Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 411 posts

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#251

Post by nerdponx »

barrkel wrote: post #239
archiepeach wrote: post #228

As noted multiple times in the article, the unethical design we’re seeing in popular apps and services today is largely a result of the widespread use of advertising as a revenue model. This is an appropriate time to show appreciation and support for the companies who are trying to demonstrate successful revenue models which are NOT based on advertising: Medium - the replacement of “Recommends” with “Claps” was to al…

I somewhat agree with your examples, except Wikipedia. It has no business being much more than a server farm and software tweaker. That's not something that needs large ongoing investment by many people. http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/21/wikipedia-keeping-it-fr...

Servers are expensive.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#252

Post by coldtea »

VOBOSHI wrote: post #235
coldtea wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't buy the idea that smartphones are extinguishing the life of the mind. That's might be because of thinking of first order effects only. > Sure, smartphones provide access to almost unlimited trash. But they also provide access to Wikipedia, perhaps the most successful encyclopedia ever developed by humans. Well, who said access to Wikipedia is something good in itself? For one, it might (and I say it does) r…

Access to all kinds of information is good. It will always be up to the individual to investigate and draw up conclusions. People who state that they can just look something up on Wiki and be knowledgeable (or gasp experts!) will have been ignorant 10 years ago, 100 years ago etc. If they wouldn't have had Wikipedia or a newspaper, they'd have had religion (or anything else) to allow feeling knowledgeable. Also, I di…

>People who state that they can just look something up on Wiki and be knowledgeable (or gasp experts!) will have been ignorant 10 years ago, 100 years ago etc.

They would -- but they wouldn't be able to pass their ignorance as knowledge in most fields. Easy access has been known to devalue things -- it's simple economics.

>Also, I disagree that reading a book is a REQUIREMENT for study. It can be beneficial, but it's just another tool.

Reading a book might not be, but reading extensively is.

Skimping through online articles and wikipedia-surfing is not that.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#253

Post by TeMPOraL »

walterstucco wrote: post #238
TeMPOraL wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't. You would spend a lot of time watching TV, reading novels, or hanging out in the bar.

At one point you stop watching TV, because there are no more new things to watch, you stop reading novels because they aren't novel anymore, you stop going to the bar because there's a fixed amount of alcohol you can consume, it costs money, the bar has opening hours. Smartphone follows you everywhere, all the time.

A smartphone has only so much battery. It's best suited for frequent but short uses. If you want to replace TV, novels and bars with social media, your best bet is still the PC.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#254

Post by Chathamization »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #248
Chathamization wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we're going to be totally honest, then first, let's call social media primarily talking to your friends and family. Which is one of the most deeply and fundamentally human things you can do. I disagree. Pre-social media, people would talk with friends and family using e-mail and programs like AIM, and there would actually be deep and meaningful conversations. This has been supplanted by social media, which is of…

> I disagree. Pre-social media, people would talk with friends and family using e-mail and programs like AIM, and there would actually be deep and meaningful conversations. This seems hilariously false.

Of course I can only speak from personal experience. But in my experience, long personal e-mail (several paragraphs) from friends to catch up used to be relatively common, and now they've all but disappeared (I don't think I've gotten any in the past couple of years). Likewise, long chats of the old AIM/MSN variety - spend an hour or two chatting with a friend sharing ideas and news with them - seems much rarer than before (where it wasn't uncommon to have them every few days).

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#255

Post by barrkel »

hk__2 wrote: post #244
barrkel wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I somewhat agree with your examples, except Wikipedia. It has no business being much more than a server farm and software tweaker. That's not something that needs large ongoing investment by many people. http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/21/wikipedia-keeping-it-fr...

> It has no business being much more than a server farm and software tweaker Isn’t that true for literally all Web-based businesses? Is Twitter "much more than a server farm and software tweaker"?

Twitter isn't a charity.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#256

Post by barrkel »

nerdponx wrote: post #251
barrkel wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I somewhat agree with your examples, except Wikipedia. It has no business being much more than a server farm and software tweaker. That's not something that needs large ongoing investment by many people. http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/21/wikipedia-keeping-it-fr...

Servers are expensive.

Look at the graphs in that article.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#257

Post by jansho »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #194
jansho wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But they also provide access to Wikipedia [etc] But let's be honest, most smartphone users spend their time confined in a limited number of domains: social media, games, shopping etc. In that sense, we can be called a bit zombie in the head.

If we're going to be totally honest, then first, let's call social media primarily talking to your friends and family . Which is one of the most deeply and fundamentally human things you can do. And it is also critical to doing anything together with other people. The Internet has lifted constraints of time and geography from communication - which is why you see people on IM in situations where, without the phone, th…

Social media is primarily intended for talking to friends and family. As others have pointed out in this thread, the reality for most people is closer to mindless browsing and addiction. That's because the systems are designed to 'hook' people that way. I'm not suggesting in any way that social media, shopping etc are bad (I use them all the time) but as the Internet is literally at our fingertips now, I do think that we need to be more cautious of unintended consequences, for individuals (particularly vulnerable ones like children) and for society as a whole. We're already seeing some of them today.

So the question to ask now is, regardless if you're solutionist/ Luddite/ neutral/ etc, how do we tackle this? Do we need to tone down some of the 'hook' features? Do we need to totally discourage unethical tactics like dark patterns? What can we do to educate/push people towards a healthier Internet diet, to have enough will to protect themselves from being psychologically hacked? This is an entirely new design philosophy, maybe not so good for big tech corps, but can potentially push the Internet to the next level.

Edit: language

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#258

Post by ihaveahadron »

"continuous partial attention"

"Joe in 1401 was worried that the invention of books would cause "semi-continuous-patial-attention" because it would disrupt the oral stories being conversated about"

This article explains the historical trope of people being unable to cope with technological progress perfectly.

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#259

Post by aethertap »

rangibaby wrote: post #241
ironic_ali wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After 18 years as a (mainly contract) BA with some PM work on govt and big Corp business and/or software solution contracts, I'd had enough and did a diploma in enology and viticulture (wine making and growing). In one of my first assignments I referenced Wikipedia on malolactic fermentation and sent it in for marking. The lecturer gave me a b+ and went on to berate me for using Wikipedia as a source that was not to…

Sorry but in “serious” writing you should never cite Wikipedia. Check and cite the original sources instead; every claim on Wikipedia should have a corresponding source per their no original research policy.

You may be right at this time, but the suggested fix feels a lot like plagiarizing the work of Wikipedia editors. It takes significant work to gather sources and turn them into an informative article. I believe that work should be recognized, even if it was published on a free access platform like Wikipedia. Is there some middle ground between using their work without acknowledging it and suffering a stain on credibility because of guilt by association?

Re: 'Our minds can be hijacked': tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia

#260

Post by [deleted] »

archiepeach wrote: post #228

As noted multiple times in the article, the unethical design we’re seeing in popular apps and services today is largely a result of the widespread use of advertising as a revenue model. This is an appropriate time to show appreciation and support for the companies who are trying to demonstrate successful revenue models which are NOT based on advertising: Medium - the replacement of “Recommends” with “Claps” was to al…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN