Can An Individual Still Resist The Spread of Technology? (chicagotribune.com)

schwit1 shares a column from the Chicago Tribune: When cellphones first appeared, they gave people one more means of communication, which they could accept or reject. But before long, most of us began to feel naked and panicky anytime we left home without one. To do without a cellphone -- and soon, if not already, a smartphone -- means estranging oneself from normal society. We went from "you can have a portable communication device" to "you must have a portable communication device" practically overnight... Today most people are expected to be instantly reachable at all times. These devices have gone from servants to masters...

Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation. Most of us would say the trade-offs are more than worth it. But they happen whether they are worth it or not, and the individual has little power to resist. Technological innovation is a one-way street. Once you enter it, you are obligated to proceed, even if it leads someplace you would not have chosen to go.
The column argues "the iPhone X proves the Unabomber was right," citing this passage from the 1996 manifesto of the anti-technology terrorist. "Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it."

Comments

Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.

Re:Not really true

[BitterOak]

Remember when there used to be payphones all over the place, so if you had an emergency or ran out of gas or something, you could call for help? Good luck finding one of those now. And when cab companies are put out of business by Uber, good luck getting transportation anywhere without a cellphone. It won't be long before you won't be able to pay bills by mailing a check and some countries have already gone cashless, and my prediction is that in less than 20 years if not sooner, America will be cashless as well, and smartphone apps will have completely replaced debit and credit cards. Up to now, I've resisted getting a smartphone, but it's getting harder and harder all the time. Meeting friends at a restaurant is getting to be a problem. It used to be you'd decide in advance where and when you'd meet. Nowadays, they expect you to be reachable all the time, so they can make their decision at the very last minute. It's really hard to have a social life today without a smartphone.

Re:Not really true

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

The Taxi companies deserve to die. Horrible response. Drivers that pretend to not understand English so they can lengthen your route. No accountability for bad drivers. High prices, low availability.

Fuck them.

If I have an emergency or run out of gas, the cell phone is far more convenient. Why would I stand on a dark corner talking on a payphone, all ripe for armed robbery?

The Unabomber was a fucking psychotic luddite. Live without the benefits of technology if you choose. Just don't bitch when everyone else doesn't stay in the 1990s with you.

Re:Not really true

[mschwanke97402]

Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.

You say you can quit any time you want, is that it?

Re:Not really true

[Harlequin80]

Why resist? Nothing makes you answer the phone. Nothing makes you read your email or messages.

But at the same time you have camera and internet and other tools at your disposal at all times.

As for mailing a cheque most countries other than the US have pretty much abandonned those anyway.

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

With respect to the Unabomber, even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and again.

Re:Not really true

[Mashiki]

Sounds like a local problem to me. Every taxi company I've run across, especially in small cities have drivers that are fluent english speakers.

I still see payphones all over the place, hell there's still one a block from where I used to live. Again seems to me you've got a local problem.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have a cell phone. Car broke once and I had to sit next to the road before a police car stopped. About 4 hours, but not really a problem. Yeah, having a phone would have solved it quicker, but this is such a rare occurrence, not worth the troubles and expenses I see my friends with phones going through...OMG, I can't find my phone. I will die. DIE............. People nowadays live in so much fear, they're becoming bores.

Re:Not really true

[DaHat]

Sounds like a local problem to me. Every taxi company I've run across, especially in small cities have drivers that are fluent english speakers.

Lucky you. On a previous trip to California, I landed at SFO and took a taxi down to SV. The driver noted the address I wanted to go to was out of the local zone so would be hit with a higher rate after we left the local ring. I agreed given I wasn't going to be paying for the ride in the end.

Along the drive, I heard his phone announce "you have left the geo-fenced area" (or something to that effect), at which point he pressed a couple of buttons on the fare meter to bump the rate. This was also during a window when he appeared to begin driving some more lengthy routes to my destination. I was of course following the route on my phone and was puzzles the entire was as to his choice of routes.

Upon reaching my destination, he pulled out his personal (and cracked) iPhone to do the math as to the actual fare (1.5x the fare on the meter), then slide my card through the attached Stripe reader... not the Android device with Flywheel app sitting on the dashboard, nor the credit card reader sitting in front of me (behind the passenger seat) provided by the taxi company. I was tired and agreed, again, I wasn't paying in the end.

Upon checking out the next morning, I asked the desk agent what a taxi ride from SFO should run... she gave a range which was ~50% less than what I had paid.

I rode in an Uber (my second, the first was to my destination that morning) on my ride back to the airport... it cost 1/4th what the taxi did.

My mother was at a company business event and later noted that the taxi had charged her card $5 more than what was on her receipt... some checking showed that multiple people from her group alone had similar billing issues... all because the taxi drivers figured some big company wouldn't know/mind being overcharged slightly.

No... f-taxis. I will never ride in an american taxi again. For all of their problems, Lyft and Uber provide a degree of transparency that

I still see payphones all over the place, hell there's still one a block from where I used to live. Again seems to me you've got a local problem.

Care to take some local photos... perhaps with a copy of the local news paper for proof? Last month I put 4000 miles on the my vehicle for a road trip that traversed 7 states (only ~50% of the road was re-driven on the way back). Know how many pay phones I saw along the way? The same # as the # of USB-C cables/chargers I found at various truck stops/gas stations/etc stores along the way... an grand total of zero.

Re:Not really true

[Tom]

No... f-taxis. I will never ride in an american taxi again. For all of their problems, Lyft and Uber provide a degree of transparency that

But maybe the problem isn't with taxis, but the way they are run in the USA? Here in central Europe, taxis are incredibly reliable, and as a passenger your list of rights is longer than for plane travel. They also charge by the meter, exactly. In all my life, I've never had a taxi driver run any funny games.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's an emergency, I can walk into any business and use their phone. If it's an emergency on the freeway, I can use a callbox.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the same as most places in the USA. However riders never complain to the local government, so the taxi companies slowly grow more corrupt over time. People in the US are too bothered to stand up for their rights and prefer to be stepped on. It gives us something common to complain about.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you are living in an insulated bubble? Maybe you have been taken for the other kind of ride and were not savvy enough to notice?

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

If someone had an accident and you could not call an ambulance because you don't have a cellphone, and someone died as a result, how would it feel? Now I know that you're probably a self-centered autistic nerd with no empathy, but we real people actually think about this kind of things. I suggest you do the same.

Re:Not really true

[thegarbz]

Last month I put 4000 miles on the my vehicle for a road trip that traversed 7 states (only ~50% of the road was re-driven on the way back). Know how many pay phones I saw along the way?

As a matter of interest as there still emergency phones in the USA? I have seen various approaches to pay phones in different countries, from leaving them in place, to upgrading to take modern payment system, to riping out, and even to upgrade them with WiFi hotspots. But one thing that remained regardless of what happened to payphones was emergency phones on the highways.

Re:Not really true

[nanoflower]

So I need to have a cell phone on the off chance that I come upon an accident and no one there has a cell phone so I am the only that can save them. I am a super hero!! Thank you for pointing this out.

My only kryptonite is my tendency to misplace things so I might not be able to find my cell phone before it's time to leave. Oh, and my tendency to forget small things like remembering to recharge the cell phone so it will work when I come upon an accident and have my chance to be a hero.

Re:Not really true

[Rande]

I had one do that to me in Eindhoven. Drove all over the place to increase the fare when I admitted I'd not been there before.

Re:Not really true

[JonnyCalcutta]

Here in Glasgow, Scotland Uber is regulated in exactly the same way as taxis and drivers have to be licensed in exactly the same way as taxi drivers. By a strange coincidence, Uber is exactly the same price as a taxi.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I experience this now in China. No taxi, but there is Didi (the company which kicked Uber out of China), and you better speak Chinese to use it, because the drivers, who solely rely on their GPS, will call half a dozen times to ask you where you are and how to get there. Also, you better have a Chinese bank account so you can use Alipay or WeChat pay.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

You are still young. You dick (this is allegory I do not give a fuck what gender you are) is still firm. There are two paths out of your hole : glory and sunny retirement living from rent etc. or bitterness associated with bad lack and having to live till late age and then not having much to hang on to. There are some middle ways too of course but that is it. When the system sucks everything out of you, you may have this ludditile idea that this is the system that sucked you dry where in fact you just a failure like everyone else.

Re:Not really true

[Zero__Kelvin]

Remember when you used to be able to just shoot a squirrel in your yard and cook it for dinner? Now you are stuck buying steak at a grocery store or having someone bringing food to your front door, and a lot of times it's already cooked. Damn this new fangled technology. I so long for the days when we weren't dependant upon it!

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you can, but do you? You can still live as we did 100 years ago, but do you?

Re:Not really true

[skam240]

"I had a bad experience with a taxi driver so all taxi drivers are bad!"

Plenty of bad experiences are had by people using Uber. It's great you have a singular story to demonize someone but that's all it is.

Re:Not really true

[skam240]

It's the same in America but like a people everywhere there are those who want to turn a singular negative experience with themselves nailed to a cross.

Re:Not really true

[KozmoStevnNaut]

You can get a smartphone without necessarily getting sucked into wasting your time or money on frivolous nonsense. A smartphone is a powerful tool when used properly. You don't have to join the gadget race, just because you buy a smartphone, you don't even have to install any apps or use it for anything but the bare essentials (ie. stuff you can't do without a phone, or which are extremely cumbersome without a phone).

Being able to look up basic information from a handheld device is extremely handy, for instance to check on the status on your flight, or look up the address of that restaurant you remember, but can't quite place on a map.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

So, do you?

Seems you missed the gist of the OP's premis.

Re:Not really true

[houghi]

Remember when there used to be payphones all over the place, so if you had an emergency or ran out of gas or something, you could call for help?

I nremeber that and also the fact that you needed change and the number and that they almost never worked and that you could aks people for help.

And when cab companies are put out of business by Uber, good luck getting transportation anywhere without a cellphone.

Why would they go out of business? I am sure that at busy places there will still be some sort of taxi-service. e.g. on airports. Supply and demand. Also: Uber and Lyft ARE taxi-services.

It won't be long before you won't be able to pay bills by mailing a check

And nothing of value was lost. I live in a country where they do not exist anymore. So how does this work?
1) You can do it via PC, tablet or app on your smartphone
2) You do it via phone line Cumbersome, but not impossible.
3) You give a standard paper to the bank who will then do the transfer. This is almost like a checque, but you give it to the bank directly and not to the other person. As all banking is standard, I can do payments all over Europe, both to individuals and to companies.
Most companies will attach such a paper when they send you a bill, although they prefer automatic payment and often will give you a reduction if you do it that way.
Many people use this method
3) You go to the bank and use the PC there. They are open 24/7
4) You go to the teller and handle stuff there.

Nowadays, they expect you to be reachable all the time, so they can make their decision at the very last minute

I email my friends. I have a wonderful social life and most of it has nothing to do with a smartphone. We SMS, if at all. Or we call, like, on a phone. But I understand that peer-pressure is a real thing and not everybody is able to resist it.
One friend of mine was told that he either turned off his phone when we where out, or not come along.
To me not having a smart phone would be pretty easy. So why do I have one? When my parents where still alive, they lived in another country and it was cheaper to call them using a VoiP app. They are both dead now, but I still have it. Otherwise? No real reason. Yes I do have my bank app, but could eqasily do that from home. I have WatsApp with 5 people on it. I have contact with 1 and that could be done over Email and SMS. My phone is off when I work and when I go out.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, I live in a remote town of 7,500 and we now have only 1 working pay phone, I know this because my homeless feral friend, who eschews most all technology, makes a bi-weekly survey checking them all out, only one works, out of all the other that used to.

He's an Air Force Vet, and is truly pissed, and he won't use even a dumb cell phone.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh my, an Authoritarian.

Chill out buddy, not everyone has to be a fucking sheep like you.

Re:Not really true

[TheRaven64]

Upon checking out the next morning, I asked the desk agent what a taxi ride from SFO should run... she gave a range which was ~50% less than what I had paid.

I've noticed that most US hotels have no idea how much taxis cost, as a policy as part of their advertising - people are far likely to stay somewhere that's a $20 taxi ride from the airport than one that's a $40 taxi ride. I've taken to doubling their estimates and found that this usually gives me a pretty accurate number.

My mother was at a company business event and later noted that the taxi had charged her card $5 more than what was on her receipt

That's usually nice and easy to fix: call the card company, send them a copy of the receipt, and they'll cancel the payment in full. It's then up to the taxi company to try to get it back from you, which can be hard if you've left the country.

I rode in an Uber (my second, the first was to my destination that morning) on my ride back to the airport... it cost 1/4th what the taxi did.

I've had a similar experience visiting Redmond. I thought I'd save some money by taking the bus to the nearest bus stop and then a taxi the rest of the way. The bus didn't give change (or take credit cards), so I was overcharged there. The 5-minute taxi ride then cost almost $15 more. Uber on the way back cost about $25 - only slightly more than the bus plus taxi.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember Silicon Valley. If you booked a taxi, you had to wait 30 minutes for the next one to be available. It wouldn't matter which taxi company you called in the phone book, they all went through the same despatch office. I don't know if the different taxi companies shared the same dispatch service, or whether they were simply fronts for a company trying to avoid being caught having a monopoly.

Bus services are once every hour. You can get from the downtown areas of every city easy enough by Caltrain, but anywhere on the periphery of each city requires a car, taxi or Uber. So Uber becomes the default winner.

Re:Not really true

[Applehu Akbar]

I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.

And we use our smartphones for each of these things that the tech makes easier. I think about this whenever I have to write that one check a month to a payee who is not on electronic payments.

Re:Not really true

[Applehu Akbar]

Plenty of bad experiences are had by people using Uber. It's great you have a singular story to demonize someone but that's all it is.

Whatever you might think of Uber as a company, the tech it uses is a fundamentally better way of arranging a ride than standing outside in the rain yelling ay cars. Soon, every cab company still in business will be using it. If you leave something in a cab, the company will have a log of who was driving when you had your ride. If a driver gets robbed, they will know exactly who was riding at that time.

Re:Not really true

[Applehu Akbar]

So I need to have a cell phone on the off chance that I come upon an accident and no one there has a cell phone so I am the only that can save them. I am a super hero!! Thank you for pointing this out.

Protecting yourself by herd use of cellphones, then? Exactly the same argument used by the antivaxers.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Llandysul, West Wales, reliable taxis of any kind are the fevered dream of a madman.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a local problem to me. Every taxi company I've run across, especially in small cities have drivers that are fluent english speakers.

I still see payphones all over the place, hell there's still one a block from where I used to live. Again seems to me you've got a local problem.

I live in a small town and I don't see taxis anymore. Nor do we have payphones anymore - although the city just put one up (non-functional) for show. It's actually an information kiosk type thing in an old phone booth.

Re:Not really true

[TheRaven64]

It probably depends on where in China. I was in Xi'an and there were a lot of taxis there. They mostly spoke little or no English and I speak approximately no Mandarin, but it was still possible to haggle via Google Translate. They seemed to enjoy the haggling a lot, so I'd do a moderate amount, but when their opening offer for a taxi ride to the airport that's about an hour's drive away works out at about $30, there would be little incentive for me to try hard even if I were the one paying. Oh, and they all took cash.

Re:Not really true

[spire3661]

The problem is you cant buy a smartphone that respects the user and offers built-in, seamless, fully factory supported rooting.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no reason to be writing paper checks in the US either. I haven't done so in over 5 years, and that was exactly one check per month to my landlord - an old man that wanted a paper check every month.

I could have avoided even that by using my bank and having them send him a check in my name, but he was a luddite and didn't want me doing that.

Honestly it's been quite a while since I've been in line at the grocery store and had an old lady paying by check in front of me. That was always so annoying because it's slow as hell, but it seems that even the old ladies aren't doing this much anymore. Either that or the store has told them they don't accept checks.

Re:Not really true

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Can you buy any phone at all that fulfills that particular requirement? The liability is simply too great, especially considering it's a device that hooks up to cellphone networks.

How many computers can you buy that offer built-in, seamless, fully factory supported rooting? You can root any (most?) computers, but it sure as hell isn't fully factory supported.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

You are still young. You dick (this is allegory I do not give a fuck what gender you are) is still firm. There are two paths out of your hole : glory and sunny retirement living from rent etc. or bitterness associated with bad lack and having to live till late age and then not having much to hang on to. There are some middle ways too of course but that is it. When the system sucks everything out of you, you may have this ludditile idea that this is the system that sucked you dry where in fact you just a failure like everyone else.

If "everyone is a failure" as you say. then shouldn't the game be changed, as we are the only ones playing it?

Re:Not really true

[mt2mb4me]

Can you buy any phone at all that fulfills that particular requirement? The liability is simply too great, especially considering it's a device that hooks up to cellphone networks.

One Plus 5 seems to be very promising in that regard. you can run custom roms on it, and all the bloat is removable, unlike say a Samsung Bloat s6, s7, or s8

How many computers can you buy that offer built-in, seamless, fully factory supported rooting? You can root any (most?) computers, but it sure as hell isn't fully factory supported.

define "Root" clearly you are allowed to install whatever OS you choose and is compatible with the hardware. Nobody offers "support" for anything without money. Not android, nor Windows, Nor HP, any of them. At no point do you void your warranty for running any OS. But let's say you "root" windows and uninstall bits and pieces that Microsoft wants you to have running at all times (I.E. Anti-malware service, Cortana, and Store) It is still supported as much as it was before you did that.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

One word: Deregulation.
The big D has f'd up most of American business and left the public at large and the individual consumer dangling from a meat-hook.
Get some G-D inspectors up in that mother-f'n taxi and see what happens. And don't give me that weak-ass stuff about "all the inspector's are corrupt". Puh-lease! Government inspectors in the US once made more in a week then anyone but the largest corporations could bribe them with, and that's the truth.
Regulate the mothers and then see how things shake out. Do we really need seventeen taxi services in every major city? It ain't helping prices none.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I know there have never been emergency phones along the Interstates in the United States. That was one driver of the CB radio craze back in the day (along with avoiding speeding tickets, of course). It was also what got MCI in the phone business as an alternative to AT&T. They provided long range relays to the limited-range two way radios used by truckers so they could communicate while on the road.
As for pay phones almost everywhere I've been in the U.S. in the last couple of years they only place I have continued to see pay phones is at airports and train stations. Every where else the phones have been removed. Note that in many areas of the country those phones were owned not by the local phone companies but by third party companies who only provided pay phones. They would contract with the local phone company for standard rates and then charge users more to make a call. When large numbers of people stopped using payphones that became and economically untenable business.

