11 ms·

Our Minds Have Been Hijacked by Our Phones

178 points by johnny313 9y ago

thinbeige 9y ago
The guys is totally right but what he says is nothing new since Nir Eyal's Hooked and B.T. Skinner's Skinner-box. Besides, the web itself, yes just simple websites, has been highly addictive for decades. This ecosystem was just transformed to mobile and because the phone is always with you the addiction is even worse. Facebook on desktop was as addictive as on mobile. I miss a solution but he doesn't propose any.
- arkitaip 9y ago
  He actually outlines a 3 step strategy for regaining control. Also, there's the non-profit he started that aims to make people more mindful on how shitty apps affect our mental states http://www.timewellspent.io/ http://www.timewellspent.io/
  - thinbeige 9y ago
    I briefly went over the site before but haven't seen the 3 steps, guess I missed them, mind to tell them? Edit: I just went another time to the site and still can't see any '3 steps' in text form. Would be great if you could enlighten us since you know the 3 steps.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - peterhartree 9y ago
      From the transcript of the TED talk [1] mentioned in the OP: > So how do we fix this? We need to make three radical changes to technology and to our society. > The first is we need to acknowledge that we are persuadable. Once you start understanding that your mind can be scheduled into having little thoughts or little blocks of time that you didn't choose, wouldn't we want to use that understanding and protect against the way that that happens? I think we need to see ourselves fundamentally in a new way. It's almost like a new period of human history, like the Enlightenment, but almost a kind of self-aware Enlightenment, that we can be persuaded, and there might be something we want to protect. > The second is we need new models and accountability systems so that as the world gets better and more and more persuasive over time -- because it's only going to get more persuasive -- that the people in those control rooms are accountable and transparent to what we want. The only form of ethical persuasion that exists is when the goals of the persuader are aligned with the goals of the persuadee. And that involves questioning big things, like the business model of advertising. > Lastly, we need a design renaissance, because once you have this view of human nature, that you can steer the timelines of a billion people -- just imagine, there's people who have some desire about what they want to do and what they want to be thinking and what they want to be feeling and how they want to be informed, and we're all just tugged into these other directions. And you have a billion people just tugged into all these different directions. Well, imagine an entire design renaissance that tried to orchestrate the exact and most empowering time-well-spent way for those timelines to happen. And that would involve two things: one would be protecting against the timelines that we don't want to be experiencing, the thoughts that we wouldn't want to be happening, so that when that ding happens, not having the ding that sends us away; and the second would be empowering us to live out the timeline that we want. [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention/transcript#t-580659 https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tr...
      - thinbeige 9y ago
        Thanks!
      - icelancer 9y ago
        Is the point supposed to be that his proposed solution is impossible to implement and flies in the face of market and incentive-driven behavior? When I think "three step proposal" I think of something actionable by an individual, not something that would have to be enacted on by basically a totalitarian government.
dcow 9y ago
It really kinda sounds like this guy woke up one day, decided he didn't like technology, and began a crusade. I'm struggling to find anything novel in what's being argued unless you didn't already know that the incentives are not stacked in your favor as a user. The interview does make one good point: who does say what is best for me as a user and why is time spent on a given platform a bad metric (even if it's not originally born of a user-centric mindset--which is also arguable since many product teams are user-centric)? Perhaps I'm enjoying that time.
- bitexploder 9y ago
  This is ignoring our finite attention and decision reservoir and something Cal Newport refers to as attention residue -- the time it takes to transition wholly to another task. It can be jarring to realize how fully these devices and distractions integrate into one's existence.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
japhyr 9y ago
I did something interesting this week. I teach high school, and this was our first week back at school. No students yet, just beginning of the year prep work. I was checking my phone every 5-10 minutes half out of restlessness at sitting inside all day, and also to keep up with rapidly evolving events in the world. But I wanted to focus more, without turning my phone off. So I put my phone in my left pocket instead of my right pocket. It worked. Every time I reached for my phone, I had to think consciously how to get it out. That interrupted the cycle of just pulling it out enough to make me only pull it out once in a while. It went back to being a tool I use to do lots of things, rather than something I use to fill time when there's nothing to do for 30 seconds. The first step he mentions, simply being aware of these habits and breaking the cycles, can go a long way in keeping these habits from becoming too entrenched.
- danielhooper 9y ago
