You need a nanny to tell you to turn off a mobile device. This is what is pseudo-intellectual "libertarian" techie boyz like to deride as "learned helplessness" in others, but pretend it could never apply to them.
You need a nanny to tell you to turn off a mobile device. This is what is pseudo-intellectual "libertarian" techie boyz like to deride as "learned helplessness" in others, but pretend it could never apply to them.
Tim Cook made the comment that even he had no idea how much he was on his iDevices until looking at his own stats with this new iOS12 function. It's led him to modify his behavior, not using his iPhone near as much as he had been. FWIW he keeps his own nephew off the kids iPhone as much as he can too, doing what he feels is best for him.
Steve Jobs? He wouldn't let his kids use an iPhone or iPad at all. Bill Gates? Pretty much the same thing, severely restricting his kids use of tech devices. Obviously they all understand something about the technology and products they develop and offer all of us that for the most part we consumers aren't yet recognizing: All this iPhone, iPad, computer, game system, smart-device etc use may not be good for family and the greater society at large.
Yeah some of this stuff may well be changing the world, but perhaps not in our own best interests.
You need a nanny to tell you to turn off a mobile device. This is what is pseudo-intellectual "libertarian" techie boyz like to deride as "learned helplessness" in others, but pretend it could never apply to them.
You need a nanny to tell you to turn off a mobile device. This is what is pseudo-intellectual "libertarian" techie boyz like to deride as "learned helplessness" in others, but pretend it could never apply to them.
Tim Cook made the comment that even he had no idea how much he was on his iDevices until looking at his own stats with this new iOS12 function. It's led him to modify his behavior, not using his iPhone near as much as he had been. FWIW he keeps his own nephew off the kids iPhone as much as he can too, doing what he feels is best for him.
Steve Jobs? He wouldn't let his kids use an iPhone or iPad at all. Bill Gates? Pretty much the same thing, severely restricting his kids use of tech devices. Obviously they all understand something about the technology and products they develop and offer all of us that for the most part we consumers aren't yet recognizing: All this iPhone, iPad, computer, game system, smart-device etc use may not be good for family and the greater society at large.
Yeah some of this stuff may well be changing the world, but perhaps not in our own best interests.
I didn't know that about Tim, Steve and Bill...
But today mobile devices get lots of competition from X-Box and web based apps and games. And worse, is the content. When I was a kid it was all about brave guys standing up to evil guys and doing the right thing. Now, it's mostly about killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you...
That's not to marginalize what Apple did with iOS 12. But merely to point out that it won't fix the problems we are and will be facing. For example, my grandson heads straight for the X-Box to play Fortnite the minute he gets home. He has an iPhone and an iPad, but those only get used when the X-Box is unavailable to him for some reason (Like he's in the car or school bus).
But, feeding off the strengths of Apple Watch, I would like to see Apple add one more parental control: Make the kid earn screen time with exercise time! Say: 30 minutes of vigorous exercise earns 60 minutes of Snapchat time... Closing your rings earns 2 hours of screen time the next day... etc, etc., etc.,.... Whichever way you look at it, you end up with a healthier kid.
This is actually a great idea, so good Apple has probably already thought of it.
GeorgeBMac said: When I was a kid it was all about brave guys standing up to evil guys and doing the right thing. Now, it's mostly about killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you...
GeorgeBMac said: When I was a kid it was all about brave guys standing up to evil guys and doing the right thing. Now, it's mostly about killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you...
Oh, please — this has never been true.
Spin it however you makes you happy....
... But, if you notice, those are Army, Navy AirForce forces fighting bad guys. Not some rogue wondering around shooting people.
Nobody blames Napa Valley wine makers for causing alcoholism so why are tech companies like Apple being blamed for the pseudo-science claims of iPhone addiction?
While your overall point is correct, it has been quantitatively shown that “smartphone addition” (or similar) does exist.
To me this whole thing is a media invention to stir up the populace in yet another attempt to blame corporations for our own lack of personal control.
What about a different take on the situation? Perhaps they’re not against one another at all. Perhaps it’s both corporations and the media facilitating a lack of personal responsibility. Perhaps they’re working together to purposely bring it about. Perhaps this has been going on for literally generations, and so the idea of not actually having personal responsibility for one’s actions is so ingrained that the vast majority of people have forgotten what real personal responsibility (for one’s life, security, health, finances, etc.) truly is.
...the lure of the drugs were outweighed by my personal determination not to lose control of myself, my personality, my ethics, and more.
I’m quite surprised you’re a liberal. Then again, you may not be. I’ve no working memory anymore.
GeorgeBMac said: When I was a kid it was all about brave guys standing up to evil guys and doing the right thing. Now, it's mostly about killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you...
Oh, please — this has never been true.
Spin it however you makes you happy....
... But, if you notice, those are Army, Navy AirForce forces fighting bad guys. Not some rogue wondering around shooting people.
Combat is a PVP game where you literally try to kill the other player, there are no clear good or bad guys. Just saying, "killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you" has always been there, and about as gruesome as the technology has allowed (in this example, not so much .
And worse, is the content. When I was a kid it was all about brave guys standing up to evil guys and doing the right thing. Now, it's mostly about killing the other guy in as gory and gruesome way possible before he kills you...
I've no idea how old you are, but it barely matters, this is patent nonsense. For as long as games have been able to render gory graphics, they have been doing so. Mortal Kombat is 25 years old and gory as they come. Older games could be just as gross, though graphical limitations limited the impact. PvP has been about killing the other guy pretty much since we got past Pong. Hell, playground games like Cowboys and Indians were inevitably about (pretend, hopefully) shooting the opposing team.
Comments
Steve Jobs? He wouldn't let his kids use an iPhone or iPad at all. Bill Gates? Pretty much the same thing, severely restricting his kids use of tech devices. Obviously they all understand something about the technology and products they develop and offer all of us that for the most part we consumers aren't yet recognizing:
All this iPhone, iPad, computer, game system, smart-device etc use may not be good for family and the greater society at large.
Yeah some of this stuff may well be changing the world, but perhaps not in our own best interests.
What about a different take on the situation? Perhaps they’re not against one another at all. Perhaps it’s both corporations and the media facilitating a lack of personal responsibility. Perhaps they’re working together to purposely bring it about. Perhaps this has been going on for literally generations, and so the idea of not actually having personal responsibility for one’s actions is so ingrained that the vast majority of people have forgotten what real personal responsibility (for one’s life, security, health, finances, etc.) truly is.
I’m quite surprised you’re a liberal. Then again, you may not be. I’ve no working memory anymore.