5 ms·

It's never popular when I post this, but I'm just going to do it again: "No matter the risk, I must carry my smartphone everywhere and install every app. It wo

• MengerSponge 7mo ago
  I don't think this is right. Most people are just not that curious, so there's no drive to be able to look things up. People don't want to be bored, so a phone with all the apps provides a reliable source of distraction/entertainment.
  • stronglikedan 7mo ago
    Also the fact that most people (the vast majority even) will never be affected by having their location data shared so they just don't care, myself included.
• gerikson 7mo ago
  There's also the possibility that we, as consumers, demand that the political system solves this issue with robust privacy legilsation that prohibits any entity from tracking our phones.
  • pocksuppet 7mo ago
    Not all political systems respond to consumer demand.
    • johnnyanmac 7mo ago
      Democratic ones do. But for 95% of causes it's hard to become so loud that they are forced to respond. That's exactly why orgs like EFF exist. Most laws also aren't passed because of overwhelming consumer feedback. It's lobbied by special interests. Which sadly took a negative connotation over the last few decades, but lobbies can be for the people too.
      • pocksuppet 7mo ago
        Studies show if 0% of the American population support a bill, it's 30% likely to be passed, and if 100% of the American population support it, it's 30% likely to be passed. Is America democratic?
        • kelnos 7mo ago
          I'm getting to the point where I believe representative democracy on the scale of hundreds of millions of people just doesn't work all that well. I've never been one of those "states' rights" people, but these days I am becoming convinced that the US should have a much smaller federal government, and states, counties, cities, and towns should have more autonomy in deciding their fates. This is not an easy problem to solve. Certainly I want more things at the federal level than the authors of the constitution envisioned (currency, international diplomacy, military, etc.): some things really need to be done at the national level (like environmental regulation). Anyway. Sure, those figures may be true for the US Congress (or not, I haven't verified), but I bet you those figures aren't even close to true for town and city councils and county government. And perhaps not even state government as well.
  • philipallstar 7mo ago
    We could also demand that the government doesn't use the location data from private companies without a warrant, but elections aren't often granular enough to satisfy individual requirements. Better to figure out a way to create and use a competitor that doesn't do this to you.
  • everdrive 7mo ago
    >There's also the possibility that we, as consumers, demand that the political system solves this issue This will never happen, but good luck.
    • GuinansEyebrows 7mo ago
      do you think that's any less likely than a mass boycott of all smartphone usage by the public?
  • pessimizer 7mo ago
    Why don't you "demand" a pony while you're at it?
• shevy-java 7mo ago
  I think many people don't know about the issue at hand; and many also don't care. The more tragic thing is that those who care about it, can not do much about it.
• jsbisviewtiful 7mo ago
  > It's never popular when I post this That's because you're coming off holier than thou and condescending. Anyone who understands gadgets will say phones are highly trackable and will have told anyone that well over 10+ years ago. It's a trade off of value. Corporations/gov can track me while I have my phone, but turn by turn directions, maps and a camera while wandering around are useful. We could legislate that traceability away in the US to an extent, but that would require our gov be working and right now it is not.
  • everdrive 7mo ago
    I'm probably going to delete my HN account soon. I'm so disenfranchised with the direction technology is going that I'm finding it really heard to be civil and constructive here. I'm not trying to be sanctimonious, but I am quite angry and perplexed at why people have have backed themselves into this corner.
    • ynac 7mo ago
      I hope you don't go! It's clearly a minority position you hold, but that doesn't mean it's a bad one. Or wrong. I've been perplexed by this and many other related issues. I wonder and hope every year, every step in the wrong direction that gets attention, we'll get to that magic 3% that stands up and corrects things for citizen good. No matter how your up or down votes end up in a few hours, know you aren't alone or wrong. At least from my point of view.
    • FpUser 7mo ago
      People could've done a lot of things to make their lives better. Unfortunately they prefer to get "managed" with all the consequences. No matter what you cancel and where you would go you will find all the same. The fact that one know how how to write b-tree from the scratch means zilch in this department
  • butlike 7mo ago
    So print off map quest and carry a disposable like in the 90s. If you don't use social media, the value proposition of a smart phone is incredibly low. I feel we peaked at mobile phones which could call and text.