Re:Not really true

[cmseagle]

Here in Bristol, England Uber drivers have to have the same Private Hire license that you'd need if you were driving a town car for a charter company, and in my experience their fares are ~20-25% less than the local cabs.

It'd be interesting to see how Uber's rates compare to local taxis when they're regulated exactly like taxis (most restrictive), like unliveried private hire cars (less restrictive), and when totally unregulated.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

We have free market and freedom. Freedom to pay off local city officials so they can gouge riders in high taxes so a few fat bureaucrats get cushy jobs. No, too much corruption here.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Try Dublin especially to/from the Airport.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

In the 1990s, everyone lived with the benefits of technology. I don't see the benefits of 24/7 tracking and more money going to the top while the rest of us scramble for crumbs, oh but look, shiny phone!

The Unabomber was a prophet, and you're too self-centered to notice.

Re:Not really true

[thegarbz]

And in Berlin if you call an Uber a taxi comes and picks you up.

Re:Not really true

[KozmoStevnNaut]

The One Plus phones would be a good choice, but it's not explicitly officially supported. Sure, you can do it, but forget about support from the manufacturer if you break something. First step in recovery will be "reinstall original software", just as it will be if you disable critical (or "critical") parts of the Windows subsystem.

Re:Not really true

[Gr8Apes]

Whatever you might think of Uber as a company, the tech it uses is a fundamentally better way of arranging a ride than standing outside in the rain yelling ay cars.

Yes, being able to "order online" anything is potentially better than calling it in (which has existed for decades, btw) but it merely is an improved handshake mechanism for ordering that removes a lot of potential of human (usually customer) error. In the case of a ride, there's only a few extra details that I'm sure are on the uber and lyft apps.

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

They never complain because the local government makes billions of dollars from the taxi companies for the sale of the right to do a business in that local government through a process called 'medalions' Complaining to the local government would be like complaining to the executioner. SOME OF THE reason taxis, though in no means justified, must cheat their passengers is that the have to make lots of bank to pay off the medallion.

Citizns do not complain because they realize it would be pointless. The USA is a government against the people of the USA, and is controlled by those to whom it owes money.

Re:Not really true

[Ol Olsoc]

Why would I stand on a dark corner talking on a payphone, all ripe for armed robbery?

Oh sheesh, you are kinda what we are warned against. Once upon a time, I would take off for an entire day without anyone knowing where I was. Now my wife and others expect to contact me immediately whenever and wherever I am. They freak if they cannot. And people shit themselves when that last signal strength bar goes away. This is the problem - addiction to the little things.

I like my smartphones. They are technology that is simply amazing. I use many of their features. But I can and do turn mine off when I don't feel like being bothered. I do any and all social media on a desktop, and walk around the world. But I'm not addicted to the smartphone like many people are. I think this is the point, and the unabomber positive cite simply alienates the people who could use the most help with their addiction.

The Unabomber was a fucking psychotic luddite. Live without the benefits of technology if you choose. Just don't bitch when everyone else doesn't stay in the 1990s with you.

Well, it is not a digital situation. There are times when the latest technology is just tremendous. There are other times that spending one's time on social media while at the Grand Canyon indicates that there is a problem.

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

My friend was driven into an alleyway by a taxi driver then dragged out and beaten by a bunch of taxi drivers with belts. They were east indian. To be fair he was drunk and probably being belligerent but.....

Re:Not really true

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Judgmental? Nooooo, not you.
Undeststanding allegory? Nooooo not you.

So Nonoflower HAS to have a fully charged cellphone within finger's reach just on the off chance they'll come across a life-threatening situation.
Just as I must leave the house and scour the streets or otherwise be available at every possible opportunity just in case there's a life threatening situation only I can deal with.
Surely you can find a better way to defend your dependence on cellphones.

Re:Not really true

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Protecting who??

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Edinburgh, Scotland, it's the same, but you just walk places mostly because it's not horrible.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I drive past a pay phone all the time and I never notice it either. Because I don't need a pay phone and I'm not driving around looking for pay phones. It's still there, though.

USB-C you might actually hunt for. But yeah there are still pay phones.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Do not take a taxi in the Netherlands. You will get taken for a ride, literally. Especially avoid a taxi at Schiphol airport, as you will pay hundreds of dollars over the normal price.

Scum, the lot of them.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I remember when you just threw a rock at it, or stamped on it really hard, none of this lugging big pieces of metal and wood everywhere just to get your squirrel. The good old days.

Re:Not really true

[Godwin O'Hitler]

I'm guessing it would feel exactly as it used to feel 50 years ago.
Let's extrapolate: how will it feel if someone has an accident and you can't immediately teleport them to a hospital because you have the latest iPorter but haven't subscribed to 3rd party teleportation?

But go ahead; keep on defending your dependence on technology with hypothetical, once-in-a-lifetime situations.

Re:Not really true

[Mashiki]

Yep. You've got a local problem. And those problems should be taken up with provincial/state governments and local city councils.

Also here's a phone booth I can drive past it tonight when I head home if you really want a "up to date picture"(the one in google is ~3 years old) it's ~15mins out of my way but not a big deal, but it's still there. You could also use street view, head down Dundas St. in the cities of Woodstock and London, Ontario. Down Thames St.(Co. Hwy 119) in Ingersoll, Ontario. They're not all gone.

Re:Not really true

[spacepimp]

AC you should tone down your hostility and trolling.

People with our without cell phones are just as likely to step over your dying body lying on the pavement. Anecdotal but true:

Las Vegas outside the Bellagio I'm walking and stop to watch the fountains. Next to me an older (mid to late 60s it looked like) man drops to the ground and lies there not making a sound. Three people he was with stand there staring and not helping. I ask if anyone knows him.If anyone is with him etc. Finally a girl fesses up, but wouldn't answer questions on if he had a history of stroke or heart attack (probably hired for the weekend or some side action). I check for breathing and opened up his shirt collar. and a few buttons revealing several incisions around the heart and along the arteries on his neck.

At this point people are literally stepping over him because he is blocking the sidewalk. I asked for anyone to please call 911 to get help there because his breathing was very faint and he couldn't speak or answer questions. Guess how many people were willing to call 911, zero... I dug through my bag and found my phone booted it up and made the call wasting the time it took to boot the phone (which at that point was a long time) Finally help arrived handed me some syringes to inject him with and that is when I stepped back not being a Dr. They took it from there.

Your simplistic anger and logic here is bullshit. Thousands of people on that sidewalk could give shit if the man lived or died. That is a fact. Most of the world is uncaring if able to get away with it. So before you call someone a cold uncaring luddite who should join your self congratulatory "community" you should come to grip with reality. People will step over your dying body if they can get away with it. Hoping someone else puts forth the effort.

Re:Not really true

[jellomizer]

Well to the point, it isn't that people can't resist the spread of technology, but technology has replaced previous technology.

We are not lamenting the days where we need to smash rocks together to start a fire, where we have easy access to matches or a lighter. Even the need to start a fire nowadays is usually more for recreational needs then for any practical ones.

We as animals have the needs to breath, stay hydrated, east substance, be in a climate where our body can maintain a constant temperature, and safe from harm.

We as humans have the need to communicate, learn, and generally have a degree of mental activity.

The modern smart phone, has replaced the need for a Personal Computer, and a Telephone, for much of our activities. However because of its popularity of its duel purpose. It has replaced other infrastructures that we had build to fill these needs. So these infrastructures are phased out, as not enough people are using them.

This doesn't mean we are actually dependent on such technologies. We can take away the cell phones from every person, and society can still function, however there will be some time having to rebuild the Public Phone system. We can learn to use old technology as well.

Re:Not really true

[MerlTurkin]

100% true. Agreed!

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you recommend carrying a firearm for the same reasons?

Re:Not really true

[Gavagai80]

Remember when there used to be payphones all over the place, so if you had an emergency or ran out of gas or something, you could call for help?

First, the payphones every mile along highways were a recent innovation which people were fine without. Secondly, they still exist in many places. Thirdly, it's infinitely easier now than then to ask a stranger to make a call for you on their phone. Fourthly, dumbphones work perfectly well for that purpose.

And when cab companies are put out of business by Uber, good luck getting transportation anywhere without a cellphone.

Eh, we have these things called buses and cars and trains and planes. I've never used a taxi or an uber in my life.

smartphone apps will have completely replaced debit and credit cards

Zero chance of that happening, because even many of us who do have smartphones have zero interest in trusting them with payments or installing countless apps.

Re:Not really true

[cayenne8]

Remember when you used to be able to just shoot a squirrel in your yard and cook it for dinner?

...Damn this new fangled technology. I so long for the days when we weren't dependant upon it!

Well, having those skills and capabilities are still good to have, just in case the power grid goes down for an extended period of time due to something like a hurricane or sun storms hitting earth.

After going a few weeks with no power, no fuel and no food/water to the grocery stores, knowing how to shoot, clean and eat a squirrel might sound pretty good.

Re:Not really true

[cayenne8]

Would you recommend carrying a firearm for the same reasons?

Actually....yes!!

:)

Re:Not really true

[TheCastro1689]

Checks will always be nice because it buys you a few more days before the money comes out of your account, oh and the fact that it's harder to steal your information and charge you again, or in some other state. I've had Credit/Debit cards compromised a couple of times, never had any problems with my checks.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you would, Cayenne; I was asking the parent.
(Posting Anon because I have mod points today)

Re:Not really true

[cayenne8]

There is no reason to be writing paper checks in the US either.

To pay one's taxes is a good reason to have a checkbook.

I've tried to pay state and federal, and if you use a credit card, well, they've farmed that out to a contractor that charges a pretty hefty FEE to do that transaction.

So, I still send paper checks annually at least to pay my taxes.

I also like to throw them checks at Costco...they just run it through their printer that types out all the info and all I have to do is sign it....easy as cash.

I like to pay most of my bills online, but even some of them aren't electronically associated with my bank, so, my bank actually cuts and mails them a physical check.

Also, many places will give you the cash rate with a check, rather than the 3% uncharge for credit cards

In general, cash and check transactions do not incur extra processing fees, and hence are still valuable to me.

Re:Not really true

[Zero__Kelvin]

In that case I would find knowledge of quick and painless methods of suicide much more valuable, but YMMV. Note that you can't go weeks without potable water, so you would want to focus on that before the squirrel. Also, there are vegetarian solutions that would be much more viable, safe, and that would taste a hell of a lot better.

Re:Not really true

[geekmux]

Meeting friends at a restaurant is getting to be a problem. It used to be you'd decide in advance where and when you'd meet.

Uh, this is still considered proper behavior between two people who respect each other's time, which is often limited and valued.

Nowadays, they expect you to be reachable all the time, so they can make their decision at the very last minute.

Oh, you are supposed to be reachable at all times, so they can make their decision at the very last minute? Fuck that shit. I'm a friend who should be respected, not some personal assistant at someone's beck and call. If a friend can't manage to respect my time and schedule as much as their own, then I doubt I would continue to find reasons to accommodate them.

Re:Not really true

[boneglorious]

And, if you don't have directions to where you're going, you used to be able to stop at a gas station, borrow a phone book, and look up the address and then consult the included map. Try that now and you will get laughed at. So if you don't have a smartphone, you might want to have a road atlas with you, but good luck finding an address if you don't have that.

Re:Not really true

[houghi]

I have an automatic debit from my bank to my land lord. I pay a few days late each month (with OK from my land lord) The information he can steal is the bank account number.
He can not charge me anything via the bank. It has nothing to do with either credit or debit card or any information.
The information I need is just his bank account number. The information I add for his and my convenience is a communication. That can be structured or free. The first one is used by large companies, so automatic systems can use it.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

How many computers can you buy that offer built-in, seamless, fully factory supported rooting?

Huh? You get root by default with Windows, and Linux if you manage to find one with Linux pre-installed.

Re:Not really true

[fisted]

Remember when there used to be payphones all over the place, so if you had an emergency or ran out of gas or something, you could call for help? Good luck finding one of those now.

Those payphones have just been upgraded. They now appear in the form of humans with phones in their pockets.
The operating procedure has also been modified -- instead of inserting coins into a machine, you insert words into a human -- along the lines of "Excuse me, I'm in an emergency; would you please let me use your phone for a second?" The best part: It's usually free!
Related life-hack: Instead of asking the first walking phone booth you encounter, wait for an attractive, female specimen and then use the opportunity to add add your num-- oh wait, never mind.

Re:Not really true

[Pfhorrest]

There are Call Boxes along the highways out here in California, but they are basically dedicated call-911 phones. You can't call anyone else with them, you can't even dial them, you just pick up and get put through to emergency services dispatch.

Re:Not really true

[houghi]

To pay one's taxes is a good reason to have a checkbook.

Not needed in Europe as we have a unified banking system where I can be to any account in all of Europe. And they do the same to me.
e.g if I need to pay them, I just transfer the money and if I get money back, they just transfer it to me.

I also like to throw them checks at Costco

When you get a bank account, you will get a debit card. You use that to pay with a pin. Easier to for all as all is automated.

I like to pay most of my bills online, but even some of them aren't electronically associated with my bank, so, my bank actually cuts and mails them a physical check

SEPA is what we use all over Europe.I have done payments in other countries at other banks without any problem. All I need is the bank account number.

I have not seen any charges for bank transfers or cash payments/debit card. I see it sometimes for very small amounts for Credit Cards. e.g. 25 cents for amounts below 10EUR with credit card.

So it seems what really stops it is a unified banking system. The reason Europe has this is because they said to the banks : we do not care what you want. We order you to do this or you close shop.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Bah, I could honestly throw my phone away right now, and the largest inconvenience would be my wife having to call my desk phone at work vs texting me. She does occasionally actually call me if its something urgent, which means the text mode is just a convenience but not necessary. The next would be getting her to pick me up from the train station when the train is late, but the train stations around here have payphones.

Get married and have kids, you don't have time for a social life, so your find your self talking to and visiting your neighbors who also have kids, dont even have to leave your own street, so that problem solves it self. Personally I cant be effed having to go out and meet people for dinner and movies and all that bullshit all the time and listen to people dribble on about their lives or complain about things that dont matter.

All phones have done is let people get more and more disorganized, sloppy and become unreliable scatter brains.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Paper cheques in the US still have at least one good use, and thats for one off transactions where a business needs to give you money, they print the cheque - super simple, banking app takes a picture of it, and boom its in the account next day, if that convenience didn't exist and I need the money, I'd find the time to drive to the bank, or walk around there on my lunch break the next day.

And you're right about nothing makes me answer my phone, seriously - I turned off 99% of push notifications, I have to manually check email and Slack on it to see whats new. If I dont recognize the number I let it goto voice mail (if its important they leave a message, if not they don't, funny how that happens to most calls), and the phone automatically goes into DND mode between 5pm and 8am. My boss has my home number (yeah I got a land line phone, and plan on keeping it around) if its an actual emergency, and in 3.5 years there has been exactly one emergency that qualified for that.

I also recently stopped having my phone out during my 45minute train commute 2x a day, and instead just look out the window and think about what ever pops into my head, funny thing about this, is I've solved many problems while daydreaming out the window vs actively thinking about it.

Re:Not really true

[cayenne8]

In that case I would find knowledge of quick and painless methods of suicide much more valuable, but YMMV. Note that you can't go weeks without potable water, so you would want to focus on that before the squirrel. Also, there are vegetarian solutions that would be much more viable, safe, and that would taste a hell of a lot better.

Of course you're correct, water would be #1 priority.

But for food....if it gets that bad...I'm not ruling out ANY options....vegetable or animal, hopefully both.

Re:Not really true

[cayenne8]

When you get a bank account, you will get a debit card.

Nope..don't want one of those, if someone gets your debit card, that cash is GONE and it often takes a lot to get it back.

I don't often carry checks anymore, so that's not usually a risk.

But I specifically told them I wanted an ATM only card, not debit.

For plastic transactions I prefer a regular CC, as that you don't lose money from your banking account if it is compromised.

So, I use CC when no extra charges come to me, check/cash whenever I can duck CC processing charges.

I find this often happens with purchases on gunbroker.com , or at a gun show where you get better prices for cash.

But apparently you're from Europe from you last answer, and sadly, wouldn't know anything about that.

;)

Re:Not really true

[spire3661]

>especially considering it's a device that hooks up to cellphone networks. AT&T tried the same argument in the last century with their wired network. We did not find it compelling then, i do not find it compelling now.

Re:Not really true

[atrex]

The thing about pay phones and emergency call boxes is someone has to pay to maintain them. If pay phones aren't getting used enough to pay for their own maintenance, then, they're going to fall into disrepair until they just get flat out removed.
When it comes to emergency call boxes on the interstate, what's more logical: spending thousands of tax dollars putting in and maintaining boxes that will save the 0.01% of motorists that break down and don't have a cell phone? Or putting that money towards maintaining the actual roads and bridges?
For the motorist that doesn't want to carry a cellphone there are prepaid tracfone's they could buy and shove in their glove compartment for emergencies.

You're arguably right about the social end of things though, unless you just group up with like minded individuals or at least friends that respect your choice not to have one.

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Bingo. Whatever Zuckerberg, brin and Soros say- we can Always Turn the stuff off. Visit the Forest, the disco, a Cafe etc.

