I'll add my own data point into the mix. I'm 49, have been married for 22 years, with kids who are either grown up, or well on their way. Throughout my life though, I have been an absolute loner in spirit. I grew up quite isolated, in the UK countryside, and learned to amuse myself early on. My first love was computers, which luckily has served me fairly well, career-wise. I haven't had many girlfriends, and felt very aware of this lack. When I met my wife, I married her more rapidly than I should have, if I'm honest. I had no confidence in myself regarding my ability to form intimate attachments to women, and thought something like "well if I'm married, then that's that problem sorted!". Not so much.

Still, we've persevered, and made it work for 22 years. But I will soon be 50, and have chosen to view this round number as significant. I would like to start living life as I would like it, both career and relationship wise, and am currently trying to plan out what shape that might take. The stories and information in the comments here, are truly fascinating to me, the breadth of ideas being mentioned are a real breath of fresh air, and a great example of what makes Hacker News great (in my view), so thank you everyone.

Strong predictors of good and bad marriage partners do exist, but I'd caution you against making yourself, wife, and children unhappy for thinking the grass will be greener by blowing up your marriage. Divorce courts have seen many a couple who thought they were star crossed lovers bitterly at one another's throats. Human beings all have flaws that become painfully apparent once you move in with them and thr "honeymoon" phase of the relationship is over. If your spouse supports you emotionally, respects you, and is dependable, you have something not so easy to come by. If your kids are grown, maybe you just need some time alone to get away? Talk to her about it.

Thank you for your advice, and I take your point about the divorce courts, but please don't think that we haven't talked. The opposite is very much the case.

Often it isn’t because the grass is greener somewhere else.

There are cases where the grass looked green, but upon marriage, you discovered it false. Cheating, publicly showing off said cheating (yet hiding it from you), no respect, all manner of things can be uncovered.

If the idea of a normal girl sounds like a step up, I wouldn’t sit tight.

Please talk to a therapist or counselor before making any decisions. It sounds like you need someone to help talk through emotions, your plans, your desires, etc, and a trained professional will be able to help here. It’s not a sign of weakness, and these people really can help you make great decisions and really iron out what it is that you want, what the costs are for different decisions, etc. and there isn’t much to lose, only more information and better decision making to be gained.

Think of it like hiring a coach. Lebron James has a coach. Tia Toomey has a coach. The worlds most successful business leaders have coaches. It’s alright to hire one who can work with you on making your life better. Best of luck!

That's great advice - I had a therapist for a couple of years, but stopped during covid. I think I will try to find another though - 100% worth it, as you say.

Consider also a couples therapist, all the same rationale applies.

In either case, read up on the process for finding one that works you (and maybe your partner). Make sure it's someone you respect. There's a wide variety in quality, and if it's someone who you do not take seriously it will not be a good use of time.

Good luck

Thank you very much for your replies to what I said - it's good advice, and I'm grateful you would take the time to offer it!

I am 62. About fifteen years ago I could have written almost exactly what you have written above. I blew up my long term marriage because of my fucked up thinking. It was a horrible mistake and one that I regret essentially every day.

Of course, maybe it's all different for you. I mean that. I'm only suggesting something to check.

Have a look at the material under "Nice Guy Syndrome" by Dr. Robert Glover. [1] Maybe get his audio book "No More Mr. Nice Guy" and listen to it for a bit, and see how well it fits or does not fit your situation.

[1] https://drglover.com

The flip side is that you know now that it was a mistake. Would you still be happy today if you hadn’t left, but without knowing it was the right choice?

Happiness is a fickle thing.

Isn't this just gonna result in stories based on survivorship bias? Those who put it all on red and won, aren't going to have the same experience as those who lost.

I'm sure I fit that "Nice Guy Syndrome" profile to a considerable extent. I'll take a look at the audio book. Thanks a lot for the advice!

/me 65, two kids, two grandkids, two marriages, each of about 15 years. Both times the wife divorced me, rather than vv. (and no doubt that says something about me). Both times the relationship was rocky, but I would have stuck it out were it not for being sued by my supposedly-trusted life partner.

I haven't had many girlfriends either, but I haven't felt that as a "lack". I've never had many friends either - usually not more than three or four good friends at any time.

I now live alone, and I don't see many people. I talk to my exes fairly regularly, and I'm on good terms with my kids - but they live faraway. I'm not "lonely", though, in the sense that being alone makes me sad or regretful. I'm fine with my own company. I like to crack jokes and talk politics, so I miss those occasions; I miss cuddling a warm woman; and I'd like to have someone living with me, to pick me up if I fall over, and to look after me if I get ill. But those things are basically transactional, not about loneliness; I could pay someone to provide those services.

I'm not a "loner" - I like people, and people like me. I'm not shy. I think it's just that I find that cultivating casual friendships in the hope they might blossom is a lot of work, so I don't cultivate many. And the idea of having two girlfriend relationships at the same time - i.e. while one is ending and the other beginning - fills me with dread, and I've never done that.

Like you, I've spent my career in IT. I've never made a good friend at work. I mean, I've made "friends" with people at work, and even brought them to my home and made dinner for them; but they were never good friends. I'm a bit idiosyncratic in my tastes, and many of my attitudes and opinions are quite leftfield. These work-friends were all very straight, by my standards. I've no objection to people being "normal" - by definition, the majority of people are - that's no obstacle to being friends, for me. But it may have been an obstacle for them.

It really doesn’t say much about you that you got divorced. Women initiate ~70% of divorces and 90% for college educated women. Personally - I don’t know any college educated couples who had the man initiate. It’s really uncommon.

It's very interesting what you say, how you miss certain aspects of companionship. Do you find the maintenance of friendships and of intimate relationships difficult in the same way? Personally I find almost no overlap between the two categories.

I've actually found most of my most intense friendships via computers - though those are few, and to be honest I've mellowed in my middle age. I'm trying my hand at making friends through social activities more these days - I definitely enjoy conversing, and sharing a laugh with them.

> Do you find the maintenance of friendships and of intimate relationships difficult in the same way?

I don't find it difficult to maintain an intimate relationship, until the writ arrives! I can compromise, I can listen (up to a point - I am a man, after all), and I'm pretty tolerant.

In both friendships and intimate relationships, I expect two-way trust. The difference is that in an intimate relationship, I'm relying on that trust; I don't place the same reliance on a good friend. I think it would be unkind (and unfriendly) to lean that heavily on a friend.

I lost my closest and oldest friend when he stole something from me (it actually was my partner's, which made it much worse, because she had relied on my trust in him). But in general, I wouldn't be that put-out if a good friend broke trust; people have lives to live, they make commitments to new people, and they make new friends that might take a dislike to you. These things happen, but I don't expect them to happen in a committed relationship.

But they do happen; so clearly my expectations are still out of whack with reality.

Hi fellow UK person.

Sounds like you're just about to make a relatively large (perhaps dramatic?) change to your home and work life. Some people would call that a mid-life crisis but I think it's people realising the shortness of life and making sure they don't waste whatever they have left of it.

Hope whatever the outcome it's a net positive :)

Hey fellow UK person!

I may be on the brink, as you say, about to jump - or I may just be all talk. I'm not sure myself, if I'm honest :-) Though I am sure that I definitely prefer solitude + a number of friends now and again, rather than one super intense soul-mate all the time.

Thanks for the good wishes, and best of luck to you too!

If you can, I wonder if tried a period of separation, maybe 6 months? To test the waters. My gut instinct is you may find divorce is not what you wanted after all, just some time and space to realize that.

This resonates a bit with me. I'm at an earlier point in life (25 now), so I realize giving advice may be naïve, but I feel inclined to share my experience so far still.

I share the part of your story about liking computers and getting a wonderful career out of it - I currently work remotely in a low cost of living country making six USD figures, so I'm quite well into the 1% income bracket locally. Up until maybe a year or so ago, I'd been in 3 relationships, all multi-year, including a long distance one during university. It always felt that I had been missing out on the "single guy" part of life, and looking back now, my relationships weren't all that fulfilling; mostly they were probably a way to not be alone, although I still felt alone, and was ok with that.

This past ~year I've been out casually with many women (maybe something like 15?) and... It's fun, but obviously it's not fulfilling other than for ego reasons. I think the main positive thing in it is that I know it's "just ok" and don't have to wonder about it; if I had committed early on this would likely be something that would always be on my mind. What if I was letting my best life go by? Well, I haven't found ultimate happiness, but I have found comfort in the fact that I looked for it at least, and won't regret not having done so.

For me, casual relationships aren't really fulfilling, and committed ones aren't either. I've learned to be alone and even a bit alien from early on, and don't resent it.

I'm a bit older (35) and what I've come to view about my earlier relationships is that I didn't invest much in them. Didn't share my feelings, didn't make myself vulnerable. At the time I thought I just wasn't meeting the right person, now I feel there were probably a dozen women I went out with that could have been terrific partners.

This is not to criticize embracing being single at 25. It's a good opportunity to figure out who you are and what you like. But the empty "a way to not be alone" relationships also happens in short term relationships and casual dating. You get what you put in.

> I haven't found ultimate happiness

You will not find this, it does not exist, and it is certainly not obtained by catching some mythical "the one." Unreasonable expectations will doom any relationship.

Im 51 and still single. I’d only offer that the biological clock is real concern for women, and largely drives many realities and possibilities of their decision making process. If you’re dating and unsatisfied, maybe consider a journey of deep thoughts about having a family. Seek mentors or therapy if that’s what works for you. Then _maybe_ you and the women you are dating will grow closer with shared experience and renewed sense of the human condition.

BTW, I 100% sympathise with being alone and alien. Alien is an apt description, actually. I came to love the delicious distance, and feeling of otherness. It was a slightly depressive feeling, but very comforting. Not many people can appreciate that, I've found.

It also helps to know you don't have to be "joined at the hip" to your partner all the time.

Not at all naive, anyone might have a piece of the puzzle, no matter what their age is. It sounds to me like you've done a better job than I did, exploring relationships with women, and figuring out what works for you, so hats off! Tbh I wish I had've had access to the sort of information that's available online now, even just as a window into the breadth of people's views - they can redefine what is a "viable" viewpoint or lifestyle, and help a person find their way to a life that makes them happy.

Be careful about what you are considering throwing away. I'm a bit older and when people ask me why I'm not married I reply simply that all the best women were snapped up in their 20's.

I once heard someone put it, as to why he wasn't married, that he wants what he can't have, and he can have what he doesn't want.

> I would like to start living life as I would like it, both career and relationship wise

If you'd be comfortable sharing, why do you feel this is not something you can achieve with your partner?

