[HN Gopher] iOS 15 Humane
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       iOS 15 Humane
        
       Author : uffo
       Score  : 1112 points
       Date   : 2021-06-10 03:56 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (potential.app)
 (TXT) w3m dump (potential.app)
        
       | EGreg wrote:
       | We have been working to make this happen. Read the items under
       | "Our Philosophy" and "Our Mission" here: https://qbix.com/people
       | 
       | But there has to be a completely different kind of company and
       | ethos behind this technology, if we are going to have an impact
       | on the world. We need open source, we need massive network
       | effects. And we need a new economic model for the web, that will
       | be ENFORCED. Would love some feedback from anyone who reads it:
       | https://qbix.com/QBUX/whitepaper.html#Decentralizing-the-Mar...
       | 
       | PS: I am just going to copypaste our philosophy and mission below
       | 
       |  _Our Philosophy
       | 
       | The internet has given us opportunities to connect with one
       | another like never before. Yet, most sites we use today have
       | barely tapped that potential. We believe in the power of well-
       | designed tools to improve people's lives and bring about positive
       | social change. They are characterized by five main aspects:
       | 
       | Time: Instead of priding ourselves on how much time people spend
       | in our apps, we want people to get in, get out, and get results.
       | 
       | Utility: Help people get things done in the real world, rather
       | than building an online persona.
       | 
       | Notifications: Let people control which updates they receive
       | about things happening in their life, instead of getting them
       | addicted to notifications like a slot machine.
       | 
       | Organic: In every context, pre-compute useful information and
       | present it to the user, enabling them to do more in less steps.
       | 
       | Business Model: Make money by helping people accomplish useful
       | things as a group, not just by selling advertising.
       | 
       | Our Mission
       | 
       | Why do we all have to rely on giant corporations mediate our
       | interactions, and trust them with our data, identity and brand?
       | Qbix works to put power back in the hands of the people. And we
       | don't just talk about it , we are building it! In order for
       | people to switch, the alternative must be as good as what they're
       | using now.
       | 
       | Qbix Platform: We've developed a social operating system for the
       | Web, that puts power back in the hands of people, communities and
       | social app developers. It is part of a movement to decentralize
       | the Web, moving it from Feudalism to a Free Market of reusable
       | components that anyone can use.
       | 
       | Qbix Browser: We've working on releasing social web browser where
       | you can share and discuss all kinds of web pages with friends,
       | from events to restaurants to news. You'll be able to search all
       | your browsing history and chats quickly, manage your contacts,
       | and be more productive. And you can do it all privately, using
       | your personal address book and encrypted communication.
       | 
       | QBUX Token: Monetizing open source software and digital content
       | on the web is a challenging problem. We are working to solve it
       | by leveraging the network effects we are building up with our
       | growing user base. Qbix can help usher in a new era of
       | collaboration and micropayments on the Web._
        
       | mark_l_watson wrote:
       | Excellent ideas. I use Freedom to limit my use of social media to
       | specific times of day, which is a good start. I especially liked
       | the idea of promoting people if they seem to be browsing
       | aimlessly.
        
       | Crazyontap wrote:
       | Even though this article is sarcastic(?) I can't help but get
       | genuinely angry at these trillion dollar companies thinking they
       | know what is better for us and trying to control and police
       | everything. This is even worse than govt censoring porn and cuss-
       | words back in the day thinking they know what is moral for the
       | society.
       | 
       | I was just talking to a friend the other day on how badly Apple
       | and Google are trying their best to kill curiosity and
       | creativity. I mean when I first got my 286 the machine was just
       | full of possibilities. I think learning the ins and outs of it
       | was more fun than doing anything productive.
       | 
       | I used to hack away at it all day and night. Learning about
       | interrupts, tinkering with the BIOS settings, hacking the serial
       | port, irq, etc. Now everything is just locked down. In my latest
       | phone I can't even run `fastboot` as that too has been locked
       | down permanently because "security".
       | 
       | Thank god we have Linux created before all this Bullshit started
       | happening. If Apple, Google and Microsoft was in charge of things
       | as they are now, we wouldn't even have any hardware to run
       | anything else than Windows and iOS.
        
         | vasishath wrote:
         | The lovely old 286 did not have a human's bank/card details and
         | neither did it had any "sensitive" photographs. Devices
         | nowadays have a lot of private information about their user and
         | most of the people do not know how it keep it safe and secure..
         | to top it all, several bad actors are consistently after this
         | private information.. hence the lockdown.
        
         | the_gipsy wrote:
         | Exactly, I don't want to be at the mercy of a tech corporation
         | to decide what's "healthy" for me or what exact degree of
         | privacy I deserve.
         | 
         | Allow real browser extensions, I just want to be able to use
         | uBlock origin. Not some overengineered "system extension" that
         | can only check the network.
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | What a weird take. It completely ignores the massive impact
         | that addictive apps have on people, how incapable governments
         | are at regulating malicious/predatory behavior by companies
         | like Facebook and others, and those tradeoffs.
         | 
         | This article is actually genius, and I truly believe they're
         | good recommendations. Apple in these mockups wouldn't be
         | _forcing_ you to turn off addictive behaviors - it 's just
         | letting you know they exist, and giving YOU the power to help
         | control it.
         | 
         | The jist of your post is that you want the freedom to smoke
         | cigarettes without the oppressive government health warnings on
         | the packages.
        
         | tarsinge wrote:
         | Both can coexist, they are not for the same usage. When I want
         | to do something creative (i.e. create music), I don't want to
         | tinker with a computer, I just want an appliance that works. I
         | spent decades toying with computers, but there are others
         | creative endeavors in life for me now. Apple (at least Jobs)
         | was always about the idea that the general purpose computer was
         | a mean not an end. An iPhone is not locked down if you see it
         | for the appliance that it is. I'm glad that Linux exists and
         | use it everyday at work though, it's just not the same thing.
        
         | dwighttk wrote:
         | > Even though this article is sarcastic(?)
         | 
         | I don't think it is
        
         | tonyedgecombe wrote:
         | >I mean when I first got my 286 the machine was just full of
         | possibilities.
         | 
         | When I got my first 286 very little was available to me because
         | it all had a cost. Want to learn C then get your wallet out to
         | buy a C compiler. Want to learn Pascal then get your wallet out
         | for Turbo Pascal . Want to learn UNIX, well hard lines, that
         | stuff is only available in ivory towers.
        
           | NeoVeles wrote:
           | The 286 was a little before my time, although I did spend a
           | lot of time in the early 90's hacking on a 8086. It is always
           | amazing to me that even in the 80's, Unix used to be
           | considered an astoundingly heavy handed OS. Now with it
           | legacy mostly living on via Linux, it is considered the light
           | weight alternative. Funny the path these things take.
        
         | trustfundbaby wrote:
         | Sounds like a business opportunity ...
        
           | fsflover wrote:
           | https://puri.sm/products/librem-5
        
           | slver wrote:
           | Yes, just imagine the billions of people eagerly awaiting a
           | blank smartphone that they can tinker the BIOS settings of.
        
             | prawn wrote:
             | Reminds me of the "women want pockets in all their clothes"
             | angle. If it were vital, someone would be making buckets of
             | money from that exact solution. That you don't hear about
             | it suggests that fashion-first is king in the sort of
             | clothing you wear out.
             | 
             | Every year there's a new pitch from a modular laptop or a
             | hackable smartphone. Never met anyone who uses one though.
        
         | squiggleblaz wrote:
         | Your comment entirely misses the point of the article, and your
         | frustration is completely backwards.
         | 
         | The current situation is that Facebook is not limited in their
         | use of patterns that increase your engagement. The author of
         | the comment is proposing some extensions to iOS that mean that
         | Facebook is able to use patterns that increase your engagement,
         | but you're also able to turn it off.
         | 
         | From your perspective of wanting more control over your
         | devices, isn't this a win? It isn't injecting javascript into a
         | running webapp with an extension that monkeypatches it. But you
         | gave that up by using a native app on iOS. It gets you back a
         | huge amount of control. If you want more, there's LineageOS
         | (self compile it with patched source code by using robotnix)
         | and PinePhone. The jump from trusted to trustless is a big one
         | now but it's not insurmountable.
        
         | robinjfisher wrote:
         | I don't think the article is sarcastic given the nature of
         | their app.
         | 
         | Where does one draw the line though? ESG[1] is becoming
         | increasingly important to investors and I already see financial
         | institutions instituting controls in their apps around gambling
         | [2].
         | 
         | When should large companies with sufficient reach implement
         | opportunities to address social harms?
         | 
         | [1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-
         | an... [2] https://monzo.com/blog/2018/06/19/gambling-block-
         | self-exclus...
        
           | camillomiller wrote:
           | It is not and it is worrying. I think Apple is doing a great
           | job about privacy, but it's a fine line the one between user
           | advocacy and the ethical state model...
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | zuppy wrote:
         | i started programming in 94, i've passed through all the
         | phases. honestly, what i want now is a phone that just works,
         | without needing to hack anything. i presume i'm not
         | representing the miniroty of ios users here. i don't think it's
         | possible to do both of those things (stability vs hacking) in
         | the same time, without a compromise and i voted with my wallet
         | for what apple did.
         | 
         | there are options for everyone, if you want to hack it, good,
         | there's android for that. there are even phones that you can
         | customize. if you want a stable black box, there's ios, this is
         | well known before you buy it. there are options for every one
         | of us...
         | 
         | i think you guys forget that this is an echo chamber and the
         | real users out there are not tech savy. i
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | > I don't think it's possible to do both of those things
           | (stability vs hacking) in the same time
           | 
           | Why is it not possible, exactly?
        
             | zuppy wrote:
             | let me come back to you with a question: do you have an
             | example where this works?
             | 
             | being hackable means exactly the opposite of stability: you
             | can change low level features and break things. if there is
             | a chance to do it, people can be tricked to do it. of
             | course, i'm excluding here people who have knowledge, as i
             | continue to belive that they are a minority.
        