• JohnMakin 7mo ago
  > It would be unimaginable to have the urge to look something up, It's not popular because this is very reductive and dismissive of the problem almost to the point of dishonesty. Many modern functions need an application and there is little or no alternative. Some examples: QR codes - lots of restaurants don't have a physical menu and need a QR code scan. This behavior extends well beyond restaurants as well. Keys - Lots of cars support lock/unlock and put a ton of features behind an app. While not strictly necessary, it's incredibly convenient if you're in the inevitable (and sometimes very expensive/difficult to remediate) situation everyone eventually faces when you lose your keys, or lock them in the car. Some garages and apartment complexes only support getting in by app, and I've seen this in hotels as well. Banking - doing many things at banks nowadays requires confirming you are you via push notification to your phone. Lots of MFA is app-based as well. I could not do my job without a phone. Navigation - I don't always carry a garmin or thomas guide around with me when I'm walking around an unfamiliar city, and it would be pretty ridiculous of me to do so. Probably could come up with a lot of other things. Without a phone it's not really possible to function in much of the modern world. There is more to the app ecosystem than tiktok, maybe that's the miss here.
  • everdrive 7mo ago
    >QR codes Those restaurants are worthless >Keys Carrying your car key does not count as inconvenient >Banking Agreed, and this is a problem, but you can just do your banking at home without carrying around your smart phone. This is a case where the industry is forcing a choice on consumers. I'm considering joining a local credit union for this reason. > Navigation How did people manage this prior to 2007?
    • JohnMakin 7mo ago
      This is goalpost shifting and ignored much of the point of my post. this same thinking can be applied recursively to “well, if you cant do that, it’s just dumb anyway.” And you’re flat out wrong about banking, there are things and situations that require you physically entering one. And yes it is a situation where society is forcing the decision, that’s my entire point - I as an individual cannot apply the non remedy of “just do everything on your computer, ldo” because society has stripped that choice from me. unless the prescription you’re giving is to withdraw from society - which is only proving my point. I’d also hardly describe my job as a minor inconvenience. I see these types of arguments a lot on this site and I am very confused where they are coming from. It’s almost like the implication is you have no right to complain about the privacy nightmare if you participate in using things that are necessary to participate in society. You can have reasonable privacy and these tools at the same time, it’s not an impossibility.
• js8 7mo ago
  It's a false dichotomy. Citizens can have useful smartphones while not being tracked by unwanted actors.
  • Lammy 7mo ago
    Not with modern cellular and Wi-Fi tech we can't. Base stations literally “steer the beam” to follow you. Precise location spying is essential to the way they achieve such high throughput.
    • throawayonthe 7mo ago
      we can't have privacy for mail contents. the post network literally "routes the package" via the address on the box. digging through your mail is essential to the way they achieve such delivery rates
      • Lammy 7mo ago
        Unfortunately also correct: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-mail.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-ma... “Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program, in which Postal Service computers photograph the exterior of every piece of paper mail that is processed in the United States” We Await Silent Tristero's Empire
        • salawat 7mo ago
          That's different. That's only tracking to a granularity of a postally recognized address. News flash, that address isn't you. It's somewhere you probably are at some point, but it isn't you. Cellular network tracking and surveillance on the other hand... You can't really get around that problem without everything being designed with store & forward in mind.
    • lo_zamoyski 7mo ago
      This confuses a technology used for the purpose of optimizing the performance of a technology with tracking for the purposes of selling you crap or keeping tabs on your location for unwarranted reasons. Huge difference. The former does not entail the latter.
• NicuCalcea 7mo ago
  You act like looking random facts up is the only thing we do on phones. My phone is a personal computer, I use it to navigate through the world, work, access my bank accounts and other personal information, and communicate with others. And yes, sometimes these can't wait the 10–15 hours I might not be at home.
• qsera 7mo ago
  You are worried about THAT? How about we carry a device with multiple cameras, multiple microphones, and 24x7 connection to the internet that is running an operating system made by an Ad Company, to the most private of places?
  • zoklet-enjoyer 7mo ago
    On the toilet as I'm typing this
  • drnick1 7mo ago
    It does not have to be that way however. There are plenty of phones out there running free/libre operating systems, including GrapheneOS, LineageOS, and various Linux options. I use GrapheneOS and wouldn't carry a phone running a proprietary OS.
• johnnyanmac 7mo ago
  Not me so much as my work and the crappy job search requiring you to be responsive at all times. Add in family if you have one.
• HerbManic 7mo ago
  Im probably to last person to defend the entire stack that is the smart phone but this feels a little reductionist. I use mine as a phone, messaging, podcast player, camera, a banking device, a little email and occastionally the web. Thats it. Some convience is good, too much is very bad. No social media or whatever millions of apps they constantly try to push in your store of (enforced) choice. In someways we have done this ourselves but also there is a deeper societal issue. As Ellule and Kacsynski both pointed out, technology is voluntary to a point. But when it becomes a tool that you are practially forced to use to merely keep up with others, it is no longer a choice unless you can figure a way without it at your own peril. For instance my bank has become entirely dependent of their app as the glue between all their functions and authorisation. I can try to avoid this but it becomes very difficult, it goes beyond just convenience at that point. I do not like that at all, I think it is very short term thinking, but here we are. I try to avoid a lot of various technologies were I can make it work, I do not have a car for that reason, but smartphones have unfortunately become very ingrained in societies expectations at a blinding pace. Try to limit their use were you can, maybe others will follow.