  Smart idea. I get a similar effect when I logout of sites like Twitter and have to face a login page when I revisit. It breaks me from my unconscious loop and lets me decide that this is not actually how I want to spend my time. Do you think changing the pocket is enough, or rather its that you're switching your dominant/non-dominant hands?
  - japhyr 9y ago
    It was really interesting to see what patterns switching pockets interrupted for me. One was the simple act of reaching for the phone - I had to consciously think about where it is. Then it feels unfamiliar to even start to pull it out of my left pocket. Then I have to decide to swipe and operate it with my non-dominant hand, or switch it over and use my right hand. There were more opportunities to break the cycle than I would have expected. I was surprised to learn there are people who don't keep their phone in a particular pocket, who this wouldn't work for.
- giancarlostoro 9y ago
  Doesn't work for me, I put my phone in any pocket and look for it in any pocket. Though if I want to stop using my phone it's easier to just uninstall apps that are distracting. Takes a lot more effort to install said app.
jrcii 9y ago
I sensed that something felt wrong with the phone->human relationship about a year ago and stopped using it completely. Never looked back.
jakobegger 9y ago
I've ignored people around me while reading books as a kid, I've ignored people by sitting in front of a PC as a teenager, and now I ignore people while looking at a mobile phone. Whenever I try to spend less time looking at my phone, I just spend more time reading the newspaper or whatever else I can find. Maybe technology has made the problem worse, but at least in my case the problem is me, not whatever distracts me.
- thinbeige 9y ago
  > I just spend more time reading the newspaper There so many great things you can do when being offline. But it's definitely not reading a physical newspaper in 2017. This doesn't make sense (for me at least) and this is not about liking or hating technology. It's like using a phone booth for making phone calls. A newspaper is just an inferior medium for that use case. The actual message of your post is good though. Edit: Why the downvotes?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - jacobolus 9y ago
    As far as I can tell his point is that he suffers from a kind of “information addiction” and it prevents him from engaging with the people around him as much as he would like or accomplishing other goals, and that he switches reading a newspaper (still a form of compulsive solitary procrastination) if for whatever reason the internet isn’t available. Your comment is a non sequitur.
- canjobear 9y ago
  > the problem is me Is it a problem? You don't have to pathologize it.
  - jakobegger 9y ago
    I don’t consider it a major problem, but it is definitely a pretty annoying habit.
binaryapparatus 9y ago
I am bit older than average and completely disconnected with my phone. Did you know that if you don't unlock iPhone for 24 hours you have to enter code to unlock? Did you know that iPhone battery can last for a week if you don't use it? I am happy not to have phone addiction.
- KGIII 9y ago
  I was a slave to my phone, for many years. It was needed for business. Today, I do have a smartphone, but I think it is in the car. I'm not actually sure where it is. I have no apps, other than what came with it. In fact, that's one of the reason I picked a Windows phone. Nobody makes apps for it. Really, it does all I want. I make calls, text, email, take pictures, and browse the web when I am bored and not home. I sometimes tether it and use a laptop. That's pretty much it. It gets lost, the battery runs out, and I don't care. I'm okay with that. There are already a bunch of ways to communicate with me. I even have a landline. It's not that bad, compared to what I witness others doing. I see people, out with others, and many of them remain glued to their phones. A friend recently informed me that people will use their phones, not as cameras, while having sex at those live cam sites. I'm not actually sure how I'd feel if the missus pulled out her phone and was posting to Facebook during sex. Speaking of Facebook, I don't have anything like that. Anyway, it seems that we have all these outlets to communicate, but the majority of activities barely seems to meet that definition. But, I digress. I guess I'm trying to say that I am also happy to not have a phone addiction. I don't even answer either of my phones, unless I have a reason to do so. It has been about ten years that I haven't needed to give a phone permission to interrupt me. It feels pretty good.
- Theodores 9y ago
  Having a bicycle and a personal 'burner' phone works for me. I do have some super-posh Pixel XL kindly provided by work but that does not fit in my pocket too well when cycling. Hence I still rock the 'burner' phone that does private chat, emails, txt and calls. There are maps and interwebs on there too, it is all I need when I am not at a computer. I don't have a 'thousand Facebook friends' as I am not on Facebook. However, on my ride to work I will see plenty of faces I know walking their dogs, jogging or cycling like myself. I get real-world 'likes' and the 'thread' of conversation is in memory only, not scrawled out in txt-spk. Having the 'big phone' in my bag means I can take decent photos if I want to, I can ssh in to servers and try those new exciting apps with it too. I don't have 'FOMO' issues because I have the latest-and-greatest phone there if I want it. The other benefit of my 'burner' phone is that it has a big battery that charges quickly, it takes SD cards and, due to light usage, the battery lasts a long time between those charges. I am always there for people on my 'burner' phone so I have not disconnected from my phone whatsoever. The only 'app' apart from