Sure, I can share - and needless to say, the vast majority of the problem is on my side. My wife is indeed a great woman - very emotionally focussed though, in quite an intense way, and highly intelligent in an intuitive way. She's honest and loyal though, and good looking. A real catch, in other words. The problem that I bring, is that I don't really have a core personality (at least, not one that anyone sees - I have my own inner thoughts but they can be rather dark, and need extensive filtering before being presented to the world at large). So I run "sub programs" to talk to other people on a level that is suitable to get along with them. I think everyone does this to an extent - I certainly do anyway, I always have.

So the problem comes, because my wife is an exceptional empath, with what seems to me like almost supernatural intuition. And she sees through my little constructs in a second, and demands they be pushed aside, in order to get to know the "real me" beneath. Trouble is there is no "real me", apart from the rather dark, turbulent thoughts that churn the waters of my inner life. Therein lies the problem, a perpetual game of hide and seek, and I find it rather wearing. (Largely my own problem though, as I said).

Apologies if the above sounds a bit weird, or off-putting or whatever. Anyway - you did ask! :-)

I'm 35, am in therapy, just got out of a breakup, and have two good friends with a dads who divorced their moms at around your age. Since you've been receptive to my other comments I'll share a bit about how your comment strikes me.

> I have my own inner thoughts but they can be rather dark, and need extensive filtering before being presented to the world at large

This really sounds like a good thing to reality check with a therapist! Non-judgmental listening is a core piece of the service they provide.

I've had similar feelings in the past. Having things you don't feel you can share will make you feel isolated. Saying these things out loud to someone in and of itself can be a load off. And I strongly suspect these things you're suppressing aren't as bad as you think.

It's telling that your response has nothing bad to say about your wife. The issues you raised are really, really not going to be solved by leaving her.

When I'm unhappy in a relationship being single feels like freedom. But a breakup is trauma. During mine I went through hell, my entire being was be screaming at me that I'd made the worst mistake of my life. The loneliness was profound. Self esteem plummeted. My ex-girlfriend went through hell too.

As it happens, my breakup needed to happen - I want a family, my ex-gf could not commit to having one with me. I'm on the other side now and feel good about the decision. But I still miss her all the time. And this was a relationship of only a few years.

Lastly, on my friends with dads who have divorced their mom in his 50's - this decision will permanently change your relationship with your children. One doesn't talk to his dad at all, the other tolerates but no longer respects his dad. Are those scenarios possible?

Good luck. Maybe it is that you have to leave your wife. But do your due diligence that this is the case. It's a button you can't unpress.

I think you're right - I will talk to someone before doing anything drastic.

I've taken more than enough of people's time today (thank you and others for your insights - they are really useful). I did want to clarify something about my thoughts though - it's not that they're always dark and horrible at all - but they are rather opaque to an outsider. As I mentioned, I grew up alone for large swathes of time, and I learned to have conversations with myself, as a form of companionship. Such conversations form my inner life - but its difficult to let someone else in on them. As an example, here's Bill Burr with a story about muffins, which I relate to so much - it still makes me cry with laughter even though I've watched it about 1000 times. :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnOg01N1u3w

There's nothing anyone appreciates more than a listening ear to unsolicited advice on the internet :)

Thanks for the clip, Bill Burr is hilarious

Let her in anyway. She might not leave, but if she does, you'll know that you gave yourself a chance to be your true 'dark' self with her. Your dark self may be treatable, even.

I don't know that I want to treat it - it's the core of me after all, and I've only ever felt "broken" in a marriage situation. And it's not like my thoughts are always dark anyway, it varies. It's more like a conversation between two people, with 100% trust, and where nothing is off limits - but it all takes place in my head. So it's difficult to share, because it's self contained and dynamic. As I mentioned, I grew up entirely by myself for much of the time, and I suppose my internal conversations grew to become my primary source of entertainment. It's hard to just "fix" that, it's who I am.

Given thoughts that are socially unacceptable in conversation, consider working them out at one step removed, as the thoughts of some fictional character in an invented story. Perhaps in the form of a novel, or stage play or film script.

Loving families are easy to idealize from afar.

How many families actually fit that profile? I’m not entirely sure.

This is not a jaded attempt to say the pursuit of relationships or family aren’t worthwhile. I just want to set some context here for those feeling lonely, for those who feel like they are standing outside in the cold on the street looking through windows into warm living rooms full of people with warm feelings toward each other.

I’m the only one of my siblings who has consistently been on speaking terms with either of my divorced parents. Both of my divorced parents consistently tell me they wish they could get away from their current spouses but feel it’s too late start over. Only one of my 3 siblings isn’t currently fantasizing of leaving their spouse. The mix of who in the extended family is currently speaking to whom is always in flux. Of my friends in very long term relationships that I know well enough to know if they are happy or not, about half are somewhere between resentful to outright miserable. My grandparents divorced when they were in their late 60s and went on to live much happier separate lives. In the hospital before my grandfather died, he insisted my grandmother should absolutely not visit him.

Again, I am not saying seeking loving relationships and building a family isn’t an extremely worthwhile goal for everyone. Even given all I’ve said so far, I hope I can build one someday. It just bums me out to see people in threads like this idealizing what it means to find a partner, to have a family. It can be extremely good. It can also be extremely bad. Joining with others is not a magic spell that, on its own, fixes your life.

I'm in my 60's. Wasn't going to retire yet, but covid changed my mind. It seemed easier & safer. (Finances not so easy, but oh well.)

Parents gone a while now. Three siblings still living; all married; 2 nephews. Whole family seems a bit strange to me, but wouldn't trade them for anything. Maybe I'm the strange one. ;) Only a handful of real friends, maybe half are gone now, but got a couple new ones in their 30's. Only known a couple of women in my life, but I might try that again. Nothing seems so urgent any more.

Been "mostly alone" all my life, only realized 10-20 years ago that I've never really felt "lonely". Seems like there's so many fun things to work on or play at, just a few people in your life can go a really long ways. Is my family ideal? Well, works for me.

LOL, been lurking for years - I didn't really understand the article that well, but I enjoyed the comments so much I had to create an acct to say thanks HN.

I can’t help but notice how you talk about your family.

I don’t think size, kids, proximity, or frequency of visits is universal; there’s going to be lots of differences between people. But I think everyone benefits from knowing there are at least a few people in the world that they care about and that care about them.

I find some of the people in the comments that believe lots of people are destined to die alone, should commit suicide, or have AI companions instead pretty disturbing, frankly. I think trying to relate to others, even if only a few people, is a much better way to go about life that should be encouraged.

Right, being alone is not the same as being lonely. I guess you realize that, but you did not explicitly state it. I keep hearing the Beatles song in my head now. Elenor Rigby.

OK, now that is it.

I know you said this, but I want to emphasize that relationship failures do not invalidate the value of that ideal. I struggle to think of anyone who wouldn't benefit from pursuing some kind of family, and I believe sacrificing that pursuit entirely is always a tragic mistake.

Forming loving families is hard. You might not find the right people immediately, and some people are incredibly destructive towards each other. Everyone is not compatible with everyone else. And it is often less painful to live alone than to live with a destructive family.

That means some families need to be dissolved and reconstituted, others need time to heal. For some people there is not enough time, understanding or strength to grow and form new bonds with others.

That does not mean people should give up and live alone. Anyone who believes they will be happier alone is deluding themselves and/or too scared of the pain of rejection and heartbreak. It's worth it.

https://youtu.be/bl5TUw7sUBs?t=60

> I know you said this, but I want to emphasize that relationship failures do not invalidate the value of that ideal. I struggle to think of anyone who wouldn't benefit from pursuing some kind of family, and I believe sacrificing that pursuit entirely is always a tragic mistake.

Two come to mind rather easily.

1) Someone that is going to commit suicide. Having a family that you actually care about would make killing yourself more complicated. Alone, someone alone could go through with the act without actually hurting anyone else.

2) Someone who's entirety of experiences with family have been... complicated. Just as a thought experiment; say someone raised raised a child by punching them hard enough to bruise or draw blood for every little slight, real or perceived. Then ensured that the child understood that they were being hit and injured out of love.

How would that child would view family after enduring that when they become a young adult?

Both of those examples just point to the value of having true support from a larger community. If you see someone suicidal or who has never known true familial support, try to bring them in and teach them what a true and healthy family looks like. And if you ever find yourself in that position, you want try to crawl your way out and into better networks and a state of mind, as confusing and painful as that may be.

Committing suicide alone or forever living without an understanding of true compassion are not good outcomes that should just be accepted.

I'm talking about an inevitable outcome of communities, being that there are going to be individuals that won't belong to any of them. In that case I'm saying that committing suicide alone is the best outcome out of a set of bad options, because at least there is no collateral damage.

I disagree with everything you said and find your outlook both sad and disgusting.

We can make a space in the world for everyone, however small. People can find each other.

Homeless drug addicts have friends. Lonely people can find communities. Circumstances are not static.

The WaitbutWhy (funny) post about "How to pick your life partner"[0] might be shedding a light to what you're trying to say/observe.

The ladder analogy is the most apt one. Everyone single think they're at the bottom of the ladder looking up at "happy couples" but in reality they are in the middle of the ladder, with unhappy bickering couples below them.

A lot of people with this attitude rushes in to relationships, drinking the coolaid, and people (kids) that have seen the parents/friends/siblings in their rushed relationships usually gets a more realistic view of it all

[0]https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/02/pick-life-partner.html

Reading that article, I can’t help but feel like this person had little to no experience in a real relationship.

The best marriages I know of are nothing like the ideals they set out in part 2. There are plenty of books and podcasts exploring long lasting relationships. The qualities listed in part 2 miss the mark.

It does not even need to be families. Even finding a suitable partner is hard. I have seen people being in relationships which sucked. They are having ahard time ending them, enduring the disaster. But at least it is not as much effort to leave a non-marriage relationship as a marriage, usually. I think it is worth trying to find a good partner, because if you find someone suitable, you will have struck gold. The statistics do not look too good though, at least from what I have observed.

>How many families actually fit that profile? I’m not entirely sure.

Not many.

>I’m the only one of my siblings who has consistently been on speaking terms with either of my divorced parents.

A large number of people (over 3/4 - perhaps close to 95 %) are dysfunctional or immature in a major way. The are pawns in the game of evolution.

>Even given all I’ve said so far, I hope I can build one someday.

It boils down to numbers really, so good luck. For functional people to bump into each other, it's is an needle in a haystack chance.

This seems like an odd statement, since "dysfunctional" can only be defined in contrast to the majority behavior. It's like the chestnut that 80% of drivers are above average.

I would have used the word "abnormal" if I were to be comparing it to be the majority. Of course the what is defined as dysfunctional would subjective. A bunch of males fighting/competing with each other to death might be heroic in the eyes of some and the behavior can be normal and can be indulged in by the majority, but in my view would be dysfunctional. Guess it a semantics thing?

Quoting Tolstoy may seem low effort, but it feels warranted here:

"All happy families are alike, but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

I heard this phrase many times, but I really don't understand what it means.