Stop whining in favour of the Data Barons!

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Europe has this is because they said to the banks : we do not care what you want. We order you to do this or you close shop.

LOL you're so naive. The reason Europe has this is because the banks benefited greatly from this. I bet you're either a young know-nothing or a retard.

Re:Not really true

[kackle]

1) Cost. $600 a year is $1000 pre-tax, which is $10,000 per decade (or a cheap, new car).

2) Cancer. Disagree if you are ignorant to the superposition principle and how it can affect your DNA.

3) Theft. Some people have gotten killed over them.

4) Loss. Some don't need another thing to worry about.

5) Effort. Did I charge its battery? Did I pay my bill this month? Was the bill correct? Did someone steal my information? Did I go beyond my data plan? Have the rates gone up again?

6) Damage. It's easily broken if just dropped.

7) Tracking. Many are tracking its location and use.

8) Need. It doesn't fit my life in any way, but I guess I'll endure the above because everyone else believes I should have one for my tiny commute.

Re:Not really true

[TemporalBeing]

Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.

We didn't have data/text on our phones for years; finally had to add it after we had kids. All the orgs that focus on children (child care facilities, schools, church programs, etc) and babysitters basically expect that you have at least text capabilities and use that as their primary means of communications, especially if you kid is getting sick, etc.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

You might be surprised at the taste. I'd take squirrel over calimari any day.

Re:Not really true

[Wintermute__]

That was also my experience in Xi'an, and Beijing and Wuhan. Cash is universally accepted, and there are taxis everywhere, as well as other transit options like city buses and trains. However, getting around in China without speaking Mandarin (or Cantonese in the South I imagine) is not for the faint of heart. I was fortunate enough to be traveling with native speakers.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

"I had a bad experience with a taxi driver so all taxi drivers are bad!"

Plenty of bad experiences are had by people using Uber. It's great you have a singular story to demonize someone but that's all it is.

I once had a bad experience in Pakistan. So I called in Seal Team 6 to take care of the problem."

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

The Amish and a few other similar groups seem to do OK also.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Shooting?
Bah. the real golden days where when you just wandered the planes looking for bones you could make soup out of. before all that fancy new-fangled flint knapping and agriculture nonsense.

Re:Not really true

[operagost]

But I was told Uber and Lyft drivers weren't properly vetted and thus, were all rapists and thieves?

Re:Not really true

[operagost]

By a strange coincidence, Uber is exactly the same price as a taxi.

Well, that's what happens when a government engages in de facto rate fixing. Of course, the Uber drivers are the ones who suffer, since eventually they'll just change careers or driver for one of the monopolistic cab companies because it's certain they will make more money that way. Small business always loses due to the costs of compliance.

Re:Not really true

[operagost]

Wanna go back to dial-up?

Re:Not really true

[unixisc]

Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.

There are however uses of the phone that one can't exactly simulate w/ discrete cameras, stamped letters or even to an extent, computers due to the Swiss army knife functionality of cellphones

I used to bank w/ E*TRADE bank, which used to have branches nationwide, but which closed all but one of them. So the only way of depositing checks there, if one doesn't have direct deposit, is to use their phone app: scan both front & back w/ the camera to get the deposit in. It worked for me, but I was forced to pick another bank when I found out that there was no way to get cashiers checks from them: one had to ask them to wire money to the target account, which not all rental properties could work w/

There have been cases where I'd like to be serviced in person, but am directed to use an app: however, what's worse is the app doesn't work. Case in point: My Verizon. So I pretty much drove to the store to get my issue fixed, rather than just sit on the chair and resolve it there.

Re: Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear you man. Its hard when you realize you are a guinea pig. My advice and I promise you its the advice I would have given myself before I got pulled into the magpoopic field is to stay the course. The tail you're chasing or whatever it is always getting away from you the more you are not true to yourself. Reach out to people who think like you who are pro low tech etc. It wont be much better in the short run but in the long run it just might be a whole lot better and couldn't be much worse than conforming.

Re:Not really true

[phantomfive]

Some of the emergency phones are still there along the highway, but they all stopped working a few years back when the analog cell network shut down. No one really cared enough to upgrade them.

Re:Not really true

[Major_Disorder]

But I was told Uber and Lyft drivers weren't properly vetted and thus, were all rapists and thieves?

Only the nicer ones. :)

Re:Not really true

[Altus]

yeah because a lot of people who are on the fence about carrying even a phone never mind a smartphone really are just dying to have all the features that you or I might add to a rooted phone.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, it was Vegas. Old man probably knew his ticket was about punched, so came to Vegas to live it up and go out with a bang. So he skipped out on his heart meds, hit the buffet, blew his kid's inheritance at the poker table, and got him one of those nice professional ladies for the night. He would have checked out there, but you just had to meddle. Now he's alive, broke, and his family hates him. Good job, hero.

Re:Not really true

[grep -v '.*' *]

Old joke (obviously):

A traveling salesman went to an isolated farmhouse to sell some stuff. The farmer refused, but invited the man in for supper. During dinner, the phone rang. And Rang. And RANG. After a while, the salesman said, "Sir, aren't you going to answer that?" To which the farmer replied, "Son, I put that phone in for MY convenience, not theirs."

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is you cant buy a smartphone that respects the user and offers built-in, seamless, fully factory supported rooting.

Its a good thing absolutely none of what he said depends on that then, huh?

Re:Not really true

[Quirkz]

We are not lamenting the days where we need to smash rocks together to start a fire, where we have easy access to matches or a lighter.

And I gave up matches and lighter when I bought my last Samsung.

Re:Not really true

[Nethead]

Agreed, if it weren't for podcasts I could be happy with an old StarTac or Bellboy pager. Hell, even the 2m ham repeater autopatch would do fine for the roadside use. But then my car has a button for that. I have gone out without my phone and it's fine. I never take them into a show or movie, hardly even to eat unless I'm on call that week.

Re:Not really true

[GNious]

Not too strong on NL laws, but think that you can file a complaint against the company.
Provide receipt, which includes start and end points + time, and distance driven - if it's an extreme distance, it'll likely be a default win and the drive reprimanded or lose his license.

Re:Not really true

[Tom]

Maybe. I have reasons to believe that's not the case, though. Didn't own a car for about 10 years while living in the center of a large city, and aside from public transport I also drove taxis a lot, for everyday stuff (you can drive a lot of taxi before it becomes more expensive than buying and owning a car).

So there's a bit of taxi experience there, and I've never had any one driver try funny games. If that's a filter bubble, I suggest you figure out how to get inside of it.

Re:Not really true

[Tom]

Funny fact, the country with the strongest base of small to medium companies, Germany, also has a lot more regulation than other countries that are dominated by huge multi-nationals.

Regulation can be abused and a terrible obstacle, or it can be used properly and level the playing field. Like a gun or a knife, it can be used in different ways, not all of them harmful.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

No one gives a fuck about a shithole like Scotland. You fuckers are still probably driving people around on goat carts.

Fuck Highlander too.

Re:Not really true

[doom]

If someone had an accident and you could not call an ambulance because you don't have a cellphone, and someone died as a result, how would it feel?

You know, I've been listening to the pro-cellphone pitch for many-a-year now, and I've heard about these terrible emergency scenarios many times, but what I actually see people doing with these "smart phones" is passing nightclub selfies around and playing games that make minesweeper look a fascinating, enlightening experience.

(Do you carry a full first-aid kit in your bag at all times? But how would you feel if you found someone bleeding to death and had no tourniquets and field dressings available?)

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I call shenanigans

NOONE would want to drive all over Eindhoven, not for any amount of money, UGH!

PS

PSV sucks!

Re:Not really true

[mattack2]

That's funny, because one of the problems is that the taxi services ARE heavily regulated, and Uber/Lyft/etc. AREN'T, and just started going into cities (until they started getting sued then stopped working in various cities).

BTW, I'm not saying I'm FOR all of the regulation that exists on taxis, but it does seem somewhat unfair (yeah yeah yeah life isn't fair) to have one business heavily regulated and ANOTHER business, doing largely the same thing, NOT heavily regulated. Yes, removing some of the regulations on taxis would be good, but then you've screwed over the people who paid what, millions for their legally required medallions.

(I've only been in a taxi once in my life, but will give up a personal car when driverless Uber or the like comes around.)

Re:Not really true

[Harlequin80]

Sure it costs money. It's a tool though that has lots of uses.
Cancer. You're right. I disagree.
Theft - don't carry a wallet or wear a watch or anything else then?
Loss - see above
Effort - Um. If you feel that's a lot of effort I guess. I don't check my bill as I don't need to. It's a fixed amount per month. I have basically unlimited usage other than data. And how are they stealing your data?
Damage - They really aren't that fragile. And stick a case on them and they are actually robust.
Tracking - Turn off gps....
Need - You are saying that as someone who hasn't ever owned one. I bought a 3d printer 6 months ago on a whim with no clear usage case. Now it is one of my most used tools. A phone is similar.

Re:Not really true

[skam240]

Is it better though? I just recently had a guy on a long Uber run who wanted to watch videos on his phone while driving and was driving dangerously as a result and we had to ask him to stop. My Aunt and Uncle on their first ever Uber run this summer where picked up by what was clearly a homeless person. They felt sorry for her and so took the ride but it was not a comfortable experience.

Cabbies aren't perfect but some types of shit I've seen out of some uber drivers I have never seen out of a cabby.

Re:Not really true

[thegarbz]

Oh wow. The only thing worse than ripping out an emergency system is leaving it in place when it doesn't work!

Re:Not really true

[houghi]

Nope..don't want one of those, if someone gets your debit card, that cash is GONE and it often takes a lot to get it back.

We use PIN in Europe, so not a real issue. You can ask your bank to make your account that you do not go in debit. That way you can't go in the red or under zero or in debt.
Bank cards have the same protection as credit cards, so as long as you don't give away your pin, you should be ok.

The reason I prefer CC is because I get a month free money. Obviously I pay back everything, so no interest. YMMV. Some banks/cards will charge from the moment you use them. Other have paybacks. I get 1% or something like that using the card. That is not why I use it.

Cash I use when eating with friends, because it is easier to split the bill that way. No tipping needed.

Re:Not really true

[JonnyCalcutta]

Firstly, we don't have 'monopolistic cab companies' here. Anyone is free to start their own cab company - you just have to be licensed if you want to drive a cab (licenses are not saleable goods). Secondly, the Uber drivers I have spoken with are 100% happy with the situation and seem to be doing OK. They are just not destroying the existing cab companies by ignoring regulation 'because internet.... '. Thirdly, 'costs of compliance' - cry me a river.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Bloody hell man. That's fucked up.

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the same in America but like a people everywhere there are those who want to turn a singular negative experience with themselves nailed to a cross.

This is a brilliant comment. Would you mind posting the other half of the words now?

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally help arrived handed me some syringes to inject him with and that is when I stepped back not being a Dr. They took it from there.

What The Fuck?

Re:Not really true

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't bitch about using text message and instant message, I do on my desktop all the time.

I just wish others would use encryption programs, I don't like the NSA spying on all my communications.

Re:Not really true

[Applehu Akbar]

When this kind of thing happens to you in a cab, you usually have no recourse. It's largely an anonymous cash business, and even if you
luck into a ride where the credit card machine is not "broken" it's not easy for you to prove that you rode with Driver X that day and to get a bad driver prosecuted.

On ridesharing services, you are known to the company through an account and you can rate every ride on a 1-5 scale using the app. Even if you don't contact the company about a bad experience, drivers with low ratings are quickly dropped.

Re:Not really true

[david_thornley]

I believe that decision allowed third-party phones that were certified for the phone network. I don't believe it allowed unlimited individual phone hacking.

Re:Not really true

[suutar]

Not especially the speeds, but the large number of available ISPs was actually quite nice.

Re:Not really true

[skam240]

Well let me put it this way, I've never even heard of bad experiences like the ones I've described above being had from taxi drivers in my local area yet those were problems with uber drivers. Everything you said is great but it certainly doesnt match up with my experiences. I've never had a homeless person or blatantly reckless driver pick me up from any of the nearby cab companies.

Re:Not really true

[Rakarra]

yeah because a lot of people who are on the fence about carrying even a phone never mind a smartphone really are just dying to have all the features that you or I might add to a rooted phone.

Like being able to put music and other media on an external SD card, something of which Samsung** loves to throw frustrating roadblocks in the way?

**or is it google? I can never tell where the bad decisions on the Galaxy S series come from.

Re:Not really true

[Rakarra]

We use PIN in Europe, so not a real issue.

Is this a name/acronym for a particular system, or are you talking about using a pin number when you use your card? We have the same system in the US and it has always been easily hackable and vulnerable.

You can ask your bank to make your account that you do not go in debit. That way you can't go in the red or under zero or in debt.

Doesn't help me with the $30k that the thieves might have pulled out of the bank already! I don't think any banks here let you withdraw more money than is in the actual account.

Protections for debit cards are poor in the US. Credit cards are generally well protected, but it's a huge mistake to treat a debit card like a credit card. Individual banks may extend protections to debit cards (mine does), but you'd have to read your agreement with the bank to ensure that's the case.

What the hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Weird drug fueled screeds that claim the unabomber was right count as "stuff that matters" now? Fuck me.

Re:What the hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure it's drugs, but begs the question. Definitely a hell of a statement, so much that RTFA was skipped. You're cool. Fuck the Unabomber, I think we can make our minds up without his assistance.

Re:What the hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Quiz time: fill in the blank:

But before long, most of us began to feel naked and panicky anytime we left home without _____

a) heroin
b) cigarettes
c) clothing
d) a cell phone

Subby is really saying that the answer is (d)? Dude: there's a 12 step program for that.

Re: What the hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if it was unabomber vs Hillary who people would have voted for.... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_for_President

Re:What the hell?

[Stormwatch]

That's not what "begs the question" means.

Re:What the hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you haven't already, go read the article, the summary doesn't do it justice.
I'm guessing you are a mobile phone user, so you may not notice this, but mobile phone users are nowadays continually trying to force mobile phone users on the few remaining people who don't want one.
I see this in my private life a lot. Some people straight-up try to use their influence over others, e.g. parents or bosses pushing a mobile on their kids or employees; some try to use social coercion, e.g. pushing people without a mobile more and more towards their out-crowd; some passive aggressively require phone use, e.g. people meeting up in a restaurant texting each other a change of venue at the last minute, leaving people without a mobile on them stranded.
Some of my friends now have a mobile, even though they hate the thing. And before you tell them to just turn it off, go over the social coercion used to get them to get one and you'll notice that it has to be on. And even when off, the thing still drains your bank account.
I've explained to them that they don't have to get a mobile on my account, that I'd accept them for what they are and would accommodate them, but although they were grateful they said most people just aren't very nice in this respect and they didn't want to throw most of their social life out of the window.

Re:What the hell?

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Much as it grieves me to say this, the "beg question" battle is lost and now joins "irregardless" and "partake in" in the list of defeats.
That doesn't mean you have to use them.

Re:What the hell?

[Godwin O'Hitler]

c) clothing; Not surprising as that's the very definition of naked.

Re:What the hell?

[TemporalBeing]

If you haven't already, go read the article, the summary doesn't do it justice. I'm guessing you are a mobile phone user, so you may not notice this, but mobile phone users are nowadays continually trying to force mobile phone users on the few remaining people who don't want one. I see this in my private life a lot. Some people straight-up try to use their influence over others, e.g. parents or bosses pushing a mobile on their kids or employees; some try to use social coercion, e.g. pushing people without a mobile more and more towards their out-crowd; some passive aggressively require phone use, e.g. people meeting up in a restaurant texting each other a change of venue at the last minute, leaving people without a mobile on them stranded. Some of my friends now have a mobile, even though they hate the thing. And before you tell them to just turn it off, go over the social coercion used to get them to get one and you'll notice that it has to be on. And even when off, the thing still drains your bank account. I've explained to them that they don't have to get a mobile on my account, that I'd accept them for what they are and would accommodate them, but although they were grateful they said most people just aren't very nice in this respect and they didn't want to throw most of their social life out of the window.

Very very true - especially if you have kids. Schools use them; babysitters use them; any child care facility uses them - all to text you. Very few use email as primary means of comms, especially in quick scenarios (e.g come get your kid - they got sick).

Re:What the hell?

[JohnFen]

And before you tell them to just turn it off, go over the social coercion used to get them to get one and you'll notice that it has to be on.

They need better friends. I know that anyone trying to pressure me into any particular thing is someone I would simply start avoiding.

Life's too short to put up with crap like that.

Re:What the hell?

[Rakarra]

Weird drug fueled screeds that claim the unabomber was right count as "stuff that matters" now? Fuck me.

What's wrong with saying "the unabomber was right?" I guess that somehow it offends your sense of morality and rightness, as if an evil person has to be so evil that he couldn't possibly be right about anything. No one was saying that the unabomber was right to mail bombs to professors, but if you think that's all he ever did, you didn't pay much attention.

Re:What the hell?

[Rakarra]

Much as it grieves me to say this, the "beg question" battle is lost and now joins "irregardless" and "partake in" in the list of defeats.

Partake in is certainly lost, but the irregardless fight certainly isn't.
I first learned about "irregardless isn't a word" on the comics page in my local newspaper. See, they do teach kids useful lessons!
Good ol' Bloom County.

Of course you can

[HBI]

I actually don't use my cellphone much. It's all voice calls or SMS. Any use as a web browser is a last resort and perhaps twice weekly. The apps are jokes and I usually don't bother even opening any of them on the average week. I spent 20 years on call. I leave my cell phone hooked up to the charger before 8pm every night and I go upstairs. If it rings or buzzes, tough shit. If you want me, you have to know my wife's number, or my private e-mail address which few have.

In regards internet usage, I stop here every once in a while. I do pay attention to the facebook crowd, mostly family. I don't use Twitter (anti-free speech issue there, as well as not seeing any value added in using it). I read my fill of 'news' of different stripe and play a FPS or two, write some code, or read books, admittedly with a Kindle, but that's only because the wife was giving me agita about the dead tree type taking up too much room in the house.

