Your phone is not the problem

This is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

Jeff says that he is a better person without his phone.

Widdershins says they’re the same with or without their phone.

I think they’re both right because when Jeff gets on his phone, he doomscrolls. When Widdershins uses his phone, he contacts his family, uses it as a digital planner, music and taking photos.

Jeff is a better person without his phone because Doomscrolling on X (formerly called Twitter) has no benefits. News outlets and social media make more money the more time we spend on them. Good news don’t catch our attention. Negative news keep us worried. They concern us so we want to be updated as much as possible on them.

But as Widdershins’ example shows: your phone is not the problem, its how you use it.

…

I’ve been following this series of blog posts with interest and I think that Antonio’s hit the nail on the head.

There’s nothing inherently dangerous about phones. But they do introduce risks, and the severity of those risks varies from person to person.

Me: I’m pretty disciplined about my phone. I don’t think I have or use any “endless stream” services: the closest thing would be my feed reader, which is curated down to my chosen providers, not by an attention-craving algorithm. I keep very few games installed and don’t play them when I’m doing anything else so they’re not a distraction from any kind of communal activity (in fact, I keep relatively few “apps” installed too: if there’s a Web-based version that works even remotely as well, I’ll use that… and if it keeps trying to “push” me towards an app version, I’ll just use it less rather than cave!).

I don’t even always pick it up for every notification bell (and I keep many of those suppressed, so they’re only “when I’m checking anyway” messages): if I’m doing something else, I’ll get to whatever ‘bing’ that was later, and yes that even includes instant messengers (if you absolutely require an immediate response and need to know whether you’ll get one, why didn’t you call me, hmm?).

This feels to me like a healthy relationship with my phone. I’m not saying it’s impossible to have a healthy relationship with yours if you don’t do these things: but it’s got to be harder. I’ve people who, seconds after the conversation slows or show ends or whatever will immediately, unthinkingly, pull out their phone and disappear into it, and that seems like such an unhealthy habit.

It’s for these people, as well as for those who’ll endlessly-scroll instead of sleeping or socialising, that downgrading to a brickphone might be a sensible move, at least in the short term.

For the rest of us, it’s probably sufficient to be mindful of our screen usage, remember that it’s valuable to disconnect and let your brain rest, too. As Lyteforce observes, you can start by not using your phone while you poop. Then, once you’ve got the hang of that, get Marie Kondo on those settings and prune the notifications that don’t bring you joy. Soon you’ll be leaving your phone behind when you get up to stretch your legs or make yourself a drink. And you’ll be happier for it.

That’s just what I think, anyway.

AI and cigarettes

This is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

…

In the 1980s and 1990s, when I was a kid, smoking was everywhere. Restaurants, bars, and a little before my time, airplanes!

The idea that people would smoke was treated as inevitable, and the idea that you could get them to stop was viewed as wildly unrealistic.

Sound familiar? But in the early 2000’s, people did stop smoking!

…

But a few years ago, the trend started to reverse. You know why?

Vaping.

Vape pens were pushed as a “safer alternative to smoking,” just like Anil is suggesting with Firefox AI. And as a result, not only did people who would have smoked anyways start up again, but people who previously wouldn’t have started.

…

I know it’s been a controversial and not-for-everyone change, but I’ve personally loved that Chris Ferdinandi has branched out from simply giving weekday JavaScript tips to also providing thoughts and commentary on wider issues in tech, including political issues. I’m 100% behind it: Chris has a wealth of experience and an engaging writing style and even when I don’t 100% agree with his opinions, I appreciate that he shares them.

And he’s certainly got a point here. Pushing “less-harmful” options (like vaping… possibly…) can help wean people off something “more-harmful”… but it can also normalise a harmful behaviour that’s already on the way out by drawing newcomers to the “less-harmful” version.

My personal stance remains that GenAI may have value (though not for the vast majority of things that people market it as having value for, where – indeed – it’s possibly doing more harm than good!), but it’s possible that we’ll never know because the entire discussion space is poisoned now by the hype. That means it’ll be years before proper, unbiased conversations can take place, free of the hype, and it’s quite possible that the economy of AI will have collapsed by then. So maybe we’ll never know.

Anyway: good post by Chris; just wanted to share that, and also to add a voice of support for the direction he’s taken his blog these last few years.

Signs Seen in Service Stations

It feels like most of the time I’ve spent in a car this year, so far, has been for travel related to somebody’s recent death. And so it was that yesterday, Ruth, JTA and I zipped up and down the motorway to attend the funeral of Ruth’s grandmother.

It went really well, but what I wanted to share with you today was two photos that I took at service stations along the the way.

Sign: "Alcohol purchases in this motorway service area can not be consumed inside or outside the premises."
A sign I discovered at a motorway service station.

This one confuses me a lot. If I buy alcohol from this service area, I can’t drink it either inside… or outside… the premises. Are they unlicensed, perhaps, and so the only way they’re allowed to sell us alcohol is if we promise not to drink it? Or is it perhaps the case that they expect us only to consume it when we’re in a parallel dimension?

Costa's slogan, "The Americano Addicts."
Costa have decided to cut down on graffiti by writing all over their own walls.

It’s hard to see in the second photo without clicking (to see it in large-o-vision), but the sign on the opposite wall in this Costa Coffee implies the possibility of being an “Americano Addict”. And there was something about that particular marketing tack that made me cringe.

Imagine that this was not a café but a bar, and substitute the names of coffees with the names of alcoholic beverages. Would it be cool to advertise your products to the “wine addicts” or the “beer addicts” of the world? No: because alcoholism isn’t hip and funny… but caffeine addiction is? Let’s not forget that caffiene is among the most-addictive drugs in the world. Sure, caffeine addiction won’t wreck your liver like alcohol will or give you cancer like smoking tobacco (the most-popular way to consume nicotine) will, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that there are many people for whom a dependency upon caffeine is a very real part of their everyday life.

Is it really okay to make light of this by using such a strong word as “addict” in Costa’s marketing? Even if we’re sticking with alliteration to fit in with the rest of their marketing, wouldn’t “admirer” or “aficionado” be better? And at least that way, Costa wouldn’t leave me with a bitter taste in my mouth.

× ×