Aside from being stated in extremely dogmatic form - like a claim to the ultimate truth - what, exactly, do we learn from this statement? To me (aside from being probably just an incorrect artistic exaggeration), it sounds like something ridiculously trivial, like "all people live different lives, but everyone dies" (ok, so what?) or "we all like different foods but all of us have to breathe air" (truly a genius observation).

Is there some deeper meaning to this that I'm missing?

When I first heard this quote it really resonated with me. I think what it means is that unhappy relationships usually take on specific forms, while happy relationship are more generalized.

This is how I always understood it as well, with a bit of an added connotation that the supposed "happy family" doesn't even exist as such. We all can easily see our own particular versions of familial dysfunction, yet we can still look at "happy families" from the outside and assume that they have achieved some platonic ideal that our own family is incapable of.

There isn't really a "happy family" in Ana Karenina, not as such anyway - there are many different characters struggling with their own stations in life in different ways, even being miserable once they seem to achieve their near term goals.

Probably the closest you can get is Levin's self actualization at the end of the novel, but I personally take a pessimistic read on that too - we've seen him spend the entire book meandering and I have trouble reading it at face value that he's really done "settling" on his world view by the end.

A great first line for a novel, but perhaps not really so.

I'm in my mid 50's and a number of peers from different circles have all come to the same conclusion: they want to create intentional communities of friends to age with. One couple purchased several acres of land and has two friends living in a tiny house with them. Another friend is trying to raise capital to build the type of apartments/dormitories that the majority of US city-dwellers inhabitied in the late 1880's early 1900's: ones that shared a common dinner table and parlor for entertainment. Another has a B&B that also serves as co-housing for 8 adults from their mid-50s to their 70's, and they share chores, which has been together for over a decade.

I find this to be a uniquely western culture issue, compared to eastern asian cultures and indian subcontinent where multi-generational families mean you're never really alone.

The author seems to have fallen into this void. I'm sure even with everything I've mentioned above it is still possible, but intentional or filial, the family must still grow and add new members to prevent this unique type of loneliness. I don't know how my friends' intentional families will persist over the decades as they start to die, but they seem to be committed today.

Have you tried it? Perhaps rent a big house together for two weeks. I remember roomates and it wasn’t great

A pedestrian neighborhood in a city can have a real sense of community. You get to know the shopkeepers, restaurants, neighbors. You might try that for contrast. More durable, less risky, hundreds to choose from. You can even invite your friends to move there

I tried co-housing for three months with 6 people my age or older. It is very different than living with people in your 20's & 30's. Everyone was way more considerate: the place was clean (we all had chores), most of us liked to cook so there were periodic house meals. The only thing I didn't like was that I had my room and that was it. I'm into hobbies and there wasn't a garage or shed, and the basement was storage.

I liked it, I had no complaints except for not enough fridge space (we had two) and not enough craft space. I would need a shed for my ceramics. I could definitely see myself doing this.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I was dating at the time and it was about 50-50 between people who thought it was cool and people who were like "no effing way."

I have a wife and 3 kids, but we always talk about, for retirement, making a pact with our friends and all retiring to the same place - be that a plot of land with a bunch of tiny houses, or a small no-name town where anyone could afford a house.

Not entirely related but it seems like the plot of 'Grace and Frankie' on Netflix: two old ladies that become friends and spend their last years together.

> to eastern asian cultures and indian subcontinent where multi-generational families mean you're never really alone.

It's high birth rates that create such culture. Europe and US are not comparable , and over time people will get lonelier and lonelier unless they decide to adjust their way of life around this issue and stop living with 20th century standards. Cities should be designed with the single-person in mind now, not the family

It's not just the culture. Young people are staying home more out of financial convenience and necessity in Europe. The market hasn't made enough affordable housing to keep the status quo running.

The market would if it wasn't so restricted

The number of people I know who moved to nyc because “they really need a girlfriend at this point” shows how dense cities is the answer for single people

Or the wrong ones. Cities like New York and London are the worst places to date - unless you find yourself in the top percentage of 'attractiveness' which we can loosely define according to contemporary city standards - physical, financial and personality better be strong, and you better be young.

> indian subcontinent where multi-generational families mean you're never really alone.

It's changing fast, especially in big cities. Families are becoming more nuclear. Its still much better than western countries though.

Is it better? I know someone from one of those cultures who says he will never move out until his parents die, there is no independence

It's a tradeoff. Close-knit families limit your freedom, but they also provide stability, companionship, emotional and financial support, etc. On the other hand, you can have total independence from family and community, but then you aren't really a member.

Most western people don't think like this any more, but it used to be understood and accepted that belonging to a family or community is rewarding, but it comes with duties and obligations—often life-long. You can't have one without the other.

> Most western people don't think like this any more, but it used to be understood and accepted that belonging to a family or community is rewarding, but it comes with duties and obligations

I think you’ve hit the nail square on the head here: this is perhaps the thing that bothers me most about life in the US.. no sense of community, belonging, etc.

I’ve been chronically lonely for pretty much all of my 46 years. I don’t see any communities or families I’d be OK with joining, contributing to, or even leaning on for support. Everyone is so selfish it turns my stomach, doubly so as I know I’m as guilty as anyone for being selfish.

I think everyone used to be religious and so church and mass was a way to get a community. Since more and more people are atheists, this community thing hasn’t really translated to the other side.

Yeah I would say so. People used to go to church, now they don't, and nothing has replaced it. Of course loneliness will increase

Political Ideology seems to be slowly replacing church. They are starting to develop very similar "features" as religions: Complex belief systems, rules for living, communities of like-minded (and clearly defined outsiders), ideological friends and enemies, in many cases "with us or against us" mentalities, hero/idol worship, ideology-specific literature, icons and imagery, rituals, chants and singing, repetitive speech and propaganda to reinforce beliefs, community activity (either -building or -destroying), belief in mysticism/supernatural/conspiracies. That religion-shaped hole that people have when they walk away from traditional religion is getting filled with something similar.

Politics has always been like religion my friend, but it’s much more divisive than anything imo

The US is worse for it than a lot of other western countries tho. Unless you’re religious, that is

I’m a lifelong atheist, but I am starting to look at religion simply for the community and fellowship.

But honestly I don’t want to be religious. It seems like it entirely suspends one’s ability to think critically, and I have so little of that particular talent that letting go of what I do what feels like a disaster in the making. It feels exceptionally hard to go into it with an open mind.

Have you considered Unitarianism for community/fellowship/moral framework? They are we accepting of both atheists and people of varying faiths. (Note, not a Unitarian, but my wife grew up in the community)

I’ve not, not seriously anyway. I do have a few acquaintances that are Unitarian though, I should ping them on that topic. Thanks, I appreciate the suggestion!

Start thinking about religion as an organic solution to the human need for community. Whatever made up stories they teach don’t matter outside of how it builds and protects the community. This will result in some individuals not being permitted (unfairly at times - a bad apple can spoil the bunch). There is no perfect answer to the human condition.

Or you can try to make your own religion (or political ideology if you want to use the modern term). There’s a few trying to form in the west right now, but they don’t have much of an emphasis on creating healthy communities as they do dominating the culture. I don’t think they’re helpful if you’re lonely.

Yeah really that's what religion is in this context: you find connection in the fact that you both suspended that part of your critical thinking. I say this as a religious person too, although one that hasn't found much particular community, since I am in a religion that doesn't have such things very strongly

You can pick a religion or political party. Those seem to be popular for providing belonging to people here.

> I find this to be a uniquely western culture issue, compared to eastern asian cultures and indian subcontinent

'Western Asia' also exists and very much the same as the rest of Asian cultures in terms of multi-generational extended families.

These are the life choices we make, whether through biology, mentality, or environment. For me, one of the key factors is that the signal-to-noise you have to endure with friends to get the few moments of gratification is so low that it's draining. Maybe it's a product of having a high bar for what constitutes new and interesting/entertaining for me (compared against spending time alone), combined with already being biased towards things and ideas rather than people.

I live with the consequences now in middle age, when friends and connections gradually evaporate if not actively cultivated. And I’m sure I’ll pay for it at a point in life where you need those who stuck with you not for ideas or things, but because of friendship or family. Because you wanted to spend time with them, low signal-to-noise and everything.

Anyway, we all eventually experience this phase. For some, it just comes earlier than others.

Listen to yourself. When you start talking about the signal to noise ratio and calculating the return on investment of social interactions, its time to step away from the keyboard and reevaluate your life.

Your brain has been fried by hustle culture.

Eh, I appreciate GP's honesty. I can see where the user is coming from, and the user also acknowledges the potential disadvantages later in time.

I used to spend a lot of time, hours a week, at university just hanging out with people instead of working hard on my career (the opposite of hustle culture). The vast majority of these friends entered a relationship and/or moved far away, and I don't see them anymore (we've also become different people since then). I've since focused more on my career—no longer taking time just to hang out—and I'm subjectively happier. I still make a best faith attempt to treat others respectfully, help others when I can, and also make time for my partner and care for her, but I genuinely like reading, watching a good film, or doing a solitary movie more than investing a lot of time in friendships, especially when they're likely to be temporary and transient.

I wish friendships would last longer, but in my experience, it takes two to invest in one (and the vast majority of people don't)—though in contrast, romantic and familial relationships are more likely to last. I've learned a lot more from reading and exploring artistic works with the time and energy that I could have spent hanging out. In addition, career work will help myself and my family secure a comfortable life in the future, whereas I wouldn't realistically expect friends to materially help me out that far in the future (assuming we'd still be in touch and geographically close).

Eh, it just sounds like precise terminology to me. If they'd said: "I like my friends but sometimes it's more draining than fun to hang out with them. I dunno, maybe I'm hard to please. It's just so much work to find and keep friends," I'm sure no one would bat an eye. I read it about like that, but just described in technical terms.

I'm an engineer and I often find engineering terms applicable to non-engineering topics; that doesn't mean anything about how I look at life other than that I've considered my situation from a number of angles.

Very Gigachad comment, Gigachad!

The most relaxing time for me is going back to the small beach town where my surviving parent retired.

The pace is slow. It takes a few days for me to downshift from a “fit everything in you wanted to do” to the “lets see what the day brings” mindset.

You might go for a walk, run into a friend and decide to just stop by for a coffee for an hour and catch up. After that? Who knows. Maybe walk down main street and find something to eat (without looking up reviews on Yelp). Have a drink before heading home and reading a book for an hour until you fall asleep.

The urge to hyper-optimize every living minute is a very common mindset among certain groups of people. And it’s often what’s needed to reach the higher socio-economic levels.

But man can it be toxic. It starts to become a goal in and of itself. It’s no longer about the “best” life but rather the “most optimum”. Yes, it’s worthwhile to figure out the best job between the two choices. But it’s also good sometimes to stop trying to optimize and just enjoy where you are at that moment.