I also don't watch TV. Full stop. Haven't since I was 12. I have a media server but it's mostly for the wife and kids. I'll watch South Park or Archer once in a while, but off the server, and therefore downloaded. I never use Netflix or any other streaming service, either.

If you told me tomorrow all the computers were going away, i'd be ok as long as I could get dead tree books. I'd regret it because then I couldn't even consider coding stuff. Otherwise, who cares. The internet is way overrated.

Re:Of course you can

[BitterOak]

The internet is way overrated.

So what are you using, if not the Internet, to read Slashdot and post comments?

Re:Of course you can

[HBI]

Of course I am. I'm making the point that if it were all over, that all the fiber was cut and we'd never have an internet again, it'd be ok. I'm not going to have "I MISS /." carved on my headstone.

Re:Of course you can

[HBI]

When you're looking for a job, remember you'll be interviewing with people like me.

Re:Of course you can

[coastwalker]

Ditto, though I have a phone, not a smartphone and I watch University lectures on YouTube for entertainment. Social media is a waste of time as youngsters who might be interesting to interact with tend to go "private" to grown-ups so it becomes anti-social media. The rest of it is either baby pictures or people sharing fake news hate speech. So I don't bother with social media much any more. Smartphones are overated so long as you have net access through a laptop, tablet or desktop.

Re:Of course you can

[HBI]

The funny part is that I got a smartphone so I could take pictures of whiteboards. True story. I would just get a camera in another age, which would be a camera with a much better lens, incidentally.

Re: Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's expose HBI for who he really is. Here's his Slashdot bio:

Pleasing the unwashed masses is not my task. That means you, with the mod points. Social Justice is the freedom to be a degenerate without being told you are a degenerate. The SJW tolerance religion is all about protecting actual white racism in lily-white Blue enclaves.

This says plenty about the type of person he is.

Re:Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you probably have that backwards.

Re:Of course you can

[sgunhouse]

I have a prepay flip phone. I put the minimum possible yearly payment on it and never run out. I do have a wifi-only tablet and a computer, but I don't do "social media". I do email. I'm on a couple of product support forums (one as a volunteer moderator). I play solitaire and sudoku (as in, games that aren't graphics intensive and don't require a network connection) on the tablet, or read books, and if a network is available check email, check the weather, visit here - mundane stuff. I don't watch TV, except if I visit a sports bar for dinner.

If the phone system died, it would be a few days before I noticed. The internet I'd notice sooner, but I wouldn't be lost without it. Television, good riddance.

Re:Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

> I also don't watch TV. Full stop. .... I'll watch South Park or Archer once in a while

So, you watch TV.

Also, obligatory Onion link.

Re:Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow this thread is just filled with elitists.

Re:Of course you can

[jenningsthecat]

I'm not going to have "I MISS /." carved on my headstone.

If you'll give me the name of the cemetery where you plan to be buried, and the plot number, I'll be happy to have that taken care of for you... ;-)

Re: Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

they're so cute at this age

Re: Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

A normal adult, sounds to me Don't worry, soon you too will have hair where there was none before.

Re: Of course you can

[Godwin O'Hitler]

It actually says fuck all that you are capable of understanding. Or me either for that matter.

Re: Of course you can

[Evtim]

A realist you mean? I concur.

Re:Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course I am. I'm making the point that if it were all over, that all the fiber was cut and we'd never have an internet again, it'd be ok. I'm not going to have "I MISS /." carved on my headstone.

But in fact that would be a hell of an epitaph. Thanks for the idea.

Re:Of course you can

[Altus]

So you are telling me that somehow, you manage to have a phone and it doesn't completely control your life? that you manage to get all the advantages you want out of a phone without giving it any more attention than what YOU desire?

What is your secret because from what I read on the internet (including this particular summary) what you describe is impossible. The phone upon purchase is surgically grafted to your hand and your eyes are pried open in some clockwork orange way an forced to look unblinking upon whatever the phone decides to show you next.

The world needs to know your secret... you should write a book! Not that anyone reads them anymore.

Re:Of course you can

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not as extreme, but moving that way. I leave my phone at home half the time, not even deliberately, just can't be bothered taking it with me. TV use continues to drop despite recent purchase of fetch TV for the kids. Still use laptop and desktop at work, so there's my news and email access. Facebook... maybe once every few weeks?

Ironic for someone who works in machine learning research according to my friends, but I just don't really care about tech that much anymore. Growing up in the mid 80s - early 90s I was obsessed, remained so through Uni, but interest started to wain after a few years of working. These days I just hang around for the maths.

Re:Of course you can

[Rakarra]

I actually don't use my cellphone much. It's all voice calls or SMS.

I get so many telemarketer calls on my phone now with hacked caller IDs that unless it's a close friend or family in my contact list, I just don't answer the phone now. The Do Not Call list is entirely ignored and there is zero enforcement.

Re:News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Found the millennial.

I'll Be The Guinea Pig

[mentil]

Give me a harem, a vasectomy, a bunker, and a lifetime supply of food and water, and I'll test that for you, for free. Medical care and lighting optional.

Re:I'll Be The Guinea Pig

[Anonymous Coward]

No beer? No Weed? No way!

Re:I'll Be The Guinea Pig

[Anonymous Coward]

Brewing (beer) and fire (smoking) count as technology, I'm afraid.

Re:I'll Be The Guinea Pig

[Anonymous Coward]

You can be afraid all you want.

Me, I'll be munching on sticky Cannabis buds, mmm, mmm.

That is, unless you're so pedantic that you think chewing counts as technology

Re:I'll Be The Guinea Pig

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading this comment, I think that bold text is a technology can live without.

wtf?

[gravewax]

excuse my ignorance. But what the fuck does the IPhone X have that proves the Unabomber right? if anything it is one of those very minor upgrades that proves you don't need it this time around.

Re:wtf?

[mschwanke97402]

Go read the article. It wasn’t about the iPhone X per se.

Re:wtf?

[Anonymous Coward]

READ IT DIPSHIT. The ubiquity of the iphone set off a chain reaction in consumerism and expectation that our economy grew into.

Re:wtf?

[gravewax]

REad now, article is fucking pathetic, So yes the summary was bad, but the article basically is waffle that says nothing.

Re:wtf?

[Anonymous Coward]

article is even worse than the summary. The iPhone did fucking nothing, smartphones were already taking off before the iPhone and the iPhone isn't even the most common smartphone.

Re:wtf?

[mschwanke97402]

Read now, article is fucking pathetic, So yes the summary was bad, but the article basically is waffle that says nothing.

You are probably right.

Re:wtf?

[no-body]

excuse my ignorance. But what the fuck does the IPhone X have that proves the Unabomber right? if anything it is one of those very minor upgrades that proves you don't need it this time around.

All this Apple stuff is driven by hype and so is a high percentage for car purchases and what else comes up as hype.
Take the hype away, the economy and stock market tanks.

Is there an alternative? No, the thing is locked shut and will tank as a whole unless .... (your turn)

Re:wtf?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called clickbaiting. Putting "Apple" or "iPhone" in any article will increase it click rate, /. do this all the time.

The logic is stupid anyway, *life* itself evolved similarly, all herbivores depended on having plants to eat, and similarly all predators that survives on eating herbivores. Thus we have an ecosystem where few, if any, organisms can survive without depending on some other organisms.

The case for avoiding new technology simply because one might become dependent on it, if made, would also make the case for every life remaining on single-cell stage. After all, by evolving to take advantage of anything in the environment means you will become dependent on it. Our life is already dependent on *something* no matter how much we give up short of life itself. If one insist we must be independent of everything, the only option is to give up and die, a corpse no longer depend on anything.

Instead, I choose to maintain the will and ability to adapt when new technology appears and disappears, rather than trying to stay, technologically, in the same place for the rest of my life.

Re:wtf?

[iampiti]

But they've removed things! How could you not get this awesome update?

Re:wtf?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

New generation discovers consumerism as if it is a novel idea. This and a real-life "Godzilla" at 11.

Re:wtf?

[Altus]

yeah but best to drop it in there to make it feel relevant

Re:wtf?

[Dread_ed]

WRONG! Life evolved because our fungi overlords wanted a better variety of tasty plants and animals to eat. They are the true rulers of this world and it would behoove you to recognize their ascendancy before it is too late.

Put that Shitake down right now! Heathen!

Re:wtf?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because I'm heterosexual so they won't let me buy a droid.

Re:wtf?

[Rakarra]

READ IT DIPSHIT

Why? The article ended up being shit. Why should we waste our time on it? Do you have unlimited free time? Are there 80+ hours in each of your days? Do you read everything you come across from start to end?

We can't read everything, it's a shitty use of our time. An informative, well constructed summary should be able to give the jist of an article, and if you're so hyped by it that you really want the details, you can go and read the whole thing. A summary should not be clickbait, it shouldn't tease in the hope that you'll click through and waste 20 minutes of time you'll not get back when you could be doing something a hell of a lot more interesting (like arguing on Slashdot...).

try going without an email account

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think cell phones are problematic, try telling an online vendor that you don't use email. They can't handle it.

Re:try going without an email account

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Try telling the man in the street to use e-mail and he'll reply OMG where's the button for that on WhatsApp?

Nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

It is certainly easier to do a lot of things with modern technology, sure, but it isn't the only way. The poster, the source piece, and the unibomber are all operating under the faulty premise that there is only one solution to a problem. That is complete nonsense. Human beings are not that one-dimensional, and they tend to be pretty good at improvising when the need arises, for the most part. This is a projection of their own myopia and ignorance (as in, this is me, therefore it is logically everyone) in my opinion. Sorry, that's patently false.

Cycles

[Anonymous Coward]

the iPhone X proves the Unabomber was right

You only need to see two technology cycles to realize the pattern. It doesn't require searching new assplosion prophets to state it. And in the spirit of not invoking assplosion prophets, it would be better to use the actual names of the people quoted such as Theodore Kaczynski in this case.

Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't need to be "instantly reachable"

You can e-mail me, and I might e-mail you back, at a time and method of my choosing.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[TWX]

And depending on the profession that you pursue that might leave you at a significant disadvantage to your peers.

I take care of equipment where I need to be notified as to the state of that equipment. There's a hundred sites involved, 700 closets plus probably another 1500 smaller devices. Having a device that does wireless e-mail is the fastest and easiest way for me to be notified of outages and service restorations.

I've used TNPP and TAP in the past for this kind of notification, but TNPP suffers from being numeric-only and TAP and SMS suffer from character limit. All suffer from needing a gateway to turn the message into something that a dumb phone can receive.

The point is that having more current information that others can mean out-competing others. The ability to communicate that information is important. Not all professions work that way, but for those that do, quick information and communications is vital.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[JonnyCalcutta]

I'm not defending the parent or luddite-ism, but surely you must realise that what you are talking about is a serious edge case? Most people do not have any professional need to be on call (even when they are at work, never mind at home).

Way back in the old days if someone went on holiday they were gone for two weeks. If some issue came up, it just had to wait until they were back because there was simply no option. Nowadays some colleague will be sending a text within 5 minutes ("we can't find the staples", "do you remember where I put the documents for client x", "how do you change the sugar in the Mr Coffee machine"). That does not seem like a net gain to me.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not being a Luddite.

I don't have a need or want for a phone. Obviously I'm not resisting technology as a whole because I'm posting here, on the internet, on a tech site.

There's other "tech" I don't want either, like oh, a ventilator or heart/lung bypass machine.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[Applehu Akbar]

In the twentieth century a phone number represented a place. Today it represents a person.

Back then, the more important a person was, the more phone numbers he had: home, office, the club, the bar, the mistress. Contact lists have a lot more entries today because can connect so much more easily, but the information in each contact was a lot more complex back then. And you had to dial each number as digits every time, which led to an entertaining frequency of wrong number calls, as well as having to guess where a person was on the list at a given time.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not defending the parent or luddite-ism, but surely you must realise that what you are talking about is a serious edge case? Most people do not have any professional need to be on call (even when they are at work, never mind at home).

Way back in the old days if someone went on holiday they were gone for two weeks. If some issue came up, it just had to wait until they were back because there was simply no option. Nowadays some colleague will be sending a text within 5 minutes ("we can't find the staples", "do you remember where I put the documents for client x", "how do you change the sugar in the Mr Coffee machine"). That does not seem like a net gain to me.

That's how it still is at sane (non-startup) workplaces. They idea is that if you're going to be gone that long and knew it you should already have made arrangements with the project schedule or briefed someone to cover for you in a pinch if something comes up.

If you text or call me while I'm on vacation we're going to have words when I get back.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[TWX]

Correct. Only time I was contacted when on medical leave was when someone screwed up the configs on some rather important core equipment and was looking for a backup. Referred them to another coworker who apparently was able to help 'em out.

When I'm on vacation I turn off the work email alerts. It's never been a problem.

Re:Don't have a cell phone and don't want one

[Rakarra]

That's how it still is at sane (non-startup) workplaces. They idea is that if you're going to be gone that long and knew it you should already have made arrangements with the project schedule or briefed someone to cover for you in a pinch if something comes up.

And/Or off-hours support, because paying someone to sit in the office to field one emergency after hours in a period of weeks would be absolute madness.

My mother has a Facebook account

[Anonymous Coward]

Therefore, the Unabomber was right.

Re:My mother has a Facebook account

[Anonymous Coward]

Therefore, the Unabomber was right.

My mother supports trump. Therefore hitler was right

No

[rsilvergun]

not in any meaningful way. Individuals can't 'resist' any broad societal change on their own.

That said, the Unibomber's manifesto is just plain silly. The problem isn't dependence. It's tech being used to make our lives worse instead of better, usually at the behest of the ruling class. It's everything from tracking cookies that know exactly how much extra you'll pay for that bag of cat food or that box of diapers to armed autonomous drones. That's the part that's worth resisting. Not some nebulous assault on an idealized way of life pulled from something Thoreau wrote but systemic oppression of the sort that leads to the next 1000 year dark ages. And no, you can't resist that as individuals. It requires a concerted effort on the part of the working class. Unions, Democracy and powerful institutions that are carefully and continuously monitored.

Re: No

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagaree. The automobile, yes, a car anaolgy, has been rejected by some. They choose not to drive. Live in cities. Take public transport. You can't tell me there isn't or was never a huge push to get everyone to own a car. Yes, horses are gone but so is the chariot.

Re:No

[Bongo]

There are broadly speaking three stages of values -- premodern, modern, and post-post-modern.
Premodern is the old empires, kings, absolute authority, most large religions, etc. It sounds archaic but it forcefully united what would otherwise be lots of fiefdoms and warlords. And the authoritarian way, was the way the world was run for several thousand years.
The modernity appeared, due a a whole bunch of circumstances, and power was distributed, and what I guess makes a true modern nation state is the quality and honesty of its institutions.
Now your terrorist type has basically a preference for warlordism, whether because they don't like the government, or the government is too corrupt, but where a lot of people would be like, whatever, let's just get on with life, the "direct action" type wants to fight someone. And if the world ever collapsed back to pre-modern in a Mad Max kinda way, these people are actually the ones who would, for better or worse, be forcefully trying to reestablish power structures.
And I think you are right, the problem is not technology itself -- the problems, when they appear, are in the social power structures.
Are the nation's institutions relatively free of corruption? The global corruption index is probably way more important than whether a nation has this or that other development metric.
Technology itself is just extending our biology. We all depend on having bodies, food, water, and shelter. We all need our mitochondria. We all depend on the food system. We all depend on lots of stuff (and which many take for granted). I mean, there was the guy who tried to make his own toaster from scratch and it took him a year and it barely worked once. We all depend on information.
And yeah, tech can be used for "evil" ie. for destroying the social systems built so far, either by corrupting it from the top, or, as people often forget, by corrupting it from the bottom, with "people action" and other things which can be like a cancer. And let's not get started on post-modern nihilism.
But fortunately, whilst tech brings both good and bad, it tends to bring in a slight net good.
The internet can be used by corps and governments to spy on people and oppress dissent, as well as allowing all the terror nutters to find each other, but it also seems to be spreading good developments faster, like women's rights in developing countries, and new ideas for food production.
But I also assume the future cannot be predicted, so I do hope the good possibilities will continue to outweigh the bad, but again, the spread of ideas may bring all sorts of unexpected developments.

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

Hurricane Harvey
Hurricane Irma

These recent events and their aftermath prove that smart phones are not needed. These same events also show how useful they can be.

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod up.
But teen-35 yo women have a relationship with their itards and trashtbook.
This affects everyone really, until they become less addicted and of a sound mind.
Free hours in the day have gone down, people work longer albeit unpaid. the nuber of mannered people who do NOT look at their phone constantly is small.

Re:No

[wyHunter]

It all depends on what you choose to participate in. No, if all your friends have smart phones and you want to stay in that social group, likely you'll have to have one. But most of my friends don't have them - and we don't interact via smart phone. We see each other in person - or - gasp - use the LAND LINE.

Re:No

[Areyoukiddingme]

I mean, there was the guy who tried to make his own toaster from scratch and it took him a year and it barely worked once. We all depend on information.

Pretty pathetic. If you're determined to make a toaster from scratch, and know nothing about toasters, make one of these. A competent blacksmith can make one in 20 minutes. An amateur might need a couple of afternoons.

Knowing that's what a toaster was for more than two centuries probably counts as information that's hard to acquire without the Internet, nowadays.

Luddite here

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I have a cell phone. The ability to make calls from remote locations was a win for me. However it's an old flip phone, and when turned off, it's off. Convinced of that because I wouldn't get three months between charges otherwise.
What amazes me is how the sheepies are prepared to put up with shit technology, not 'technology' as such. I mean, having the charge the damn thing every day, and not actually being able to use them for their advertised purpose (making phone calls if you couldn't work that out) when out of town AND the damn things are tracking devices as well. Now THAT'S tragic.