               | fouric wrote:
               | > do you have an example where this works?
               | 
               | Yes. On my laptop, Linux is extremely stable, and yet
               | extremely hackable. What, Linux doesn't work for you
               | flawlessly? 99% chance it's drivers, which has nothing to
               | do with stability and everything to do with the limited
               | amount of effort that people have poured into drivers on
               | that particular platform.
               | 
               | > being hackable means exactly the opposite of stability
               | 
               | False. "Stability" implicitly means "without
               | modifications". There's _no_ product or (human-made)
               | system in existence that remains stable once you start
               | making arbitrary modifications to it.
               | 
               | > if there is a chance to do it, people can be tricked to
               | do it
               | 
               | Yes, and "freedom" (which is a core tenet of the United
               | States Constitution, where most HN commenters are based)
               | _includes the ability to do things that will hurt
               | yourself_.  "We know what's better for you than you do"
               | leads to tyranny the majority of the time (as it does
               | here, where Apple has full control of their devices and
               | regularly makes decisions that hurt their users).
               | 
               | Moreover, it's relatively easy to design a system that
               | prevents the vast majority of users from shooting
               | themselves in the foot (by making root(-adjacent) access
               | difficult to acquire by accident and fairly difficult to
               | be tricked into doing), and coupled with actual
               | _education_ would keep the levels of this particular kind
               | of computer fraud (where someone convinces you to bypass
               | your computer 's security features) well below the rates
               | of other computer fraud (such as falling prey to scam
               | emails).
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > being hackable means exactly the opposite of stability
               | 
               | Any computer with preinstalled Linux will "just work".
               | Typical users will only install apps from the
               | repositories, and those are _more_ secure and private
               | than App Store.
        
         | camillomiller wrote:
         | Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we
         | learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices,
         | learning how they work to the bits, plus some random Linux
         | thrown in. This comment is ignoring that a device that does all
         | that without you having to worry about how it works is a tool
         | way more powerful than one in which you need to at least know
         | how to build everything from scratch with an enormous learning
         | curve. Curiosity can be about design, the arts, literature,
         | drawing, composing music, making and editing videos. All of
         | which you can do so much better and so much more democratically
         | on these "opinionated" devices. So please, enough with this
         | narrative, it's really outdated and based on such a limited
         | world view.
        
           | collectiveness wrote:
           | I think you are mixing up "not having to worry about how it
           | works" with "having the freedom to tinker". We should demand
           | both. One reason is for our curiosity. The other is to have
           | checks and balances on the big companies.
        
             | Applejinx wrote:
             | The big companies have all the technical resources, and
             | profoundly strong motivation, to apply their own malware
             | and harm the user.
             | 
             | You do NOT check and/or balance big companies by allowing
             | them the freedom to tinker alongside the little guy. They
             | will wrest the machines to their purposes every time, and
             | they are Not Happy about obstacles in their path.
             | 
             | Having checks and balances on big companies is a very good
             | argument but it points the opposite direction from how
             | you're seeing it...
        
             | camillomiller wrote:
             | We should. What I'm saying is that we still have that, and
             | more. The suggestion is mostly the opposite, from comments
             | like yours. That we should have less things like the Apple
             | ecosystem, which has been fundamental in creating an entire
             | generation of creative tinkerers, exactly because of its
             | opinionated and broadly simplified nature.
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | We have an either-or choice, and there's no reason for it
               | to be like that.
        
           | creata wrote:
           | This has to be the least charitable reading of Crazyontap's
           | comment. Couldn't you have just inserted the implied:
           | 
           | > I was just talking to a friend the other day on how badly
           | Apple and Google are trying their best to kill curiosity and
           | creativity [with regard to the computer they're using].
           | 
           | Also:
           | 
           | > So please, enough with this narrative, it's really outdated
           | and based on such a limited world view.
           | 
           | You'll have to explain how it's a "limited world view" to
           | suggest that we can have our cake and eat it too: that we can
           | have open, hackable platforms that are _also_ popular and
           | easy to use.
        
             | fartcannon wrote:
             | From the tone, I believe they are intentionally trolling
             | for reactions. It is probably best not to feed them.
        
               | camillomiller wrote:
               | It's called democratic discussion, but sure, go ahead,
               | call me a troll. If that's your only argument, I think
               | you've effectively helped in explaining what a limited
               | world view is with a very practical example.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | camillomiller wrote:
             | Creative professionals gained immensely through Apple's
             | approach. If I'm a music producer, a film maker, a writer,
             | a graphic designer, and so on, I gain immensely from a
             | computer that just works 99% of the time. I don't need or
             | want to spend time on thinking what's the best set of
             | drivers I should install, or worrying about all the
             | dependencies of this new open source program with no hint
             | of UX-design I've just installed. And yet, anything that
             | isn't exactly that is often dismissed as lower class by
             | people who have learned that over years and years, and
             | don't seem to understand that there's an entire world of
             | good people who just want to apply their curiosity at a
             | different level. That is, in my opinion, a limited world
             | view. In my experience, it also does not happen both ways.
             | People that can't do that (but maybe can master film
             | coloring post-processing -- I invite you to give a stab at
             | that, if you dare) have enormous respect of the low level
             | tinkerers. The opposite is very often not through.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | How does being able to get root access to an iPhone (the
               | way you can on a Mac) limit creativity?
        
               | Ensorceled wrote:
               | They are claiming the exact opposite of that: not having
               | root access isn't a limit on creativity.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | They're replying to a comment arguing _for_ open devices.
               | Saying  "I'm fine with a closed device" is at best
               | irrelevant. "I'm fine with a locked-down computer" is no
               | argument against "I want my computer to be more open",
               | as, in the end, if you're fine with your locked-down
               | computer, just keep it locked down.
        
               | BeFlatXIII wrote:
               | > it also does not happen both ways. People that can't do
               | that (but maybe can master film coloring post-processing
               | -- I invite you to give a stab at that, if you dare) have
               | enormous respect of the low level tinkerers. The opposite
               | is very often not through.
               | 
               | This feels related to the saying that it's easier to
               | innovate down the stack than it is to innovate up the
               | stack. It's far easier for Apple to design and fabricate
               | its own chips than it would be for Intel to make its own
               | consumer OS.
        
               | Applejinx wrote:
               | I program DSP software, but I find DaVinci Resolve SUPER
               | daunting. I completely agree (and am also a Mac user, for
               | what that's worth)
               | 
               | There are so many domains where you can dive incredibly
               | deeply into 'em. Some of them are computer augmented, and
               | benefit from a stable, predictable computer host. There's
               | been a lot of instances over the years where Macs served
               | that role of 'creativity toaster' and did it well... now
               | we've got the same thing, except for phones.
               | 
               | Anybody who's used to that situation doesn't find the
               | status of iPhone ecology shocking. A bargain is being
               | made. Or a service is being hired, from effectively a
               | computer administrator.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > I gain immensely from a computer that just works 99% of
               | the time
               | 
               | Are you implying that Linux doesn't work 99% of the time?
               | If so, you are mistaken. I'm running Linux for me and my
               | relatives without issues for years. I'm not a
               | programmer/hacker.
               | 
               | Just choose the hardware designed for it (exactly like in
               | the case of Apple).
        
               | odshoifsdhfs wrote:
               | Ohh come on. I am not against linux but to say it works
               | flawlessly is ridiculous. My last try with it a few years
               | was the most ridiculous. If i plugged my bamboo stylus,
               | the screen would just go all crazy, as soon as i
               | unplugged it, back to normal. Stylus worked on windows
               | and mac, but on linux (ubuntu lts) i couldn't even plug
               | it in (and took me a while to find out that was the
               | problem as it installed everything fine, then after the
               | reboot this happened, only when i decided to disconnect
               | everything but the monitor and try plugging one by one
               | did i find this out
               | 
               | And lets not even go over the ux disaster that is the mix
               | and match of uis from various apps.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > Stylus worked on windows and mac, but on linux
               | 
               | Here comes your problem (which I actually mentioned in my
               | above post). Choose hardware _designed_ for Linux if you
               | want it to really work. Why don 't you complain that your
               | Windows installation does not work well on a Macbook?
        
               | odshoifsdhfs wrote:
               | If I plug a non supported device on my macbook, the
               | screen doesn't go all scrambly.
               | 
               | And even so, how can you say it works 99% of the time if
               | you have to go and research each piece of peripheral that
               | you want to use? Normal users go to bestbuy or amazon or
               | whatnot and buy a microphone, they don't want to go and
               | see if it works on ubuntu or whatnot or have weird
               | behaviours at home. you can blame manufacturs for not
               | supporting linux while they support win/mac, but again,
               | normal users experience just isn't that great.
               | 
               | You said you are running linux for you and your
               | relatives. Who installed it on your relatives machines?
               | Who checked the compatibility of each hardware and maybe
               | even bought some replacement things to work on linux? I
               | know most users/relative I know wouldn't go to websites
               | to try to find out if this or that works well with this
               | and that. They just want to go to a shop, buy a
               | laptop+accessories and plug them in when they get home
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | Yes, the actual problem is the lack of preinstalled Linux
               | on retail products. You can find that in online shops
               | though. My laptop came with Linux preinstalled and I
               | can't recommend it enough.
        
             | simonh wrote:
             | Because we also need sophisticated, powerful internet
             | communications devices that contain our personal data,
             | private photos and video, social media information, etc,
             | etc and that we also rely on for a huge range of creative
             | tasks.
             | 
             | These are not the right tools to also have completely
             | exposed with no security or guard rails, where we can
             | easily open up or broadcast everything to the world.
             | 
             | You can have your cake and eat it too, there are devices
             | available that work just how you want, but that doesn't
             | mean every device has to work that way. It certainly
             | doesn't mean that my device has to work that way, just
             | because you want it to.
        
           | boudin wrote:
           | Why do you make the assumption that a device with freedom
           | would be a device to worry about? This is exactlty what the
           | op is saying. The Apple narrative of "we have full control
           | over your device and your software for your own good" is
           | horrible and worrying. I'm not gonna make a parallel about
           | Apple source of inspiration but it doesn't scream creativity,
           | freedom and certainly not democracy.
        
