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

'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 870 posts

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#581

Post by zzo38computer »

I saw on Usenet about "Digitalzwang". Here is the quotation:

> The German movement "Digitalcourage" has coined the term "Digitalzwang" (compulsory digitalisation) for this feature. For instance, some public funding programmes cannot be used unless you have access to a PC (a smartphone is not sufficient) hooked up to the internet.

> Digitalcourage support responsible digitalisation by offering help in the usage of secure authorisation and encryption but strictly disapproves of any form of compulsory digitalisation. People who refuse using public data networks, whatever their motives, must have equal rights as everybody else.

What they describe is not quite what the linked article describes, but is similar and is related.

I would further say, that in addition to that (and the stuff mentioned in the linked article), you should not be required to use computers with specific complicated software (including web browsers), or to use computers (including smartphones) or credit cards at all, if that is applicable to whatever you are doing working with. There is also the issue of a smartphone running out of battery power or otherwise not working, even if you do have it.

(I have once been in a restaurant where a app is required, although customers who do not have a smartphone can borrow a iPad from them. This is not as bad, but still it is not as good as just not requiring it at all.)

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#582

Post by autoexec »

Henchman21 wrote: post #266
Boogie_Man wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point does this constitute a hostile action against the user and what degree of retaliation is appropriate? Open question for everyone.

I’m gonna punt on the question of where the line is for hostile actions and use some past legal justification of “I know it when I see it” and I see it clearly here. The second part is the more interesting question to me: Appropriate reactions would seem to include: - finding a new doctor/practice/provider. Super hard in practice as they seem to be geographical monopolies a la the cable networks - providing appropria…

> stop using smartphones and claim hardship — not sure how this would pan out.

This is basically what I do now. When someone tells me to install their app or give them my cell phone number I tell them that I don't have a cell phone. Sometimes I do it while holding a cell phone in my hand.

I've told employers that if they make using an app a requirement they'll need to buy me a cell phone.

If people really push on why I won't use an app I'll tell them all about how my buying a phone doesn't make me the owner of one since multiple people at multiple companies have privileged access to the device I paid for far beyond my own level of access which enables them to access/add/remove/modify files and settings at any time and for any reason without my permission or even without making me aware that they've done it. Why would I use a system controlled by an unknown number of others who are only interested in enriching themselves to keep highly personal information like my medical history or banking information? Cell phones are inherently insecure and adversarial devices designed to collect and leak our private information while stealing our attention.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#583

Post by svelle »

SoftTalker wrote: post #302
svelle wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parking app I use in Berlin, easy park, works in the sense that I pre-select a timeframe I think im going to park which then gives me an estimate for how much it'll cost and reserve that amount using my CC. When I end the parking before that timer ends, the actual time I've parked will be taken and only that amount is charged. It used to be even better in the sense that you'd only start and then end parking witho…

Of course the apps could easily detect that parking has ended. They could note your location when you park. When the phone returns to that location, and then moves at driving speed, parking has ended. But they don't because they make more money by profiting from people who forget to "clock out" when they are done parking.

> Of course the apps could easily detect that parking has ended. They could note your location when you park. When the phone returns to that location, and then moves at driving speed, parking has ended.

They could at least start with adding proper CarPlay and Android Auto support so you can just end the parking from the infotainment. But I think there can be at most a single engineer working on this app if at all. Up until a couple months ago it didn't even have the option for a persistent notification to remind you that you had an ongoing parking...

> But they don't because they make more money by profiting from people who forget to "clock out" when they are done parking.

fwiw, at least in this case, the app that profited from you not clocking out got shut down and bought out by the app that asks you to pre-set your parking time. Which I guess is still not great, but at least somewhat of a step up.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#584

Post by archon810 »

2shortplanks wrote: post #167

One thing this article doesn’t mention is how this all falls apart when you spend time in more than one country. My UK bank (Barclays) won’t let me install their app on my US iPhone (i.e. my phone that uses a US based iCloud account). Tesco won’t let me use their loyalty app. I can’t install an app that’ll let me order Starbucks or McDonalds in the UK (I only have access to the US versions of these apps). I can’t wat…

If you're on Android, apkmirror.com or another similar site is a good and safe solution.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#585

Post by ncruces »

369548684892826 wrote: post #293
pqtyw wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. I certainly don't agree with that one. I really don't miss having to pay for a fixed number of hours and then having to figure out what to do if I'm running late (or wasting money if I get back early). > 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. Unless the app is exceptionally horrible you can just export it to Apple/Android wallet which is muc…

>> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. > I certainly don't agree with that one. I really don't miss having to pay for a fixed number of hours and then having to figure out what to do if I'm running late (or wasting money if I get back early). Pay-on-exit car parks are the answer to this. Combined with contactless card payment and that's peak parking experience.

