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

91–100 of 870 posts

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

#91

Post by mindslight »

rs186 wrote: post #75
unsupp0rted wrote: post #3

> He does own a smartphone – an Apple iPhone he bought secondhand about three years ago – but says: “I don’t use apps at all. I don’t download them for security reasons.” Yes and? He makes a choice and he is being penalized for it. Presumably the benefits for him outweigh the costs. For Richard Stallman they do. There is no innate human right to grocery store coupons or private parking lots.

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.

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

#92

Post by tdeck »

One thing not mentioned yet is what happens when you've got a cheaper phone filled with photos and videos. At various times I've had to spend a few minutes deleting things just to download some stupid 100 meg app that I need to use for a total of 5 minutes to complete some basic task.

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

#93

Post by agumonkey »

everdrive wrote: post #28

People are writing this off, but it eventually becomes impossible not to own a smartphone; an expensive device, with an expensive monthly plan, and an absolutely terrible privacy record. Eventually more businesses will require smartphone usage just to use their services. There could even be a time when government services require it.

Depending on where you live, a smartphone can be bought for 100 bucks and a basic line (voice, messages, 2GB of data) for less than 5 bucks. It's not ideal but it's not a sacrifice anymore.

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

#94

Post by goodpoint »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #3

> He does own a smartphone – an Apple iPhone he bought secondhand about three years ago – but says: “I don’t use apps at all. I don’t download them for security reasons.” Yes and? He makes a choice and he is being penalized for it. Presumably the benefits for him outweigh the costs. For Richard Stallman they do. There is no innate human right to grocery store coupons or private parking lots.

Privacy is very much a human right and it's being violated all the time.

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

#95

Post by hypeatei »

cenamus wrote: post #20
JeanMarcS wrote: post #10

My brother doesn't have à smartphone (by choice). For example, he cannot access his bank account via his desktop anymore. He have to go to his agency in person. Well we all did that for years so it's just annoying, because he still have the possibility to do it and it's his choice. But what will happen if all the brick and mortar close ? When will it be mandatory to get a smartphone for his bank app, just to have acc…

I really felt that when I was waiting for a replacement display from china for about 3 months... If you want to do stuff at a physical bank you pay fees for everything, if there's even a branch still open close to you. Can't even buy bus tickets without an app (tracks your journey with GPS of course), without paying more, even at ticket machines in the busses.

> If you want to do stuff at a physical bank you pay fees for everything

This hasn't been my experience at all in the US. If you need something in-person, going to the bank is the best option since they don't charge fees like a random ATM does.

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

#96

Post by dumbfounder »

JeanMarcS wrote: post #10

My brother doesn't have à smartphone (by choice). For example, he cannot access his bank account via his desktop anymore. He have to go to his agency in person. Well we all did that for years so it's just annoying, because he still have the possibility to do it and it's his choice. But what will happen if all the brick and mortar close ? When will it be mandatory to get a smartphone for his bank app, just to have acc…

Then you will need to use an app.

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

#97

Post by echoangle »

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B wrote: post #63
Yeul wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By choice. Society doesn't penalize anyone if they decide to go off the grid. Look at it this way: should the rest of us with smartphones pay for that bank office?

It’s a bad rebuttal because you’re paying for the phone, and the bank pays for their office with what they gain from credits, stock market stuff… If the bank had no office it wouldn’t be cheaper.

At least in germany, there are both traditional banks with offices and online-only banks and one of the reasons given for the fact that traditional banks have worse conditions (less interest, sometimes monthly charges for even having an account etc.) is that they hvae to pay the offices somehow.

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

#98

Post by arrowsmith »

alabastervlog wrote: post #90

The entire history of technology is our becoming dependent on one invention after another, such that anyone with any interest in the area(s) that invention touches no longer has a realistic choice not to use it. They may technically be able to, but only through outsize sacrifice that leaves them worse off than they would have been before the thing was invented.

Hi Ted.

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

#99

Post by derac »

em-bee wrote: post #44
ekianjo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the solution is to let the market do its work and move to another bank?

in many places there is no bank that offers an alternative

I don't get why your parent was downvoted. If you live in the middle of nowhere without a cell phone, life is going to be tougher.

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

#100

Post by pimlottc »

> Some of the best savings rates are offered by app-only providers – made up of banks and “electronic money institutions” (EMIs), which do not have their own banking licence, but put your money in a bank that does.

Okay, this wins for euphemism of the week. "We're not a bank, we're a money institution!"

Post reply on HN