             | simonh wrote:
             | Democracy is about choice, including the right to make
             | choices you disagree with. You can choose to use an iOS
             | device, or you can chose not to. I choose to use one, and I
             | like the way it works. You or others like you want to take
             | that choice away from me.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | This is such a tired argument. Nobody is arguing that
               | iPhones should be rooted by default, only that they
               | should be _rootable_.
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | I don't want my kids rooting their phones. Also I use
               | facebook, but I dislike it and don't trust them, but I
               | use it and Messenger occasionally to keep in touch with
               | some friends. I also use WhatsApp fair bit.
               | 
               | I like the fact that Facebook can't pull their apps from
               | the store, put them on a rival store with lax standards,
               | or otherwise circumvent the app store controls. These
               | controls clear benefits for me, but side loading and
               | alternate stores would cripple their effectiveness. In
               | fact crippling the effectiveness of these controls is the
               | purpose of side loading and alternate stores.
               | 
               | If you want a phone you can root, buy one. There are
               | options out there. Why do you want to take my choice away
               | from me?
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | > Why do you want to take my choice away from me?
               | 
               | You keep repeating this disingenuous argument. If you
               | don't want to root your phone, don't root it. If you
               | don't want your kids to be able to root their phones,
               | don't pretend like you aren't taking away their choice.
               | 
               | If you don't want rival stores with lax standards, don't
               | install them. Just don't keep telling people who want to
               | be given a choice that they're somehow "taking your
               | choice away from you".
               | 
               | If you want to be in prison, go ahead, but don't pretend
               | that having the option to leave is somehow "taking your
               | choice away".
        
               | p49k wrote:
               | This is unrealistic. If it were easy to root an iPhone,
               | then we would reach a situation where app developers
               | would stop releasing necessary apps in the App Store
               | because they want to bypass all the ethical behavior it
               | requires. It would effectively force everyone to the
               | lowest common denominator.
               | 
               | If it were possible to root an iPhone, Facebook would
               | have never agreed to give users the option to stop
               | tracking them across apps; they would have instead said
               | "please watch this video and do what it says to continue
               | using Facebook/Instagram!" and guide naive users into
               | rooting their phones.
               | 
               | Closed ecosystems have many advantages (and
               | disadvantages) over open ones. However, a closed
               | ecosystem with a gaping hole in the wall is no longer a
               | closed ecosystem; you can't have it both ways.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | I don't know what to tell you if you believe that, while
               | conversions drop off a cliff if the "signup" button isn't
               | prominent, asking users to unlock their bootloader and
               | install a third party app store just to get Facebook
               | working on their phone is a thing that would get a
               | nonzero amount of users.
        
               | p49k wrote:
               | Epic literally did this with Fortnite on Android, one of
               | the largest mobile games in existence - they taught users
               | how to download the APK and sideload the app to avoid the
               | Google Play store.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | This isn't very relevant to the current discussion,
               | though, as you don't need root or an unlocked bootloader
               | on Android to do that.
        
               | p49k wrote:
               | It's directly relevant. It's an example of a large
               | company forcing its users to learn how to implement a
               | somewhat complicated bypass to an app store to avoid
               | having to follow its rules, something that no one tries
               | on Apple because of how tightly Apple controls its
               | ecosystem.
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | It wouldn't just be facebook though, it would be all
               | facebook's apps (Messenger, WhatsApp, etc), plus all
               | Google's apps, Amazon, Fortnite, Spotify, etc, etc. A
               | single 'Freedom' store with all that on it would have
               | huge pull and would completely undermine the
               | effectiveness of the App Store's privacy policies. No
               | thanks.
               | 
               | This doesn't happen on Android because Google has no
               | interest in enforcing strict privacy policies on the Play
               | Store.
        
               | boudin wrote:
               | It's not about you. It's about the direction that
               | technology has been taking where a big chunk is
               | controlled by very few companies that are more powerful
               | than a lot of countries.
               | 
               | I want to be able to chose a device I control, with
               | software I control because I have strong concerns on
               | privacy, freedom to create and waste management. My
               | choices are quite limited and things are hardly moving in
               | the right direction.
               | 
               | Do your concept of democracy being all about your own
               | choices and seeing anybody with different point of view
               | as your enemy kinda reinforce my point. This is not about
               | your specific choices and personal freedom. This is about
               | everybody choices and freedom.
               | 
               | Yes, authoritarianism as a business freaks me out, seeing
               | people embracing it and embracing the fake sentiment of
               | safety it provides is freaking me out. And yes, I do
               | think it's time the Apple and Google duopoly is broken
               | down and people are actually given choice.
        
               | Kbelicius wrote:
               | So you agree that iPhones should be used in whatever way
               | the user wants, including using a different app store? I
               | mean, it is a choice that you disagree with but for some
               | reason it should be taken away. Why?
        
             | p49k wrote:
             | Apple's approach is pragmatic. If they offered anyone the
             | ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers
             | manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to
             | bypass security, payment restrictions or similar. Even the
             | limited options Apple provides are already abused, such as
             | Facebook convincing users to install VPN profiles with
             | their Ovano product and abusing it to spy on users.
             | 
             | Having the option defeats the fundamental advantages their
             | approach offers.
             | 
             | There are a lot of problems with Apple's approach from an
             | antitrust perspective and fair competition should be
             | regulated through legislation, but there are good reasons
             | for closed ecosystems to exist and plenty of great
             | alternatives for people who want something more open.
        
               | collectiveness wrote:
               | At what point do we need to start worrying about Apple
               | holding too much power over their closed ecosystem and
               | can potentially abuse it?
        
               | camillomiller wrote:
               | Until we leave in a capitalistic system? Apple should be
               | scrutinized, but I prefer a world in which a company with
               | strong values polices the ethical limits of technology,
               | to one where companies like Facebook (and Google, to a
               | lesser extent) hypocritically push an open agenda just to
               | exploit such technologies to milk our data.
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > Apple's approach is pragmatic. If they offered anyone
               | the ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers
               | manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to
               | bypass security, payment restrictions or similar.
               | 
               | The problem is a social one and hasn't been properly
               | solved by technical measures as you note. Instead of
               | acting like the digital world is somehow separate from
               | the rest of the world, we should have enough strong and
               | effective laws and regulations that if a person steals
               | from me, they can reasonably expect to spend a few years
               | in prison.
               | 
               | The result of discovering a person has released a
               | fraudulent product to the Google Play Store is currently
               | that they get get their Google account shut down, maybe.
               | The actual result should be that they find out what the
               | inside of a prison cell is.
               | 
               | The result of discovering that a company tracks a user
               | without effective permission through the use of dark
               | patterns that meant a user pressed "I agree" under the
               | misapprehension that this was the only way of using the
               | app should have their shares acquired by the justice
               | system at a penalty rate - or some other effective
               | penalty so that companies don't balance the cost of
               | obeying the law with the cost of the fine.
               | 
               | If Apple believes that their users want protection from
               | digital thieves, Apple has a responsibility to lobby for
               | better laws and regulations. They can't use halfmeasures
               | as a pretense in the hope that some amorphous other will
               | get laws that protect their users passed.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > If they offered anyone the ability to jailbreak, you
               | would see major app makers manipulating naive users into
               | jailbreaking in order to bypass security
               | 
               | This is FUD. Linux works flawlessly despite giving all
               | the freedoms. Typical users don't install anything
               | outside the repositories. Apple has countless problems
               | with security and privacy in their App Store.
        
               | handrous wrote:
               | > This is FUD. Linux works flawlessly despite giving all
               | the freedoms.
               | 
               |  _eyebrows raise to the ceiling_
               | 
               | > Typical users don't install anything outside the
               | repositories.
               | 
               |  _head tilts nearly horizontal with the floor_
               | 
               | "Flawlessly" is here being stretched beyond the breaking
               | point, and anyone who is OK with only installing software
               | from the official repos for any major Linux distro is
               | _not_ a  "typical user", very obviously.
        
               | igetspam wrote:
               | I've been using Linux exclusively since the mid 90s. I've
               | run so many different variants. I was a attended the
               | church of Slackware for a long time. There has never been
               | a time in my many years of using Linux that anything has
               | been "flawless" and I _definitely_ have to install things
               | "outside the repositories" pretty regularly. Even if
               | that's a broad statement meaning "any type of repository
               | anywhere, including but not limited to git."
        
               | handrous wrote:
               | Right, I'm struggling to think of a user profile that
               | would be OK with just software from major distro repos.
               | 
               | "Normal" users? They're going to want several proprietary
               | programs, some of which will surely not be in even the
               | non-free repos, unless they're an only-uses-the-browser
               | type who'd be fine with a Chromebook (or, more
               | realistically for that user profile, just their phone).
               | 
               | Power users? I have to assume my experience of _often_
               | wanting or needing something outside official repos, or a
               | newer version of something in official repos, is far from
               | unusual. I 'm not even _that_ demanding a power user, and
               | that 's still a very common situation for me. What's
               | worse is the more one chases system stability, the worse
               | this problem becomes, since Linux distros mix the base
               | system and user-facing applications all together (and the
               | structure of x-window-system/wayland/drivers/GTK/QT makes
               | it hard _not_ to do this)
        
               | aks_tldr wrote:
               | That is because Linux is not used by general public.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | Unfortunately you can't even find a Linux computer in
               | shops anywhere, which could be the reason few people use
               | it. It's actually harder to find malware there.
               | 
               | See also: Android is Linux used by the general public.
        
               | ntauthority wrote:
               | Funnily, you can find various somewhat-Linux devices in
               | stores mostly, except they're called 'Chromebooks'. This
               | is the same device series that uses Coreboot as a boot
               | loader and usually had an internal screw to remove to
               | disable firmware write protections and fully unlock the
               | device, as well as other visually and auditory (they make
               | a large beep on boot) tamper-evident 'developer unlock'
               | modes. Nowadays instead of the 'unlock screw', there's a
               | mandatory security chip that can be unlocked into a less
               | visibly tamper-evident mode in which it is disabled via a
               | special USB-C cable for sale on the open market with a
               | reference schematic available as well, which is a much
               | more fun solution to assert physical access. [1]
               | 
               | Many older models also would run mainline Linux fine, and
               | the default Chrome OS install usually has a container and
               | a Wayland to Chrome adapter behind a toggle.
               | 
               | [1]: https://unrelenting.technology/articles/FreeBSD-and-
               | custom-f...
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | I don't think it's relevant for the general public.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | eptcyka wrote:
           | You can learn about design, arts, literature, drawing et al
           | without having to sacrifice the freedom to own your device.
           | Apple devices deliver great UX despite their walled garden.
           | They can have their ecosystem without locking people out of
           | running their own software or making it difficult to repair
           | it. Don't create a false dichotomy.
        
