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

811–820 of 870 posts

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

#811

Post by rs186 »

mindslight wrote: post #91
rs186 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for pointing this out. However, it seems that HN crowd really doesn't like this kind of viewpoint. "If you cannot do everything without a smart phone, that's the society's fault, not yours.", as echoed by comments under my (also downvoted) comment. Many people here seem to have trouble understanding how the world works. If all you do is complain (which will change nothing) instead of adapt, good luck with y…

Because it's dismissive, sophomoric, and can be applied to literally anything you might complain about - eg "If you don't like how the 'HN crowd' votes, then stop coming here". In reality, Exit is not the only option.

Dude you seriously need to go out in the real world and try to understand how things work.

Complaining on the Internet never does anything. Zero.

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

#812

Post by genewitch »

Kwpolska wrote: post #808
genewitch wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I need 100 rolls of quarters. I need 500 $2 bills. I need to change my pin on a debit card. I need to change all these $2 bills and quarters into $20 bills. Trivial examples that I have done at my bank. Maybe drbit cards now don't need to be put into a machine to change the pin anymore, idk.

The PIN thing can be done online at both of my banks. As for the cash stuff, those are things you may need to do if you’re a shopkeeper, but I can’t imagine a reason why I would do that myself. Banks over here will sometimes charge fees for changing cash.

in the US $2 bills are an icebreaker. There's still a lot of people that don't believe they're real. I also used them as incentives for my kids to go above and beyond with their communal chores. The quarters thing i haven't done personally but i was adjacent to for a club, it was for a game in a booth at an event.

banks here don't charge, as one of their expected roles is to change money in the US.

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

#813

Post by greycol »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #626
rangestransform wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only an issue because the US somehow became allergic to enforcing vandalism and property crime laws aggressively

Unfortunately, people have bought into the idea that enforcing laws which are disproportionately broken by the socially disadvantaged is tantamount to oppression. Vandalism and property crime tends to be committed by the poor underclass, often by racial minorities to boot. So people don't want to enforce laws against those people, whose lives are already kinda crap, because they think it's just oppressing them furthe…

I've bought into that idea (with caveats case by case, i.e. evaluated by judges with discretion), but it only works when those kind of crimes are feeders into social support agencies. Without effective social support to either rehabilitate behaviour or remove the need for that behaviour you're either going to need to remove the offenders or accept repeated crimes.

The cheapest cost per prisoner in the US is $23,000 per year (Arkansas with other states costing more). That's a lot of support you can give a person before it makes sense to send them to prison, especially if the prison doesn't actively work towards rehabilitation.

Problem is MVP prisons for your criminal population is viewed as needed while spending the money more effectively doesn't really have political consensus.

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

#814

Post by kortilla »

autoexec wrote: post #586
kortilla wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You’re talking about national elections. California has demonstrated time and time again that it’s able to regulate businesses and impose environmental regulations beyond the federal government

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

#815

Post by kortilla »

Henchman21 wrote: post #412
kortilla wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I vote. I am 50. I have voted in every election I was able to. In my life my preferred candidate has won exactly twice: Obama’s second term and Biden’s first. This includes local, state elections, and national. To quote George Carlin: “ If voting mattered, they wouldn’t let us do it ”. Trump lost in 2024 but took the win because his cronies disqualified enough voters in enough states to win. So, please, spare me. We’…

“My preferred candidate only one twice” is the hallmark of a “only the federal govt elections matter” midwit. The federal government is the least effective way to lead on regulatory change. California has demonstrated leadership this way repeatedly.

>So, please, spare me. We’re up to violence already. You’re just well behind the times unfortunately.

There have been nut-jobs saying this and inflicting violence since the beginning of the country. Then there are people who actually affect change. Pick a side.

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

#816

Post by kortilla »

TheDong wrote: post #506
kortilla wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

>Where can I vote for "Medical establishments should have an accessible-friendly browser-accessible no-javascript webpage for all functionality"?

Get off your ass and start a ballot measure. If you want to literally vote for a direct regulation that’s the way to do it.

Alternatively, start talking to state legislators and get them to support a bill doing it.

