You know you are getting old when:

[belfastboy]

I find that reading on screen requires a very different set of skills than reading on paper. When reading on paper I see the whole page, and I process the information in that context -- the layout of the page often has as much to say to me in conveying the significance of the information as the words themselves. Plus the fact that I read very fast means I often process entire pages rather than single paragraphs at once. On screen, because I have to enlarge the image so much because of my poor vision, I don't see the full page, and I find it much more difficult to interpret what I'm reading. I find screen reading like trying to read thru a blindfold, and I avoid it if at all possible.

Reading news online is a particular problem this way. When I read a newspaper the first thing I do is look over the layout, the play of the story, the arrangement of the headlines. That alone tells me a great deal about the relative significance of what I'm reading, or at least how the editors of the paper want me to view that signficiance -- and understand that informs my interpretation of what I read when I get to the individual articles. It's like scanning a map to get the lay of the land before venturing out into that land.

I can't do this with internet material. On the internet, every article you click on is equal to every other in terms of its layout and its emphasis, and that, again, gives the effect of reading with only one eye open. Even looking at scans of newspapers on line is difficult, because, again, the size of the image I'm forced to use because of my vision makes it impossible for me to see the whole page at a glance.

I suppose a generation of people who learn to read on screens won't have this issue because their brains will be wired differently. But I'm not that generation, and I can't force myself to be. It's a question of hard wiring.

I read more paper books than on the screen but I do find that at my advanced age with my eyesight not able to refocus as quickly I am a much faster reader on a tablet screen than a paper book. With the paper each time I turn a page my eyes are required to refocus. On a tablet or reader I just touch the screen and the page changes....my eyes stay at the same level, stay glued to the page and I can begin reading almost immediatelyi. With the paper book when you tally the time it takes to turn the page and then refocus multiplied over 300+ plus pages it makes a huge difference in the time required. I have not found any difference in retention between the two. Overall I prefer paper books just because BUT my ereader is a boon when I travel as I no longer have to schlepp a box of books.

 

[BobHufford]

Ouch ... I remember.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The ball was pretty good for throwing at your sister, too.

 

[EngProf]

The ball was pretty good for throwing at your sister, too.

And the jacks were good for throwing at your brother. (OW! You'll put your eye out.)

 

[Trenchfriend]

Yep, we have now three clear evolutionary steps.

The middle-aged and older still reading newspaper. We 30+ still listening to radio and watching TV. The youngsters smart only smombies...

 

[BobHufford]

 

[Trenchfriend]

View attachment 218123

Remembering typewriter with Courier type.

 

[Bushman]

Remembering typewriter with Courier type.

Remembering typing on a typewriter with Courier type.

My mom had one at the office when I was a kid, and although the computer had already became the industry standard, electronic printers were (and still can be) painfully slow. She often used the typewriter to write quick memos that needed to be typed for her boss. They still have it in the office, and apparently a few years ago, one of the new hires in her office asked what it was. This girl couldn't have been much younger than I am.

 

[Tiki Tom]

I sometimes remind the youngsters at work that, when I started university electric typewriters were still the norm. By my Senior year, new fangled computers had arrived. BTW, after a few embarrassing instances where the Americans had been able to get into their shorts, the German Intelligence Service has reportedly gone back to typewriters for some communications because they are unhackable. Old school!

On a completely different subject, I always somewhat smugly thought I was getting “older but wiser”. Recently I realized this is not uniformly so. It dawned on me that I’m still a fool for the pretty face and the flirty approach. I completely got “played” the other day and gave away more than I should have (figuratively). Oh well, with retirement on the horizon, I suppose it doesn’t matter and I should be enjoying my victory lap. Old enough to know better, young enough to fall for it anyways.

 

[MisterCairo]

...you realize this thread is almost six years old.

 

[Peacoat]

...you realize this thread is almost six years' old.

And 270 pages.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Twenty years ago, extreme boot-cut jeans became big fashion in early 2000, in old Germany.

I remember it very well, because suddenly all teen- and twen-girls and some boys had them. With stupid looking low and wide flares. Elephant jeans...

 

[MisterCairo]

The 1980s, in part, are now 40 years ago. That blows me away. I remember like yesterday when 40 years ago, it was the second world war...

 

[Trenchfriend]

Yep, nearly 40 years ago and I was not even born!

 

[Fading Fast]

Yep, nearly 40 years ago and I was not even born!

I was in college when that song came out and you heard it everywhere and saw the video on every TV screen.

 

[BobHufford]

I was in college when that song came out and you heard it everywhere and saw the video on every TV screen.

I'm old enough to remember when there was music on MTV.

 

[Tiki Tom]

I'm old enough to remember when there was music on MTV.

I was the COOLEST DUDE in town! That was because when I was getting ready for work in the morning I'd have MTV on as the background soundtrack... err... of course it was on a TV that was as big as a moving box and had to be plugged into the wall... and I was wearing ties that were about eight inches wide, and I had my hair in a mullet, and I was wearing Reebok hightops... but really, I was the COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE. (pop)

 

[Zombie_61]

I was the COOLEST DUDE in town! That was because when I was getting ready for work in the morning I'd have MTV on as the background soundtrack... err... of course it was on a TV that was as big as a moving box and had to be plugged into the wall... and I was wearing ties that were about eight inches wide, and I had my hair in a mullet, and I was wearing Reebok hightops... but really, I was the COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE, COOLEST DUDE. (pop)

What, no Members Only jacket? Hmmm...

 

[Fading Fast]

I'm old enough to remember when there was music on MTV.

Exactly that, the station that was playing it in very heavy rotation.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I'll never forget the first time I ever saw MTV -- January 1983, at the "Wash 'n Fun Laundromat" in Santa Barbara, California. They had a big TV set mounted above the washing machines and played MTV continuously -- with no sound. I had no idea such a thing existed, and the visuals without the audio were absolutely incomprehensible. (And as I later discovered, they weren't even comprehensible *with* the audio.)