           | shaan7 wrote:
           | Ah well, you are basically replying to a limited world view
           | by another limited one.
           | 
           | Notice how you say "Curiosity *can be* about design, ..." but
           | then the tone of your comment reads like you mean "Curiosity
           | *should only be* about design, ...". Please don't do that.
           | 
           | Curiosity can be about anything, lets just leave it at that.
        
           | fimbulvetr wrote:
           | These are sad times when someone who wants to "hack" and
           | learn and disassemble and reassemble and just "understand"
           | gets shit on "hacker news". "Limited world view"? Really?
           | They are the one with the "Limited world view"?
        
             | handrous wrote:
             | The notion that computing devices that aren't wide-open are
             | "kill[ing] curiosity and creativity" in anything other than
             | a very restricted sense is a limited world view, yes. That
             | such devices being available as an option _at all_ rankles
             | people so and drives them to insult anyone who likes them
             | as mindless consumers (very common in discussions like
             | this, on this site) is downright parochial.
        
           | otabdeveloper4 wrote:
           | You missed his point. BigTech is trying to make open computer
           | hardware and software illegal, because "security".
           | 
           | That is a loss for everyone, even if tinkering with computers
           | is not your hobby.
        
             | vladvasiliu wrote:
             | > BigTech is trying to make open computer hardware and
             | software illegal, because "security".
             | 
             | I wonder what they stand to gain from this, since they
             | wouldn't bother if there wasn't a benefit.
             | 
             | Android I can possibly understand, what with Google being
             | an ad-company and expecting to track users. But Apple
             | doesn't seem to be doing that all that much anymore.
             | 
             | For the tractor situation, John Deere & friends expect to
             | capture the business of independent repair shops, so
             | there's a gain in their locking down the devices.
             | 
             | If I buy an iPhone to run myOS on it, how's this a loss to
             | Apple? Especially since they don't charge for IOS updates,
             | and they also support their phones for a long time, so if I
             | don't buy a new iPhone every year it's not because I'm
             | running some custom OS. My iPhone 7 still has all the
             | latest updates and I haven't paid Apple one cent ever since
             | I bought it used more than four years ago.
        
               | blackoil wrote:
               | Apple is not in biz of selling phone or laptop. They sell
               | complete ecosystem. If you own an iPhone, airpod are
               | magical, AirTag/iCloud makes sense. Why not also buy
               | Macbook to tinker with own apps and an iPad when you need
               | pencil/touch. And not just current, you also capture all
               | future innovation, so you can charge for digital
               | downloads. You can make new rules to charge for all
               | digital transactions across all apps.
               | 
               | What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join in
               | the ecosystem.
               | 
               | If IBM had been smarter and launched PC as a closed
               | platform it would have been a 10/100 trillion dollar
               | enterprise.
        
               | vladvasiliu wrote:
               | > What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join
               | in the ecosystem.
               | 
               | Not necessarily. They could still continue to charge for
               | every download, just as I can, and already do, listen to
               | music on my iPhone without an Apple Music subscription
               | and without purchasing from the iTunes store.
               | 
               | If I want the whole Apple experience, I will continue
               | using macOS / IOS. Hell, that's the reason why I started
               | buying MacBooks when I could afford them: the "apple
               | experience".
               | 
               | But I also run Linux on my work PC, because for that I
               | don't care about the Apple experience. But I hate my HP
               | laptop, for comfort reasons. If I could buy a MacBook and
               | have Linux run on it as well as it does on the hp, I
               | would (because I love the hardware) and that would be a
               | net gain for Apple, wouldn't it?
               | 
               | I get the whole point of the "experience" and
               | "ecosystem", etc. Up until a few years ago I absolutely
               | loved it. Still love my iphone and wouldn't switch to
               | android.
               | 
               | But now I can't stand macOS anymore for my work needs.
               | I'm looking to buy a new laptop to use Linux on it. The
               | offers from Lenovo / HP / Dell don't look all that great
               | to me. I would absolutely buy an MBP if I knew Linux
               | worked perfectly on it, but I know it doesn't, so Apple
               | doesn't get to make a sale.
               | 
               | The point is: If I want to tinker with an iPhone and
               | would not buy one if I couldn't, why is it a loss for
               | Apple to sell an extra phone, even if the buyer won't
               | consume their other digital products? The seller wouldn't
               | have consumed them anyway, especially without buying the
               | iPhone.
               | 
               | Yes, there's the support side of things, but again, they
               | could have some sort of warranty voiding system in place.
        
               | otabdeveloper4 wrote:
               | Simple - close the door to any possible competition or
               | disruption in the future.
               | 
               | A future with only one or two computing monopolies is a
               | desired end state for history to BigTech.
        
             | tommit wrote:
             | I mean, that point was in there, sure. But I get the
             | comment you replied to regarding how the OP comment reads.
        
           | icelancer wrote:
           | There is no reason the machine can't do everything you said
           | and everything the parent said.
        
             | BluSyn wrote:
             | There are fundamental engineering trade-offs here. The
             | amount of effort required to secure a device AND make it
             | accessible to "tinkerers" would be an effort worthy of an
             | MIT research lab. It's not trivial, and a huge security
             | risk to satisfy 0.01% of the user base. Especially when
             | such users will likely just buy an open source device
             | anyways. Seems like a huge waste of effort to me.
        
               | fartcannon wrote:
               | Do you think Apple engineers don't have access under the
               | hood? Simply provide that access to those who request it,
               | everyone else can keep it locked. Problem solved.
        
               | om2 wrote:
               | This program exists to get that level of access:
               | https://developer.apple.com/programs/security-research-
               | devic...
        
               | fartcannon wrote:
               | "The initial application period ended August 24.
               | Applicants will receive an update this fall."
               | 
               | This is not at all what we are looking for.
        
               | camillomiller wrote:
               | In which reality where Facebook doesn't exist do you
               | write from? :D
        
               | vladvasiliu wrote:
               | I'm not overly familiar with the low-level details of
               | iPhones and Android phones, but it's not clear to me why
               | it would be such a big effort to allow one to install
               | whatever OS they like on an iPhone.
               | 
               | Maybe display a big, scary "unofficial OS, you're on your
               | own, don't bother us if your iPhone becomes unusable".
               | Maybe have one jump through some hoops, like getting an
               | "approval" code by signing some mile-long EULA on the
               | iCloud account stating you forego any software-related
               | warranty / support.
               | 
               | This should be enough to deter "regular users" from
               | messing with their phones, and Apple wouldn't have to go
               | to any length to guarantee that a "restored" device isn't
               | compromised. Kind of like the KNOX thing on Samsung
               | phones used to work.
               | 
               | And this actually seems to be possible, since people are
               | having success with running Linux, a non-apple sanctioned
               | OS, on the M1 Macs, which have the secure enclave, etc.
               | My understanding is that whatever issues they are
               | experiencing are related to hardware support.
        
               | tshaddox wrote:
               | I think the point there isn't a technical challenge, but
               | rather a business challenge. Namely, Apple probably
               | actually cares about how satisfied their customers are.
               | They probably could easily make their iPhones support
               | following instructions from some forum about how to
               | install Fortnite hacks, but some of those hacks are going
               | to cause problems for their customers, either
               | accidentally (bugs) or maliciously (spyware, random ware,
               | etc.). The typical response from a HN thread might be
               | "well if the user installs something that's their
               | problem," but Apple probably actually cares about their
               | customers' satisfaction more than they care about
               | assigning moral culpability.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | _Apple probably actually cares about their customers'
               | satisfaction more than they care about assigning moral
               | culpability._
               | 
               | This is it right here. Power-users will blame the user
               | for having their device compromised. Users, on the other
               | hand, will blame Apple. Apple will do anything they can
               | to avoid negative PR like that.
        
               | camillomiller wrote:
               | And the media will amplify that into oblivion.
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > They probably could easily make their iPhones support
               | following instructions from some forum about how to
               | install Fortnite hacks, but some of those hacks are going
               | to cause problems for their customers, either
               | accidentally (bugs) or maliciously (spyware, random ware,
               | etc.).
               | 
               | I don't know what the state of the world is today, but
               | I've installed custom OSes (mostly Linux) on every Mac
               | I've owned (my most recent was a 2012 Retina which I
               | really liked).
               | 
               | Installing a custom OS isn't easy and it's pretty obvious
               | to everyone it means thinking "Yes, it's a good idea to
               | lose support for almost every program I run". By
               | "everyone", I really do mean that: I've never heard of an
               | anecdote of someone who's mother wiped MacOS and threw
               | Ubuntu on their box and encountered some bugs. Technical
               | knowledge about security isn't out there, but we do get
               | "Apple makes the system that is an iPhone, going away
               | from Apple's product means abandoning my iPhone" seems to
               | be there, even if they don't understand what it means for
               | something to be an operating system.
        
               | csande17 wrote:
               | The engineering effort is entirely surmountable; we
               | already have a pretty decent solution in Chrome OS's
               | Developer Mode.
               | 
               | "Security" has become the excuse big companies use for
               | everything they foist on users. Better update to that new
               | OS version that ruins the user interface -- it comes with
               | security patches! Better make sure you can't play any
               | games that aren't approved by Apple -- it's the only way
               | to make iPhones secure! Better centralize the entire
               | Internet so it all depends on four or five giant
               | corporations to run -- they're the only ones who can be
               | trusted to implement security!
        