Whatsapp! and a compass app that I have installed is an app that tells me how often I checked my phone over the last 24 hours. Normally I am around 10 'checks of phone' a day, I believe most people are at the 65 level. My colleagues that commute in via tin-box means, be it train, bus or car, well, they may be getting the 'Facebook likes' to light up their dopamine receptors but this is fake, much like how class 'A' drugs work. I enjoy knowing real-world people in the real community, with no adverts to see on my cycle commute. I also think it is a two-way thing, those half-dozen people I exchange smiles and friendly words with probably also enjoy being out and about for the same reasons. Now what if I decide to sell the bicycle and endure normal transport instead, stalking people on social media instead of interacting in the real world? What if everyone did that? Would we have any community at all? If this happens, who will say hello to the old folks that don't have computer skills? What human interactions will they have? I think that we really should be starting to call social media what it really is. Let's start calling it 'anti-social media' because that is what is really going on with this phone obsession people have and the apps that lure them in to scroll their life away.
nessup 9y ago
I've been following Tristan Harris's work since he released Time Well Spent. I think he has a legitimate complaint, but his proposed solutions are terrible. For example, he suggests to Facebook: > Imagine we replace the Comment button with a Let’s Meet button. When we want to post something controversial, we can have the choice to say, “Hey let’s talk about this” in person, not online. Why would Facebook, or any "attention seeking" Internet company for that matter, do this? You can even tell the interviewer is skeptical. If he had suggested, say, that we should take our business to consumer companies whose business models don't rely on attention grabbing, that would've at least been a start. Instead he suggests we "become more self-aware" and "transform design." Which consumers should become self-aware? Why would entrenched companies change their design? The idealism is nice and all, but so far I think this has been a wasted opportunity to fix a real problem. The messaging could be far more specific and realistic. But at least we're talking about it.
- dcow 9y ago
  Exactly. If his hypothesis is correct and we are better off without these attention-seeking platforms, then the true solution lies in building platforms that are better for humanity and migrating as consumers to these healthier platforms. Instead he's just groveling for CEOs of platform comeanies to issue some edict that will transform their business model and health metrics overnight to something that is less about attention and more about.. social value? Last time I checked shareholders and your bottom line don't care about social value unless that is the product you're in the business of providing. It's not Facebook's job to help me be a good person and frankly I don't want them pretending it is. If I want to meet you for beers and politics I'll make that happen, not Facebook.
  - pmoriarty 9y ago
    "Last time I checked shareholders and your bottom line don't care about social value unless that is the product you're in the business of providing." There's something called "Ethical Investing" (aka "Socially responsible investing", "sustainable investing" or "resposible investing").[1] Its existence is clear proof that at least some investors do care about the social value of the companies and products they invest in. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_investing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_investing
mjevans 9y ago
Am I the only one that sees much danger in the 'meetup IRL' button mentioned in the middle of this? While I very much agree that something needs to be done to encourage making real friends in real life (possibly some kind of sonar app based on short range peer to peer?), I think trying to get opposing sides in a heated debate together is less than wise.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
  I think it's a double-edged sword; disagreements IRL are less likely to get nasty, but it they do get nasty things can escalate faster and end worse.
- Tepix 9y ago
  It's usually not a problem ... unless you live in a country where everyone has a gun.
- sliverstorm 9y ago
  Yes, let's separate people who disagree and avoid letting them talk about their disagreements in person. It's much safer to avoid anyone you disagree with, and minimizes hurt feelings.
KirinDave 9y ago
I typically summarize this to fellow professionals shipping mobile apps as: "We optimize for measurable engagment as a proxy for customer satisfaction, which is itself often suggested as a proxy for product value. This is a terrible mistake and it makes us optimize for novel forms of addiction."
amelius 9y ago
I'd like to read some more compelling arguments. Or for example, a story about how someone's life is influenced by social media and how it could have been better. It's not that I cannot understand this, and see where things can go wrong. It's that I can't seem to convince others of it. The same holds for privacy issues. The arguments are all true, but just not compelling enough.
_nalply 9y ago
I think the end user should be given the power to customise their experiences. For example I wrote an user script for Youtube to hide recommendations and to redirect to a blank page when a video ends. It was for my kids but I realise it's also good for me.
- ColanR 9y ago
  any chance you can share that script?
  - _nalply 9y ago
    Sure, but no guarantee given. https://gist.github.com/nalply/6bcb91154df56b58974a65ebb3f0b492 https://gist.github.com/nalply/6bcb91154df56b58974a65ebb3f0b...
