4 ms·

You're effectively forced to have a smartphone. It pisses me off, because aside from the privacy aspect, it marganalises a lot of people. As with many things, h

by elric 2y ago

You're effectively forced to have a smartphone. It pisses me off, because aside from the privacy aspect, it marganalises a lot of people. As with many things, how true this is depends on where you are. But many restaurants refuse to hand out menus, many places require mobile payments, gyms require apps for access, etc.

BLKNSLVR 2y ago
Do they require payment before eating? If not, I'm sure they'd find a way to accept payment from someone who has eaten and has means to pay that don't include a smart phone.
1over137 2y ago
Whoa, really? What country is that?
- dt3ft 2y ago
  Sweden. Good luck living there without a smartphone.
  - nicce 2y ago
    It is not only about the smartphone but social media too, to be precise. You are less attractive, "odd" or "strange" if you are not there. There is huge social pressure.
    - hiatus 2y ago
      > You are less attractive, "odd" or "strange" if you are not there. There is huge social pressure Other people's thoughts of you are not under your control. That people feel pressured to be on these platforms says more about the company they keep than anything else.
      - elric 2y ago
        What? Society moves in one direction, some people don't (can't, won't, whatever). Those people become marginalised as society fails to provide adequate alternatives. Reducing it to "the company you keep" and "feeling pressured" seems a tad simplistic.
    - 93po 2y ago
      If someone evaluates whether to socialize with you based off of this, and it's important enough to you to not have or carry a smart phone, then they're probably not super compatible as friends or a partner anyway
BSDobelix 2y ago
>because aside from the privacy aspect, it marganalises a lot of people. Why not go to the European Court of Justice? And I did not say that there are no parallels to 1984, but I would argue that there are more parallels to Lord of the (key)ring than to 1984 ATM. By the way, the driving force behind this law is also Swedish (Ylva Johansson), so maybe Sweden has some work to do ;)

by elric 2y ago

BLKNSLVR 2y ago

Do they require payment before eating? If not, I'm sure they'd find a way to accept payment from someone who has eaten and has means to pay that don't include a smart phone.

1over137 2y ago

Whoa, really? What country is that?

dt3ft 2y ago
Sweden. Good luck living there without a smartphone.
- nicce 2y ago
  It is not only about the smartphone but social media too, to be precise. You are less attractive, "odd" or "strange" if you are not there. There is huge social pressure.
  - hiatus 2y ago
    > You are less attractive, "odd" or "strange" if you are not there. There is huge social pressure Other people's thoughts of you are not under your control. That people feel pressured to be on these platforms says more about the company they keep than anything else.
    - elric 2y ago
      What? Society moves in one direction, some people don't (can't, won't, whatever). Those people become marginalised as society fails to provide adequate alternatives. Reducing it to "the company you keep" and "feeling pressured" seems a tad simplistic.
  - 93po 2y ago
    If someone evaluates whether to socialize with you based off of this, and it's important enough to you to not have or carry a smart phone, then they're probably not super compatible as friends or a partner anyway

BSDobelix 2y ago

>because aside from the privacy aspect, it marganalises a lot of people. Why not go to the European Court of Justice? And I did not say that there are no parallels to 1984, but I would argue that there are more parallels to Lord of the (key)ring than to 1984 ATM. By the way, the driving force behind this law is also Swedish (Ylva Johansson), so maybe Sweden has some work to do ;)