Re:Luddite here

[serviscope_minor]

I've got an android phone. I'm pretty sure than when it's off, it's really off, because I wouldn't get three hours between charges otherwise.

Jokingnotjonking.

Anyway, you're right, they are remarkably shit technology in quite a burnt of ways. Mine does make voice calls but it's kinda mediocre at that. Maps is super useful though. And I like being able to IM my partner too.

Re:Luddite here

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Jonking sounds like fun. Does it require technology or is it like sex?

Re:Luddite here

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, having the charge the damn thing every day, and not actually being able to use them for their advertised purpose
 
So I can't make a phone call on my smartphone? Huh... that's news to me.
 
As for the charging? As much as I use my phone, a smartphone would hold enough charge for me to use it for three months as well. And it's no bullshit. I keep an old smartphone around for a couple reasons and I have left it off for months are booted it with no charging.
 
So how about go fucking yourself, dickweed. Just because you're a fucking old timey asshat doesn't mean that people who own a smartphone fits your stereotype.

No mobile != resisting technology

[Roger W Moore]

I don't have a mobile because, at least in Canada, they are ridiculously expensive and I haven't yet found a use for one that is worth the cost of owning it. However, I'd hardly say that I'm resisting technology or estranging myself from normal society, well, at least more than anyone else posting on Slashdot.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[complete loony]

I don't have a phone either, and I have noticed a number of online services are starting to assume that you have one.

I couldn't sign up for online access to my bank's services without a phone, because they want to send me an SMS verification code from time to time.

Use popular services from google or facebook, and they will periodically nag you to enable what they call 2-factor, which again involves an SMS code. Both services fail to provide a "quit annoying me" button.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

I have one and it is handy at times. But the plans in the US are just ridiculous. I have TracFone because of my very low data and minutes requirement. But I am a male engineer. My calls don't involve chit chat.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[Roger W Moore]

Yes, I have noticed that too but only for the UK. It's my UK bank which has the requirement for an SMS verification and British Airways which insisted on a mobile number for SMS texting when I bought a ticket online despite having an option for "no mobile" which just gave an error (fortunately they took my office phone number). I've not seen nagging from Google about this but I don't have a Facebook account again because I don't see any use for it that justifies the cost of having one.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[kamapuaa]

You are an engineer and you can't afford $40/month for a cheap plan? And you don't think a little handheld computer with internet access has at least the potential to be useful?

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

You really don't need Internet access from your phone - especially when your job has you in front of a computer all day anyway (and even more especially when that job is from home so doing online bills or whatever on a break isn't a problem )

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[stephanruby]

Google does not require SMS for 2-factor authentication. It never has.

1. SMS is one of the choices they give you, but it's not the only one.

2. You can also print a paper with a list of one-time codes.

3. Or you can buy a little piece of hardware on a keychain that will generate a different code every minute.

4. And/or you can install an app on a phone/tablet that will generate that different code every minute (without the need of internet access)

5. The source code for generating that code is even open source, so there is really no reason it can't be ported to most other computing devices out there.

Apparently, Facebook 2-factor authentication works the same way also. So there is really no excuse for having 2-factor authentication turned off on either Facebook or Google.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[complete loony]

I don't have a phone or laptop that I carry with me everywhere, so that rules out *all* software solutions. I'm also unlikely to carry around a piece of paper, or buy a key fob. My gripe is that there's no permanent opt-out of the question. While I already know that there are other 2-factor options, the question is phrased primarily around adding a phone number. Which I don't have.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[stephanruby]

If you don't want to carry a piece of paper in your wallet, I suppose you could keep one with a friend. As to the software, I'm sure it could be run on a server as well, but accessing that bit of info from the same computer would defeat that purpose because if that computer is compromised, so is your account.

In any case, I understand if you don't want to keep your email/youtube account secure, but if you want your bank account to be equally insecure, then you can't blame the bank when your online bank account gets taken over by someone else.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[Zero__Kelvin]

Ask a homeless person to borrow theirs.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[TheRaven64]

In the UK, you don't need a mobile to receive SMS - if they're sent to a landline they'll be read out using text-to-speech (sometimes with amusing results). That said, in the UK, there's no landline plan that works out cheaper than having a mobile, so not having a mobile means either living somewhere where BT is the sole supplier for broadband and getting the landline because they refuse to unbundle their offerings, or having no phone at all.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[TheRaven64]

You are an engineer and you can't afford $40/month for a cheap plan?

First: $40/month is a cheap plan?!?! How much do expensive plans cost where you live?

Second, there are lots of things I could do with $40/month, and there are far more things that cost $40/month than I could afford if I decided to buy all of them. Budgeting isn't usually a question of 'can I afford X?', it's 'is the value of X to me greater than the cost of X?' Unless you have so much money that you can buy anything that you might ever want (including a warehouse to store all of our crap in, and some servants to keep it sorted), then 'can't you afford X?' is the wrong question.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

In the third world, like Canada, you pay out of the ass for "cheap" plans, yes.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure my smartphone saves me more than an hour of time per month. That's easily worth $40 to me.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to access Google, you are using a device that can run the software for the two-factor authentication. No device, no Google.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, so does the social security system in Australia -and they want you to do it online.

You BREAK their system when you do NOT have a mobile phone number nor an email address. You might be blind, over 75 or medically challenged.

So you write letters ALL the time.- that is your right (for now).

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[tepples]

I don't have a phone or laptop that I carry with me everywhere

With the removal of payphones, how do you contact someone in an urgent situation?

I'm also unlikely to carry around a piece of paper

How do you pay for things without carrying currency?

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[tepples]

One of the steps to link a Google Account with Google Authenticator is "turn on 2-Step Verification for your account using your phone number." This cannot be done on a laptop or tablet computer without a subscription to phone service.

Re:No mobile != resisting technology

[tepples]

if you want your bank account to be equally insecure, then you can't blame the bank when your online bank account gets taken over by someone else.

Instead, you blame your mobile carrier when intruders exploit SS7 flaws?

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[tepples]

Anonymous Coward wrote:

I'm pretty sure my smartphone saves me more than an hour of time per month. That's easily worth $40 to me.

This assumes that you would be paid $40 for working one additional hour. I can think of a few reasons why this may not be the case for others reading your comment:

• Many employees are paid less than $40 per hour.
• The marginal hourly rate of an employee on salary is zero.
• The marginal hourly rate of an employee whose employer refuses to give him or her additional work to do is also zero.

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[avandesande]

I pay 12$ a month on usmobile. Just do some research. 100minutes 100texts 250MB data

Re: No mobile != resisting technology

[h4ck7h3p14n37]

You can get a $15 dollar plan with unlimited cellular voice and texting through Republic Wireless. If you want cellular data as well, add $5 for a GB/month. They let you bring your own device, so you can use one of the cheaper Android phones.

Can someone still resist the spread of technology?

[DontBeAMoran]

No. Resistance is futile.

Wrong place for the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Today most people are expected to be instantly reachable at all times. These devices have gone from servants to masters...

The device hasn't changed to be a slave, only you have. Quit it.
If someone demands your attention and attempts to guilt you for not giving it, tell those fuckers to fuck off.

I've kept my phone on silent without vibrate for nearly the entire past 5 years and still manage to be part of society just fine.

You letting others have that much control of your life is something you and only you can give.

Problem is the question.

[gurps_npc]

1) You personally not using technology is NOT resisting the spread of it. It still spreads. You can't resist the spread of technology. Even if you don't use it other people will, and this spreads it.

2) You can use the technology while refusing the stupid abuses. For example, despite the moronic statement, in the article you can have a phone and not answer it. I would even go so far as to call people that insist on answering it fools. All cell phones have answering machines and if it is important, they text. I would even go so far as to say that slowly, over time, people that are stupid enough to answer the phone at the wrong time will get themselves killed (car accidents for example).

3) The problem is not even the spread of technology, nor the social change that it brings. Certain technology makes certain abuses less likely and certain abuses more likely. The spread of machinery helped eliminate slavery (by reducing the need for low skilled work). The spread of the internet made cyber-bullying far more common. But this changes. Over time, new technology replaces the old ones and often solves the old problems (while creating new ones.) In other words, having new tech DOES solve the problems of old tech. If you resist it long enough, it goes away. Or better yet, YOU can solve the problem.

For example, perhaps someone will find a way to make cellphones with real secrecy. Maybe it will be TOR based, who knows. But it is totally possible if enough people demand it.

Stop crying about the problem and solve it.

Re:Problem is the question.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much this.
I absolutely hate phone calls. But sometimes people want to talk to you on the phone.
If it's outside work hours and I don't feel like talking, then I don't answer.
Even if it's my parents, or whoever. I have a life to enjoy, and enjoying it doesn't consist of sitting around talking to a device.
But even so I carry my phone around for emergencies and other useful features.

Re:Problem is the question.

[TheRaven64]

All cell phones have answering machines

I turned off my voicemail a few years ago. It combines the worst aspects of email and telephones: it's not instant and it's not easily searchable. If you call me and I don't answer, then it means that I'm not paying attention to my phone. The primary purpose of old answering machines was to let you know that you'd missed a call and who it was from, but I get that information far more concisely from the call log on my phone now.

Re:Problem is the question.

[AmiMoJo]

I disabled voicemail on my number. I realized that the only people who ever leave messages are recruiters who didn't read the bit I wrote about not calling me during work hours. Everyone else texts or emails. All having a voicemail box does is generate spam texts asking me to call it.

Re:Problem is the question.

[jareth-0205]

1) You personally not using technology is NOT resisting the spread of it. It still spreads. You can't resist the spread of technology. Even if you don't use it other people will, and this spreads it.

It often amuses me the number of people on this site in particular that crow about how they're not on Facebook, or they have their address book not synced to Google / Apple, and therefore are somehow 'off the grid'. They never think that this information is available by other means because other people do use the systems... phone books are highly corollated between groups and if enough of your address book have smartphones and have synced their addressbook not only is your name and number and address shared, probably your entire friendship group can be generated too. Networks can survive without some of the nodes.

2) You can use the technology while refusing the stupid abuses. For example, despite the moronic statement, in the article you can have a phone and not answer it. All cell phones have answering machines and if it is important, they text.

Interestingly maybe (and offtopically), this is very culturally dependent. In the UK you text someone if it's not urgent, and call if it is. Probably because here traditionally it cost money to call and didn't (or less) to text, whereas in the US (I'm assuming you're there) the billing was opposite to that.

Re:Problem is the question.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate how people don't answer the phone anymore.
If I actually go to the trouble of calling someone, there's a reason for it. And voicemail is usually useless. People don't call back, either.

Re:Problem is the question.

[thegarbz]

go so far as to say that slowly, over time, people that are stupid enough to answer the phone at the wrong time will get themselves killed

I don't understand what you mean here. Specifically the "slowly over time" bit. It seems like every idiot on the road feels the moment they unpack their first phone they need to instagram themselves from behind the vehicle.

Re:Problem is the question.

[doom]

gurps_npc wrote:

1) You personally not using technology is NOT resisting the spread of it. It still spreads.

Correct. I personally don't carry a mobile phone of any sort (strangely enough, I get by fine without one -- I may very well be "estranged from normal society" but I probably would be anyway). This does not prevent the obsession with these gadgets from changing my life, however-- just to pick one, I have to deal with linux software updates randomly changing software interfaces over to some very silly features popular with phoney people (like, everything buried under a hamburger icon, no useable keyboard shortcuts, etc).

You can't resist the spread of technology. Even if you don't use it other people will, and this spreads it.

You have a point that individual resitance has limited effectiveness at "reducing the spread", but I would stop short at saying that there's no way to resist it. Occasionally, people attempt organized boycotts, or public information campaigns to discourage a type of technology-- admittedly this is usually with limited success (the parking lot at the "Berkeley Bowl" has plenty of SUVs-- and that's at the "Berkeley Bowl").

2) You can use the technology while refusing the stupid abuses. For example, despite the moronic statement, in the article you can have a phone and not answer it.

Yeah, okay, but expecting perfect self-discipline out of a human being is a crazy trap in itself -- technologies bia human beings towards behaving in certain ways. This is going to happen, and pretending you can prevent it with "self-control" is not actually realistic, however popular this attitude is in a certain kind of rhetoric...

I would even go so far as to call people that insist on answering it fools.

A case in point.

... over time, people that are stupid enough to answer the phone at the wrong time will get themselves killed (car accidents for example).

And one method of preventing that from happening to you is to recognize you have an addiction problem and stop carrying the gadget with you. Or maybe stop owning one of the gadgets.

And this appears to be a very unpopular line of thought these days, but if you're designing software that's inherently intended to distract phone addicts (pokemon go comes to mind, but there's plenty of examples), you share in responsibility for the inevitable deaths that are going to occur because of this distraction.

And I'm going to quote this paragraph in full because I think there's a fascinating amount of dodging and dancing around the real issue:

3) The problem is not even the spread of technology, nor the social change that it brings. Certain technology makes certain abuses less likely and certain abuses more likely. The spread of machinery helped eliminate slavery (by reducing the need for low skilled work). The spread of the internet made cyber-bullying far more common. But this changes. Over time, new technology replaces the old ones and often solves the old problems (while creating new ones.) In other words, having new tech DOES solve the problems of old tech. If you resist it long enough, it goes away. Or better yet, YOU can solve the problem.

So, should we ignore the potential effects of a technology, secure in the belief that further technological progress will always solve any problems?

Allow me to suggest another possibility: at present, we have no sensible method of evaluating what a new product is going to do to us, and we end up swept along by the enthusiasm of faddish people who can't even imagine a down-side to their latest obessions (everyone likes it, it must be good! But what's bad may be that everyone likes it. Then what?).

Might there not be a set of alternative social institutions we could use to attempt to anticipate (and perhaps "regulate"?) potential problems before we encounter them?

Re:Problem is the question.

[Godwin O'Hitler]

If I'm talking to my significant other and her phone rings she'd better be able to come up with a good reason for giving that person priority. Even if it's "you were boring" me (which she could have said without needing a phone call).

Seriously, there you are in the physical presence of someone and they put you on hold for 1/2 hour. What the fuck is all that about?

Re:Problem is the question.

[Godwin O'Hitler]

How did that used to work out when you couldn't just call people? Or are you too young to have known that?

Re:Problem is the question.

[Godwin O'Hitler]

I would guess a lot of them are not "crowing" about not being on Facebook, just saying "forget that option for keeping in touch with me".
I don't sync my contacts to Google for practical reasons: it's not a useful option; not all contacts are equal. Apart from which I am grown up enough to manage my contacts myself thank you.

Re:Problem is the question.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the telephone was invented about 150 years ago. I'm going to guess that he is too young to remember. How old are you?

Re:Problem is the question.

[Anonymous Coward]

This person needs to be demoted from "significant other" to simply: "other". Anything less is just encouraging this rude behavior.

Re:Problem is the question.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can use the technology while refusing the stupid abuse:

No you cannot.

Try using a cell-phone without your location information being stored (long-term). The tracking of your location is necessary for the networks operation. The long-term storage of it is not, and is abuse.

Try sending an email without your ISP logging the meta-data for the government, just i case they need it.

Try to browse the web without every URL you visit being logged by you ISP for the same reason.

Try walking in any major city without being recorded and stored for eternity.

Try driving around without camera systems on the motorway reading your license plate and logging your location.

Try buying a modern car that does not track everything you do and sends telemetry home.

Try to not give Facebook any of your information.

Try to use public transport without the transport company keeping complete track of your movements.

The thing is, you cannot only not avoid the abuse. New technologies are designed with the abuse-purpose in mind.

Re:Problem is the question.

[gurps_npc]

I wasn't dodging and dancing, I was trying to demonstrate the falsehood of the statement in the rticle that "new technology" doesn't solve the old problems."

That's not true. New tech does may have new problems, but it often solves the older ones. I am not saying we should ignore the problems (in fact I advise people to solve them - with technology).

We do have several institutions that attempt to anticipate new problems. One of them is called Science Fiction writers. Bad ones love to do "if this goes on" stories, good ones try to point out "hey, if we figure out how to do this, it might cause a problem."

For example, in 1968 Larry Niven started writing several stories pointed out the problems that might have happened once we started perfecting transplant surgery. We avoided the horrors in part by passing laws that prevented the sale of organs in 1984.

Now we have the horrors of not enough organs.

Re:Problem is the question.

[Godwin O'Hitler]

I bet you couldn't use it 150 years ago for calling someone whose whereabouts you didn't know. You know perfectly well what I meant.

User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Zombie Ryushu]

I think that the question is being answered in the wrong way. The technology itself isn't bad, its resisting the bad uses.

I and my Spouse have Android Phones. They Communicate to our Home Domain Controllers. Our Home Domain Controllers run an Application called Spectrum 2. The Spectrum 2 Server operates behind a NAT firewall, and uses an internal Account Database of registered Social Media Accounts (exccluding Facebook for security, stalking, and abuse/harrassment reasons). The Mobile devices use Spectrum 2 to translate the various proprietary libpurple compliant messages into XMPP.

The Mobile Android devices running LineageOS on the Phones see all contacts and can communicate transparently with said media services. It stays encrypted via XMPP and the Domain Controller translates it into AIM, Yahoo, Skype, Discord, so on and so fourth.

On an unfamiliar Wifi Network? We have IPSec for that.
More people need to apply this approach.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's really no practical difference. You surrender your phone security to LineageOS - and your entire model hinges of that being more secure than standard Android OS.

Rooting your phone and installing something downloaded from the Internet on it seems like a really really bad idea to me. Or are you telling me everyone should read Lineage OS code and do their own security audit of it? Because that has worked really well for Open Source projects.

The "many eyes, bugs are shallow".ideology is dead. Only a small portion of people actually read the code. The rest just blindly install and use - and that's no better than blindly trusting Google or Apple.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

that's no better than blindly trusting Google or Apple.