pmoriarty 9y ago
"an interview on the Sam Harris podcast about all the different ways technology is persuading millions of people in ways they don’t see" Tristan Harris is only mentioning some very recent manifestations and variations of a critique that has been around for a very long time. The history of this critique is a complex and not easily summarized one,[1] but, to take just one example, in The Technological Society[2] Jacques Ellul[3] argued that it was the efficiency improvements in what Ellul called "technique" (which can be thought of as technology in a broader sense) were effectively irresistible and inevitable to society as a whole, as the adopters of less efficient techniques were inevitably out-competed by users of more efficient ones. For Ellul this was important because it meant the loss of humanity's freedom, as they are inevitably following where efficient technique leads them. This was presaged by Heidegger[4] most famously in The Question Concerning Technology[5], and a whole field of Philosophy of Technology followed.[6] A more recent and popular exploration of technology's influence can be found in the documentaries of Adam Curtis.[7] [1] - For one easily accessible but analytically-flavored attempt at a summary, see: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ [2] - https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/dp/0394703901/ https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/d... [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul [4] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidegger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidegger [5] - https://www.amazon.com/Question-Concerning-Technology-Other-Essays/dp/0061319694/ https://www.amazon.com/Question-Concerning-Technology-Other-... [6] - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ [7] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis
- gshubert17 9y ago
  In addition, Timothy Wu has written a book, The Attention Merchants: How Our Time and Attention Are Gathered and Sold, which describes the interaction of advertising and technology, especially the "three screens" (movies, television, and computer). https://www.amazon.com/Attention-Merchants-Tim-Wu/dp/1782394826 https://www.amazon.com/Attention-Merchants-Tim-Wu/dp/1782394...
pcmaffey 9y ago
No one can hijack your mind without your consent. - Eleanor Roosevelt
- etiam 9y ago
  Oh, if only.
calvinbhai 9y ago
I wish I could get something like the Self Control app (that's on my mac) for iPhone. If tweetbot adds this to the app, it'll be very useful!
blubb-fish 9y ago
today i deleted my Facebook account ... true story!
- harryf 9y ago
  well done
Chiba-City 9y ago
Do we confuse efficiency engineers (purpose, work, routing, training, outcomes) with inefficiency engineers(distraction, entertainment, inputs)? I cut some teeth on early laser printed govt report generation where every page has a minutes-to-read constraint for decision makers. That is efficiency. Couchsurfing And Meetup make in-person local group formation and related discussions possible. DC here is a town where people talk for money, but many communities of Americans are very shy about meeting any strangers. Masses of people burdened by kids and long commutes or old age mostly seek distraction. Those are yesterday's TV ad audiences ordering more pizza cheese. I ignore my phone. Some nerdier people have "auditory agoraphobia" and tune in to music, podcasts or books on tape in lieu of chewing cud. I think that is good compared to listening to Howard Stern in a car. Other people are just remarkably bored. I bothered to spend a few weeks asking people what they were they doing on their phones outside offices. I was surprised to learn how most women I asked were constantly catalog shopping. I was surprised because I use Amazon like preppies used LL Bean to avoid wasting time in retail shopping. Visually obsessed shoppers are problems few will pay engineers to solve.
StanislavPetrov 9y ago
This is most relevant (and troubling) among younger people. While its just as possible for older people to get wrapped up with their smart phones and social media sites, at least they weren't completely absorbed their formative years when their brains were developing. We are in the midst of a massive social experiment with a generation of children being raised with these devices, social media, and all the many things that are entailed. How it is going to turn out anyone's guess.
jdnier 9y ago
A great quote from the article: "Advertising is the new coal. It was wonderful for propping up the internet economy. It got us to a certain level of economic prosperity, and that’s fantastic. And it also polluted the inner environment and the cultural environment and the political environment because it enabled anyone to basically pay to get access to your mind.
cerealbad 9y ago
selling targeted advertising in front of curated information is not the cyberpunk future i was promised. information needs to become transparent so addicts look through it rather than at it, with an augmented reality horizon. current mobile computing is incapable of providing immersive or useful experiences, the success of games shows the potential and inbuilt demand in connected movement devices. a mask is far more useful than a pair of glasses: identity tag, atmospheric filter, audio visual screen, trauma drug delivery system, human net, fashion and status symbol. ideally you should wear your net/node like a second skin, after all it's the clothing of the 21st century. before we get there we need flexible integrated circuits, paper thin devices that are powered by light or heat. decades and decades away from mom and dad slipping on their iVide's.

