4 ms·

Comparing a smartphone to a hat is like comparing a Tesla to a sock. It doesn't illuminate the conversation at all, it's a straw-man in the extreme. Some peopl

Comparing a smartphone to a hat is like comparing a Tesla to a sock. It doesn't illuminate the conversation at all, it's a straw-man in the extreme. Some people don't want smartphones. Some people can't get hold of them. They are both getting locked out of basic societal functions.

scarface_74 3y ago
So these are college students on a college campus who can’t get a hold to smart phones and you’re worried about them getting locked out of societal functions? If those people who don’t “wan to use a cell phone, then they are free to suffer the consequences of their decisions. No need for society to bend to their whims.
- austinjp 3y ago
  Dude, come on. You can surely see where this line of argument leads. Are you seriously defending a society that continually and arbitrarily raises the barriers to accessing services? On what criteria are those barriers raised? Those decisions are being outsourced by states -- which (democratic) societies elect to act in their best interests -- to monopolies that have none of those responsibilities. In fact, as your comments illustrate, market pressure and competition provide neat justifications to avoid those responsibilities. They lead to a race to the bottom, not the top.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    It’s called progress. You can always become Amish. You make the choice - you suffer the consequences of your choice. If you can’t for some reason use a smart phone, then yes the college should offer assistance just like most colleges offer assistance for people with disabilities.
    - flangola7 3y ago
      Progress implies society is becoming better, more equitable, and a heathier environment to live in. O don't see how mandating smartphone ownership works towards any of those.
    - austinjp 3y ago
      Limiting access to services that were previously available is certainly not progress.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

scarface_74 3y ago

So these are college students on a college campus who can’t get a hold to smart phones and you’re worried about them getting locked out of societal functions? If those people who don’t “wan to use a cell phone, then they are free to suffer the consequences of their decisions. No need for society to bend to their whims.

austinjp 3y ago
Dude, come on. You can surely see where this line of argument leads. Are you seriously defending a society that continually and arbitrarily raises the barriers to accessing services? On what criteria are those barriers raised? Those decisions are being outsourced by states -- which (democratic) societies elect to act in their best interests -- to monopolies that have none of those responsibilities. In fact, as your comments illustrate, market pressure and competition provide neat justifications to avoid those responsibilities. They lead to a race to the bottom, not the top.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  It’s called progress. You can always become Amish. You make the choice - you suffer the consequences of your choice. If you can’t for some reason use a smart phone, then yes the college should offer assistance just like most colleges offer assistance for people with disabilities.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    Progress implies society is becoming better, more equitable, and a heathier environment to live in. O don't see how mandating smartphone ownership works towards any of those.
  - austinjp 3y ago
    Limiting access to services that were previously available is certainly not progress.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]