But using something else obviously made GP feel more superior than the rest of us.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[phayes]

The Amish asked themselves similar questions generations ago - long, long before the homicidal unabomber crackpot - and can respond that it is indeed possible for individuals to resist the spread of technology -- if you are willing to change your lives to do so.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you imagine what it must be like to live with such a paranoid and insufferable nerd? holy shit get a grip.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[AmiMoJo]

The problem is that if someone commercialized this and sold it to non-technical people, the various companies running those apps would take steps to break it. Just like they did the last time someone tried to build a commercial, multi-network chat client.

The real problem is the unwillingness to say no. Recruiter emails me, asks for a Skype chat. I can either install Skype, make an account and chat about that job I want, or I can tell them I don't have Skype and the reasons why I don't want to install it or make an account and ask if they can use something else... And that something else is going to have to be an unpopular open source system that respects my privacy, or what is the point, so chances are they won't have it and now I'm asking them to install software and make an account...

It reminds me of the early days of mobile phones, when you couldn't call other networks. As I recall we didn't have unrestricted, low cost cross-network messaging until it was demanded by regulators with the threat of legislation to back them up.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

Amish have smart phones, landlines (but usually connected to an outhouse) and use many modern conveniences/technologies. They have figured out ingenious ways to hook up air or propane or batteries to power or light or cool lots of different stuff. It is a common misconception that Amish are anti-technology. They are not. They are against those items that would have the potential to disconnect them from each other as a community.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[doom]

It is a common misconception that Amish are anti-technology.

Yes, my understanding is they first appoint someone to explore the use of a technology and think about whether they should adopt it, and what the right way might be for them to use it.

Ideas that like that are completely alien to mainstream consumerism, which is supposed to be all about individual freedom, but ends up being ridiculously shallow and short-sighted.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Godwin O'Hitler]

I honestly can't understand why everybody doesn't do that.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Amish asked themselves similar questions generations ago - long, long before the homicidal unabomber crackpot - and can respond that it is indeed possible for individuals to resist the spread of technology -

Um, not quite

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Anonymous Coward]

Amish aren't individualist in their approach to resisting new technology. barn raising comes to mind.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[tepples]

I can either install Skype, make an account and chat about that job I want, or I can tell them I don't have Skype and the reasons why I don't want to install it or make an account

If you have used Outlook.com or Hotmail that preceded it, you have a Microsoft account. If you have set up Windows 8 or 10 and accepted the defaults, you created a Microsoft account. And if you have a Microsoft account, a web browser, and the Pidgin IM client, you can log in to Skype for Web once with your Microsoft account credentials and then build and install Skype for Pidgin.

Re:User Controlled Technology vs. Company.

[Nethead]

Or just tell them to send you their WebEx link. If they don't have WebEx, they aren't really a tech head-hunter.

Amish.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes they can.

Re:Amish.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe. Strict order Amish may often utilize "modern" technology for "work", including electricity, machinery, smartphones, etc. There are other exemptions too depending on the religious order they're in. While many Mennonites have and regularly use smartphones. And shop at Wal-Mart. Not kidding either. The Ephrata, Pennsylvania Wal-Mart even has a horse stall. It's a bizarre sight to see traditional dressed Mennonites and Amish shopping Wal-Mart. Among the nicer Wal-Marts with good service and clientele verses the 3rd world feel in many others. Definitely worth driving out of the way to shop there, but I digress.

Alfred Whitehead

[shayd2]

It is a profoundly erroneous truism, repeated by all copy-books and by eminent people when they are making speeches, that we should cultivate the habit of thinking of what we are doing. The precise opposite is the case. Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them.

Re:Alfred Whitehead

[Anonymous Coward]

Civilizations fail. Historians have written this is a contributing factor.

Re:Alfred Whitehead

[Anonymous Coward]

Civilizations fail, and then another rise in its place.

Not making any advance for fear of failure is called giving up. Fortunately, most people chose to advance with the risk of failure, rather than choosing to give up.

Re:Alfred Whitehead

[Anonymous Coward]

your sentence is just full of hot air presented as some kind of authoritative voice.

Re:Alfred Whitehead

[Anonymous Coward]

Just don't come crying to me when civilisation advances in a direction you abhor.

How to

[AHuxley]

A work phone thats on as needed to keep your well paying private sector job.
Use a secure email service thats not your ISP.
Find a secure VPN service that covers your entire network not just some parts of your browser.
If you have to be on social media have a laptop just used for that work related task. Get work related social media use done without using social media for any other activity.
Dont respond to social media unless its work related.
Have email or what was an answering machine allow you to find your own time to get to messages.
Find your own time when to use email unless its a work related account.
That allows the human to be less of a consumer.
Buy a safe SUV thats not part of some network all the time.
Start saving for a nice off the grid cabin well away from the inner city areas.
Start enjoying life in your new rural community as time allows.
Just stop having social and consumer networks on 24/7. Keep that work related cell phone as needed.
Enjoy been part of a real human community and not an ad network.
Its not the technology its the hours lost to it. Stop spending time online. Enjoy the off the grid life and put the time to better use with new sports and hobbies.
Get out of the inner cities areas and rediscover the fun of Americana.
Use the local library not an ad supported search engine for reading and research.

Re:How to

[Godwin O'Hitler]

I'm glad you posted that. Offline I go!

Re:How to

[AHuxley]

The main tacking is done with driver/passenger CCTV, automatic licence plate recognition, facial recognition, internet social media and ad tracking.
Move out of the inner city areas and a lot of that technology is only used on main roads and highways.

utility and dependency

[Tom]

There's a fine line between something that's just really useful and something that you depend upon.

The smartphone has become such an essential part of everyday life, that whenever I leave the house and forget mine, I very much notice it. But - it rarely actually stops me from doing anything. It's just an unusual feeling because it became a habit. Now habits might be hard to break, but they are not yet dependencies.

I can imagine that teenagers who grow up without ever having lived without a smartphone depend more strongly on it. And some individuals certainly develop a dependency on the level of addiction. And yes, more and more of the world around us simply assumes that you have a smartphone. There is a lot of truth to it. But the real world is rarely as black and white as manifestos make it.

Re:utility and dependency

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a smartphone. But when I accidentally leave it behind, I don't miss the smart at all, just the phone.

The real problem? I Want My EmTeeVee!

[Anonymous Coward]

It started the kids on this. JJ? Gone! Nina? Crack whore! Alan? Lost in L.A.! Martha? Gone! Mark? Doing car commercials in Albany! And last but not least? YOU! Here!

Just like SystemD

[Anonymous Coward]

Society is being made dependant upon technology via api calling for no good reason. Thanks Potter ing person Again.

Sure you can!

[aglider]

You can decide how to dress, what to eat.
Maybe you can struggle to find your cloths and food of choice.
But yes, it's up to you.
I don't answer to phone calls if I am busy.
My family's messages have a different alarm sound so I only pay immediate attention to them.
I check emails on my PC a few times in a day, when I think I can be interrupted.
People expects to be readily available all the time because they fail to filter stuff out and want you to fail as well.

Why should we?

[xenobyte]

That's the important question here. Why should we resist the spread of technology?

Just think about it. We've been dependent of various form of technology for centuries now. The post talks about smartphones (and cellphones) but that's just the latest piece of technology. How about houses? Heating? Electricity? Refrigeration? Vaccines? Cars? Roads? Trains?

The Unabomber basically advocated going back to the caves. Is that what we should? It's all a never-ending evolution of evermore complex technology so who or what decides where to 'stop' (if we can)? Was dumbphones really better than smartphones? Was it a better time when we were dependent on payphones outside our homes and businesses instead of cellphones? Was horse and buggy better than automobiles?

My personal opinion is to embrace technology and to push for an even faster technological evolution. I want my flying car, dammit! ;)

Re:Why should we?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are downsides too. Yes technology is good, but there are downsides too. The resources on our planet are limited, more digital devices means more environmental destruction. Not just the mining of rare earth metals but of those garbage we dump on the ground. I heard in CNN just now, China is shipping back to US those hundreds of tons of garbage which was shipped to mainland China. Garbage will surely be a problem and destruction of our planet too. That's the price of tech evolution.

What a stupid question....

[zantafio]

OP never heard of the Amish?

Humankind always did this

[thsths]

This is the history (and pre-history) of humankind: to invent technology, and to use. Fire, clothes, weapons, why would you not use them? Or do you really want to dig up roots to chew with a pointy rock for the rest of your life, running around naked?

Technology makes live easier, and because it is so useful, it is hard to reject.
 

I refuse:

[Anonymous Coward]

1. To use/carry around ANY (not just "smart") cellphone, except having one disassembled at home as a last resort (emergencies) with the battery pulled out at all times.
2. To speak to anyone who has one on them.
3. To speak in the same room or area where any of those surveillance devices are.

Same goes for laptops/pads/whatever. You can't speak freely anymore in this dystopian nightmare of total surveillance. Even with these measures, there are mics and cameras in everything from cars to light poles these days... I'm feeling like I want to crawl out of my own skin. And if you actually mention this to anyone, they send you to the mental hospital (literally in my case)... It's beyond scary. It's beyond stressful. It's Hell.

Getting along without a phone...

[WolfgangVL]

Is easy. It's liberating, it's cheaper, and it's safer. You only THINK you can't go without a smartphone.

Personal computers, on the other hand.....

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this isn't a millennial view. This shows how far Slashdot has fallen. I remember Slashdot at its best, around 2000, and this is awful in comparison. There are still a few reasons to visit this site, even though the site sucks now. And yes, the management and editors are to blame for it.

This seems like an anti-tech story. Although there have always been concerns here about privacy and censorship, there was still an appreciation fow new technology. There were a lot more articles of interest to nerds instead of mainstream news. Are nerds really interested in multiple articles within a few hours of each other about how sites like Google and Facebook allowed advertisers to target racists? Such things are commonplace on Slashdot now, and that's why many nerds have left. Here are things Slashdot did have in the past:

1) Lots of articles about open source and Linux, especially when new versions of widely used software were released. Slashdot was committed enough to open source that they released the source to this site and hosted it on Sourceforge. Sadly, that code hasn't been updated in almost a decade, though it has been forked. Slashdot also posted a lot more content that would be of interest to programmers and developers.

2) More general tech articles about the releases of new hardware and closed source software.

3) A few posts about scientific advances, many of which were in the science section rather than on the front page.

4) Your rights online did raise concerns about piracy, TSA, surveillance, censorship, the ability to film the police, and privacy. However, there were a lot of articles about things like DeCSS, software patents, and often how they affected open source software.

5) Lots of articles about hobbyist DIY projects. If someone completed a cool software or electronics project, they'd create a webpage showing how they did it, and would submit it here. These were very cool because readers could duplicate the projects or even improve upon them. I really liked seeing how creative people were and the ideas they came up with.

6) There were a lot more articles about topics of interest to nerds like Star Trek, Star Wars, comic books, and stuff like that. They didn't really involve tech, but they appealed to nerds and we're of interest to nerds like Rob Mala who ran this site.

7) Ask Slashdot questions were often very useful because this site had a lot of very intelligent and experienced people who could answer challenging tech questions.

8) Slashdot posted lots of articles about video games and new releases. There were also articles about retro gaming.

9) There was a lot of user-submitted content including book reviews, features (editorials written by users), and questions submitted by Slashdot readers for intervews with prominent people. There are occasionally interviews still, but these were much more frequent in the past.

10) Malda and some of the other editors hosted what was effectively a podcast, long before that term was coined. It was called Geeks in Space.

11) Jon Katz was basically Slashdot's paid troll. He wrote editorials and almost always got flamed for them. He lost his job due to cutting costs a bit and wasn't replaced.

Many of these things are long gone. Slashdot wasn't a mainstream tech news site or a place for paranoid lunatics. It was a news site for nerds, and many of the topics that appealed directly to nerds are long gone. Even the focus on open source appealed to nerds because having access to the source allowed them to tinker with the code and do some really interesting things. Slashdot appealed to nerds and hobbyists, and most of that content is long gone. If the editors want the nerds to come back, they should post more of that content or go out and look for it online. Solicit that type of content, along with features and book reviews. Cut out most of the articles designed to generate political discussion, because we don't need several articles within the span of a day or two that are effectively about the same thing.

Bring back news for nerds!

Wow

[XSportSeeker]

Chapman there must really be sucking Tim Cook's cock to go this far to write a counter culture convoluted piece about Unabomber and technology dependance using one among the most uninspired, feature cloning, iPhone releases of Apple's history...

From the article: "Once the latest iPhone is in stores, some consumers will decide they simply can’t live without it. The rest of us may eventually find that whatever our preferences, neither can we."

What a load of bullshit. Did someone pay this guy to put iPhone X there, or is he this brainwashed?
Does he live in some paralell world were Android doesn't have 85% of the market share while iOS holds less than 15%?
The absolute majority of people can't even afford and iPhone X in the first place. Living in a bubble of ignorance apparently.

Could've talked about the first iPhones and how some markets converted to it, smartphones in general, something else like IoT devices and always listening always dialing back crap like Google Home or Amazon Echo, the entire cloud thing as a whole, but nooo, had to put iPhone X in the title like a moronic sheeple. Are people really this gullible? No one needs an iPhone X. The majority of Apple fanboys don't need it, and I doubt most will buy it. It has no features that makes it a must. In fact, the vast majority of iPhone users are on older versions of the smartphone.

I can live without an iPhone X just fine... in fact, I can live without a Samsung Galaxy S8, which the iPhone X is basically a clone of. If you are feeling pressured to get any of those, what you really need is to check your priorities. Much like Chicago Tribune apparently needs to check the crap they are putting up as advertorial.

And to be perfectly honest, I lived for a couple of months late last year with a dumbphone - calls and SMS only. It's fine. There are some jobs you absolutely need to have a smartphone (like, you know, marketing, app development obviously, jobs that absolutely demand you to always be reachable, and a few others), but other than those you can live without one. And you probably should try doing it for sometime.

It'd be isolating in some cultures to live without a cellphone and computer connected to the Internet, but you know... even for those, plenty of people still do worldwide. So yeah, individuals can resist. Doesn't mean that you need to, but you certainly can.

Yes Who Cares!

[oldgraybeard]

I do not have a Facebook account, Twitter account, Instagram account.
I don't see a need or use for them. And I am a contract computer programmer. i also write XCode/Swift apple stuff.
I create technology, but do not use much of it.
Tech is only important if you make it so!

Re:Yes Who Cares!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true. For instance, where I live, the plan is that relatively soon, you won't be able to use public transportation without having a smart-phone and using some retarded, battery draining app. This abusive use of technology isn't limited this though, and we're already seeing places that relies on facebook logins etc for verification.

You see? You're completely wrong. Tech is only important if the people creating the systems we need thinks it's important. We're increasingly forced into all kinds of disgusting, pointless and over-complicated systems, because the people creating them think they are "natural" or because they simply don't care about people who are not like themselves.

Re:Yes Who Cares!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I don't even have a slashdot account!

Re:Yes Who Cares!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I don't even have a slashdot account!

Me neither you insensitive clod!

Re:Yes Who Cares!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, crack is only addictive if you smoke it. You want to be the guy selling the crack.

Yes

[MrKaos]

If you have mastered key aspects of technology. No if you have not.

Of course

[jandersen]

There are certain tecnologies that are so compelling that it would be absurd to avoid them - the use of fire, cooking, clothes, knives etc, but the mobile phone doesn't even come close. I think the people who keep coming up with this sort of hype, have something they want to sell, and I have no confidence in what they have to tell us.

Re:Of course

[thegarbz]

I think the people who keep coming up with this sort of hype, have something they want to sell

And yet none of those technologies you listed are remotely related social interaction, you know, the topic of TFS.

Context matters.

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Clothes are usually recommended for most social interactions.

Re:Of course

[justthinkit]

the mobile phone doesn't even come close

Agreed. What we all fail to keep in mind with cell phones is what a downgrade they are.

New phones are $500 to $1,500 whereas I recently bought a great Win7Pro system with twin Xeon processors and 16GB RAM for $200.

A cell phone screen is smaller than any desktop or laptop screen. The Osborne 1, released in 1981, had a 5" screen.

PCs can be made secure in a variety of ways. Cell phones only if we root them, and and and.

Computers never need charging. Cell phones barely go a day without requiring a charge.

And then there are the monthly charges...Our four computers at home share one pipe. I see 4 cell phone packages advertised at $45 per line, for a total of $180/month.

Longevity...I'm still on a Q6600 that I got 9 years ago. The two cell phone users in this house have gone through 3 or 4 each in that time.

tl;dr? Cell phones ain't the highest of high tech. True techies know this and take or leave them as the situation warrants.

The problem for Anonymous cowards

[Chrisq]

When you go in real life and tell someone that they are gay twats for liking Windows 10 the amusement ends rather quickly

Re:The problem for Anonymous cowards

[UberVegeta]

The LUDDITE APPS guy, on the other hand, would probably have a lucrative career in giving keynote speeches if only he could stick to the ONLY APPS CAN APP APPS part.

All in moderation

[KozmoStevnNaut]

You can use technology without letting it control you. Exercise moderation, don't get sucked into BS social media timewasters, don't join the race to have the newest, fanciest toy. A 2 year old phone is still perfectly capable of doing all the things you need it to do, such as calls, messaging, basic navigation, using a taxi app and so on.

Re:All in moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

But a low-end 2yo phone is not good at playing Pokemon Go.

Re:All in moderation

[KozmoStevnNaut]

My 2yo Moto X Play handles Carmageddon perfectly. That's my guideline.

Re:All in moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and in 2 years today's phone will be capable of doing all the things I will need a phone to do in 2 years.

It'll take me the intervening 2 years to figure out what those things are, though, and that's not going to work out unless I have a phone that can do those things.

10 years ago no phones did navigation, for instance.

Re:All in moderation

[doom]

And how are your experiments with heroin use going?