178 points by johnny313 9y ago

The guys is totally right but what he says is nothing new since Nir Eyal's Hooked and B.T. Skinner's Skinner-box. Besides, the web itself, yes just simple websites, has been highly addictive for decades. This ecosystem was just transformed to mobile and because the phone is always with you the addiction is even worse. Facebook on desktop was as addictive as on mobile. I miss a solution but he doesn't propose any.

arkitaip 9y ago
He actually outlines a 3 step strategy for regaining control. Also, there's the non-profit he started that aims to make people more mindful on how shitty apps affect our mental states http://www.timewellspent.io/ http://www.timewellspent.io/
- thinbeige 9y ago
  I briefly went over the site before but haven't seen the 3 steps, guess I missed them, mind to tell them? Edit: I just went another time to the site and still can't see any '3 steps' in text form. Would be great if you could enlighten us since you know the 3 steps.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - peterhartree 9y ago
    From the transcript of the TED talk [1] mentioned in the OP: > So how do we fix this? We need to make three radical changes to technology and to our society. > The first is we need to acknowledge that we are persuadable. Once you start understanding that your mind can be scheduled into having little thoughts or little blocks of time that you didn't choose, wouldn't we want to use that understanding and protect against the way that that happens? I think we need to see ourselves fundamentally in a new way. It's almost like a new period of human history, like the Enlightenment, but almost a kind of self-aware Enlightenment, that we can be persuaded, and there might be something we want to protect. > The second is we need new models and accountability systems so that as the world gets better and more and more persuasive over time -- because it's only going to get more persuasive -- that the people in those control rooms are accountable and transparent to what we want. The only form of ethical persuasion that exists is when the goals of the persuader are aligned with the goals of the persuadee. And that involves questioning big things, like the business model of advertising. > Lastly, we need a design renaissance, because once you have this view of human nature, that you can steer the timelines of a billion people -- just imagine, there's people who have some desire about what they want to do and what they want to be thinking and what they want to be feeling and how they want to be informed, and we're all just tugged into these other directions. And you have a billion people just tugged into all these different directions. Well, imagine an entire design renaissance that tried to orchestrate the exact and most empowering time-well-spent way for those timelines to happen. And that would involve two things: one would be protecting against the timelines that we don't want to be experiencing, the thoughts that we wouldn't want to be happening, so that when that ding happens, not having the ding that sends us away; and the second would be empowering us to live out the timeline that we want. [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention/transcript#t-580659 https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tr...
    - thinbeige 9y ago
      Thanks!
    - icelancer 9y ago
      Is the point supposed to be that his proposed solution is impossible to implement and flies in the face of market and incentive-driven behavior? When I think "three step proposal" I think of something actionable by an individual, not something that would have to be enacted on by basically a totalitarian government.

dcow 9y ago

It really kinda sounds like this guy woke up one day, decided he didn't like technology, and began a crusade. I'm struggling to find anything novel in what's being argued unless you didn't already know that the incentives are not stacked in your favor as a user. The interview does make one good point: who does say what is best for me as a user and why is time spent on a given platform a bad metric (even if it's not originally born of a user-centric mindset--which is also arguable since many product teams are user-centric)? Perhaps I'm enjoying that time.

bitexploder 9y ago
This is ignoring our finite attention and decision reservoir and something Cal Newport refers to as attention residue -- the time it takes to transition wholly to another task. It can be jarring to realize how fully these devices and distractions integrate into one's existence.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

japhyr 9y ago

I did something interesting this week. I teach high school, and this was our first week back at school. No students yet, just beginning of the year prep work. I was checking my phone every 5-10 minutes half out of restlessness at sitting inside all day, and also to keep up with rapidly evolving events in the world. But I wanted to focus more, without turning my phone off. So I put my phone in my left pocket instead of my right pocket. It worked. Every time I reached for my phone, I had to think consciously how to get it out. That interrupted the cycle of just pulling it out enough to make me only pull it out once in a while. It went back to being a tool I use to do lots of things, rather than something I use to fill time when there's nothing to do for 30 seconds. The first step he mentions, simply being aware of these habits and breaking the cycles, can go a long way in keeping these habits from becoming too entrenched.