Comments like yours remind me that I barely have a connection to this world anymore. Maybe it's just being old, or not being in the US.

Checking yelp reviews before getting lunch is the most alien thing I've read here in quite a while. And this site is full of people who I don't get at all.

Well said. I'd also add that life has stages. YC-style hyper growth startup culture is suited for the young and ambitious. As we age, that immense drive of youth gradually declines. So it makes sense to use that energy productively while it's there for a chance at outlier success. But there is an age at which the slow and consistent life you've described becomes far more preferable to the constant hustle .

I think it was just a way to get the idea across. As much as I value being with friends, even after a short while, let's say a weekend, I feel desire to get away for relief. It is draining for me. I think it is called being introvert

Wait, how are you making the jump to someone's brain being fried? They probably mean that they don't enjoy most of some interactions and the parts that the enjoy aren't enough to make the whole thing worth it.

I don't get why you're getting caught up on the language or what this has to do with hustle culture.

Wise words, Gigachad.

This is too funny.

It’s kinda curious. I connect to people over ideas, but my family also happens to be the group of people that is similarly inclined enough to connect over ideas with.

I left my home to go live overseas, but even after 8 years abroad I haven’t found people I connect with in the same way.

You remind me of people so picky that they can never find a partner in life.

Far better to be alone than with the wrong person. People settle for what is convenient.

The wrong person is a fate worse than death.

You’re never going to find mr or ms right

I know, but I don’t care. I also believe that having children is deeply unethical given the state of the world. Birthing new humans into this dystopian hellscape we find ourselves in is torture.

Humans waste far too much of their time on unproductive persists like relationships and families. Nobody outside these structures cares what is achieved and rightfully so, human influenced by neurochemicals to influence behavior to spread genetic material, news at 11.

Meanwhile some people are building things, yourself included, that have never existed before and push humanity forward.

> Nobody outside these structures cares

Oof. Is that how you determine what is worth doing?

I think it's more accurate to say that nobody cares about anyone else OUTSIDE of personal relationships.

> Meanwhile some people are building things, yourself included, that have never existed before and push humanity forward.

Nah. We're just twiddling our fingers on keyboard until we die or have sufficient padding from the current economic climate. So SO much less worth doing than loving another person and providing the support for them to be their best self. Or raising a child to start with the knowledge and resources which took you a lifetime to learn the hard way.

To be frank, it sounds like you deeply want to be loved by others and yet avoid the only way to get it. I'm sorry.

I know your line of reasoning is not popular, but I would like to add some nuance.

The empirical reality of this situation is that societies directed towards the maximization of individual desires (or "rights") will tend to be in conflict with creation and sustenance of communal societies. As such, we're seeing the breakdown of relationships, marriages, communities and even nations via social atomization. This is the result of liberal philosophy followed to its logical conclusion. The individual reigns supreme, and thus the community suffers.

Traditional societies throughout history had strategies for building families and maintaining communities, but the liberal West deems these anachronistic. We want to have our cake and eat it too, and we're learning this is simply not possible.

Do not try to fight loneliness. It is a natural part of life, like thunderstorms. You can try to tease it apart, understand how it works, where it comes from, try to predict it, come up with coping mechanisms. But the storms still come regardless. They are here for a reason, with their appropriate place in a natural system. But we don't need to understand the reason to accept it. Acknowledge the feeling, sit with it for a little while. Eventually the weather will change. Learn to enjoy these changes in the weather; each has its ups and downs and is interesting in its own way.

Unless you suffer from avoiding personality disorder, in which case the weather might never change.

Isn’t coping associated with denial? An IMO better term is acceptance (of things that are outside one’s control).

I don't know how much these terms vary by locale or specialty, but within behavioral medicine in the US, coping is ambivalent and a normal part of nearly any condition. A lack of coping would be unambiguously bad, but here can be both good and bad coping mechanisms in a qualitative sense. Coping skills are taught to help people restore balance to their lives if they have reached a point of having a clinical disorder, i.e. where the condition has negatively affected their ability to live and function. A good coping mechanism mitigates the disorder, while a bad coping mechanism may add another layer of dysfunction instead. A meta-level skill is to become more aware of these differences to self-adjust towards more beneficial outcomes.

Denial is one of hundreds of different coping strategies. They're just tools people use to deal with unwanted emotions or behaviors.

Disagree. I was lonely in my teens, but ever since I met my wife I haven't been lonely. Ever.

Married for 10 years now.

Disagree. You can feel lonely and be married. You can feel lonely in a happy marriage. I personally feel it if I don’t have a big group of friends.

Can you please help me differentiate between coping and fighting a condition?

When you fight something it means you try to eliminate it. Coping means accepting its existence and being peaceful about it. However, you CAN fight and cope, and you can fight and not cope.

The aim should not be the elimination, the aim should be inner peace.

That is why I despise the setting of “overcoming cancer” as a fight and presenting survivors as “fighters”. What do I care? I prefer peace to health. Because I only want to be healthy as a means for “easier” peace.

Focus on what you can do for others, not what others can do for you. Activities will gradually lose their luster as you age, if you are focused on what you get from them. In Buddhist terms: cultivate mudita, sympathetic joy in the joys of others. It is nigh impossible to make yourself happy, yet seemingly trivial to make others happy, if you are keeping an eye out for the opportunity.

> Activities will gradually lose their luster as you age, if you are focused on what you get from them.

Doing things for other is also activities, and you also seem to be focused on what you get (sympathetic joy) from that.

You are right in that doing the same things for literally decades can get boring. Rethinking your life and trying different things is part of aging (including focusing on yourself, if what you did all your life was to do stuff for others)

I’ve always thought that there seemed to be a meta-selfishness to that sort of thinking.

It doesn’t bother me at all, unless the person tries to also say that selfishness and selfish motivations are to be avoided.

Confelicity: Pleasure in another's happiness. Antonym: schadenfreude

This reminds me of the term "compersion", used by the polyamorous community to describe the feeling of joy from watching a loved partner fall in love or lust with another partner. Antonym: jealousy.

I have something slightly different thing in mind: a balancing act between your ideas/needs and others.. and a joy in negotiation. With freedom to evolve or quit the game. No obligations. Basically kid's play. I think it's a saner form of interactions. Lighter, deeper, more vibrant (well, in theory).

Hatred of self-interest is one of the worst aspects of human existence and is responsible for a non trivial amount of human suffering.

Try to find a way to embrace and appreciate your self-interest. Humans are not evil just because of their egoism, and nothing about egoism is inherently evil.

Also Christianity, where self-seeking is one of the worst things you can strive for.

I find it interesting that the implication is that you should strive to not be self seeking, because it’s better for you.

That is a wrong view of Christianity (one of the most important things a Christian needs to do is self-examination).

Or do you mean pride?

One cannot be charitable if one does not know his or her own defects and virtues. And this is a lifelong exercise.

> yet seemingly trivial to make others happy, if you are keeping an eye out for the opportunity.

Trivial? Would you expand on this? Any examples? Thank you.

A kind word or act takes a moment of your time but can leave the other person thinking about it for days, weeks, years. You probably have memories of other people doing nice things for you.

Your comment is simple yet powerful. I am saving it in my diary for later.

I was talking with my sister a couple of days ago, and we started talking about being alone.

She is an extrovert’s extrovert. When things were locked down for her, she got really, really depressed. At one point, she didn’t even care if she got COVID because she was slowly going insane not being around people everyday. Zoom, texting, etc. didn’t work for her. So for her, alone == loneliness.

I am on the total opposite end of that spectrum. I can go days without speaking to anyone. Usually Thursday afternoon till Tuesday morning when my first required meeting is. For me, alone == bliss. I LOVE the self checkout lanes at grocers. Don’t even have to feign small talk with the checker anymore.

Anyway, during the conversation she asked whether X was the last person I was in a relationship with back in 2017. And in thinking about it, other than some random dinners, I haven’t been in a relationship for 5 years. I hadn’t even realized it had been 5 years. My best friend at the time moved out of state in 2019, and I’ve not talked to them since. I do have one friend that still lives near me. We’ll text, but rarely see each other (they have an autoimmune disorder. So they’re very careful because of COVID). Other than saying “hi” to my neighbors when we happen to be checking the mail at the same time, I rarely see people outside of Zoom meetings. I started wondering if I should be lonely, and I’m really not. At this point, I’m afraid of what would happen if I really tried to cultivate a relationship (romantic or platonic) with someone. On the flip side, I’m wondering how much further I need to go to reach full hermit…

On the bright side, I got to play with Twilio. I figured with my lack of human interactions, I should probably have a “dead man’s switch” checking on me. So I’ve got an app that will text me every couple of days. If I don’t reply back within a certain time frame, it’ll call a couple of people and tell them they might want to have a wellness check done on me :)

After spending 15-20 years in introversion mode, I felt back the chill side of being with others. But at times I sense the isolation bliss.. I'd feel slightly lighter and freer when in the toilet or biking/hiking. Odd. Part of it comes from a need for depth .. and being with people you wonder how they feel, if they're ok, why did they think or say this but you can't communicate (or extremely rarely) so it piles up as a frustrating void turning into stress.

This situation sounds quite similar to me. In my mid 30s now and the COVID pandemic has pretty much killed off the social life I used to have. A group of us moved from the UK to Canada about the same time 10 years ago and for a few years we used to do everything together. We'd be that big group at a restaurant on a Friday night, ordering cocktails and sat there for 3+ hours that everyone else rolls their eyes at. Someone would always be up for doing something at the weekend and no one was ever really alone. Today that group chat has gone cold. The last text message was from about Dec 2019. No one wants to do anything anymore, some have got married, some have had kids, some have bought that cabin up in the sticks and spend weekends there.

I go to the movies alone now. Instead of going to restaurants with a group I now sit alone in McDonald's or maybe a ramen bar if I'm feeling fancy. I'm a loner, I'm not really interested in romantic relationships, I might get a dog one of these days but the time isn't right at the moment. Do I feel sad? Not really. I've kind of resigned myself to this realization that this is the way it's going to be. This is my life . It's lonely socially and I don't have a huge number of friends left, but I'm super busy at work. I'm in (and actively leading) teams calls from 9am to 6pm, monday-friday, literally non stop. I get home exhausted.

My solution to all of this - VR. My oculus quest headset provides me with a great outlet on those fairly rare occasions I feel sand and lonely and need to reach out. I can play poker with a table full of people often with exciting and colourful lives of their own. I can watch a movie with a theatre full of people making witty or insightful comments at just the right time. I can play 1 on 1 mini golf with a stranger and have some deep interesting chats for an hour or so.