  • curt15 7mo ago
    >For instance my bank has become entirely dependent of their app as the glue between all their functions and authorisation That sounds horrible. What are users to do if their smartphone breaks?
    • HerbManic 7mo ago
      In my case a few weeks back when my phone failed, it meant no access over the weekend until I could get a very lengthy phone call to reinstate app access on a new phone.
• libraryatnight 7mo ago
  This is funny because one of my major gripes with everyone having phones is they don't really use them for meaningful information seeking. They'll sit in conversation and speculate and invent nonsense, accept the smartest/most convenient sounding nonsense at the table, and move on as if they did not have the ability to look it up on the spot. Then later they quote the nonsense to someone else as if it were something they learned as opposed to made up with one of their social circles.
  • trinsic2 7mo ago
    Yeah this is a good point. It would probably be a good idea to have an elective in high school/collage class on the recommended using of mobile tech and why its a concern to to using it to doomscroll because the algorithms are gaming your attention and trying to steer your perception.
• onion2k 7mo ago
  They MUST have access ALL THE TIME, no matter the downside. The problem is that the downside is incredibly small (government isn't interested in most citizens) until it's suddenly massive (government is interested in you.) That makes it very difficult for people to build a mental model of why it's a problem: because in all seriousness it genuinely isn't unless you're either fighting the system, you're a criminal, or you have a level of perception where you can understand that other people are a threat to the government and you have empathy for them or you can see that the government might see you as a threat to in the future. Most people can't or won't understand about that. You can't really blame them. Mobile devices are useful beyond 'looking stuff up'. Maps, communication, banking, etc are huge upsides to counter the probably very small (if you ignore empathy) downside for most people.
• kelnos 7mo ago
  I agree with you, but at the same time: we shouldn't have to worry about this. We should be able to have nice things. We should be able to live our lives how we want (within reason) and not have to worry about our own government spying on us and tracking our every movement. The response to revelations about this sort of tracking should not be to roll our eyes at people who carry their phones everywhere. It should be to get angry at our government for treating us all like potential criminals, and vote out shitheads who support this sort of thing. (Which I know feels damn-near impossible most of the time...)
• JKCalhoun 7mo ago
  I have access ALL THE TIME… …to a Field Notes book in my wallet (and a pen).
• nancyminusone 7mo ago
  For whom are you speaking? It certainly isn't me. My phone plan shares 3 lines on a single 2gb of data/month. I'd have to pay more for even the current base plan, but I don't feel like it. This is because the mobile experience is worse in almost every way. But that's a moot point, because advertisers will still track you on any device you use.
  • Defletter 7mo ago
    Fun fact, generalisations can still exist even if they don't 100% apply to literally everybody.
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• juris 7mo ago
  funny. i actually woke up this morning fairly early and bustling alive with ideas (oh you know, nonsense 5am ones like what i should do if the petrodollar collapses... trade eggs and make a fiat cryptocurrency internal to my company (not subject to oversight) based on favors? wax tokens melted after favors met... something or another. and i noted that urge to check my phone to validate those (later midday: embarrassing) ideas. it occurred to me then that it's precisely that urge to check the phone that usually kills them. and if it isn't that, it's the missed smses and emails and the latest gripe on hn. i wondered how many good ideas were strangled with the mundanity/viciousness (depending on your algorithm) of this device "is it really so bad to sit alone with my thoughts, without having an immediate answer to put them to rest?"
• landscape5497 7mo ago
  > No matter the risk People don’t necessarily know the risk. Some do, and as someone on HackerNews you are in a space of such people who are more likely to know, but I don’t think the average person knows just how deep risks go. > We've done this to ourselves, and we're terrified at even the most minor inconvenience > It's baffling. > I am quite angry and perplexed at why people have backed themselves into this corner I don’t think this framing is quite right. It puts the onus of the problem onto the people and solely frames it as something people do, leaving out anything else. I don’t know if that’s how you meant it, but that’s how it comes off. It’s baffling that people would push themselves into the corner because that’s not the full story. At least in part, they are being pushed into that corner; it’s not just something they do but something being done to them. That’s what marketing, and at least some aspects of design, are. A company wants people to know about and use their product, and they want people to keep on using their product. Taken farther along, this leads to desires becoming needs or addictions. This can happen with many technologies, products, etc., phones included. I don’t think it’s as baffling that people are drawn towards using a product excessively when there are millions to billions of dollars alongside time and effort put towards getting people to go down that path