting in future technologic innovations, would it really make a difference? The concept of artificial light made to emulate natural light sounds ludicrous, and adds another failure to the human race. Would people still want to go outside, walk through the streets and see the trees sway when they can view virtual simulations of it through stereoscopic sensory technology? No. Despite one health issue being solved, another will surely arise due to the world seeking dynamic equilibrium. The point is: humans have moved indoors. Even if there were a way to make a near-perfect simulation of the outdoors through lighting, air quality, etc., there is no way that humans will abandon technology.