3 ms·
I think we should talk more specifically than "phones" or "the Internet". For example, the rise of "phones" from 2012 onwards coincided with the dominance of so
by epups 4y ago
I think we should talk more specifically than "phones" or "the Internet". For example, the rise of "phones" from 2012 onwards coincided with the dominance of social media.
I know this sounds pedantic but the author lists several studies pointing to social media impact, and still decided to go with that title and a big picture of Steve Jobs. If we forbid smartphones tomorrow and kept the rest of the Internet the same, I doubt anything would be much different at all.
- tgv 4y agoPhones (and tablets) facilitate access much more than e.g. laptops and desktops. The thing buzzes or vibrates in your pocket, you grab it and look at it. It's immediate, it interrupts everything.
- epups 4y agoAnd what does it interrupt you with? Social media notifications. It's true that phones might be a better vector for it than most, but it's important to have clarity if we want to change anything. The article presents zero evidence for the damage phones cause without citing social media.
- fleddr 4y agoI could not disagree more. Before smartphones, one would "surf the web" for an hour or so at night, and physically sit down at a PC. That's a radically different experience compared to the 24/7 always-on information overload and forever temptation of the smartphone. The very article points this out: there was a time where the internet complemented physical life, in good ways even. Second, smartphone engagement is shallow. On a PC one tends to read more, write more extensively, because it's easy to do so.