danielhooper 9y ago
Smart idea. I get a similar effect when I logout of sites like Twitter and have to face a login page when I revisit. It breaks me from my unconscious loop and lets me decide that this is not actually how I want to spend my time. Do you think changing the pocket is enough, or rather its that you're switching your dominant/non-dominant hands?
- japhyr 9y ago
  It was really interesting to see what patterns switching pockets interrupted for me. One was the simple act of reaching for the phone - I had to consciously think about where it is. Then it feels unfamiliar to even start to pull it out of my left pocket. Then I have to decide to swipe and operate it with my non-dominant hand, or switch it over and use my right hand. There were more opportunities to break the cycle than I would have expected. I was surprised to learn there are people who don't keep their phone in a particular pocket, who this wouldn't work for.
giancarlostoro 9y ago
Doesn't work for me, I put my phone in any pocket and look for it in any pocket. Though if I want to stop using my phone it's easier to just uninstall apps that are distracting. Takes a lot more effort to install said app.

jrcii 9y ago

I sensed that something felt wrong with the phone->human relationship about a year ago and stopped using it completely. Never looked back.

jakobegger 9y ago

I've ignored people around me while reading books as a kid, I've ignored people by sitting in front of a PC as a teenager, and now I ignore people while looking at a mobile phone. Whenever I try to spend less time looking at my phone, I just spend more time reading the newspaper or whatever else I can find. Maybe technology has made the problem worse, but at least in my case the problem is me, not whatever distracts me.

thinbeige 9y ago
> I just spend more time reading the newspaper There so many great things you can do when being offline. But it's definitely not reading a physical newspaper in 2017. This doesn't make sense (for me at least) and this is not about liking or hating technology. It's like using a phone booth for making phone calls. A newspaper is just an inferior medium for that use case. The actual message of your post is good though. Edit: Why the downvotes?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- jacobolus 9y ago
  As far as I can tell his point is that he suffers from a kind of “information addiction” and it prevents him from engaging with the people around him as much as he would like or accomplishing other goals, and that he switches reading a newspaper (still a form of compulsive solitary procrastination) if for whatever reason the internet isn’t available. Your comment is a non sequitur.
canjobear 9y ago
> the problem is me Is it a problem? You don't have to pathologize it.
- jakobegger 9y ago
  I don’t consider it a major problem, but it is definitely a pretty annoying habit.

binaryapparatus 9y ago

I am bit older than average and completely disconnected with my phone. Did you know that if you don't unlock iPhone for 24 hours you have to enter code to unlock? Did you know that iPhone battery can last for a week if you don't use it? I am happy not to have phone addiction.

KGIII 9y ago
I was a slave to my phone, for many years. It was needed for business. Today, I do have a smartphone, but I think it is in the car. I'm not actually sure where it is. I have no apps, other than what came with it. In fact, that's one of the reason I picked a Windows phone. Nobody makes apps for it. Really, it does all I want. I make calls, text, email, take pictures, and browse the web when I am bored and not home. I sometimes tether it and use a laptop. That's pretty much it. It gets lost, the battery runs out, and I don't care. I'm okay with that. There are already a bunch of ways to communicate with me. I even have a landline. It's not that bad, compared to what I witness others doing. I see people, out with others, and many of them remain glued to their phones. A friend recently informed me that people will use their phones, not as cameras, while having sex at those live cam sites. I'm not actually sure how I'd feel if the missus pulled out her phone and was posting to Facebook during sex. Speaking of Facebook, I don't have anything like that. Anyway, it seems that we have all these outlets to communicate, but the majority of activities barely seems to meet that definition. But, I digress. I guess I'm trying to say that I am also happy to not have a phone addiction. I don't even answer either of my phones, unless I have a reason to do so. It has been about ten years that I haven't needed to give a phone permission to interrupt me. It feels pretty good.
Theodores 9y ago
Having a bicycle and a personal 'burner' phone works for me. I do have some super-posh Pixel XL kindly provided by work but that does not fit in my pocket too well when cycling. Hence I still rock the 'burner' phone that does private chat, emails, txt and calls. There are maps and interwebs on there too, it is all I need when I am not at a computer. I don't have a 'thousand Facebook friends' as I am not on Facebook. However, on my ride to work I will see plenty of faces I know walking their dogs, jogging or cycling like myself. I get real-world 'likes' and the 'thread' of conversation is in memory only, not scrawled out in txt-spk. Having the 'big phone' in my bag means I can take decent photos if I want to, I can ssh in to servers and try those new exciting apps with it too. I don't have 'FOMO' issues because I have the latest-and-greatest phone there if I want it. The other benefit of my 'burner' phone is that it has a big battery that charges quickly, it takes SD cards and, due to light usage, the battery lasts a long time between those charges. I am always there for people on my 'burner' phone so I have not disconnected from my phone whatsoever. The only 'app' apart from Whatsapp! and a compass app that I have installed is an app that tells me how often I checked my phone over the last 24 hours. Normally I am around 10 'checks of phone' a day, I believe most people are at the 65 level. My colleagues that commute in via tin-box means, be it train, bus or car, well, they may be getting the 'Facebook likes' to light up their dopamine receptors but this is fake, much like how class 'A' drugs work. I enjoy knowing real-world people in the real community, with no adverts to see on my cycle commute. I also think it is a two-way thing, those half-dozen people I exchange smiles and friendly words with probably also enjoy being out and about for the same reasons. Now what if I decide to sell the bicycle and endure normal transport instead, stalking people on social media instead of interacting in the real world? What if everyone did that? Would we have any community at all? If this happens, who will say hello to the old folks that don't have computer skills? What human interactions will they have? I think that we really should be starting to call social media what it really is. Let's start calling it 'anti-social media' because that is what is really going on with this phone obsession people have and the apps that lure them in to scroll their life away.