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

#817

Post by eesmith »

invalidname wrote: post #627
eesmith wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just as a disabled person would have a caretaker sign as a proxy for them You should likely be more careful about how your use of "disabled person" as I'm sure you know most disabled people do not have caretakers. Also, the link I gave says 'agent or representative' - a caretaker is not necessarily either of those. My point is that, yes, I would complain if the bank requires everyone to sign with a pen - and so wou…

You're right, accessibility and disability are large and complex subjects with a huge gradient of issues/conditions/situations. One of the banks I use requires an app since it's an online only bank. I pay lower rates as a result. Does this bar some people from using that bank? Yes. But as long as other banks exist that shouldn't be a problem. Would it make sense to require that bank to offer branches, phone access et…

Take a look again at rwmj's comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43137896 .

* I think it's reasonable to requiring an app bad.

* Maybe not a "tyranny", we'd probably want to reserve that for the government doing it, but not good news.

You replied "Why?"

Since you and rwmj agree that calling is tyranny is too much, it comes across like the "Why?" refers to the objection to requiring an app.

When you follow that up with "Do you complain when the bank requires you to sign something with a pen?", it sure sounds like a statement that you don't think people would complain for an app-only requirement. Otherwise I can't make it make sense.

> But as long as other banks exist that shouldn't be a problem.

So, as long as one bank exists somewhere in the US? Somewhere in a 100 mile radius? When is it a problem, and what could be used to prevent it from getting there? Is 1 mile to the nearest non-app parking space a problem?

Would you say that so long as one bank has handicap access, the other banks should save money and provide lower interest rates by not being handicap accessible? I hope not.

The cantons of Geneva and Neuchâtel in Switzerland voted for the fundamental right to live offline. What's wrong with having that everywhere?

> and are not discriminatory in the vast majority of cases.

We have Braille on elevator buttons even though not having Braille on elevator buttons is not discriminatory in the vast majority of cases.

Because the vast majority of people don't need Braille.

More people don't have smartphones than need Braille.

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

#818

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

lucb1e wrote: post #606
hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe not for you, but rooted phones are a legitimate risk for users that do sideload pirated games and malware etc. I still think the risks are arbitrary, but I can understand why banks want to avoid rooted phones

Then they should also avoid rooted Windows machines where malware is a legitimate risk and orders of magnitude more prevalent than on mobile. Doing one but not the other is arbitrary and just pushes people towards having a locked-down device that they don't fully control with them all the time (can't uninstall tracking software from the vendor, for example). A locked-down computer that just sits in your office all da…

If they could enforce locked down desktops, I’m sure they would.

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

#819

Post by AStonesThrow »

meristohm wrote: post #361
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 tend to push back against this nonsense pretty firmly, and would go so far as to request paper documents be sent, as "I don't have a device up to the task" (which sometimes is true, as I use old hardware until I luck into a handmedown or the thing breaks). I get that paper and postage and time are costs. So is user time and stress level.

It will be an uphill struggle for you to claim obsolescence.

The general public are currently being trained with administrative assistant/clerical skills in order to do this labor for companies unable to support a workforce.

Your card transactions are now your responsibility, not a cashier's. Your menu ordering is in your hands from the cloud, not a waitress you can harass. Your vehicle's vital functions, safety mechanisms, and accessories are all on you, in motion or at rest. All your paperwork is cloud-assisted but you're the secretary and they're going paperless so you'd better have a nice printer, too.

Your mobile apps are living rent-free in your home/pocket and you've got limited authority over their resource usage, especially if a coin miner or botnet is part of your package deal.

Currently I'm struggling with my ISP because apparently the providers in USA are segregating/unbundling Mobile Wireless service and moving toward stricter metering/throttling of data and bandwidth, so it would seem that this Mandatory Smartphone also demands an Unlimited 5G plan to match.

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

#820

Post by AStonesThrow »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #159
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what retaliation are you imagining and against whom? who is even "the user" here?

Do a little reverse engineering/analysis on the app, to parallel-construct the claims of 'fifticon (as to not require them to leak internal info or become a whistleblower). If it's as bad as it sounds, go to press. Or just dump an expose on Twitter/X to maximize public awareness. > who is even "the user" here? The doctors and their patients. If it's as bad as it sounds, it actively degrades the ability of doctors to…

My PCP once apologized for a system upgrade (he had joined a larger medical practice) which "forces me to look at this laptop screen instead of you, My Friend"

And he was well aware that I'm a guy whose mental illness can mostly be traced to escaping into screens since the first Family Cathode Ray of 1974 and Clarke Monolith of 1968

Post reply on HN