4 ms·

Everyone has a smartphone lol - i can tell that living in a country with great digital services is a lot less stressful than in country with no digitization and

Everyone has a smartphone lol - i can tell that living in a country with great digital services is a lot less stressful than in country with no digitization and old school paperwork i have gone through both.

closewith 1y ago
Falsehoods programmers believe about society.
jcgl 1y ago
If smartphones are to be a requirement for participation in civil society, privacy- and freedom-preserving smartphones are needed at the very least. People shouldn't be required to submit to some company's Terms of Service in order to participate in society.
- ta20240528 1y ago
  Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? The answer is yes: which is why banks are licensed and have ombudsmen. As are telcos. No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. Perhaps they should (IDK), but they won't.
  - pjc50 1y ago
    Telcos are licensed. Mobile phone manufacturers and, crucially, OS providers, are not. Although in the EU they are now subject to some Digital Markets Act control.
    - jcgl 1y ago
      And telco licensing isn't even really relevant. Afaik, licensing condition only has to do with their use of the airwaves and other such technical stuff. It's got nothing to do with ensuring the rights of the telco users.
  - afandian 1y ago
    > live in fear of private companies It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-and-mastercard-cut-a-secret-ad-deal-to-track-retail-sales https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-an... Meaningful regulation would mean e.g. air-gapped infrastructure so they can't make inadvertent privacy mistakes. And guaranteed service levels, and a service of last resort. Google have based built a business model without accountability and transparency. Which is fine, as long as we're not forced to use them by the state.
    - jcgl 1y ago
      > It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g. It's not just the specific things that those companies do, it's the (lack of) structure of rights and entitlements that the users have.
  - jcgl 1y ago
    > Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? Maybe so, I don't know. Though it is worth remarking that "private" banks in the US really are only semi-private. The (admittedly imperfect) regulations that banks are subject to starts to blur the lines between public and private. Not to mention that there are far more banks than smartphone handset-and-OS makers. > No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. This is not the only option (though it would potentially be an option for some sufficiently-powerful societies). Other options could include: 1. Multilateral coalitions to do some combination of specify/design/build smartphones and/or their OS 2. Specify a set of user rights and regulate smartphone handset and OS manufacturers accordingly As a sibling commenter said, this isn't about living in fear of private companies as such. It's about not wanting to be coerced into a system of products that don't preserve liberal rights.
afandian 1y ago
Not everyone has a smartphone with the latest OS and a fully charged battery. > i can tell that living in a country with great digital services is a lot less stressful For everyone who deserves to participate in society?
- octo888 1y ago
  > fully charged battery. Yup. Look at train tickets in England. For now it's a convenience but you'll notice the law hasn't kept up with the push to have tickets on phones: the law still says you must produce on demand a ticket when requested. So if your battery runs out or your phone crashes or the app glitches or you've annoyed the "safety" department of Google/Apple... it's entirely your problem A moody ticket inspector is under no obligation really to give you a few minutes to sort it out
  - sjw987 1y ago
    Or, if like I experienced yesterday, the most popular train ticket app stutters during peak rush hour and you cannot display the ticket you have actually bought to the conductor and exit gates at the destination. :)
hkt 1y ago
Not everyone has a smartphone. A substantial number of especially older people don't. Plus poor people, and just.. well, offline people whose lives are much more communal than ours. The requirement for a hundreds-of-units-of-currency device to prove who you are is bonkers.
- bapak 1y ago
  Sorry but aluminum foil level of thinking to me. First of all, my digital ID is still a physical card. Second, you're on the wrong forum complaining that people need a device to do things in life.
  - qwopmaster 1y ago
    But this isn't a conversation about people being excluded from the latest JS framework, this is a conversation about people not using a smartphone being increasingly excluded from pretty fundamental things. App only tickets for public transportation? Grandma can't do that. E-voting? Grandma can't do that. Online banking? Grandma can't do that, because grandma struggles to send a text message much less to navigate a modern app with five different dickbars that is outright designed to get people to sign up for marketing trash. Having an option for digital ID is great, and there are many potential benefits to it. Requiring a modern smartphone for it is wildly out of touch.
  - Muromec 1y ago
    >Second, you're on the wrong forum complaining that people need a device to do things in life. I think it's exactly right forum, because we know how unreliable and unmagical are those things and are in a good position to judge the risk of relying on them too much.
sjw987 1y ago
Not everybody wants to carry a smartphone around all the time. If the ID becomes about more than proving right to work, and becomes a daily carry, it's not hard to see the appeal of a government down the line tapping into an always on-hand microphone, GPS, internet enabled device. Even putting the tin foil hat aside, I and many people like me enjoy leaving the phone at home, and want as little time spent on the thing as possible.
qwopmaster 1y ago
The vast majority of people after 65 or so are incapable of using modern smartphones beyond extremely simple things like calling.
unethical_ban 1y ago
Digital is more convenient at the loss of privacy. And no, absolutely not, NOT everyone has a smartphone nor can use one. Go read the thread on teaching iPhones to seniors.
cess11 1y ago
Perhaps if you never think about what the state and corporations can do with that surveillance and the amount of control and violence it enables.