           | CraigJPerry wrote:
           | I don't know. Why can't we have both? Why can't we have
           | devices that permit "mucking about" but also when configured
           | appropriately allow us to ignore the low level details and
           | muck about with higher level stuff? They don't have to be
           | mutually exclusive despite "bt whole home wifi app has
           | detected this is a jailbroken device and for your safety will
           | not run". It's my wifi, it's my phone!
        
             | khazhoux wrote:
             | You literally have both, and more.
             | 
             | Right now, I have a nearly uncrackable walled-garden iphone
             | on my desk. And a mac laptop running XCode (learning about
             | Metal programming), and at the same time running an Amiga
             | emulator (tinkering with 68k assembly), and a windows
             | gaming laptop next to it, and a breadboard on the floor
             | with a pile of resistors and capacitors and transistors.
             | 
             | So what's the problem again?
        
               | tpm wrote:
               | The problem is the kid will be given the iPhone and not
               | the breadboard.
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | For a communications device they will take into school,
               | that they rely on for school work, communicating with
               | parents and teachers, and with each other on social media
               | and contains a lot of private information, that is
               | probably the right choice. An open system with zero
               | security and no guard rails is simply not appropriate for
               | that use.
        
               | mft_ wrote:
               | And most kids given an Amiga or a 286 wouldn't hack or
               | code it - they'd just load up games.
        
               | tpm wrote:
               | Sure, but the possibility was there. I was given a ZX
               | Spectrum clone and started coding, my brother only played
               | games. I am not sure I would work in IT if that didn't
               | happen. We were pretty much poor by today's standards and
               | probably could not afford another such device, never mind
               | that we would not know what to buy (as nobody in my
               | family had any IT experience and there was no IT shop in
               | our small town).
        
               | khazhoux wrote:
               | Exactly this. My brother only played games on our C64 and
               | Amiga, while I did nothing but program on it.
        
               | phillc73 wrote:
               | Games were in some way 99% of my use of the Apple IIc we
               | had, which was my first computer. Original Bard's Tale in
               | glorious green screen. Good times.
               | 
               | However, I also spent a lot of time painstakingly copying
               | BASIC games, line by line from magazines, then figuring
               | out how to expand upon them for additional features.
               | Gaming was just the gateway drug.
        
               | mosselman wrote:
               | Where are the parents? Who is giving kids phone instead
               | of something else? Also, why should kids tinker with
               | computers if they can explore art by painting or music by
               | learning an instrument or literature by reading?
               | 
               | What makes it important for them to use Unix rather than
               | something that works fine the way it is while maintaining
               | some standard of UX?
               | 
               | If kids show an interest in computers, they can just
               | install unix on some computer like a raspberry pi and
               | tinker on that.
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > What makes it important for them to use Unix rather
               | than something that works fine the way it is while
               | maintaining some standard of UX?
               | 
               | The concern is whether the device is a piece of paper or
               | a television. A television can show much more complex
               | images under the control of the average child, but it is
               | purely for consumption. A piece of paper lets you display
               | anything you can draw or you can turn it into a paper
               | plane or do origami, but the realism of the resulting
               | products is going to be much less, and they will be
               | relatively static.
               | 
               | An iPhone is, by design, a television. Unix systems are
               | pieces of paper.
               | 
               | Last time I used MacOS, it was a functional piece of
               | paper and it worked as a television too, so there isn't
               | really any dichotomy here. Any television could be built
               | on top of a piece of paper and give you access to the
               | base level too.
               | 
               | The concern is that the television is winning out: even
               | though Android and iOS are built from pieces of paper,
               | their maintainers only bless television-like interfaces.
               | Frankly, I believe a major part of this is because
               | they're built on top of Unix like interfaces, which is
               | based certain assumptions that they don't want to
               | maintain. So I certainly wouldn't say Unix-like is the
               | solution.
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | Kids might not even _know_ they have an interest in
               | engineering (which is not the same as  "interest in
               | computers"). Back in 90s, a lot of kids, myself included,
               | found out that we like that stuff because we were
               | inadvertently exposed to it while playing our video
               | games, and, later on, surfing the early Web. My first
               | programming language was MS-DOS batch files, simply
               | because it was readily available.
        
               | tpm wrote:
               | > Where are the parents? Who is giving kids phone instead
               | of something else?
               | 
               | The parents might not know better.
               | 
               | > Also, why should kids tinker with computers if they can
               | explore art by painting or music by learning an
               | instrument or literature by reading?
               | 
               | They should be given the chance to do so, as they should
               | be given the chance to explore art or craft or a lot of
               | other things.
               | 
               | > What makes it important for them to use Unix
               | 
               | I don't see how mentioning Unix is relevant here. They
               | should be given the opportunity to play and tinker with
               | the devices, not only the preplanned path with games on
               | the devices, that is all.
        
               | eptcyka wrote:
               | It's not untrackable unless you opt out of "FindMy"
               | services and disable bluetooth (disable, rather than
               | disconnect).
               | 
               | Why can't I run Xcode on iOS or iPadOS devices? What's
               | the technical limitation? These devices have the
               | capability to render stuff on larger screens wirelessly,
               | and one can connect keyboards to them. The limitation is
               | purely artificial.
        
               | brandonmenc wrote:
               | > You literally have both, and more.
               | 
               | Seriously.
               | 
               | When I was a kid I would have killed to have had easy
               | access to things like Raspberry Pi's, microcontrollers,
               | SGI workstations (which is what the Mac is these days),
               | and a zillion free programming languages.
               | 
               | Instead, while I had full access to the family's PC and
               | could learn C and assembly language programming on it
               | (btw I had to pay for those compilers), and learned all
               | about interrupts and writing to VGA registers, I still
               | couldn't do anything super low-level like muck around
               | with the boot sector because my dad needed it for work,
               | the phone system was so locked down that you'd go to jail
               | for "exploring" it, and I had barely any idea how to get
               | started playing around with logic chips because there was
               | nothing like Sparkfun, Adafruit, Hackaday, etc, and Radio
               | Shack in the mid-90s really wasn't much help.
               | 
               | There is still room for improvement - yes it would be
               | nice if _all_ the tech we used was both hackable and
               | secure - but geeks who want to tinker are living in a
               | land of plenty right now.
        
               | fauigerzigerk wrote:
               | _> You literally have both, and more_
               | 
               | I guess it depends on who "you" are. A lot of kids get
               | exactly one device. Some have to share it with their
               | siblings as well. So I do think it matters whether our
               | most widely used devices are completely locked down or
               | not.
               | 
               | It doesn't just matter for kids either. It also matters
               | for democracy how many people only own devices that
               | governments have complete control over.
               | 
               | That said, I do think the problem can be exaggerated.
               | People tend to find ways around restrictions. It can even
               | be a motivation for looking more deeply into how things
               | work.
               | 
               | And not all of those workarounds are terribly expensive.
               | Ironically, the most expensive devices are also the most
               | locked down.
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > I guess it depends on who "you" are. A lot of kids get
               | exactly one device. Some have to share it with their
               | siblings as well. So I do think it matters whether our
               | most widely used devices are completely locked down or
               | not.
               | 
               | This is true, but RPi Zeros are so cheap and powerful
               | that I think it's much easier for community organisations
               | (schools, scouts, dedicated groups) to start hacking
               | events. The kid who can't get a 10 USD computer and a
               | phone and access to a shared laptop is the kid who
               | couldn't access to shared desktop in the olden days. In
               | those days entry level could be a month's salary for a
               | professional.
               | 
               | For the households where every kid has their own laptop,
               | a Pi is accessible.
               | 
               | And for those who only have access to single shared
               | machine, the kid today has access to a VM. That means
               | they have options the rest of us didn't have - I couldn't
               | run Linux until I had a paper round, because installing
               | Linux on the family computer was not going to happen.
               | 
               | Perhaps one clear advantage to the old world is that in
               | the 1980s and early 1990s, anyone could write an
               | operating system and eventually get something that could
               | do everything their old computer could do. I mean the
               | idea was tractable. It's not like today where even
               | thinking about creating a web browser filled Microsoft
               | and Opera with such dread they gave up.
               | 
               | To be clear: I don't think it's all rosy today. But I
               | don't think it's all bleak either.
               | 
               | > It also matters for democracy how many people only own
               | devices that governments have complete control over.
               | 
               | You are right that there's social implications here, but
               | I think the social concerns are primary and not a
               | consequence of the technical situation. We arrived at
               | this situation because companies decided they own their
               | customers when we have massive social problems mistrust
               | and distrust. This has come on the back of a generation
               | that learnt abominations like a company's only obligation
               | is to its shareholders. If you want to build trustworthy
               | business, you need to maintain the right culture.
        
               | fauigerzigerk wrote:
               | I don't disagree, but I think we're talking about a
               | couple different issues here.
               | 
               | One question is whether a low income but educated and
               | dedicated parent can find a way to acquire some hackable
               | device for a highly motivated kid. I think the answer is
               | probably yes, with some exceptions in extremely poor
               | countries.
               | 
               | But that's not the most likely scenario. A far more
               | likely scenario is a kid that wants to modify the device
               | they're _actually using_ on a daily basis to make it do
               | something slightly different. There are no parents
               | involved, and it would be utterly pointless to hack some
               | completely different device like a Raspberry Pi just
               | because it 's more hackable.
               | 
               | So I worry that widespread use of locked down devices and
               | locked down distribution channels makes the path from
               | consumer to power user to hacker to software engineer to
               | entrepreneur far less smooth. Some people who could have
               | been interested in being more than mere consumers are
               | going to be left behind.
               | 
               | You are absolutely right that access to all sorts of
               | devices is hugely easier and cheaper than back in the
               | 70s, 80s and 90s. It's definitely not all bleak. It was a
               | decidedly rich country upper/middle class affair at the
               | time. But we're also having to live with restrictions
               | that would've been unimaginable back then.
               | 
               | Just imagine Microsoft in 1995 attempting to restrict
               | what software people were allowed to install on their
               | PCs. Imagine what regulators would have said if Microsoft
               | had tried to charge 30% on all software and content
               | loaded onto PCs. Or what if Microsoft had been able to
               | issue no-recourse lifetime bans on using any of their
               | software and platforms?
               | 
               | The objection that Microsoft was a monopolist isn't
               | really convicing given that they were replaced by a
               | hugely more powerful and ubiquitous oligopoly that now
               | runs the actual economy, not some tiny niche called "The
               | New Economy".
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | The problem is that there's absolutely no reason why you
               | shouldn't be able to disable your iPhone's security and
               | mess around with it if that's what you want. Apple owns
               | the device, not you.
        