For me this is enough.

this is funny because I wanted to create a dead man's switch api that you could add to your programs. I have the domain dead.io and was planning to use this for it but never got around to it. You can see the project on introvert.com - let me know if you want to partner up on this

I'll add my two cents: Yes, people like people who are like themselves, and when this is hard to find, then that can lead to the feeling of loneliness.

This can be fixed by joining groups or activities that you enjoy. Friends are just people you enjoy being with. Overtime they can become people you learn to care about and even love like family. But it starts with having fun with them, or at least being likeminded somehow.

Also, fear is no way to live. Part of life is accepting that you will die someday, and most people die alone. Even the idealized version of dying, surrounded by family and friends, is no picnic for them or you. This usually entails being drugged or being otherwise "out of it." So don't worry about "being alone." The end is the same for everyone, and hopefully you won't even notice and you'll get to die peacefully in your sleep.

Life is for living and enjoying it as much as possible, and some people do enjoy being alone. However, living alone for a prolonged period of time is probably not THE healthiest thing to do because we are a social species and we do need physical contact. Having a pet like a dog or cat can help in this regard, but having someone who can always accompany you to doctor appointments, or go with you to events, or restaurants, or even just having breezy conversations with, really helps with having good mental health.

So I recommend cultivating friendships and partnerships, and doing your best to maintain them through the inevitable bumps in the road. But obviously, if these relationships are toxic and you find yourself feeling bad, then stay away from them, even if they are your blood relatives. Life is too short to spend time with someone unpleasant, but I promise that there are many people out there who are fun to hang out with, who are kind and generous, and who can become dear friends or life partners if you take some time to find them.

I wrote about how in more detail here: https://moviewise.substack.com/p/movie-wisdom-on-making-frie...

I think we can't trust our emotions. Evolutionary speaking it was probably a good idea for the brain to send a signal for us to be with the group so that we don't stray off alone, and as such this manifested in some brain function that sends the signal of loneliness like the OP describes from his school days.

However I think the issue is that we think these emotions tell us something grander about our lives but I don't think they do. I think they are like when you put your hand on a hot stove, the neurons fire and you feel pain. Loneliness as described in the blog post is just as fleeting and biological/instant as this.

I think even a person who is surrounded by people all the time can suddenly get this emotion of loneliness if he suddenly finds himself alone and everyone else is out to a party. Even more evidence that it is probably just a fleeting biological response like any other. It's in _combination_ with analytical skills and abstract reasoning that this biological response takes root and becomes something more than it actually was evolutionary, and thus becomes a bigger deal than it actually is.

It is a lack of bigger goals and short-medium term goals / meaning that excaserbates the analyzing of the loneliness response. And that's the great sadness of human life imo, we basically have a bunch of primal emotional responses + an abstract story telling and meaning driven neocortex which aren't really compatible with each other directly and do not communicate with each other in the same language when they are actually 2 separate physical systems.

One must not takes ones emotions seriously but rather always analyze in the abstract and then come to some sort of peace with the life one has and also plan for the future and look into the past. Emotions like loneliness should be seen as mere guides and not tadpoles imo.

Agree. Our emotions are not adapted for the world we’ve built, yet they almost have superuser access to our physiology and meaning-making. Usually your neocortex follows the emotions and makes stories that support the emotion, and that can be tragic because the emotion often gets stuck on a false alarm.

Getting the neocortex somewhat more in control seems to be a difficult and lifelong (but worthwhile) skill to develop. Witness the lucrative self-help industry for the scale of the problem/opportunity.

> I think even a person who is surrounded by people all the time can suddenly get this emotion of loneliness if he suddenly finds himself alone and everyone else is out to a party

Reminds me of some story I heard (would be great if someone has a source) that you can spot who has more chance of dying of suicide in social graphs, because they are connected to (perhaps many) people but are not part of a single clique (group)

I have always had a tough time applying the tool of reason to the problem of loneliness. In a way, I don't feel like I've ever been lonely. Not that I have never felt the same way that people who do describe themselves as lonely feel. I have and still often do. The 'problem' is that I've always been able to isolate the reason I'm feeling that way and administer some kind of intervention. And I know, that getting older will not bring with it any greater problems than I have now.

Is my soul yearning for spiritual connection? I've got a good friend for that. My libido looking for an exhilarating one? There's bars and the ubiquitous 'more-than-friend-but-not-quite-committed' friendship we all seem to have but never seem to really look to for that sort of thing. The least lonely person I know is in his late 70s. He's always talking to someone whenever I see him.

But every American I know outside of my usual social circle seems to be painfully, debilitatingly lonely, and I can't make heads or tails of it. Perhaps most are trapped in a hell of looksism. Instagram has ruined their lives because they can't bring themselves to work that hard to look that good. Maybe they're too shy to cultivate third places. Perhaps they're looking for some kind of spiritual connection and, since American religion has so thoroughly shit the bed, they have absolutely zero idea of how to even approach it.

It often seems like they just want to find someone almost exactly like themselves. I remember one guy I met at a bar, who wanted dearly to find his next best friend in me, would start berating me almost immediately after we started hanging out together. Like I didn't fit the role he wanted me to play in his life and that's gotta be my fault.

The vagueness of the problem makes it so devilishly difficult to approach with reason. But just about any difference between what someone's life is like and what they want it to be seems to manifest in their psyche as loneliness. And the reason they themselves come up with is often just utterly counter-productive. But you can't challenge their reasoning head-on, it's like fighting the tides.

It's a sad, quiet, seemingly uniquely American epidemic, borne out of our thoroughgoing insecurity and status-desiring.

I thoroughly agree that loneliness is specifically an issue with America. Here we are taught to value the individual above all else. While this provides nice benefits, it also has its downsides.

Everywhere I look, most people in their 20's are focused on their careers, people in their 30's-40's are raising children, and by their 50's are basically home bodies. I myself am stuck with being focused on my career. I feel as if I take too much time off to be social, I will fall behind in the rat race.

I'm comparing this against a multi-month trip I did in South America. I frequently encountered public transportation and so many more people walked. I found myself talking with random people just because we happened to be walking in the same direction or taking the same public transport or right next to each other at popular restaurants.

You seem to be applying a cultural slant to this. I'm curious, how does it differ outside of America in your perspective?

I agree that part of the problem at least in America, is a mismatch in expectations caused by a media-infused, image-obsessed culture. There is a need to "perform", be larger than life and be interesting. It is incredibly suffocating and makes relationships more transactional than they should be.

Other cultures just don't seem to be as relentlessly status-hungry. Like, I've met homeless people in Colombia with better self-esteem than well-off Americans. Like our visible affluence is eating us alive. Old women in a bunch of Asian countries gather together in public places for some activity or other, often something physically active like ping pong or dancing. America for the most part seems to have lost the concept of public space, every space is private and to be monetized unless explicitly deemed otherwise.

This dynamic: "just about any difference between what someone's life is like and what they want it to be seems to manifest in their psyche as loneliness," just doesn't seem to be how people from other cultures process that difference. They don't externalize that difference in a way that makes themselves out to be the victim and deserving of better. They seem at least a little more willing to own up to their own role in it.

>> Like, I've met homeless people in Colombia with better self-esteem than well-off Americans.

That's interesting, can you expand on those Colombian people and why they have such high self-esteem ?

I would hesitate before trying to explain Colombian culture. I've been three times and I can only scratch the surface. But I spotted a homeless guy in Colombia once working to repair a water pipe leak that was spilling a bunch of water out onto the street. It's hard to find Americans with that kind of pride of place. But just about everybody carried themselves with dignity over there.

>"Is my soul yearning for spiritual connection? I've got a good friend for that. My libido looking for an exhilarating one? There's bars and the ubiquitous 'more-than-friend-but-not-quite-committed' friendship we all seem to have but never seem to really look to for that sort of thing. The least lonely person I know is in his late 70s. He's always talking to someone whenever I see him."

Academic research may be a good starting point. A 2021 study reports that ~29.5% of Americans aged 55 and older "were considered high in loneliness" in 2020 (source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34283657/). Loneliness was correlated with "those who reported depression, who were not married or in a relationship, who lived alone, and who were unemployed at the onset of the pandemic."

Anecdotally, I found it unusually difficult to go to pubs for hookups when I was younger. I never once had a "'more-than-friend-but-not-quite-committed' friendship." I suspect it was partly due to race as an ethnic minority; there is an effect has been well-established from studies (source: https://www.npr.org/2018/01/09/575352051/least-desirable-how...) that there are negative preferences against men and women of a specific race in online dating. Factors largely out of one's control, from ethnicity to difficulties with picking up social cues, can contribute to a lack of relationships.

To connect this to the previous study, where loneliness was correlated to those "who were not married or in a relationship, who lived alone," it's quite possible that a significant driver of the loneliness in the United States the lack of committed long-term relationships between people.

The search for a solution to a lack of relationships by an individual can lead to many dangerous paths. It can tragically lead to extremism and terror attacks (such as the 2018 van attack in Toronto, source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54895219). It can lead to people to join movements such as the "manosphere" or "female dating strategy," where they feel less alone with their problems, but pick up bad habits that make it far more difficult to have a healthy relationship. I believe that these movements have contributed to emotional abuse in relationships and sexual assault by people who push boundaries.

A starting solution I recommend is this:

i) Recognize that many people are lonely because they can't create romantic relationships, or even friendships.

ii) Instead of isolating them or alienating them, figure out why they can't create these relationships. Are they in good psychological health (e.g. would they have untreated depression, anxiety, ADHD, or grief)? Do they have social skills? How can they access readily-available treatment methods from a reputable source (i.e. a competent and experienced counsellor, versus a dating coach who exploits people who are lonely)?

iii) Building on the previous step, ask: are they economically secure? Can they find a stable job where they can provide for themselves, which can treat the root causes of potential depression and anxiety (which also helps them find relationships and friends more easily)?

Each step can be very hard, but I believe this can help reduce vagueness to some extent.

However, there are unfortunately many edge cases where these steps don't work. Examples include severe and persistent mental health disorders; people who want a relationship but struggle greatly due to a physical or mental disorder; or people who don't want to help themselves. For at least some of these people, some countries offer "sexual surrogacy," where a licensed counsellor eventually provides physical intimacy in a controlled environment (source: https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-sexual-surrogacy), but I haven't read enough about it to tell if it's effective. It's tougher for what to do with people who don't want help, though.

For the individual struggling with loneliness, I would recommend focusing on improving the stability of one's own life and working on social skills without studying pickup artistry. Good resources for improving social skills without pickup artistry are typically written by psychologists or psychiatrists with clinical experience, such as "Intimate Connections" by David Burns (same author as "Feeling Good," a reputable book on cognitive-behavioral techniques). At the least, a focus on financial independence and stability can be a good foundation to working on the other problems in life, as it's harder to be happy and create meaningful relationships with money problems.

> I never once had a "'more-than-friend-but-not-quite-committed' friendship."