I understand that if you just exercise moderation, occasional heroin use is no big deal.

Re:All in moderation

[KozmoStevnNaut]

False equivalency. Smartphones are nowhere near as addictive as heroin, they do not cause physical addiction and they do not have physical (sometimes fatal) withdrawal symptoms.

Stop being facetious.

Re:All in moderation

[KozmoStevnNaut]

I assume you don't live in an bubble, completely isolated from the world outside. You read reviews, you engage in discussions online. You can learn about new functions through those interactions.

Re:All in moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

False equivalence. Technology is to drugs (prescription included) as social media timewasters are to heroin.

Re:All in moderation

[doom]

False equivalency. Smartphones are nowhere near as addictive as heroin ...

And before adopting a new consumer toy, we know that it's not going to be as big a problem as heroin, because...

Re:All in moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

The older your phone, the less likely you are to get critical security updates.

No.

[Anonymous Coward]

And why should anyone want? It's called progress. Embrace it.

Yes

[Mike Frett]

I get along just fine without a Phone. I can see myself going without a Phone for at least 5-10 more years. What is gradually creeping up on me is USB powered devices. Soon I'll be required to change a Power Outlet to one that includes an outlet for USB -- or get an adapter.

As the time-line progresses, eventually we will all be forced to adapt to the Tech.

Central Europe ???

[gDLL]

Lol you must be joking, here in central europe also the taxi drivers will scam you in 5 different ways. Come on down here to the south and test !

Re: Central Europe ???

[Corbets]

If youâ(TM)re talking Italy or Greece, then that attitude is hardly restricted to taxi drivers...

Re:Central Europe ???

[Tom]

How much south you want? I'm in Italy in three hours by car. That's not even central Europe anymore.

Resist spread of surveillance by the Big Brethren

[codeButcher]

This is my longish anecdote about Whatsapp.

I have a 6 year old Android phone. Due to a period on a tight budget (self-employed), I did not upgrade the device to the newest and shiniest. It still does all the things I want (even web browsing and e-mail), so I figured no need. Then I locked the screen with a PIN that I memorized incorrectly. Did a factory reset to clear that.

While I kept the software fairly up to date before the reset, the OS was not updated. After the reset, all those incremental updates were not available any more and I could not even access the Google Play store. I could get some apps from F-Droid or APKs directly from the developers (I have simple needs).

So this year I entered the employee market again, an lo and behold, already 2 clients wanted to add my number to their special project Whatsapp group. On a device and connectivity that I pay for out of my own pocket, that I have no contractual obligation to possess or to provide the number for to them. So imagine the looks and snide remarks I got when telling them: I don't want to install Whatsapp, and even if I wanted to, I am unable to install it on my device.

To reiterate some problems I have with this application:
* Owned by Facebook
* Uploads address book to their servers to do whatever with
* Users (and their contacts) being commoditized
* Closed garden ecosystem
* What if I prefer Telegram/Yabber/xxx? No interoperability
* No separation between social, work, and other domains

So far, quite happy to steer away from this particular "technology" and similar, even at the cost of some head-bumping with employers.

"Technology" starts with tool usage

[gotan]

Humans have been advancing "technology" for more than 2 million years now (starting with toolmakers of the stone age), and they're still at it.

So unless someone wants to live naked somewhere in the amazon jungle on a diet of picked berries, dug up roots and some insects; No, one can't "resist the spread of technology".

And if "technology" only refers to recent developments:
Who is to say, that a specific state of technological development is "best", and according to which criteria?

But sure, someone can avoid owning a mobile phone and a computer. Nevertheless in day to day life that person relies on an environment that in turn relies on computers and fast, reliable communication (among other things).

Semi-related Quote:

"[...] lots of the people were mean, and most of them were miserable, even the ones with digital watches. Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake coming down from the trees in the first place, and some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no-one should ever have left the oceans." -- Douglas Adams

Typical pseudo-intellectual noodling

[Applehu Akbar]

From the linked column, claiming that Kaczynski was right because:
"He cites the automobile, which offered every person the freedom to travel farther and faster than before. But as cars became more numerous, they became a necessity, requiring great expense, bigger roads and more regulations. Cities were designed for the convenience of drivers, not pedestrians. For most people, driving is no longer optional."

Like every other technology, the automobile caught on as it became apparent that it was not just slightly better than the old way of doing things, but much better (The "Peter Drucker principle"). This is the lock-in claimed by the column, rather than some magic power that tech has to enslave us.

Suppose that when the automobile was introduced we had made a conscious decision as a society to reject it? We might then have developed railroading to some Japan-like ultimate limit, with every American living in high-rise apartments in cities of 40 million, and nothing in the countryside but large-scale farming and mass train travel to National Parks. Kaczynski would have complained just as much about having to live in a "regimented" society of this kind, "where we never have intimate contact with nature."

At any given time we live the way we want to live, given the tools available.

Re:Typical pseudo-intellectual noodling

[Anonymous Coward]

The dependence on the automobile was intentionally engineered. That's why VC firms like Y-Combinator suggest all wannabe "disruptors" study the history of the automobile, since that was one of the most disruptive technologies ever forced on consumers.

Re:Typical pseudo-intellectual noodling

[lastman71]

[Citation needed]

No really. I meant it. Just curious.

Re:Typical pseudo-intellectual noodling

[Applehu Akbar]

The dependence on the automobile was intentionally engineered. That's why VC firms like Y-Combinator suggest all wannabe "disruptors" study the history of the automobile, since that was one of the most disruptive technologies ever forced on consumers.

All technology companies want to see consumers use their technology. So does every company making citrus products.

What you mean is that as a liberal, you believe that GM and Ford had magical powers to force people to buy cars when they really wanted to get around forever on buses and streetcars. Magical powers that, had they existed, would have prevented any other auto manufacturer in the world from competing with them.

Re:Typical pseudo-intellectual noodling

[david_thornley]

They did in fact wage a quite successful campaign against streetcars, in order to sell more buses. You don't need magic when you've got good-sounding deceit and likely bribes.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Applehu Akbar]

Excellent points! Why do you seal yourself off in the AC ghetto?

Now you want to complain?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did any of you speak up when we went from "you can have a car" to "you must have a car" practically overnight...? All the people crying about face id were probably the first to line up at the dmv to get a driver license when they became mandatory.

Re:Now you want to complain?

[Godwin O'Hitler]

Maybe in some countries a car is indispensable. But there are plenty of countries where ownership is less than 50%, and I don't mean 3rd world countries.
I do have a car but it must get used once a month, basically to stop it seizing up. There again cycling is a very viable alternative here.

No because Black Indian Liars

[Anonymous Coward]

now believe me when i tell you that the woes we are receiving are almost certainly because of Black Indian Liars who came from India and settled here on H1B visa which are actually visa for Black Indian Liars who work for a pittance. So There now you know the black indian liar truth.

Resist?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have any devices breaking down my door to make their nest in my house. I have to drag them here myself!

As for resisting the urge to interact with the devices, well, after ~25 years of using them for consumption/diversion and not much to show for it, it becomes easier and easier to walk away from or find something better to do.

I do not have a smartphone

[Anonymous Coward]

And I study software engineering.
I rarely feel like it would improve my life.

Unabomber

[Lord Kano]

He made many good and valid points. His method of dealing with them invalided his thinking in the minds of most people.

LK

Re:Unabomber

[Anonymous Coward]

The annoying thing is dozens of other writers made better and more coherent critiques of technology, but most STEM workers spent their whole education learning to be a human Matlab instead of reading, so some shit like the Unabomber's manifesto blows their mind.

Re:Unabomber

[Lord Kano]

Can you point to any examples?

LK

the real question:

[Anonymous Coward]

what is normal society?

I mean if you are trying to live like a celebrity and think that that is a normal lifestyle then sure you wont be able to live with out technology.

If you enjoy a quiet life with a small trusted group of friends then no you don't, just like you dont need the technology to meet new people either. Most social groups have routine times in which they meet to conduct their activities as human being are quite often creatures of habit. for example: fitness classes, sporting events, lectures, classes, etc. these things happen on a regular basis.

The larger problem is that people really need to re-evaluate their "needs" and wants.

Do you really need a taxi? last time i checked, most metropolitan areas had a form of transit system, and there are generally buses that will get you between the different cities/towns etc.

as far as people being expected to be reachable at all points in time, well simply it is up to an individual to manage those expectations. I make sure that people know well in advance that i am not reachable at all points in time and that there really is no emergency that requires me to be on call 24/7. seriously, no reason at all, and once people start to get it then they will either respect your wishes or not talk to you any more but do you really need those people to be talking to you. People who expect you to be available 100% of the time 24/7 have an air of desperation and co-dependency about them, they are the ones that require constant hand-holding and encouragement to even do the simplest of things. they are the ones who have rejected a normal society, one where people are individuals working together to achieve a greater good. they are the narcissists who expect the world to be all about them, and truthfully they are the ones who have bought what was sold to them by people willing to control them. After-all once you take away the individualism and reinstall it with codependency then those people will always be dependent on the ruling class.

Normal? There's your Problem!

[Anonymous Coward]

"...To do without a cellphone -- and soon, if not already, a smartphone -- means estranging oneself from normal society...."

Why would you assume cell phone / smart phone = normal?

You don't need entertainment.

[Anonymous Coward]

Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation.

Entertainment is the one you can do without, and quite easily once you get over the shock. I get very little entertainment, and it's amazing what you can accomplish/learn/do once you try. Our society would be far less superficial if more of us did give it up. We might even get around to solving some real problems if more of us focused.

Total BS

[Anonymous Coward]

People re addicted to it, but can easily live without it. About 3 months ago I started to leave my phone at home, it feels so much better to go for a run or bike ride without the f#$$ phone, you just absorb what is around you instead of massaging your phone with one finger like total a%% hat...

I don't have a personal mobile phone.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am probably one of the few that doesnt have a personal mobile phone.

The funny thing is I develop for devices, I even have test devices in the office.
I have a landline@home, a landline@office, I have the internet@home, I have internet@office (messaging,email,skype etc.. )
But once I leave work, I leave all that stuff behind. My commute to and from work is deviceless.

This is a personal choice. There is more than one way to get in contact with me and all the other times I dont want anybody to know where I am.
It gives me digital peace and balance in a noisy world and I save on device ownership.
I feel very privileged that I can discard this item that most in the western world are addicted to and as I develop for them I really know that I am not missing out on much. It is possible to leave a fulfilled life without a smart phone. BTW I generally dont need maps for my working life, just on holidays and I love to pull out paper maps/charts.

The only thing is that my wife hates me for it, because she does not get 24 hours access to me. However I see that as more of a sanity bonus.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[stabiesoft]

Check out www.eurekalert.org. It has lots of real news for nerds. No comments though.

Yes people can resist technology

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

I used to live in a small town in my state. I moved to the largest metro area over 20 years ago. I had a friend in my hometown that I have completely lost touch with him because he doesn't have any phone at all. I would be shocked if he had a cell phone. He is the cheapest person I've ever seen in my life. He had a good job that paid him well in the local community, but he just refused to pay monthly charges for a phone so he never had one. He had no internet either. I used to send him email, but his work got picky about employees sending and receiving personal email, so that option went away. My only way to contact him became to visit him whenever I was in town and hope he was home, but the last time I tried that he wasn't home and it just became more hassle than it was worth as he didn't live particularly close to my relatives. I would guess maybe I last saw him 17 years ago. If his mother needed to talk to him she either had to call him at work or call his apartment complex's business office and ask them to send somebody down to his apartment and bring him to their phone so she could talk to him. It was a small complex, so amazingly they were willing to do it. All he did was live like a miser and save every extra dime he got. He never married and has no kids so I guess when he dies some distant cousin is going to inherit his money. He probably can never get a date if he even wanted to. Can you imagine telling a woman that you don't have any phone or personal email at all because you're too cheap to pay for it? Yeah, that's going to go over well. The town he lives in isn't that small where he can do that and get away with it.

Re:Yes people can resist technology

[Ash-Fox]

This is going to sound silly, but why didn't you use letters? There are plenty of online services that allow you to type and send online and then look at received mail online even... So, convenience wise, it isn't that big of deal either.

Funny

[kelemvor4]

Funny how they slipped "entertainment" in with the needs list. It can be argued transportation isn't a need, either but entertainment doesn't even really need an argument. I guess those selling entertainment (Chicago Tribune) would love for entertainment to become a need.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Soylentnews.com as well

I still.....

[MerlTurkin]

Do not have a smart phone. I still use a flip phone. I don't need to be connected to the internet every freaking minute of the day. I have a life.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Godwin O'Hitler]

So you're saying it was better before. When mobile phones were still new and there was no Uber or Cloud or SaaS.
Got you.

"Instantly reachable" is a psychological problem

[gweihir]

Just set your phone to "vibrate" or "silent" and only accept calls when you like. If it is important, people will text or leave a message. From my experience, this does cause no problems. And if you want some hours of complete peace, leave your phone at home.

Sure

[HideyoshiJP]

I drive stick. My 2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata should last me plenty of years. I hope I can drive it until I'm too old to drive.

Fairphones offer rooted devices

[Herve5]

Actually the Fairphones model 1 did come pre-rooted (I own one).

At this moment with the model 2 it seems you need to install one of Fairphone-provided alternative rooted ROMs instead, which many original users felt negative, but still there are detailed how-tos and apprarently many more users wanting the baseline as it is now...

My main issue being that with a model 1 that can last many more years (by replacing the replaceable battery) I didn't feel the need to change ;-)

Then you have the Jolla Sailfish operating system, that contrary to rooted androids is fully separate from Google (with obviously less apps).
There are not many phones supporting it, but again Fairphones do.
There was even a Jolla phone (very nice northern Europe design) but I understand it is now a couple years old so 'not so fast'...

Ensure your safety

[Anonymous Coward]

Conducting a Background Check is important when hiring someone.
#BackgroundCheckServices #Police_Background_Check_Online

https://identifypeople.wordpress.com/2017/09/18/conducting-a-police-background-check-online-like-a-pro/

I'm an anecdote! I'm not estranged!

[stomv]

I don't have a cell phone. At all. I'm nearly 40, work a white collar job that requires about 40 nights of travel per year. I've got a wife, a young school aged child, and a pre-school aged child. We live a perfectly normal American urban/suburban lifestyle. How do I manage without a phone (smart or otherwise)? Well, I've got lots of phones. I've got one at my desk at work. I've got a landline at home. My wife has a cell, so if we're traveling as a family we've got access to one. The rest of the stuff is a combination of good planning (let's meet at a place that serves beer or is out of the rain or whatevs), knowing where to find a payphone (they're still out there), and having a tablet or laptop handy to use email/texting/Internet.

I'm not estranged in the least. I,live a busy life balancing work, home, social, and community needs. I use lots of technology, just not a cell phone (well, my family doesn't own a car either).

But what if there's a convenience call, like asking the wife if she needs anything from the grocery store on the way home? Well, we communicate well in advance, and sometimes we miss out on that convenience. But what if there's an emergency? What emergency could I really solve on the telephone that the person on the other end of the line couldn't solve for himself or herself? It turns out that cell phones aren't necessary for engagement; they are simply remarkably convenient for most.

Re:I'm an anecdote! I'm not estranged!

[Ash-Fox]

I don't have a cell phone. At all. I'm nearly 40, work a white collar job that requires about 40 nights of travel per year. I've got a wife, a young school aged child, and a pre-school aged child. We live a perfectly normal American urban/suburban lifestyle. How do I manage without a phone (smart or otherwise)? Well, I've got lots of phones. I've got one at my desk at work. I've got a landline at home. My wife has a cell, so if we're traveling as a family we've got access to one. The rest of the stuff is a combination of good planning (let's meet at a place that serves beer or is out of the rain or whatevs), knowing where to find a payphone (they're still out there), and having a tablet or laptop handy to use email/texting/Internet.

I see no problem with this.

But what if there's a convenience call, like asking the wife if she needs anything from the grocery store on the way home?

Well convenience, it's not the end of the world. But it would be convenient to have it.

What emergency could I really solve on the telephone that the person on the other end of the line couldn't solve for himself or herself?

In my experience, thinking clearly - I found a lot of people panic and are unable to do this. In the few emergency situations I've been involved with, I think the situation would have unfolded very differently if those persons hadn't access to a mobile phone.

I don't think corruption is the problem

[rsilvergun]

it's wealth inequality. Nobody would really care about corruption if they had what they needed. The problem is we have a powerful ruling class who benefits from the existence of poverty. e.g. what good is being rich if nobody's poor? You can't boss people around if you don't have control over their economic future. At least not without being an actual expert in something, which members of the ruling class generally are not.

The future can definitely be predicted. Maybe not with 100% accuracy but we _can_ see problems coming and fix them before they can happen.

Re:I don't think corruption is the problem

[Bongo]

it's wealth inequality. Nobody would really care about corruption if they had what they needed. The problem is we have a powerful ruling class who benefits from the existence of poverty. e.g. what good is being rich if nobody's poor? You can't boss people around if you don't have control over their economic future. At least not without being an actual expert in something, which members of the ruling class generally are not.

I'm not sure how to define "poor" though. I am "poor" compared to anyone who has 10x the money I have, but I am also "rich" compared to at least half of the world (hard one to estimate as the world is growing so rapidly). There was a claim that many in the West are "the one percent." Not just billionaires, but any upper middle class people, as compared to the rest of the world.

But then it is also confounded by the issue of "need", as in, everyone "needs" good health, but much of the food industry, even if you can afford to buy lots of food, is not geared to health, and much of "healthcare", is not geared to prevention, but is more geared to "fixing" problems after they arise, and so the West as a whole may be "rich" compared to the rest of the world, but we are "poor" in the sense of, most of the West is bankrupting itself with chronic health problems, like diabetes, dementia, and cancer (none of which are necessarily the product of "old age" but may be down to eating crap all our lives).