               | vosper wrote:
               | If you open Chrome devtools on Facebook there's a huge
               | red warning saying "if someone told you to do this they
               | are trying to scam you and steal your account!"
               | 
               | So there may be a good reason why Apple don't want this
               | to happen, given that essentially everything is on your
               | phone these days.
               | 
               | There's still Android
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | > So there may be a good reason why Apple don't want this
               | to happen
               | 
               | Yes, this is why the phones are locked by default. This
               | is not at all why the phones aren't unlockable, though.
               | They can be unlockable and still be secure. Apple just
               | doesn't want to give you the choice.
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | Yes there is. I don't want Facebook or Google to move all
               | their apps to side loading or an alternate store with lax
               | controls and opaque privacy disclosure. I need to use
               | their apps, but I want them to have to satisfy Apple's
               | app store policies. Side landing and alternate stores
               | would cripple the effectiveness of those policies.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | So the reasoning is "if you allow my phone to be
               | unlocked, so many people will want alternate stores that
               | Facebook and Google will unlist their apps from the App
               | Store and use the alternative stores only, and then they
               | won't be as rigorously reviewed"?
               | 
               | Like how you can't get Facebook on the Play Store because
               | it's only available on F-droid on Android, for example?
               | 
               | That's certainly... interesting.
        
               | eecc wrote:
               | Nope, you're surreptitiously adding a righteous "the
               | people will freely choose what suits them best" twist to
               | the parent's post. That's a rich assumption, history
               | proves that "the people" just want their shiny toy and
               | will sheepishly accept whatever condition imposed by the
               | manufacturer. Remember IE6?
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | Then people arguing this should stop being disingenuous
               | that this is somehow about enabling user freedoms, and
               | outright say "your phone should take away your choice
               | because you can't be trusted with it" .
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | Epic, Facebook, Google, Amazon, Spotify and a host of
               | other companies are itching to get on to a rival
               | 'Freedom' app store on iOS, with lax controls and weak
               | privacy disclosure. Where they go, users would have to
               | follow. It's not as though users are crying out for
               | weaker privacy disclosure, but they'd go anyway.
               | 
               | Facebook is quite happy on the Play Store because it has
               | weak privacy and disclosure policies, because Google has
               | no interest in enforcing such things.
        
               | grrowl wrote:
               | Yes, I can't pwn this device which makes it incredibly
               | hard for anyone else to pwn this device. Very convenient
               | actually, in that my most critical and private
               | communications flow through it and it goes everywhere I
               | do.
               | 
               | Really secure data goes through a seperate device of
               | which I have total control, but which I treat carefully
               | (and less conveniently). It's a very comfortable trade-
               | off.
        
             | irrational wrote:
             | You can? There are tons of kits and circuit boards and
             | parts and everything electronic imaginable available for
             | quick delivery right now. Back in the day we had Radio
             | Shack, but it couldn't hold a candle to all the circuit
             | boards and electronic components available today. It's an
             | embarrassment of riches.
        
           | fouric wrote:
           | I count five logical fallacies here:
           | 
           | > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment
           | 
           | Unnecessarily inflamatory - perhaps an ad-hominem attack, or
           | appeal to emotion.
           | 
           | > in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with
           | devices
           | 
           | Strawman argument - this is a blatant misrepresentation of
           | GP's point.
           | 
           | > This comment is ignoring that a device that does all that
           | without you having to worry about how it works is a tool way
           | more powerful than one in which you need to at least know how
           | to build everything from scratch with an enormous learning
           | curve
           | 
           | False dichotomy (there's no reason you can't have an
           | opinionated device that works flawlessly OOTB while also
           | being extremely hackable) _and_ another strawman (OP never
           | advocated for you having to do everything yourself, only have
           | the ability to tinker).
           | 
           | > So please, enough with this narrative, it's really outdated
           | and based on such a limited world view.
           | 
           | Another appeal to emotion.
           | 
           | I encourage you to take a class on logical argument, because
           | this ain't it.
        
             | witherk wrote:
             | Someone got a lot out of their high school debate club
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | No. It's not just that individuals can't tinker with
           | hardware. It's also startups having this problem. Apple is
           | integrating the entire supply chain. What we need is better
           | "modularization" of the market where everybody has access to
           | important components.
           | 
           | > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we
           | learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices,
           | learning how they work to the bits, plus some random Linux
           | thrown in.
           | 
           | Totally unnecessary generalization.
        
           | _Understated_ wrote:
           | It's about having choice: Microsoft used to be quite good at
           | making stuff usable but the underlying geekery was still
           | there and could allow control to the max if you wanted it.
           | 
           | It worked for mom & pops and techs alike but corporations new
           | attitude of "We'll decide what's best and remove other
           | options" is a bloody pain in the arse now.
           | 
           | A particularly bad one is this insistence on not allowing me
           | to permanently say "no" to something. It's always "maybe
           | later" or "remind me in 24 hrs" or similar... even Firefox
           | does it now when you set it up - I think it was to do with
           | sending FF to my mobile or something - but the message was
           | "do it now" or "do it later"... I don't want it EVER!
           | 
           | So, no! I don't want anyone else's opinion for stuff like
           | this - let me decide what's best for me and allow me to
           | tinker if I want!
        
             | cromulent wrote:
             | If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things
             | myself" setting is in Teams, please share.
             | 
             | I'm really tired of it deciding when I should be on mute,
             | or when it should warn me that I am muted. Just let me do
             | it.
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things
               | myself" setting is in Teams, please share.
               | 
               | It's the X button in the top right corner.
               | 
               | In the olden days we had individual developers who would
               | work out the internal API these applications used to
               | work. I wonder if that's still theoretically possible.
               | Surely it must be? Even if the client app needs a signed
               | certificate, since it runs in an unsigned environment
               | (i.e. Linux) it should be possible to grab the
               | certificate and present that when you need it.
        
             | vosper wrote:
             | > Microsoft used to be quite good at making stuff usable
             | but the underlying geekery was still there and could allow
             | control to the max if you wanted it.
             | 
             | Windows 10 is the best Windows ever for the vast majority
             | of people who use Windows. Same with Office. But you can
             | still install whatever software you want on your Windows
             | machine. Explain to me again how this is worse than what we
             | used to have; where Microsoft have gone wrong in how they
             | build software? Is it perfect? Of course not - no-one could
             | even agree on what that means. But let's be realistic about
             | how much progress has actually happened: it's a lot.
        
               | _Understated_ wrote:
               | Try disabling Windows update...
               | 
               | Also, almost every patch has issues these days: that
               | hardly ever used to happen. Their quality has taken a
               | dive.
               | 
               | I am not saying that is isn't the perfect tool for many
               | people: it has been for many years. The issue is that
               | when I wanted to change things and leave them changed, I
               | used to be able to do that. Now, they are doing their
               | best to remove that ability! That makes no sense! Let me
               | break it if I want! I have no warranty anyway!
               | 
               | Disable Windows update and it comes back on due to the
               | Windows Update Medic Service. Ok, disable that then!
               | Oops, you're not allowed. Ok, I can circumvent this by
               | changing permissions on the dll and then deleting it.
               | I'll then run updates later at a time of my choosing. Now
               | I run updates. Oops, it's back again! Microsoft knows
               | best.
               | 
               | By all means make it easy for the "typical" user. But I
               | wish they'd stop taking away the underlying power-user
               | stuff because they think they know best!
        
               | ntauthority wrote:
               | Update disabling is still there - gated behind more
               | expensive editions and enterprise policy settings,
               | because Microsoft likely had gotten a bad reputation in
               | the past for systems with updates disabled becoming
               | botnet nodes due to vulnerabilities.
               | 
               | In a way, the restrictions which used to be exclusive to
               | Home are now part of Pro, the more expensive Pro for
               | Workstations is what Pro used to be and Enterprise (also
               | available through a per-user subscription model instead
               | of a per-machine model, cheaper in a way for individuals
               | with 5 PCs nobody else uses) also has some extra toggles
               | _not_ removed.
               | 
               | I think the subscription versions also include an Intune
               | license which is the only supported way (other than
               | installing third-party AV) to disable Windows Defender
               | permanently, as well.
               | 
               | Now, MDM-managed Apple phones still come with a number of
               | core restrictions, though I believe there's more loose
               | side loading on there - however you have to register
               | Apple hardware into MDM at purchase time as only
               | authorized resellers can grant this access to a serial
               | number.
        
               | riversflow wrote:
               | Question, how does an individual go about acquiring an
               | Enterprise license? For the exact reasons you mentioned
               | (features, per-user licensing) I've tried in the past to
               | get setup with a license and not had any luck.
        
               | ntauthority wrote:
               | These days there's a self-service panel on the Microsoft
               | 365 sign-up/admin page once you've set up a tenant. I've
               | not been asked for any formal business registration
               | numbers via that process, but the old days of needing to
               | acquire these licenses via a partner seem to be somewhat
               | gone.
        
               | plater wrote:
               | Yes, because it's based on a PC. A quite standard and
               | open specification where you can buy motherboards, CPU,
               | RAM, disk, IO peripherals etc from many different
               | manufacturers and build and install what software you
               | want. However, on a Mac, you cannot install or change the
               | hardware as you like, you cannot install what software
               | you want.
               | 
               | If Linus Torvalds was a teen today and there was no open
               | PC standard, only a Mac, then it would not have been
               | possible to create Linux the way it is today.
               | 
               | Imagine if also Microsoft starts to make their own
               | processors and then sell their own computers with Windows
               | and all locked down, and don't allow anyone else to make
               | computers with Windows or their processors.
               | 
               | Sure Dell, HP and others could still make PC's, based on
               | Intel or AMD CPU's or some ARM processor and then run
               | Linux (or develop their own OS), but it's a hard sell.
               | 
               | The PC's sold to the mainstream thanks to
               | Windows/Word/Excel maybe, but then people who wanted
               | could tinker as much as they wanted and where free so
               | make and sell their software (windows based or whatever)
               | or their HW peripherals.
               | 
               | Now you are at best stuck within an app store if you
               | create something.
        
