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

“When we all have pocket telephones”

openculture.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–208 of 208 posts

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#201

Post by lrvick »

account42 wrote: post #193
lrvick wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone really deals with life or death emergencies they would likely benefit from a device made for that with multi-week battery life and very broad range, like a pager. Doctors and firefighters still use those for a reason. Short of that, it is probably not an actual emergency and real human people in front of you should have your full respect and attention with a rare exception being when you are trapped, like…

Unless you are somewhere remote a charge time > 16 hours might as well be infinite as you can charge it while you sleep. And I'm not just thinking about people being on call where a dedicated device makes sense but just your normal people emergencies that might happen to someone you care about that require immediate action on your part. Sure, those are exceptional but so are many other things you might prepare for. A…

If I agreed to spend time with someone I absolutely owe them my attention and respect. To pull out a phone in front of them is to disconnect from being present with them. Everyone says they are still listening when a phone or a laptop is in front of them and they are liars. Some notification will pop up and suck them away and it is 5 minutes before the trance snaps. Rather than passively aggressively insult someone I should just admit to myself I am out of social energy for this situation and leave to be alone.

I have had to resort to offering to buy dinner if people turn their phones off because they are so addicted to being constantly connected to every chat, meme, tiktok dance, and facebook political rant.

All the time I see entire friend groups or families sitting around tables at restaurants all on their phones ignoring each other. It is gross.

I am fine always being the person at the table pushing for the exact opposite of that, and maybe we can all tolerate the middle ground.

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#202

Post by _carbyau_ »

_piif wrote: post #196
_carbyau_ wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> businesses that do this all have different crappy apps. I want "app containers" on my phone to limit these apps and feed them fake data as needed.

On Android you should be able to create new user accounts on the phone which are completely separated and can be quickly switched between. I used to create one with just WhatsApp installed for instance. Alternatively if you are rooted Xprivacy[0] does what you asked, allowing you to grant apps permissions but then feeding them fake data as configured. No idea about iOS though. EDIT: There seems to be an app called In…

Multiple worthy suggestions? Which I could upvote more than once. Thank you.

Insular seems to rely on the inbuilt managed profiles to "run as" another user. Seems straightforward. I'll try it out!

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#203

Post by ev1 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #120
alistairSH wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's a new one for me (only app payments accepted). In the US, at least.

Ticketmaster using monopoly power to force use of app to attend concerts. Can’t even print ticket any longer.

I have not installed the TM app - you can add a ticket to Apple Wallet from the website, and every order I've seen has "don't have a phone? go to the box office for tickets when you arrive" somewhere

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#204

Post by mixmastamyk »

ev1 wrote: post #203
mixmastamyk wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticketmaster using monopoly power to force use of app to attend concerts. Can’t even print ticket any longer.

I have not installed the TM app - you can add a ticket to Apple Wallet from the website, and every order I've seen has "don't have a phone? go to the box office for tickets when you arrive" somewhere

> go to the box office for tickets

They're not allowing that in general any longer. I wasn't allowed to log in to their site this summer without phone text verification.

However, I believe they still have a ticket printer for emergencies, such as when you show up at the window saying you broke your phone, but just happened to print a receipt before leaving.

Still prevents any sort of anonymous attendance.

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#205

Post by eesmith »

ltbarcly3 wrote: post #198
eesmith wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what "tribal arguing" means. I did read your side. You believe I'm not arguing in good faith. I think that's a misinterpretation. I am not versed in the topic, and I don't pretend to be one. But the exchange was claim/counter-claim/counter-counter-claim without any citations, going nowhere. While presenting wrong, or at least incomplete numbers, shifts it to one about presenting the actual numbers and wh…

It's a trope among liberals in the US that taxes are too low, just look at the marginal rates, they used to be 90%! If they used to be 90%, then it's perfectly reasonable to raise them to 35%... I would guess you've heard this quite a few times (even if you don't agree with it, it's a very commonly presented argument), whether you realize it or not, and you are just repeating it. This is largely how political opinion…

Years ago a FB friend posted something along the lines "every country where the debt is 100% of GDP ended up with runaway inflation." (It's been a decade; I've forgotten the exact details.)

It was easy to point out that the US had >100% ratio in the 1940s, due to WWII, without the consequences he postulated.

I then found it was a "tribal point" going around, that he was repeating without investigating.

This claim that taxes now are the highest ever felt like the same sort of "tribal point."

How does one challenge an seemingly wrong assertion without also being labelled "tribal"? Especially in a field so contentious as this where there are position papers upon position papers for- and against- just about every point you can think of.

FWIW, I think the premise is flawed. Rich people put their assets in trusts and foundations, which are not subject to the same taxes, and yet controlled by the them and their family.

(For example, "Patagonia Billionaire Who Gave Up Company Skirts $700 Million Tax Hit; Founder Yvon Chouinard structured the transfer of his firm in a way that keeps control within the family and avoids taxes." - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-15/patagonia... )

Because those savings aren't paid taxes, they don't show up in charts which summarize only those taxes paid.

So when "liberals in the US [talk about how] taxes are too low", I believe it also refers to the legal techniques rich people use to avoid paying taxes, including through laws which were specifically created for this purpose.

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#206

Post by ltbarcly3 »

eesmith wrote: post #205
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a trope among liberals in the US that taxes are too low, just look at the marginal rates, they used to be 90%! If they used to be 90%, then it's perfectly reasonable to raise them to 35%... I would guess you've heard this quite a few times (even if you don't agree with it, it's a very commonly presented argument), whether you realize it or not, and you are just repeating it. This is largely how political opinion…

Years ago a FB friend posted something along the lines "every country where the debt is 100% of GDP ended up with runaway inflation." (It's been a decade; I've forgotten the exact details.) It was easy to point out that the US had >100% ratio in the 1940s, due to WWII, without the consequences he postulated. I then found it was a "tribal point" going around, that he was repeating without investigating. This claim tha…

I agree 100%, I would guess that he was probably repeating 'taxes are the highest ever' that he heard on a conservative talk show or FoxNews or something. I think the taxes as a % of GDP data is not perfect but it's at least a fairly reliable well studied ratio that avoids the problems with the details of tax rates as you point out, tax rates don't correlate well with taxes paid so looking at them is misleading at best.

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#207

Post by Buttons840 »

Buttons840 wrote: post #137
enedil wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that if somebody cannot afford a haircut, their data would be that pricey.

I'm thinking more on a macro level. Someone at Google has said "people want to pay us money to have better support and be treated like customers instead of products", and the response was "no, not worth it". On a macro scale Google was not interested in the money of individuals. Facebook / Meta is one of the richest companies in the world, and they didn't make their money by taking money from individuals. Politicians…

Oh. Another great example of this is how many companies focus more attention on getting VC money than on getting paying customers. Again, average people don't have enough wealth for it to be a focus for the biggest companies.

Re: “When we all have pocket telephones”

#208

Post by jean_tta »

bena wrote: post #80
jean_tta wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really tricky to compare marginal rates like that. Has the definition of taxable income changed over time? How many people were actually taxed at those marginal rates? And so on.

You didn't bother to interrogate the other poster on these aspects. Why is it only tricky when looking at the evidence against the claim?

It would be tricky whatever the claim
Post reply on HN