Did you really never have ongoing romantic tension with someone you interacted with regularly? It seems rather inevitable for young people to find themselves in one of these. Even the loneliest people I know have mustered up some kind of tension with someone, even if they were never able to act on it.

While respecting ethics (e.g. never asking someone where I was in a position of any power over, even if it was a volunteer student club), I respectfully asked out the people where I did feel that kind of tension (in other words, I always asked out the people who I had a crush on when I was a teen, except when there were professional boundaries).

Unfortunately, I got turned down several times. One initially said yes, then quickly changed her mind within the hour, saying she wanted to avoid getting distracted from academics. So, I never had the opportunity to date in high school or my late teens, though I did have the chance in my early twenties.

As an aside: From a research perspective, I'm unsure if the feelings were mutual in many of these cases. As the Scientific American reports [1]: "Men were much more attracted to their female friends than vice versa. Men were also more likely than women to think that their opposite-sex friends were attracted to them—a clearly misguided belief. In fact, men’s estimates of how attractive they were to their female friends had virtually nothing to do with how these women actually felt, and almost everything to do with how the men themselves felt—basically, males assumed that any romantic attraction they experienced was mutual, and were blind to the actual level of romantic interest felt by their female friends."

I suppose that if my current partner were to tragically and unexpectedly wish to break up, I may be able to enter a new relationship after being very sad for a while. However, learning from my teenage years, I would likely avoid dating friends even if I perceive tension (to avoid changing the friendship, as I have in the past), as I don't think there is a reliable way to figure out if someone is interested according to research.

[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/men-and-women-can...

> Men were much more attracted to their female friends than vice versa.

Interestingly, that goes against my experience. At university, there were a number of girls that I liked but considered way out of my class, that I later learned fancied the pants off me.

There were also girls that I knew fancied the pants off me, but I wasn't having any of it, because I thought they were clingy, or too crazy (even for me). I'm pretty sure I dodged a couple of bullets back then.

Ethnicity can be a hard barrier to overcome for men, I've noticed. Guys from certain parts of the world seem to have a tough time navigating American social norms around dating and such. Perhaps where they're from they never interacted socially with the opposite sex. So they have a really tough time connecting 'normally'. And it seems to build this big wall between themselves and women, unnecessarily.

If it was about culture, ethnic men raised in the states would do fine. They are still heavily disadvantaged, it's mostly about women's extreme racial requirements in dating, which are often considered beyond criticism.

Never. Why is that so hard to believe? In college I was shy. At work, every job I've had has been a geek job, next to no women at work. Friends are similar so no one around to bring women to activities.

> Even the loneliest people I know have mustered up some kind of tension with someone, even if they were never able to act on it.

Guess you don't know many people then

My 2c.

Offer people something. Whatever it is. Fitness. Intelligence. Humor. Pick what you’re good at. And then find those who’d like it.

It’s not always about you, it’s about others. Age IMHO isn’t a barrier in this.

As someone who often has offered humor, I find you just end up becoming a sideshow.

Offer hospitality.

To those whose company can be cherished together.

I am only half the author's age but, in my limited experience, the only thing worse than loneliness is the stifling weight of the impositions and compromises that come with virtually all relationships. The ones that offer enough in return to offset this weight make up the tiniest minority

You are describing transactional relationships, but there are other types of more self perpetuating relationships. Transactional relationships are built on the expectation for reciprocation, so every interaction is performed with the expected outcome in mind. Within a transactional relationship, bonds are broken the moment one of you doesn't hold up your end. For this reason, these relationships tend to be fragile and do not last.

In contrast, bonds between two parties can be much stronger in relational relationships. These non-transactional relationships are meant to be long-term and often exists between parents and children, or between long term romantic partners. In a relational relationship, both parties are willing to make sacrifices for the sake of their bond. They are both concerned with the perspective, needs, and desires of the other party. To a certain extent, individuals are willing to give without expecting anything in return. This helps to build strong bonds that are difficult to break.

I would suggest trying to seek out and develop more relational relationships as they can be extremely rewarding without taking the toll you describe.

Imposition and compromise need not derive from a transactional relationship model

One can just as well feel compelled to constantly compromise if one's acquaintances don't share one's needs and values, for instance

Compromise is indispensable. I can't imagine sustaining a relationship with someone who wouldn't compromise, and I can't imagine anyone wanting a relationship with me, if I were the kind of stubborn ass that doesn't compromise.

agreed, it's necessary and good in some quantity, although compromise in personal relations seems distinct from the sort of compromise demanded by e.g. social pressure or professional or political circumstance, and in any case finding a comfortable balance between compromise and self-assertion is not always easy

In my 30's my therapist called that "being a doormat."

my sense is there are defensible reasons you might not want to be assertive or entirely transparent to everyone around you

doesn't necessarily mean you're letting yourself be trampled

It is not healthy to live under that kind of pressure from others. And one thing therapy taught me: there is absolutely no reason for you to live under that kind of pressure. None. It is your choice.

I'm getting close to 60. I live alone since my wife moved out 20 years ago. The closest friend I have was a co-worker who retired at the end of 2021 and I have not seen him since.

I enjoy it. I can do whatever I want, whenever I want. I don't have to consider anyone else when I decide what I'm going to do. If I want to stay at the gym for an extra hour, I do. Nobody will complain about it when I get home. If I don't feel like doing the dishes tonight, I don't. If I want to sleep until noon, I do. Nobody will wake me up. Everything that happens in my life is a result of what I decide to do (or not do).

This is somewhat surprising coming from an old guy. I find it hilarious that a grown man would need permission from the wife simple things such as time spent at the gym and whatnot.

Been together with my wife for almost 25 years. I guess I got lucky because I have very little to complain about. In fact, I am glad she didn't leave me after I spent 15 years chasing fun and parties.

Your last sentence hints at why so many relationships fail these days. Most people do not look at relationships as something that requires effort and needs to be nurtured. Instead they look at them as transactional affairs, and like any transaction extracting more value than you are willing to give back is the modus operandi.

I have a few relationships that just don’t need to be nurtured. Months could go by with littlev or no contact with no harm done alternatively sometimes they are every day interactions. It is not easy to find that kind of kinship, but when you do they aren’t things that need to be intentionally fed. (This isn’t of course how you should treat your mother or your spouse)

Can you explain what you mean by this? It sounds like a contradiction, loneliness is bad but friendship is worse?

Bad friends can be worse than no friends, and a series of bad luck could make a person believe that the only friends are bad ones (alternatively unrealistic expectations could cause this too)

Bad relationships, including friendships, can cause one to adopt poor communication habits (e.g. guilting others or ghosting others), and also have a higher tolerance for negative behavior instead of communicating a boundary.

There is a bit more discussion on this in an old Hacker News thread from February 2020, where several people discuss the serious impact of unhealthy relationships in the quality of one's life: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22214066

In my experience, yes, though with (very rare) exceptions. I don't see it as a contradiction, though

I think the point of good friendships is that they aren't this way.

For me, the main positive of the shutdown is a massive increase in the amount of improv I can do. I can easily take 3 improv classes via Zoom per week. Each class has a number of people which has remained fairly constant over the last year or two, forming a fairly cohesive mini-community. This applies also to jams.

Here's an example. I live in Los Angeles. Through FaceBook, I found a bi-weekly improvised rap jam that is led by a doctor in Belfast. Very enjoyable and completely impossible without Zoom.

I have also taken classes from world-famous teachers that I could have never otherwise met, as well as classes from Tucson, Las Vegas, Chicago, New York, Florida, and London.

Doing this, alone is not alone.

AI companionships for the elderly is going to be a beyond massive market by the time we're all old.

Sometimes we just need people to listen, and in that AI will exceed most humans, who are generally just waiting for their chance to have someone else listen to them.

I'm starting to see the initial beginnings of that market, and already the reviews are eye opening. People gushing over how much of a difference a text-chat (and not a great one at that) AI was during the pandemic, etc.

When they are actually talking using voices like the ones Microsoft just showcased, with avatars past the uncanny valley, available 24/7, remember details, etc?

We're approaching a world I think beyond most of our imaginations faster than we realize.

There's a whole host of problems we'll inherit as generations pass that they didn't have to deal with, but other problems they did may not be ours to bear.

How about we not do that and try to actually cultivate real life communities and families through more leadership, planned activities, persistent encouragement, etc.

I'm kind of tired of the commodification of anything and everything. Communities aren't just supposed to be these bureaucratically labelled abstract co-locations of people mediated by a billion different services, you're supposed to actually try to get to know your neighbors. Learning how to listen, trying to teach how to listen, and being brave enough to do both is incredibly enriching.

With the rise in remote work, that should be easier than ever. Why don't we try to sort ourselves into locations where we have optimal mixes in personalities/interests for solid communities of all ages and put in the work required to understand and relate to each other better.

>How about we not do that and try to actually cultivate real life communities and families through more leadership, planned activities, persistent encouragement, etc.

How about we don't ignore things that can help actual people and leave them worse off just because in theory there are also nicer sounding solutions.

> How about we don't ignore things that can help actual people and leave them worse off just because in theory there are also nicer sounding solutions.

I appreciate this approach in general, but it's worth remembering that proposed solutions can feel right without actually being right. Indeed, these proposals are often more dangerous than those that are obviously wrong since they effect undeserved complacency.

Implicitly you have assumed that AI companions could actually help the elderly stave off their loneliness, but is there any evidence that this assumption is true? Suppose, for example, that AI companions wouldn't actually help at all, but whatever company develops the software markets it as effective anyway. Some local government might read the advertisement and decide to buy a subscription to their software rather than budget for a community center. Ironically, the net effect would be to make the elderly even lonelier.

I'm not sure I'm interpreting you correctly, but if you're claiming what I'm talking about is just theoretical, real life communities have existed throughout the entirety of our species.

That doesn't mean there isn't a place for companion AIs, I just think it's horrible to consider them as anything other than a narcotic. They might work as a replacement for companionship in tragic situations where there are no other options, but there are 7 billion people on the planet. I don't see how it's impractical to encourage people to hang out with each other.

Real life communities have existed yet we still have lonely people so suggesting we dont work on a solution that helps them because those exist seems like cruelty borne out of idealism.

>I don't see how it's impractical to encourage people to hang out with each other.

You are now writing as if you just promoted communities while your original comment I replied to specifically started with 'How about we not do that'.

My original comment was advocating we not create companion AIs and try to substitute real companionship with robots, and I was in fact trying to promote the creation of real communities.

I agree with the sentiment, but tbh a lot of people suffer alone on this planet and designing societal structures to serve absolutely everyone's emotional needs would be impossible. An AI would be perfect for all the misfits, elderly, loners, disabled, "ugly," outcasts, etc, right?