               | hutattedonmyarm wrote:
               | > you cannot install what software you want
               | 
               | What? Of course I can. Gatekeeper exists but can be
               | disabled
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | > If Linus Torvalds was a teen today and there was no
               | open PC standard, only a Mac, then it would not have been
               | possible to create Linux the way it is today.
               | 
               | Torvalds didn't create Linux as a teen in his bedroom
               | hacking on what he had. He created it at university
               | studying operating systems. He would have created it on
               | Raspberry Pi or some other platform.
               | 
               | Linux is widely deployed on x86 because x86 is available
               | and open enough. It replaced Unix operating systems on
               | dedicated architectures, like Solaris on SPARC.
               | 
               | > Sure Dell, HP and others could still make PC's, based
               | on Intel or AMD CPU's or some ARM processor and then run
               | Linux (or develop their own OS), but it's a hard sell
               | 
               | GNU/Linux was a hard sell in the beginning too. In the
               | olden days, if you put Linux on a laptop you lost special
               | features and you had very limited software support. Web
               | pages were designed to work with IE only and you could
               | only run Mozilla. Your major option for producing
               | printable documents was special purpose programming
               | languages like TeX or using Mozilla Composer. And good
               | luck getting your winmodem/winprinter to do anything!
               | 
               | Today enough exists that you can buy hardware from
               | companies that expect you to put Linux on them and then
               | run them with full features and great intercompatibility.
               | Your phone will be crap but it'll be good enough, and in
               | ten years time it'll have a lot better features. Till
               | then, if you want a great lowlight camera, buy a great
               | lowlight camera.
               | 
               | The inversion of trust is a frustrating aspect of modern
               | business, and it creates many social problems. But it
               | isn't a technical barrier to oldschool hacking about.
        
               | SergeAx wrote:
               | > He would have created it on Raspberry Pi
               | 
               | Raspberry Pi would be unable without Linux.
        
               | samstave wrote:
               | Linux War Story:
               | 
               | Back in ~1997/8 I was working at a software manufacturing
               | company - we burned and printed and shipped all the
               | Solaris Software for SUN....
               | 
               | We would receive EDI data from sun to burn to CDs then do
               | the fullfillment shipping - so If you went to SUN.com and
               | ordered Solaris, it was made and shipped by us...
               | 
               | We needed a better way to receive the files from SUN, and
               | so we had a few FTP servers... We hired a group of dudes
               | who knew linux and had them setup our FTP machines,
               | chrooting users and various security measures...
               | 
               | So I, the IT manager, sat down with one of the
               | consultants that we had hired and I told him "You know,
               | If I were you - I would setup a Linux Support company and
               | offer Linux support as a service"
               | 
               | A few weeks later Dave Sifry came back to me and said
               | "Guess what we started, LinuxCare... to offer Linux
               | support as a service"
               | 
               | He was later valued at ~$100 million and LinuxCare was a
               | ~$1 Billion company...
               | 
               | Chris DiBona of google fame was on the team, and I can't
               | recall the two other guys' names...
               | 
               | But yeah - that was when support for Linux was basically
               | non-existent...
               | 
               | Oh yeah - I forgot; SUN wanted us to learn this new thing
               | that they were using to create the EDI files... XML. So
               | we had to accomodate XML when the only people that knew
               | XML at the time were SUN employees...
               | 
               | And finally, I think that SUN had the best logo ever
               | made. And the shittiest firewall, Checkpoint sucked.
               | (sorry Checkpoint team - your lead developers on
               | Checkpoint were friends of mine... but I hated that
               | firewall)
        
               | flohofwoe wrote:
               | > Windows 10 is the best Windows ever for the vast
               | majority of people who use Windows
               | 
               | Meanwhile I'm setting here just now, wasting hours hand-
               | holding Windows10 because it's unable to install one of
               | its own big feature updates, without any idea what was
               | going wrong or where to start fixing the problem (because
               | everything is so "user friendly").
        
         | slver wrote:
         | How many smartphone users want to use interrupts, tinker with
         | firmware settings, hack the port, and so on?
         | 
         | Exactly.
        
           | RedShift1 wrote:
           | The two things are not mutually exclusive. We can have
           | hardware and software that's open to tinker with but still
           | come ready to use out of the box.
        
             | slver wrote:
             | Apple's job doesn't end when you open the box.
             | 
             | Unless you want a rootkit installed when you charge your
             | phone with a public charger, it needs to be locked down.
             | These restrictions are made for security and stability. If
             | the average user doesn't need them, then don't enable them.
             | Simple logic.
        
         | user-the-name wrote:
         | iOS alone has far, far more tools for creativity than Linux has
         | ever had.
         | 
         | "Creativity" doesn't mean "tinkering with kernel settings".
        
           | megous wrote:
           | I doubt it. Every single time I have to do something more
           | complicated on one of these GUI only devices, I get to
           | appreciate how GNU/Linux ecosystem allows me to actually
           | combine the power of multiple tools to achieve what I want
           | quickly and my way.
           | 
           | Combining simple apps together like lego building blocks to
           | build something, is where it shines.
        
             | user-the-name wrote:
             | That is not creativity, that is just wanting to do things
             | your specific way, which is a way most people do not really
             | prefer.
        
               | megous wrote:
               | There's no "my specific way". And people prefer to defer
               | some things to me, because I can usually find some way to
               | do tings in batches, rather than them doing those same
               | things individually using common tools.
        
         | jb1991 wrote:
         | Your case of curiosity is a very very specific one, and while
         | most people are curious in different ways, for those who are
         | curious in the same way as you, anyone with an Apple device and
         | an Apple computer can sit down and start tinkering with code
         | and running stuff on their own iOS devices, it's fun and pretty
         | easy to get started. If I was just a child or a teenager today,
         | I think I'd have just as much fun, probably a whole lot more,
         | playing around with iOS and learning how it works and building
         | really interesting applications using its extraordinary range
         | of technologies, things that were never possible in the old
         | days of tinkering.
        
         | quink wrote:
         | "Actually, I have never even checked 386BSD out; when I started
         | on Linux it wast available (although Bill Jolitz series on it
         | in Dr. Dobbs Journal had started and were interesting), and
         | when 386BSD finally came out, Linux was already in a state
         | where it was so usable that I never really thought about
         | switching. If 386BSD had been available when I started on
         | Linux, Linux would probably never had happened."
         | 
         | Linus Torvalds, 1993
         | 
         | https://gondwanaland.com/meta/history/interview.html
         | 
         | If Linux hadn't been created, 386BSD and its derivatives would
         | be correspondingly more popular. Or Hurd would have happened.
         | Or both. Maybe BeOS would be a contender amongst commercial
         | OSes.
         | 
         | If Linux hadn't been created things wouldn't be that different
         | in all likelihood.
        
         | drikerf wrote:
         | I understand your point and yes, low-level hacking has become
         | increasingly difficult due to both locking down and increased
         | complexity.
         | 
         | There's still many ways to be creative though and I think
         | there's also more potential than before due to increased
         | resources for developing other kinds of applications.
         | 
         | It's not all bad.
        
         | BluSyn wrote:
         | Using "security" in air quotes diminishes the significant
         | effort Apple and others put into making devices secure, and
         | this does have _fundamental trade-offs_ for the end-user. Some
         | of us actually care a great deal about security, and appreciate
         | the trade-offs and effort put in to making that happen.
         | 
         | I sympathize with the tinkerer mindset, but this mindset
         | exposes serious lack of empathy in exposing REAL risk to REAL
         | people by allowing anybody to hack devices simply to satisfy
         | 0.01% of users who want to run a custom bootloader. This is not
         | a valid engineering trade-off for a "trillion dollar company".
         | The world doesn't revolve around you. There are other products
         | on the market for tinkerers that don't involve exposing
         | everyone from your grandma to politicians to serious security
         | and privacy breaches.
        
           | superasn wrote:
           | Sometimes one in that 0.01% end up creating a world changing
           | operating system like Linux.
           | 
           | I shudder to think what the world would have be if Andrew
           | Tanenbaum/Linus/Wall/etc had to wait for a week long review
           | after creating their software and got rejected every time
           | because Apple support told them.. "Are you out of your
           | freaking mind!? You possibly can't think we will let you do
           | anything remotely like that on our hardware. P.S. Also your
           | account is now permanently banned."
        
             | a_t48 wrote:
             | The great news is that we had options then and we still
             | have options now.
        
               | Dah00n wrote:
               | I keep reading this. What alternative do we have today
               | that is as open to tinker and invent on as x86 hardware
               | that is also widespread enough that it actually makes any
               | difference at all?
        
               | handrous wrote:
               | > What alternative do we have today that is as open to
               | tinker and invent on as x86 hardware that is also
               | widespread enough that it actually makes any difference
               | at all?
               | 
               | x86 hardware.
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Is that 0.01% really deterred by one particular OS and
             | hardware platform being restricted? There's alternatives.
        
               | Dah00n wrote:
               | What is the equivalent phone today to the X86 Linus did
               | his work on? Neither iOS or Android is anywhere near
               | this, so what are the alternatives?
        
             | Ar-Curunir wrote:
             | There's plenty of hardware that runs Linux just fine, and
             | allows deep tinkering.
             | 
             | In the mobile world, Android allows tinkering, but also
             | achieves much worse privacy and security guarantees
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | Linux became as popular as it is because it could run on
               | the most widespread desktop hardware: IBM PC compatibles.
               | And that was possible because it was an open ecosystem.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | Librem 5 and Pinephone both allow deep tinkering without
               | privacy problems.
        