closewith 1y ago

Falsehoods programmers believe about society.

jcgl 1y ago

If smartphones are to be a requirement for participation in civil society, privacy- and freedom-preserving smartphones are needed at the very least. People shouldn't be required to submit to some company's Terms of Service in order to participate in society.

ta20240528 1y ago
Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? The answer is yes: which is why banks are licensed and have ombudsmen. As are telcos. No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. Perhaps they should (IDK), but they won't.
- pjc50 1y ago
  Telcos are licensed. Mobile phone manufacturers and, crucially, OS providers, are not. Although in the EU they are now subject to some Digital Markets Act control.
  - jcgl 1y ago
    And telco licensing isn't even really relevant. Afaik, licensing condition only has to do with their use of the airwaves and other such technical stuff. It's got nothing to do with ensuring the rights of the telco users.
- afandian 1y ago
  > live in fear of private companies It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-and-mastercard-cut-a-secret-ad-deal-to-track-retail-sales https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-an... Meaningful regulation would mean e.g. air-gapped infrastructure so they can't make inadvertent privacy mistakes. And guaranteed service levels, and a service of last resort. Google have based built a business model without accountability and transparency. Which is fine, as long as we're not forced to use them by the state.
  - jcgl 1y ago
    > It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g. It's not just the specific things that those companies do, it's the (lack of) structure of rights and entitlements that the users have.
- jcgl 1y ago
  > Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? Maybe so, I don't know. Though it is worth remarking that "private" banks in the US really are only semi-private. The (admittedly imperfect) regulations that banks are subject to starts to blur the lines between public and private. Not to mention that there are far more banks than smartphone handset-and-OS makers. > No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. This is not the only option (though it would potentially be an option for some sufficiently-powerful societies). Other options could include: 1. Multilateral coalitions to do some combination of specify/design/build smartphones and/or their OS 2. Specify a set of user rights and regulate smartphone handset and OS manufacturers accordingly As a sibling commenter said, this isn't about living in fear of private companies as such. It's about not wanting to be coerced into a system of products that don't preserve liberal rights.

afandian 1y ago

Not everyone has a smartphone with the latest OS and a fully charged battery. > i can tell that living in a country with great digital services is a lot less stressful For everyone who deserves to participate in society?

octo888 1y ago
> fully charged battery. Yup. Look at train tickets in England. For now it's a convenience but you'll notice the law hasn't kept up with the push to have tickets on phones: the law still says you must produce on demand a ticket when requested. So if your battery runs out or your phone crashes or the app glitches or you've annoyed the "safety" department of Google/Apple... it's entirely your problem A moody ticket inspector is under no obligation really to give you a few minutes to sort it out
- sjw987 1y ago
  Or, if like I experienced yesterday, the most popular train ticket app stutters during peak rush hour and you cannot display the ticket you have actually bought to the conductor and exit gates at the destination. :)

hkt 1y ago

Not everyone has a smartphone. A substantial number of especially older people don't. Plus poor people, and just.. well, offline people whose lives are much more communal than ours. The requirement for a hundreds-of-units-of-currency device to prove who you are is bonkers.

bapak 1y ago
Sorry but aluminum foil level of thinking to me. First of all, my digital ID is still a physical card. Second, you're on the wrong forum complaining that people need a device to do things in life.
- qwopmaster 1y ago
  But this isn't a conversation about people being excluded from the latest JS framework, this is a conversation about people not using a smartphone being increasingly excluded from pretty fundamental things. App only tickets for public transportation? Grandma can't do that. E-voting? Grandma can't do that. Online banking? Grandma can't do that, because grandma struggles to send a text message much less to navigate a modern app with five different dickbars that is outright designed to get people to sign up for marketing trash. Having an option for digital ID is great, and there are many potential benefits to it. Requiring a modern smartphone for it is wildly out of touch.
- Muromec 1y ago
  >Second, you're on the wrong forum complaining that people need a device to do things in life. I think it's exactly right forum, because we know how unreliable and unmagical are those things and are in a good position to judge the risk of relying on them too much.

sjw987 1y ago

Not everybody wants to carry a smartphone around all the time. If the ID becomes about more than proving right to work, and becomes a daily carry, it's not hard to see the appeal of a government down the line tapping into an always on-hand microphone, GPS, internet enabled device. Even putting the tin foil hat aside, I and many people like me enjoy leaving the phone at home, and want as little time spent on the thing as possible.

qwopmaster 1y ago

The vast majority of people after 65 or so are incapable of using modern smartphones beyond extremely simple things like calling.

unethical_ban 1y ago

Digital is more convenient at the loss of privacy. And no, absolutely not, NOT everyone has a smartphone nor can use one. Go read the thread on teaching iPhones to seniors.

cess11 1y ago

Perhaps if you never think about what the state and corporations can do with that surveillance and the amount of control and violence it enables.