Peek (parking) experience is the car having a tag and paying for itself, on parks, fuel pumps, toll roads at 120km/h (75mph), etc.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#586

Post by autoexec »

kortilla wrote: post #398
Henchman21 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m gonna punt on the question of where the line is for hostile actions and use some past legal justification of “I know it when I see it” and I see it clearly here. The second part is the more interesting question to me: Appropriate reactions would seem to include: - finding a new doctor/practice/provider. Super hard in practice as they seem to be geographical monopolies a la the cable networks - providing appropria…

VOTE MOTHERFUCKER Local government politics work. State politics even kinda work. The fact that murder is on your list but not voting is mind boggling.

> The fact that murder is on your list but not voting is mind boggling.

for hundreds of years our government and the corporations who bribe them have worked to limit the influence of the average person on the laws and regulations that we live under. After seeing our broken two party system, the gerrymandering and voter suppression, the open bribery, the lack of integrity or accountability, the inability/unwillingness of congress to do their job, and the growing list of laws and policies most Americans support and problems we want solutions for that get ignored time and time again while laws are being passed to appease corporations and industries, I really don't blame people for thinking that their ballot box is not the solution to their problems.

When people feel they don't have a way within the system to get the things they need they'll look for ways to get them outside of the system. Our government used at least put in the effort to give the appearance that working within the system could be successful, but these days they barely bother to do that.

Personally I still like to hold onto hope that voting can make a difference, especially at the local level, but it's a hard sell these days and getting harder all the time.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#587

Post by jagged-chisel »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #577
jagged-chisel wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what should one do if the network is down? Stand there indefinitely hoping it comes back up? Recall the driver can’t continue without an address.

Better they can't continue than they do the last order wrong, amirite? There's some strong "Seeing Like a State" vibes here. I'm pretty sure these apps are intentionally designed as tools to force the users (here, drivers) into a specific flow, a flow that minimizes complexity for the vendor , reality be damned. Another way to look at it: the job of the driver side of a delivery (or taxi) app isn't to be useful to th…

So the automaton can’t deliver to the next customer because the app can’t phone home.

I don’t see how this benefits anyone.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#588

Post by JumpCrisscross »

cookie_monsta wrote: post #564
brookst wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that users much prefer native apps. The idiomatic UI, the use of OS specific capabilities (even if the same result could be done without), the appearance of better performance because the app launches before a network connection is made. We can opine all we want about how things should work, but the ground truth is a good native app has higher user satisfaction, more engagement, whatever metric you wan…

> The problem is that users much prefer native apps. I imagine there is some data on this, but it goes against my observations of me and my circle. I have maybe 4 apps that I use heavily and another 10 that I use when I have to. I actively avoid installing another app when the web version is sufficient. I don't need the weekly updates to clog up my storage. I don't need notifications going off at all hours. And I don…

> it goes against my observations of me and my circle

Your friends are probably tech savvy. That means your browser is well configured (or configured at all), running an ad blocker and on a modern machine. You probably value the privacy attributes of using a browser, versus most of the population than will trade privacy for convenience.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#589

Post by dartos »

bee_rider wrote: post #407
jagged-chisel wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many places in apps just wait for no reason. Let's take a hypothetical situation: Suppose you're doing gig delivery. You're delivering to two customers in the same neighborhood on the same run. You drop the first order, take your photo of the drop, and the app spins. It's waiting for the photo to be delivered before it moves on. You can't get directions to the next customer until the app moves along. Why can't it…

That’s bizarre. The whole point of having an app instead of a website is to have more processing occur locally, right?

No, the whole point of apps is data collection, background tasks (when the device is closed) and push notifications.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#590

Post by autoexec »

TylerE wrote: post #525
TheDong wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where can I vote for "Medical establishments should have an accessible-friendly browser-accessible no-javascript webpage for all functionality"? I see the "democrat" and "republic" checkboxes, but I don't see the magical third "Good apps, and also health insurance companies have to cover medical claims without questioning whether my doctor is competent, denying each claim once, and requiring 3 months of arguing on a…

Democrat is the only sane choice if you want a functioning government. Republicans have departed reality.

There are no sane choices. We're only stuck with republicans now because democrats were happy to maintain a status quo that was keeping them rich but wasn't addressing the needs of the people. The dems might throw us a bone now and then, but they weren't willing to make the kind of meaningful changes that might threaten their power or the interests of the corporations and industries bribing them. Now we're left with folks who just want to pillage everything they can and burn the rest to the ground.
Post reply on HN