nessup 9y ago

I've been following Tristan Harris's work since he released Time Well Spent. I think he has a legitimate complaint, but his proposed solutions are terrible. For example, he suggests to Facebook: > Imagine we replace the Comment button with a Let’s Meet button. When we want to post something controversial, we can have the choice to say, “Hey let’s talk about this” in person, not online. Why would Facebook, or any "attention seeking" Internet company for that matter, do this? You can even tell the interviewer is skeptical. If he had suggested, say, that we should take our business to consumer companies whose business models don't rely on attention grabbing, that would've at least been a start. Instead he suggests we "become more self-aware" and "transform design." Which consumers should become self-aware? Why would entrenched companies change their design? The idealism is nice and all, but so far I think this has been a wasted opportunity to fix a real problem. The messaging could be far more specific and realistic. But at least we're talking about it.

dcow 9y ago
Exactly. If his hypothesis is correct and we are better off without these attention-seeking platforms, then the true solution lies in building platforms that are better for humanity and migrating as consumers to these healthier platforms. Instead he's just groveling for CEOs of platform comeanies to issue some edict that will transform their business model and health metrics overnight to something that is less about attention and more about.. social value? Last time I checked shareholders and your bottom line don't care about social value unless that is the product you're in the business of providing. It's not Facebook's job to help me be a good person and frankly I don't want them pretending it is. If I want to meet you for beers and politics I'll make that happen, not Facebook.
- pmoriarty 9y ago
  "Last time I checked shareholders and your bottom line don't care about social value unless that is the product you're in the business of providing." There's something called "Ethical Investing" (aka "Socially responsible investing", "sustainable investing" or "resposible investing").[1] Its existence is clear proof that at least some investors do care about the social value of the companies and products they invest in. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_investing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_investing

mjevans 9y ago

Am I the only one that sees much danger in the 'meetup IRL' button mentioned in the middle of this? While I very much agree that something needs to be done to encourage making real friends in real life (possibly some kind of sonar app based on short range peer to peer?), I think trying to get opposing sides in a heated debate together is less than wise.

yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
I think it's a double-edged sword; disagreements IRL are less likely to get nasty, but it they do get nasty things can escalate faster and end worse.
Tepix 9y ago
It's usually not a problem ... unless you live in a country where everyone has a gun.
sliverstorm 9y ago
Yes, let's separate people who disagree and avoid letting them talk about their disagreements in person. It's much safer to avoid anyone you disagree with, and minimizes hurt feelings.

KirinDave 9y ago

I typically summarize this to fellow professionals shipping mobile apps as: "We optimize for measurable engagment as a proxy for customer satisfaction, which is itself often suggested as a proxy for product value. This is a terrible mistake and it makes us optimize for novel forms of addiction."

amelius 9y ago

I'd like to read some more compelling arguments. Or for example, a story about how someone's life is influenced by social media and how it could have been better. It's not that I cannot understand this, and see where things can go wrong. It's that I can't seem to convince others of it. The same holds for privacy issues. The arguments are all true, but just not compelling enough.

_nalply 9y ago

I think the end user should be given the power to customise their experiences. For example I wrote an user script for Youtube to hide recommendations and to redirect to a blank page when a video ends. It was for my kids but I realise it's also good for me.

