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

Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#71

Post by LoganDark »

redeeman wrote: post #70
danielbln wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the feeling OP is one of those who tells people with depression to just stop feeling sad...

you are wrong, I am however one of those people who say that if you are allergic to peanuts, you do not get to scream "make peanuts illegal", but you instead accept that you have a task of making sure what you stuff your face with does not contain peanuts.

I think it's reasonable to disallow peanuts in shared public spaces that people with allergies cannot realistically avoid. Certain people can have life-threatening allergic reactions to even the scent of peanuts.

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#72

Post by phito »

boffinAudio wrote: post #44
mrweasel wrote: post #11

Someone pointed out in a similar discussion: "It's not the phone itself that they issue, it's the content." Yesterday there was a debate locally about screen time, both for adults and children, and how much is to much. It's always about the phone, the iPad or the TV, never about the content. At this point I'm leaning more towards, well, we tried social media, streaming, online gaming and funny meme site and our monke…

> "It's not the phone itself that they issue, it's the content." I take strong issue with this position. (Disclaimer: I make professional broadcast and media-related devices and have an opinion, decades in the making, on what has been done with mobile phones vis a vis, making other devices redundant.) It is the phone itself. The phone itself has usurped the user of all agency, and responsibility, for their content .…

> Imagine your data stays where you need it to stay - on your device - and the bank has access to it when it needs to service you, the customer - as opposed to the current scenario, where the customer data is owned entirely by the bank and you need permission to access it.

Wouldn´t that allow me to add some zeroes to my account balance?

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#73

Post by redeeman »

LoganDark wrote: post #71
redeeman wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are wrong, I am however one of those people who say that if you are allergic to peanuts, you do not get to scream "make peanuts illegal", but you instead accept that you have a task of making sure what you stuff your face with does not contain peanuts.

I think it's reasonable to disallow peanuts in shared public spaces that people with allergies cannot realistically avoid. Certain people can have life-threatening allergic reactions to even the scent of peanuts.

what if two people in the entire world was deadly allergic to apple or perhaps avocado?

It sucks, but if you are extraordinary, you have some precautions you have to take in your life. Additionally if you are THAT sensitive to something like peanuts, you would be totally crazy to simply trust that ink on a page would protect you. You would take precautions

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#74

Post by LoganDark »

redeeman wrote: post #73
LoganDark wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's reasonable to disallow peanuts in shared public spaces that people with allergies cannot realistically avoid. Certain people can have life-threatening allergic reactions to even the scent of peanuts.

what if two people in the entire world was deadly allergic to apple or perhaps avocado? It sucks, but if you are extraordinary, you have some precautions you have to take in your life. Additionally if you are THAT sensitive to something like peanuts, you would be totally crazy to simply trust that ink on a page would protect you. You would take precautions

> what if two people in the entire world was deadly allergic to apple or perhaps avocado?

That's the thing though. Peanut allergy is the second most common food allergy. Around 1 in 100 people have a peanut allergy. I can't seem to find data on what the average sensitivity to peanut is, but in a shared space such as a school, 1 in 100 is a real consideration.

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#75

Post by boffinAudio »

phito wrote: post #72
boffinAudio wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "It's not the phone itself that they issue, it's the content." I take strong issue with this position. (Disclaimer: I make professional broadcast and media-related devices and have an opinion, decades in the making, on what has been done with mobile phones vis a vis, making other devices redundant.) It is the phone itself. The phone itself has usurped the user of all agency, and responsibility, for their content .…

> Imagine your data stays where you need it to stay - on your device - and the bank has access to it when it needs to service you, the customer - as opposed to the current scenario, where the customer data is owned entirely by the bank and you need permission to access it. Wouldn´t that allow me to add some zeroes to my account balance?

Not if the OS had the ability to set up cryptographic systems to ensure that the banks balance and my balance were always properly synchronized ...

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#76

Post by d3w3y »

redeeman wrote: post #10
namaria wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not acknowledging the dark patterns and the addictive economics of free apps and the advertisement economy is disingenuous. I'm glad your iron will isn't affected but pretending like there isn't a huge societal problem because it doesn't affect you is just arrogant.

theres a problem because people have been raised to be idiots in front of the pictocube.

So you admit that technology is inherently harmful to human beings' cognitive development?

Re: Turning away from smartphones: 'We need to go places and touch things'

#77

Post by owisd »

cubefox wrote: post #26
owisd wrote: post #17

Shout out for "Apple Configurator" for Mac, if a dumb phone appeals to you but can't because there are some apps you really need, I hardly ever see it mentioned in articles like this. It's designed for IT departments to configure all their company phones, but you can also use it to dumb down any iPhone by whitelisting a specific set of apps, it's way better than the parental controls / screen time options.

How hard/easy is it to circumvent the whitelist? Moreover, do you whitelist the whole browser?

You need to be back at your Mac to install a new profile to circumvent the whitelist, you can't do it from inside your phone.

Yes the whole of Safari can be white/blacklisted, although the way I have it set up if you're in an app with a webview it's still using Safari under the hood, and if that web view lets you browse to an arbitrary site then it can be circumventable that way. You can presumably lock it down further to prevent this, e.g. force the phone to use a specific VPN that you can then control to whitelist certain domains.

Post reply on HN