So I don't really worry too much about the "ruling classes" as we have bigger and worse problems. It is mostly ignorance, I think. Really, everyone needs a good education in critical thinking. (And I'm not claiming I'm great at it, just that there's too many things I look back on and wonder, fuck I used to believe that?)

There's another thing. It may be what bothers people more isn't inequality, but rather, unfairness. Like if your neighbour won the lottery, you may have no envy and just think, good for them. But if you knew they'd somehow gamed the system and won unfairly, that would probably actually bother you? So I think corruption is a key issue, particularly because it stops systems from working efficiently, it ruins the level playing field and meritocracy.

The modern value and philosophy is supposed to be that all men and women are created equal. And I agree, there are classes which try to protect their own survival, and I'd add, part of that is that, those classes also get all arrogant and start dictating to the poor how they should live (like rich Western elite academics telling Africa how to make its energy). But again, the modern principle is that we are all intrinsically equal and every child born on the planet should have a good education and good heath. And any corruption, in all its forms, gets in the way of that.

Re:I don't think corruption is the problem

[Rakarra]

it's wealth inequality. Nobody would really care about corruption if they had what they needed.

Many people always want more. More luxuries. More things they don't really need, but they like to have them. Better quality things that they need when they were perfectly capable of affording lower-quality items (like luxury cars). It's not enough to have your needs met, for the corruptable, they just want MORE.

if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch...

[karlandtanya]

...you must first invent the universe. (Carl Sagan)

Technology is just applied knowledge--from yourself (and where did *you* get that knowledge?) or those immediately around you.
Separating yourself from technology or from society is a matter of degree and a matter of choice.

The article answers the question: "Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation. Most of us would say the trade-offs are more than worth it." (yes I did rtfa)

Many of my neighbors (I live near Middlefield, OH; there are a lot of Amish) have made a decision to give up what some of us call "technology" and isolate themselves from what some of us call "society". But it's just a matter of degree. Horse-and-buggy is still technology. Paying "english" for rides or taking money from us for work is participation in what we call "society". "Society" here gets quotes around it because obviously Amish people DO participate in society--just not exactly the same one that some other people might.

Many of us are not aware that we have a choice and a most of the rest of us us don't want to be responsible for the choice we've made.

One last thing--The article cites as an example of the futility of ignoring technology: "Eventually, those who preferred to live as foragers — such as the American Indians — no longer had a choice." This is wrong in so many, many ways. Rather than preach about other folks current and past way of life I invite anyone who's curious what might be wrong with that statement to use the device you're reading this on to look around a little.

Yes and no...

[CohibaVancouver]

Do you need a smartphone these days? Mostly yes.

Do you need a $1000+ latest shiny thing from Apple? Absolutely not.

I have a Samsung Galaxy S5. Bought it refurb'ed last year for around $150 CAD. I can visit Facebook, watch Netflix, take pictures, use navigation... Everything.

Friend's parents just bought a brand-new Acer Smartphone from Costco for $150 CAD. Ditto.

Re:Yes and no...

[david_thornley]

So at least you can feel smug.

You paid $150 for a phone that, apparently, isn't anything special to you. Some people will pay $1K for a phone they really like. Given that I use my phones for at least three years, $1K is less than a dollar a day for something I use a lot, so it's not much at all.

CME +/- EMP

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of this can become a "first-world" problem ......

While the Sun is currently experiencing a sun-spot minimum, just last week it fired off a blast just ahead of earth. If it had fired its main blast at earth, we would be having a whole different conversation right now ... It is at sun-spot minimums that you get some of the strongest CMEs, btw.

Note: This spot will return to the Earth-facing side of the disk in 3 or 4 days and Earth will be in "target-range" in 5 to 7 days. Also, while on the back-side, this spot fired-off couple of more CME's

Or, rocket-man (aka North Korea) doesn't have to get its thermal nuclear devices too far back into the atmosphere to detonate on that generates an EMP -- which will cause most technology for a very wide-range to be NFG ....
Getting his "devices" to lower atmosphere are a really "hard-problem" (that he hasn't proven he can do), but then the device does a lot of direct damage. An EMP hits a lot wider area and causes a lot longer suffering (aka a much larger burden for the nation(s) attacked to have to take care of and those resources can't be applied against him).

Then, there is always a large-enough asteroid hitting the earth ....

Likelihood of any of this happening?? Probably pretty small, but, if one of these (or other similar events) does happen, all these first-world problems will seem a lot less important ..

Some people can...

[JasterBobaMereel]

20% of Americans do not own a smartphone, 5% do not have a mobile phone,...

Re:Some people can...

[Anonymous Coward]

I may not be in the 1%, but I'm in that 5%.

My wife doesn't have one

[irrational_design]

My wife doesn't have, or want, a smartphone (she does have a cheap flip phone that just does phone calls - no text, data, apps, etc.). She gives out our home phone number (a landline) as her phone number. I cannot tell you how many times people have complained that she didn't respond to their texts. Then when she explains that we have a landline which doesn't accept texts (why don't they get a "text not received" message instead of the text going into a black hole that makes it appear that it was received?) they inevitably ask for her cell number. When she says she doesn't have one (she doesn't give out her cell number, so I and the kids are the only ones with it) they often respond with disbelief and even anger. It really blows my mind that people have come to assume that everyone is instantly accessible via text messaging.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

In 2000, only nerds had computers with internet access. Now, a cheap self-configuring device bought for non-nerd reasons allows any idiot to come here and comment. Changing the articles won't help much. If you want something like the old slashdot, you need to restore the barriers to entry.

Google Authenticator requires a phone number

[tepples]

And/or you can install an app on a phone/tablet that will generate that different code every minute (without the need of internet access)

You still need to receive SMS in order to add your Google Account's key to a TOTP app because Google considers SMS to be the primary second factor and TOTP apps as a backup to SMS. From the article "Google Account Help: Install Google Authenticator":

To set this up, first you need to complete SMS/Voice setup.
[...]
Setting up the app
1. If you haven’t already, turn on 2-Step Verification for your account using your phone number.
2. On your computer, go to the 2-Step Verification settings page.
3. Scroll to "Alternative second step."

Twitter also appears to require SMS in order to set up TOTP.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Secure Contexts

[tepples]

One reason is that in order to run a web server on a Raspberry Pi computer on your LAN, you have to buy a domain and keep it renewed. Otherwise, several JavaScript APIs will throw security exceptions because they work only in secure contexts. No domain name, no certificate. No certificate, no HTTPS. No HTTPS, no secure context. No secure context, no sensitive JavaScript APIs.

It's simple to live without a smartphone

[maiden_taiwan]

I'm a successful IT professional who has never owned/needed a smartphone, just a flip phone circa 2006 for emergency calls from my family, i.e., I almost never use it. This choice has not hurt my career nor my social life one bit.

At home, I have an iPad for those moments when an app would be useful, like depositing bank checks or using Uber. But I don't carry it with me.

I use Facebook and Twitter every day... at the end of the day, for a short time. Not constantly throughout the day. For texting, I use an email-to-text gateway. Sometimes people have to wait awhile for me to reply, but I have (intentionally) never set expectations that I reply immediately, so people have learned not to expect it.

The upshot? Freedom from interruption. When you and I have a conversation, you get my full attention because there are no phone notifications. I never have to wonder whether a buzzing in my pocket might be more important than talking to you.

The only real trade-off is that sometimes, I don't know the answer to a question, and I can't look it up online immediately. So I wait until the next time I'm back at my desktop. Gratification isn't always instant. It's not a big deal.

Re:It's simple to live without a smartphone

[Ash-Fox]

I'm a successful IT professional who has never owned/needed a smartphone, just a flip phone circa 2006 for emergency calls from my family, i.e., I almost never use it. This choice has not hurt my career nor my social life one bit.

I'm similar, except I have a smart phone.

I use Facebook and Twitter every day...

I don't.

For texting, I use an email-to-text gateway.

I don't really use texting either (although I receive text messages from specific numbers for certain events). I do have my work e-mails on my phone and read it while traveling, but no notifications otherwise. Other than that, I have instant messaging on my phone for my social life outside of work. I primarily use stuff like Slashdot while traveling for work purposes.

Sometimes people have to wait awhile for me to reply, but I have (intentionally) never set expectations that I reply immediately

When it's work related and I'm at work, I tend to reply immediately that I have seen their message at the very least (of course, I have to be looking at my e-mail client for that to happen, since I don't get notifications on my phone about it). I don't work on sleepy projects, so taking 'awhile' leads to blockers and waste of hours where people use me as the excuse. I don't like that and I'm quick to unblock people whenever I can.

When you and I have a conversation, you get my full attention because there are no phone notifications.

I don't have this problem on my smartphone. I do admittedly have this problem in person when there are several people trying to get my attention for all "urgent" issues.

I never have to wonder whether a buzzing in my pocket might be more important than talking to you.

I know how urgent a notification is based on the tone. I only have notifications for meeting notifications (five minutes before), critical (mission critical system needs immediate attention or high risk health and safety matters (generally need to be addressed immediately).

I noticed you didn't mention how you handle telephone calls. Generally, anyone work-related that calls me is treated as an urgent call and if they are not needing something urgent, I direct them to send a meeting invite or e-mail me.

"Normal society"?

[Anonymous Coward]

People with smartphones grafted to their retinas are far from "normal society". Sure - *they* think they're "normal society", but ultimately the joke will be on them.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Voyager529]

1. I agree with the fact that having more articles about software releases would be nice. However, software itself has generally made its way to 'rolling releases', making version milestones less common. Additionally, there's the paradox that if software is large enough for a release to be relevant, most people already know. If it's not large enough, an article would be of questionable utility.

2. Agreed with this.

3. Also agreed, and these do happen (see the sizeable discussion about the end of the Cassini mission). I pose a genuine question though - how many scientific advances that are front-page-of-Slashdot worthy are made with any frequency? It's entirely possible that I'm ignorant on this front, but I submit that science has gotten a bit more iterative or niche-based, and that there are fewer articles because there are fewer headline-earning breakthroughs.

4. DeCSS is completed software, and present discs are using more sophisticated encryption methods. I'm unaware of an OSS Blu-Ray decryption tool. There are the occasions when a court case makes waves, but with a lot of the trail blazed on these fronts, again, less news about them.

5. Definitely agreed here, but I think societally there are far fewer people for whom 'because I could' is a reason to do anything anymore. It's a topic of its own as to why the adventurous project spirit seems to be endangered in our current climate, but I would like to see more from those who still have it.

6. Star Wars and Star Trek topics still regularly come up. However, post-Disney acquisition of Star Wars and Marvel, and post-paywalling of Star Trek, there's a bit less news that requires Slashdot, so much as 'a pulse' to find out. With CBS making it all but impossible for some of the more prominent fan films to continue ("Continues", "Phase II", and others) after the Axanar debacle, they too became less newsworthy.

7. Ask Slashdot suffers a bit from the rising sea level. Questions that are beginner to intermediate level commonly get met with "RTFM" or an LMGTFY link, rather than individuals taking the time to provide information anyway. Advanced level questions are usually niche specific to the point where fewer people can answer them. With more information generally available by asking Aunt Google or more specialized forums (Spiceworks, StackOverflow, forums.$PRODUCT.com, even Reddit), Ask Slashdot is in a bit of a tight place.

8. Agreed on this one, but I'm also wondering if Steam has helped be that place, with curators and lots of indie games, it's possible to get information and discussions on games elsewhere.

9. I like the idea of user-submitted content, but consider the population of Slashdot at this point. There are 1.3 million accounts before mine, and mine is nearly a decade old. As much as user submitted content that doesn't have an upstream source would be interesting (I would be interested on the Slashdot take on a few of my blog posts), I think it would be incredibly difficult for even full-time editors to go through the deluge of content of that nature and figure out what's worth posting vs. what isn't. Also, there are plenty of AMAs on Reddit.

10. I think you answered your own question - Geeks in Space was a 'podcast' before 'podcasts' were a thing. Now, you can find a dozen podcasts of varying quality on basically any topic. Some complement Youtube channels, Twitch feeds, or other forms of self-broadcast media. I submit that the reason the podcast is gone is because thousands of people are doing it better.

11. Jon Katz is a bit before my time. Bennett Hasselton is not. I'm kinda fine with the lack of editorial content, because editorials themselves assume a top-down narrative sort of situation, rather than the more egalatarian layout that is "the comments section".

TL;DR - I agree on a number of these fronts. However, I similarly submit that one of the major problems is that there is simply less news for nerds.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

So, in other words, the world moved on. Slashdot evolved away from what it once was into something else. Some people didn't like it and still resist the changes that happened over a decade ago.

Ironic post, given the article it's posted under.

Great, now the unibomber is being quoted?

[vizbones]

I don't a cell phone or smart phone. Just a land line at home and in my office (at work). And I'm a software developer. Just ask anyone (except my boss).

Avoiding technology.

[Anonymous Coward]

Suppose you owned some land, wanted to build yourself a shack and 'live off the land' like was done by our pioneers. You would quickly find out that building codes make that illegal.

'iphone' + 'luddite terrorist' = clickbait

[h00manist]

I fail to see how this is any more than throwing tempting bait, pleading for clicks.

The statement "the terrorist was right" is a glaring and obvious attempt to create controversy where there is none, just to get attention.

Technology creates dependence? Duuh. Yes -- the invention of fire, the wheel, writing, agriculture and medicine are all rather useful, obviously few people want to go back in time and live without them again. You can do it if you want to. You won't have much company. For the obvious reason that people don't like to suffer.

Have fun living life as a monkey. No, you can't use a knife, club, spear, or fire, either. Those are technology, inventions. Zero technology means monkey life. Go for it.

Re:Not really true AT ALL

[Anonymous Coward]

> some countries have already gone cashless

[citation needed] for the list of these countries.

Can we simply resist them during resting time?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love it if all phones stop functioning immediately after working time and re started automatically the following weekday during the morning.

Wow, such douchebags. But not everyone is.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry that's the experience you had, where i live everyone who sees that would run and do everything to help someone in an emergency. So i'm not so sure that "most of the world is uncaring if able to get away with it", maybe it's just people in your area.

Re: News for nerds? Seriously?!

[Anonymous Coward]

THIS is a reason as to why I find the whole name and shame game so irritating with this site, and collectively it is akin to bullying, and we nerds are all too familiar in THAT arena.
*AC should stand for privacy - because we fight for it
*AC is an Anonymous Contributor _and_not_always_trolling_ - everyone has an opinion and is free to submit their views
*AC makes it easy for passers by to drop in and say hi, because friends are cool is why.
No one should be forced to sign up to yet another boring website, and let's face it, the parent is spot on with their post. I tire for Musk, Trump, Betteridges law of headlines etc. This site is a dump. But that is my AC opinion and who the fuck are you anyway (Generalising, not aimed at anyone in particular).
Yes, great post, but seen all too frequently these days.

step over your dying body

[Anonymous Coward]

Las Vegas -> US -> victim can sue helper (even if they won't win the case) -> no one wants to get sued-> result: no one wants to help (in addition to bystander effect)

Just my old sigs from over the years.

[HBI]

I cut and paste them into that profile block. But thanks for making them all public again. I loved every one in its time.

Re:Resist spread of surveillance by the Big Brethr

[Ash-Fox]

already 2 clients wanted to add my number to their special project Whatsapp group. On a device and connectivity that I pay for out of my own pocket, that I have no contractual obligation to possess or to provide the number for to them. So imagine the looks and snide remarks I got when telling them: I don't want to install Whatsapp, and even if I wanted to, I am unable to install it on my device.

Honestly, the bigger annoyance for me is when they announce stuff on whatsapp groups and you don't hear about it until some arbitrary deadline has past (I don't use whatsapp). I've never had snide remarks about not using whatsapp, I just say "I don't have it" and people seem to accept that.

How Funny! Of course you can!

[I75BJC]

You can resist technology "in place". Just use what you want and ignore the rest. You can resist technology by moving "out of place". I have traveled to Ecuador, to South Africa, and to Mozambique. Ecuador and Mozambique are definitely full of non-technology places and one can move to any number of non-technical places. Of course, just visiting as I did, reveals the benefits of technology that I want to hold onto and reveals the ease of letting go of technology that I don't want to participate in. Technology is NOT an "all or nothing" affair -- it's a pick and choose thing. Any place is a place to let an uncomplicated life -- either totally or moving to a less complicated life. (Your question begs the question in my mind, "Don't young people get this?", i.e., that your life is full of choices that only you SHOULD make?)

Luddite hypocrisy

[Anonymous Coward]

"Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, so that they can never again do without it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it."

He's right. Those bastards who invented fire, the wheel and houses (what's wrong with caves for heaven's sake?) have a lot to answer for.

And of course the UnaBOMBER himself wasn't immune from this unfortunate trend that he so eloquently identified. Thus, he didn't rely on his bare hands to kill the people he thought of as his - and humankind's - enemies. Instead, he had become dependent on a technology called EXPLOSIVES. (Ironically, the people who first invented explosives used them for entertainment purpose. But our murderous intellectual friend knew better.)

Hostage of Expectations.

[MercTech]

Ted Kaczynski did recognize one of the facets of rapid technological growth; you can be held hostage by expectations associated with technology.
      Today, you are considered odd of you don't have a cellphone. If you are applying for a job and don't have your own cellphone you at least get a down check in the employee traits checklist. You are expected to be available for communication 24/7.
        And the cellular providers can play on this and over charge to a ritidulous level for outmoded levels of service. (the U.S. has one of the slowest cellular data rates of all the developed countries. South Korea has the fastest.)
    The latest hostage tactic is to REQUIRE you purchase television service in order to get buggy full speed broadband service which is barely broadband compared to Japan and Europe at three times the rate overseas. (Yep AT&T and Comcast; looking at you.)
    That policy may have been nixed by now but they hit me with that last year. I had to buy TV service I didn't want for a year to upgrade the speed of my internet connection.