ColanR 9y ago
any chance you can share that script?
- _nalply 9y ago
  Sure, but no guarantee given. https://gist.github.com/nalply/6bcb91154df56b58974a65ebb3f0b492 https://gist.github.com/nalply/6bcb91154df56b58974a65ebb3f0b...

pmoriarty 9y ago

"an interview on the Sam Harris podcast about all the different ways technology is persuading millions of people in ways they don’t see" Tristan Harris is only mentioning some very recent manifestations and variations of a critique that has been around for a very long time. The history of this critique is a complex and not easily summarized one,[1] but, to take just one example, in The Technological Society[2] Jacques Ellul[3] argued that it was the efficiency improvements in what Ellul called "technique" (which can be thought of as technology in a broader sense) were effectively irresistible and inevitable to society as a whole, as the adopters of less efficient techniques were inevitably out-competed by users of more efficient ones. For Ellul this was important because it meant the loss of humanity's freedom, as they are inevitably following where efficient technique leads them. This was presaged by Heidegger[4] most famously in The Question Concerning Technology[5], and a whole field of Philosophy of Technology followed.[6] A more recent and popular exploration of technology's influence can be found in the documentaries of Adam Curtis.[7] [1] - For one easily accessible but analytically-flavored attempt at a summary, see: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ [2] - https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/dp/0394703901/ https://www.amazon.com/Technological-Society-Jacques-Ellul/d... [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul [4] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidegger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidegger [5] - https://www.amazon.com/Question-Concerning-Technology-Other-Essays/dp/0061319694/ https://www.amazon.com/Question-Concerning-Technology-Other-... [6] - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/ [7] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis

gshubert17 9y ago
In addition, Timothy Wu has written a book, The Attention Merchants: How Our Time and Attention Are Gathered and Sold, which describes the interaction of advertising and technology, especially the "three screens" (movies, television, and computer). https://www.amazon.com/Attention-Merchants-Tim-Wu/dp/1782394826 https://www.amazon.com/Attention-Merchants-Tim-Wu/dp/1782394...

pcmaffey 9y ago

No one can hijack your mind without your consent. - Eleanor Roosevelt

etiam 9y ago
Oh, if only.

calvinbhai 9y ago

I wish I could get something like the Self Control app (that's on my mac) for iPhone. If tweetbot adds this to the app, it'll be very useful!

blubb-fish 9y ago

today i deleted my Facebook account ... true story!

harryf 9y ago
well done

Chiba-City 9y ago

Do we confuse efficiency engineers (purpose, work, routing, training, outcomes) with inefficiency engineers(distraction, entertainment, inputs)? I cut some teeth on early laser printed govt report generation where every page has a minutes-to-read constraint for decision makers. That is efficiency. Couchsurfing And Meetup make in-person local group formation and related discussions possible. DC here is a town where people talk for money, but many communities of Americans are very shy about meeting any strangers. Masses of people burdened by kids and long commutes or old age mostly seek distraction. Those are yesterday's TV ad audiences ordering more pizza cheese. I ignore my phone. Some nerdier people have "auditory agoraphobia" and tune in to music, podcasts or books on tape in lieu of chewing cud. I think that is good compared to listening to Howard Stern in a car. Other people are just remarkably bored. I bothered to spend a few weeks asking people what they were they doing on their phones outside offices. I was surprised to learn how most women I asked were constantly catalog shopping. I was surprised because I use Amazon like preppies used LL Bean to avoid wasting time in retail shopping. Visually obsessed shoppers are problems few will pay engineers to solve.

StanislavPetrov 9y ago

This is most relevant (and troubling) among younger people. While its just as possible for older people to get wrapped up with their smart phones and social media sites, at least they weren't completely absorbed their formative years when their brains were developing. We are in the midst of a massive social experiment with a generation of children being raised with these devices, social media, and all the many things that are entailed. How it is going to turn out anyone's guess.

jdnier 9y ago

A great quote from the article: "Advertising is the new coal. It was wonderful for propping up the internet economy. It got us to a certain level of economic prosperity, and that’s fantastic. And it also polluted the inner environment and the cultural environment and the political environment because it enabled anyone to basically pay to get access to your mind.

cerealbad 9y ago

selling targeted advertising in front of curated information is not the cyberpunk future i was promised. information needs to become transparent so addicts look through it rather than at it, with an augmented reality horizon. current mobile computing is incapable of providing immersive or useful experiences, the success of games shows the potential and inbuilt demand in connected movement devices. a mask is far more useful than a pair of glasses: identity tag, atmospheric filter, audio visual screen, trauma drug delivery system, human net, fashion and status symbol. ideally you should wear your net/node like a second skin, after all it's the clothing of the 21st century. before we get there we need flexible integrated circuits, paper thin devices that are powered by light or heat. decades and decades away from mom and dad slipping on their iVide's.