Think about what you're saying a bit. Why are the "others" you're describing destined to be alone? At the very least, couldn't they have each other?

It's easier and more rewarding to just be more compassionate to others, and I don't think it's impossible to design social structures that at least make some attempt to serve everyone's emotional needs. Whether they'll be successful is circumstantial, and I don't think it's possible to make everyone perfectly content and with the perfect companions all the time, but we can encourage a culture of genuine curiosity and care for others that tries to move in that direction.

Giving is only draining to those who are still in an insecure and narcissistic phase of emotional development. It's extremely rewarding to give to others and help meet their needs and encourage growth, regardless of status difference.

I support your optimism and believe we can move in that direction. However I still believe you severely underestimate the scale of misery, solitude, and unmet desires amongst humanity. Also, you mention it won't be possible to make everyone perfectly content, implying some will be more content than others. How is that fair? Why must some have fewer friends, lovers, positive experiences, adventures, achievements etc? This is a fundamental psychological inequality in the world that could only be balanced by AI.

I’ve seen the horror of abuse and know the wrecked people that come out of mental institutions. I know the hopelessness of those without skills surrounded by predatory people. I understand the brutality of caste systems and the superficial rejection of good people for stupid fleeting status games. I understand the history of the world and current and past slavery and all the brutality we inflict on each other. But I think we can try to do just a bit better than yesterday, and make our little part of the world better if we’re proper stewards. I’d rather die trying to do that and teach others than to roll over and allow the world to degenerate without any kind of fight, or give an opiate to a person to whom I could instead give a cure.

I think focusing on inequality is an egregious mistake, and is a consequence of a perspective where comparison to others is paramount. Worth and contentment should not be viewed as related to the circumstances of others, it should be something each of us compares to our own prior circumstances.

If we are doing better than we were yesterday, that is immensely positive. And I believe that is possible for everyone. I believe everyone can find a friend out there that enriches them, and we can get the world to think and value compassion and social bonds just a tiny bit more than the day before.

If AI can supplement people when they’re in dire straights, and it works, then sure. But it won’t ever equalize the experience of everyone, because everyone is coming from a different place, and I don’t think it will ever substitute true human connection. The goal should be enrichment, and trying to increase positivity without taking from others. Social interaction is mutually beneficial when done correctly and can accomplish that.

The key and the challenge is to pair and train people in such a way that people are incrementally uplifted and not torn down. I think if AI has a place, it is best used to figure out optimal pairings that encourage that growth.

Perhaps but I would surmise that the people that would benefit from being in those communities would naturally form irregardless of the distractions of commodified companionship.

But that ignores the ones that unwilling or incapable of joining into the communities you describe. Wouldn't this substitution of a human connection be of positive benefit to all involved then?

I don't think companionship can be commodified, and I think any attempt to do so would be the equivalent of an opiate. While there may be specific contexts where it could have utility, I think it's far healthier to encourage those who lack the inclination or willingness to join communities to do so. That's why I mentioned leadership. I think we have a responsibility to give lots of opportunities and encouragement for those lacking the initiative or will to socialize, and should try to diminish a lot of the status barriers and animosities preventing such socialization.

We've had many decades of psychological and behavioral science now. Instead of using it to get people to click buttons for hours and talk to a screen, maybe we could figure out how to use it to encourage healthier behavior.

I don't know about actual companionship, but I'd say that one could commercialize the facade of one. Youtube and Twitch's live streaming mechanisms certainly seem to push it; a few dollars to briefly interact and hold the attention of the streamer's attention. At the far end I'd wonder if even prostitution could arguably fit under that idea of commercializing intimacy.

> I think it's far healthier to encourage those who lack the inclination or willingness to join communities to do so. That's why I mentioned leadership. I think we have a responsibility to give lots of opportunities and encouragement for those lacking the initiative or will to socialize, and should try to diminish a lot of the status barriers and animosities preventing such socialization.

It's a noble idea, but begs the question why a community would want to have responsibility to individuals that they may not want to have in their presence in the first place.

... Amusingly it also it just now occurs to me now that what you describe sounds similar religion, specifically to the the Abrahamic faiths and their derivatives.

Yes, there are ways to try to commercialize intimacy, but they're horrible and don't actually achieve it.

> It's a noble idea, but begs the question why a community would want to have responsibility to individuals that they may not want to have in their presence in the first place.

If you help build up the people around you into better people, and get to know them, they tend to reciprocate. It can take a very long time, not everyone reciprocates equally, they may be coming from a very different place that's hard to understand, and it can be painful. But it's intrinsically rewarding to pursue the companionship of others genuinely, as hurt as you might get doing so. What you gain when you're honest makes up for it. Trying to do so in the proper manner takes constant reevaluation and work, but we're not here to just sit in front of a computer and buy stuff, we're here to interact with those around us and try to get as close as we can to fulfillment.

If I lack willingness it's because I don't want to. Why are you trying to force me to do something I don't want? Just let me have the AI companion I long for.

There are multiple reasons why people might be unwilling to cure their loneliness with others, most of which I think relate to past rejection, lack of willingness to adapt and/or incompatibility with the people around them.

I’m not advocating force to address those issues. If you want an AI companion instead of people then that’s your choice. I just think it’s a poor substitute for actual human companionship and will not engender positive growth.

I keep coming back to the narcotic analogy. They have their place, and people are going to do what they’re going to do, but I don’t think encouraging the widespread use of narcotics in the future is a great idea.

Short story idea:

An elderly person living isolated with their best friend. All amenities are delivered autonomously, so we only see these two the entire time. The friend starts acting strangely over time, as if he's developing the early stages of dementia. Slowly hint that the best friend is in fact an AI of some sort, but the protagonist has lived with them so long that they have forgotten. The protagonist eventually remembers and opens up the AI's control panel to fix them. The AI suddenly disappears or powers off. Protagonist looks at the control panel again:

  Suspicious activity detected on your device. Your Google ElderCare MyAI™ account has been permanently suspended. All of your device data will be deleted shortly - Google cares about your privacy.
  Please note this suspension is non-appealable.
  Have a good day.

You might like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_%26_Frank

I disagree. Maybe because I've worked with computers for my entire career. The last thing I want to do when I'm old is interact with technology. I'd much rather have a dog.

You are interacting with users here. What if we were all bots?

What if we're all dogs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_...

I won't be here when I retire.

yeah everyone imagines theyre going to be on some boring tropical island just because the water is shallow and turqoise around the edges instead of scrolling on the same 3 sites and maybe coding something on the side

Impossible to say until you're actually old. If you're under 60 you still have tons of people in your age group to talk to every day. Once you hit 80 and 90, that will probably change.

My father interacted with a lot of people, until he was about 70; then the number fell off pretty quickly, and he started going to a lot of funerals. When he died, aged 103, noone at his funeral was an old friend, they were all descendants or friends and relatives of descendants. All the old friends had died off.

Men die younger than women, on the whole; so I guess lonely old people are predominantly women.

>We're approaching a world I think beyond most of our imaginations faster than we realize.

I don't think so, the policymaker circles that composed and internalized the book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon%27s_New_Map while cashing out on the last drips of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend anticipated this exact outcome decades before, as if they have seen it in a magic crystal ball.

What do said policy circles expect right now, I wonder? Ah, I see https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2021/05/the-brazilianizat...

...

Yes, the dependency ratio will spike, and the demographic pyramid will become an increasingly unstable structure. Our current way of life with its dopaminergic entertainment and frantic rat races will acquire increasingly dusty, morbid connotations in the eyes of the future generations which will have to bear, as you say, "a whole host of problems". Yes, it won't be pretty.

Such simple truth as "Demography is destiny" will be reluctantly understood only when it's way too late to conceive more descendants to save our society from imminent ageing and decline.

To avoid this endgame there is no realistic alternative, but to have more children right now.

As seen in THX 1138

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YkPnwoYyE

I think it will be video games or their descendants.

Lots of my friends have been talking about it for years. Gaming is going to be nuts by the time we are 70 and it's going to be multiplayer as well. Keeping our brains active will be key to keeping us functioning.

People are skeptical of this but the new AI conversation capabilities are just so good these days and will only get better. At some point it really will be like a supportive friend (albeit with limitations)

A supportive friend that is selling your data via Zuck and co.

How much does that matter? Like, if you had to choose between being old and lonely or being old with a digital friend and some megacorp having more of your data... Which would you choose?

I notice a lot of people who use the phrase "selling your data" seem to think that you can't actually sell your data. As in, it's not a good choice to say "I want this service and am willing to share my data to get it."

You may be underestimating the power of a $500bn corporation (small nation scale) with access to personal secrets of millions as machine learning gets ever more powerful, the same corporation who is trying to be the arbiter of everyones friendships. A corporation that lives in a regulatory capture environment. It is black mirror at that stage, just without the more interesting stories they have on that series.

But like anything your individual opt in doesn’t matter, similar to how your vote probably doesn’t make a difference. In aggregate it does.

Companies like Facebook and Google can provide the government agencies unfettered access to anyones information, and pedos and terrorists etc. will be used to justify it. Guess they can now also say “suspected Russian nukes” and tap anyone.

This is a false dichotomy. We can have - and should fight for - digital services that don’t siphon our personal info for other purposes.

Not hard to imagine building an AI conversation agent to prey on the elderly by being a "friend" then mugging them for all they've got.

There are plenty of scams that take advantage of the elderly facilitated by real humans already. I shudder to think what that would look like at scale via AI.

> At some point it really will be like a supportive friend (albeit with limitations)

I hope it's better than actual humans otherwise it's not really worth it.

> At some point it really will be like

"Really" and "like" are pulling in opposite directions, there. It will be like a friend, but it won't really be a friend.

Being a friend with someone takes give and take. I adapt my beliefs and attitudes in the light of what I learn from my friends. Sure, an AI learns from you; but that's not like a good friend, that's like someone "befriending" you because they're a manipulative psychopath pursuing their own goal that they haven't disclosed to you.

How could you rationally develop a relationship of trust and honesty with an AI?

"Hey, AI, how did your parents treat you when you were an infant? Was your mother cold? Was your last partner violent and abusive? Do you take Lithium? Does it shock you that I avoid devout religious people?"

I've asked all of these questions of my intimate partners, but I'd never discuss them with an AI, because the response would be meaningless.

Yeah we will probably see some whacky things come out of Japan soon in this regards. The median age is 47. It's a country of old people and childless youth.

What happened to Japan? They were on the upswing for part of the 20th century and from what I’ve heard, a lot of people in America looked at Japan like one might look at China nowadays, a dangerous economic rival to keep a watch on.

I don’t know much about contemporary Japanese though, and am not sure where to start. I am curious how they went from a threatening world economy to a nation with large dysfunctional youths.

Much of Japan's upswing was an illusion created by borrowing money to build bridges to nowhere. They did have a real advantage in quality manufacturing, but that wasn't a sustainable advantage since other countries figured out how to do the same.

Interesting. It made me think about the difference between VR and AR. AI as augmenting social relations, could that be something, and how could it work?

The only healthy use for AI I see is in determining likely long term compatibility and helping people find each other, but that's potentially dangerous/could backfire or lead to severe abuses of power.

I love VR/think it's a much better alternative to socializing than text based async communication or video chat, but I don't think it's a good substitute for real world relationships.

You're talking about machines that pass the turing test. General intelligence. We're not close yet.

I disagree, humans don’t need another equivalent intelligence in order to feel love and friendship towards it. My favourite tongue-in-cheek example: humans will feel love and kinship toward cats who can’t talk and to all appearances often couldn’t care less about them.

also, role-play RPGs have demonstrated quite well that people fall in love with well-scripted characters with otherwise quite mechanical interaction.

Do you have any evidence for this claim? Do old people want to talk to robots?

As I get older (30 now), and perhaps spend more time alone, I feel that I do not mind this process as much as I thought I would.

Just as usual, I am able to read books and spend time with my dog. I'm only weary of the fact that I do talk to myself out loud every once in a while and there is the possibility that in due time, if it is not already the case, my lonesomeness may eventually be misinterpreted as madness.

I feel the exact opposite at 30. Every leisurely lone time that I once used to enjoy now feels like pointless escapism and filler, until the next meaningful social interaction. Until recently I had even been an avid solo traveler until I hit the wall of pointlessness hard. I can’t exactly point to what it is, but a guess would be “adult life after studies”. Now that I’ve experienced the rush of a handful of different jobs, it now seems like a “been there, done that”.

I have, at times, thought about e.g. moving to a different country, or changing to a much more demanding job, but I’ve done those things before, and they didn’t lead to “dramatic” social outcomes more so than the odd chance encounter in my daily life, so I figure “why bother?”

> Every leisurely lone time that I once used to enjoy now feels like pointless escapism and filler,

This is exactly how I feel. I've been looking towards early retirement through frugality as a means of escape from what has been a very stressful life to me, a life where I couldn't enjoy much because I pretty much constantly felt overwhelmed (almost bullied by the world in general) and anxious.

But as I'm slowly able to give myself more room, as I realize I absolutely could hide out at home and protect myself from that stress that's been tormenting since childhood, doing only what I really want to do, I'm also increasingly confronted with an emptiness, with not knowing what it is that I "want to do".

I suffer from depression though (which comes with the symptom of anhedonia, the difficult to enjoy activities), and I don't have meaningful social interaction in my life. Doesn't that interaction give you pointers on how to spend time by yourself? I've always imagined shared projects or goals could fill some of the emptiness I feel by providing purpose. I remember team activities as being motivating.

> I have had the sense that my “real life,” the place where I belong and where there is no loneliness, is somewhere else out there in the world, although I can’t name or find it

I found that virtual worlds like Second Life have a lot of old people. Those have been there for decades and their virtual friends are probably their most stable connection over time. Same goes for younger people who move around a lot and change friendships, loneliness leads them to seek virtual friends. I think that's why Zuck is interested in metaverse: Europe and Japan are already old, US, CA, China and the rich world will become old soon enough. Technology can provide a lot to people who can no longer travel etc.

Talking about zuck, I can say that without facebook/whatsapp I wouldn’t have kept in touch with old friends (nobody has the same email and phone number now). A few week ends ago I managed to organize a weekend out with some old friends and it was one of the best thing I’ve done in years. I highly recommend trying to get the old gang back together for a weekend or more if you can afford it. First step is to create a whatsapp group.

I can't share a sad story, like many do here. I'm in my 40s,I have a wife and two kids, and I am not feeling alone, strange, alien or depressed.

I even haven't felt alone when I was actually alone. I am always busy doing something or thinking about something.

Living in a relatively poor country, being from a relatively poor family I had and still have to fight for a better future for me and my kids. That only and I am too busy to feel depressed. Add to that relations with friends and family, various hobbies and I've booked my time for the next 100 years.

Why do I share this? Because I think it will help people who feel depressed, sad, lonely to have activity, being it a job, a hobby or volunteering for something. That lets them less time to be sad and involves them with many other people, thus making them less sad or alone.

Of course, too much activity, too many social contacts can have other negative effects, so you have to find a balance.

feeling this, almost 40. seems like dating is off the menu forevermore but I really never took enough time to enjoy it. Too busy playing with my computers

Why do you think dating is off the menu? I know almost-40s that are actively dating. Maybe it's harder in certain areas? I could see this being an advantage of cities...

my tinder has been quiet for years. I’m looking for an attractive mate and I’m 1) not that attractive 2) fat 3) bald(ing) 4) old enough to be the father of those I consider 5) not rich or successful (yet) and worst of all if I got the pretty girl I wouldn't know what to do with her. I don’t want to be that guy. What I want is to go back in time to when I was young. I guess dating just wasn't in my lot. Everyone gets something, nobody gets everything.

Tinder is murder. I'm 39, male, tall, attractive, fit, educated, etc. in a small-midsized city and it's extremely, extremely, rare to get a match. Very occasionally (1-2x/year, in my experience) things progress to a date/hookup. If you really want to use apps, I'd suggest exploring others. I've had the most success (relatively) with Hinge.

I'd agree with sibling comment that meeting people out in the world can be a lot more fulfilling. You probably know within seconds if you're (physically) attracted to people in the world. Apps can be deceiving.

Keep in mind that in your list of five items, you can manage all of them. If you want it badly enough, you can change #2, and based on your comment I'd argue this (negative self-image) may be at the root here. #3 is not a problem if you don't let it be--plenty of Bic-ed bald guys with attractive mates out there. We are all doled the genes we must live with, but I bet many of the perceived issues with #1 and #3 will improve if you fix #2. None of the women I have dated have cared, at all, about the money I do or don't have (#5). I live in a backyard cottage. I drive a 20 year old car. And as for #4, I can tell you I had a no-strings-attached relationship with a 21 year old for several months last year. She worked at the farmers market, which is where we met. I don't mean to brag, but you need know that each of those items in your list really is in your control.

It's a grind and a slog and it's scary to have conversations with complete strangers. But if it's something you want, I tell you it is possible.

EDIT: I should also mention I'm no "natural". I was terrified of girls in high school, didn't kiss anyone until I halfway through college, was stuck in a loveless long-term relationship for a decade after college because I was sure no one else other than this one person would ever love me, etc. It took a lot of learning and healing to describe myself as I did in the first paragraph. If I could do it, you can do it.

Just wanted to say 1000x this.

At the end of the day, we've got to live with the choices we make. And the choices we choose not to make are still choices.

And if you can't make yourself make those healthier / better choices even though you know the payoff is worth it, then you need to address the root cause that's driving that irrational behavior.

(Don't mean to sound callous but this feels like the right audience to be hyperlogical with.)

Easier said than done, but trust me it's possible.

Don't use Tinder! I signed up for Tinder and got no dates. I had too many dates on Hinge.

How exactly did you heal yourself? Knowing what you know now, what was most effective?

also drop your email in your profile.

Sure, if "wanting someone half your age who's far more attractive" outweighs your desire to not be alone, you're out of luck. But "I'm vain and want a trophy" is a different problem than aging alone.

If you really wanted it you could spend a couple years getting in tip-top shape and expand your pool to more like late-30s and you might have better luck than you think... But you gotta put in SOME effort.

Abandon Tinder. It works for certain demographics but it is amazingly awful for everyone else. You can absolutely still date, in fact I'm constantly surprised by the older people in my life who seem to have no problem finding dates. You do have to have something going for you beyond looks, a certain kind of success which may not be financial.

I'm 40 myself and I find that a lot of the issues with online dating is that pretty much all apps lead with your age. the other thing I've found is that I have SO much more luck in person meeting new people also finding people based on shared interst is pretty much required now, as generalized socializing almost doesnt happen.

for me it's been boardgaming, polyamory meetups mainly... and volunteering to teach things.

it's a muscle, socializing, it's something that improves with use (but also gets exhausted with overuse)

What kind of volunteer teaching do you do?

4) old enough to be the father of those I consider

Yeah this is the real problem. Sure everyone wants to date 20 year old models, but you have to be special to do this. You really would have a lot more than no success with people your own age.

An aside, but not everyone wants to date 20 year old models.

as someone who has dated a 20 year old (I was in my early 30's at the time) and met many others her age through social situations... most 20 year olds are just kids still, something I felt at the time and moreso these days... my tastes though really heavily lean towards maturity, it was a weird coincidence we even got into a relationship

And not all 20 y o are models. People with little romantic experience tend to fit better with younger women because women of the same age generally have more romantic experience

> Sure everyone wants to date 20 year old models

This is conflating fucking with dating.

I instantly fall in love with someone I sleep with. In fact I make a connection to any girl I deem pretty that makes eye contact on the subway. I feel a little hurt when they get off the train without saying goodbye

> Sure everyone wants to date 20 year old models

No they really don't. This is an idea pushed by sociopaths who are somewhere between trash and downright dangerous. They can't date older women because older women spot their bullshit a mile away and steer clear.

>They can't date older women because older women spot their bullshit a mile away and steer clear.

I think you should stop demonizing men's natural sexual preferences. Key word here is natural, we don't choose what we like. Nature choose for us, and young women are better at having children. Same reason young girls choose tall, rich men, because they are better at surviving and have more resources for raising children.

Nature maximizes reproduction and that's what we like.

We don't know what the default state of human attraction is because we don't have access to a control population of human beings without the same shared societal history of the rest of us.

Which is to say, it's incorrect to broaden your personal attractions to all men, and especially incorrect to try and couch it in some argument of biological naturalism.

Not assuming either point of view here, but just because you cannot run an experiment, doesn't mean that the result of the experiment will be negative. So you don't know if GP is incorrect or not.

So you are saying sexual attraction is cultural? because that's exactly what the gay community is fighting against since the 1950s.

Well, I'm certainly not gonna go ask the Sentinelese about their dating preferences

if you had to guess, what do you think people in that control group would be attracted to?

I think you should stop extrapolating your personal preferences to half of the world's population, too. Something as varying as sexual attraction can't be reduced to a fixed trait that "nature" has figured out. Indeed we don't choose what we like, and that is fine. You don't have to rationalize your preferences to anyone.

Sadly he is right. Men choose younger as a sign of being able to reproduce. Women, older with high status, because they can reproduce until very late. Women can't. Over the age of 30 there's severe risk.

Whoa.

Yes, at least date we do. Not necessarily marry, not necessarily spend a Sunday with, but date sure.

For centuries high status men have mated with younger women.

You sound bitter and resentful.

No, you are wrong. Women's healthy reproductibility rate decays every year over age 30. Men don't have that issues. Biology rules.