               | Dah00n wrote:
               | That is a disingenuous comparison though. Compare X86
               | market share when Linus started coding Linux and
               | Librem/Pinephone market share today. The difference is
               | that to have a snowball's chance in hell to grow and
               | spread you need to be able to thinker and invent _on the
               | hardware most people use_.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | I'm not suggesting that we don't need more freedom for
               | hardware most people use. I just say that _if_ you want
               | to support freedom, consider abandoning Apple and
               | choosing other phones.
        
         | _Understated_ wrote:
         | This x 1000!
         | 
         | I remember back in my DOS days as a kid tinkering with
         | autoexec.bat, himem and all that just to get an addition 10Kb
         | or memory to run a game.
         | 
         | Now, with Windows in particular, they're slowly removing my
         | ability to dick about and do what I want.
         | 
         | The defaults are all pretty much set to "we know best" and you
         | have to jump through more and more hoops to disable stuff
         | (Windows update, I'm looking at you!).
         | 
         | I'm moving to Linux (again) at the end of the month (got uni
         | exams coming up... want to get them out the way). Had issues
         | with it in the past but I will try and live with them this time
         | as I want my freedom back.
        
           | NeoVeles wrote:
           | This is why I ended up moving over to Linux many years back.
           | I had run it on an off since about 1998 but about 5 years
           | back there, I had blown away my install of Windows and for
           | reason in particular I simply never reinstalled it.
           | 
           | It is just one of those things were very rarely I realize
           | that I am running (by ratio) a fairly rare OS as just a daily
           | desktop. To that, don't try and force your self onto Linux,
           | eventually you may just sit with it and never go back to
           | Windows. If you do, that's fine if that works for you. If you
           | stay on Linux, cool power to you.
           | 
           | Happy hacking!
        
         | planb wrote:
         | And yet you can get a raspberry pi (which is way faster than
         | your 286) for less than the price of a mediocre restaurant meal
         | and learn all this stuff. Or an Arduino microcontroller to go
         | even deeper low level. There are so many ways to tinker with
         | electronics right now - but my main computer and phone are not
         | "games", they are tools that I expect to work in a secure way.
        
         | asauce wrote:
         | This comment fails to see the real reason that Apple, Google,
         | and Microsoft lock down their hardware and software, ease of
         | use.
         | 
         | A vast, vast majority of the population could care less about
         | learning about interrupts, tinkering with BIOS settings, etc.
         | They want a device that is easy to use, and as simple as
         | possible. So companies therefore abstract away 90% of the
         | "creativity-inducing" components because a computer is a lot
         | less intimidating when the user clearly knows what they can and
         | can't do with it.
         | 
         | Apple and Google are not sitting in a meeting room pitching the
         | best ways to stifle creativity. They are selling a product to a
         | population that wants their highly complex device to be as
         | simple as possible.
        
           | nucleardog wrote:
           | > They want a device that is easy to use, and as simple as
           | possible.
           | 
           | I'd add "reliable" or maybe more accurately "repeatable".
           | 
           | When my mother runs into technical problems, she will
           | literally get frustrated to the point of tears. She doesn't
           | give a single fuck whether she can change the OS or install
           | unapproved software to tinker, she just wants the stuff that
           | was working yesterday to still be working today.
           | 
           | When she wakes up and an OS update has broken some app she
           | uses, she's never gone "Let me dig into why this happened,
           | maybe I can fix it." and she never will. That's simply just
           | something that has gone wrong in her life and ruined her day
           | and now she needs to find a new way to do the thing that she
           | wants to do.
           | 
           | But you're wasting your breath. A very vocal segment of HN
           | are effectively fundamentalists about this. The fact that
           | there exists a market segment best served by devices which do
           | not conform to their fundamental ideals because they have
           | different priorities is simply unacceptable regardless of any
           | other consideration.
        
       | colordrops wrote:
       | How about just making network access for apps opt-in rather than
       | opt-out, and further more also making background network access a
       | permission request, and something that can be monitored.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | You can get that by using a Chinese iPhone.
        
           | colordrops wrote:
           | Which phone?
        
       | heroHACK17 wrote:
       | I am really impressed by the ideas here. I read the whole thing
       | from top to bottom (rare) and I was shaking my head yes the whole
       | time. Bravo. I hope Apple implements all of this.
        
       | colordrops wrote:
       | The FDroid app store kind of does something similar to this.
        
       | kajaktum wrote:
       | That means we need to stop using ((((free))))) services and start
       | paying for them. Unless its literal charity, I have no reason to
       | believe that any of these free company isn't trying to
       | manipulating me in some other ways.
       | 
       | One of these is Youtube. Hosting petabytes of on-demand videos is
       | an extremely daunting feat. Why are you surprised that you are
       | hit with ads? What were they supposed to do? For whatever reason,
       | no one wants to pay for premium to remove these ads. Instead, we
       | just have this back and forth with people coming up with
       | extensions and Google coming up with ways to circumvent these.
       | Both sides are going to get crazier if this goes on.
        
       | SavantIdiot wrote:
       | This is an aspect of a very important movement that started with
       | Calm Technology. Think it will be the next step in gaining
       | control of the genie from the bottle.
       | 
       | [1] https://calmtech.com/
       | 
       | [2] https://www.amazon.com/Calm-Technology-Principles-
       | Patterns-N...
        
       | ______- wrote:
       | Phones for me were always for consuming content, and I rarely
       | 'created' anything with them. For creation I would use a standard
       | desktop PC with Ubuntu and code to my heart's content. If you
       | want a 'bicycle for the mind' then you would not use a handheld
       | device. You would use a desktop PC (either a laptop or tower PC,
       | or whatever).
        
       | paul7986 wrote:
       | I wish like the flashlight i could toggle on and off "Silence All
       | Unknown Callers," which for me I leave on always. There are times
       | when I need to have a call come in and have to drill down into
       | the settings to get to it.
       | 
       | Also, I'd love to be able to wake up using the built in alarm to
       | a Internet URL (radio station, podcast, whatever).
        
       | drdd wrote:
       | That time will come, where you will have a fully AI-integrated
       | phone that can be your secondary optional brain for everything
       | you want to do on your life, not limiting a person but expanding
       | their horizon. After all its only natural to fill those emotions.
        
       | malkosta wrote:
       | Is it possible to send a file via Bluetooth yet?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | andymatuschak wrote:
       | These are very interesting ideas. But I'd like to see to see
       | credit given where it's due. Many of the specific interface
       | concepts here (retrospectively monitoring whether time was well
       | spent, disabling infinite feeds, a regret tax, batching
       | notification delivery, switching an infinite feed to a paged one
       | which reflects activity) were presented several years ago by Joe
       | Edelman and Tristan Harris. See eg https://medium.com/thrive-
       | global/how-technology-hijacks-peop... and
       | https://medium.com/what-to-build/is-anything-worth-maximizin...
       | 
       | Ideas like these are public goods, so it's difficult to profit
       | off inventing them. Given that, we should incentivize their
       | creation with social rewards by crediting their authors.
        
       | beermonster wrote:
       | I think this is great. Hopefully someone at Apple is reading.
        
       | bb101 wrote:
       | Has anyone else tried the app "Friendly"? For a while I've wanted
       | to stop using Facebook, but quite a few community groups I'm
       | involved with use it as their only method of communication.
       | Friendly is an augmented wrapper for the mobile web versions of
       | Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn and a few of the other
       | time-sappers.
       | 
       | I find it works really well. I still get to use an app to access
       | the information in an convenient way, but without the bells and
       | whistles that make hours pass like minutes, and without having to
       | give the platforms access to my phone's metadata. Downside: it is
       | clunkier than the respective apps, but then that's the point.
        
         | occamschainsaw wrote:
         | Thank you for the suggestion. I just set up Friendly+ for a
         | couple of time sinks like Instagram (hide stories, go straight
         | to chat page), Facebook (hide stories, disable suggstions),
         | Youtube (go straight to Subscriptions page), Twitter (disable
         | promoted tweets) and even HackerNews. I also like that you can
         | save tweets and other media posts easily.
        
       | ckolkey wrote:
       | I absolutely love this idea. I find that nudges or 'speedbumps'
       | offer just enough of a barrier to get me to reconsider my own
       | actions, sort of snapping me out of a trance. I would welcome
       | these kind of changes.
        
       | jonathan_garner wrote:
       | Developing tools and methods like this to be more intentional
       | with our tech is so important, whether that's digital solutions
       | like a humane iOS, or building our own set of intentional habits
       | to put us in control. I found this great analogue toolkit to help
       | start doing this right now, no tech required
       | https://www.mindovertech.com/digital-habit-lab/
        
       | busymom0 wrote:
       | Almost all of this could be achieved via third party apps if the
       | screen time data was available via an API and background app
       | mode. I understand why it's not though as it's a lot of personal
       | data. However Apple does provide access to health data via the
       | HealthKit so maybe they can do something similar for Screen time?
       | 
       | Did they make any API changes in iOS 15 announced yesterday?
        
         | geoffpado wrote:
         | Yes, there is now a Screen Time API:
         | https://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeviceActivity and it
         | allows you to do things like block other apps:
         | https://developer.apple.com/documentation/ManagedSettings, but
         | there's nothing like a background mode that will pop up outside
         | of either your app or the app you're managing.
        
       | subpixel wrote:
       | I'd love a setting that would turn Instagrams search page into an
       | input field - nothing else.
       | 
       | Every time I search I have to actively fight the temptation of
       | food photos, bra-less dance videos, New Orleans architecture
       | shots and whatever else the algorithm has learned will derail me.
        
       | gigatexal wrote:
       | Doing any of this would set a precedent of Apple being able to
       | change the functionality of an app and that is a precedent I
       | don't want to see no matter how much I detest Facebook.
       | 
       | Also this power would bring the anti-trust hammer down so hard.
       | Apple doesn't want this. They're working on tools to help you use
       | your phone and other hardware more fully but also giving you data
       | on usage and such so people can make up their own minds.
        
       | onurcel wrote:
       | why stop there? why wouldn't you make an OS that would turn the
       | phone off if you use it more than 1 minute? Boum, you solved
       | everything.
        
       | MrGilbert wrote:
       | I really dig the "infinite scroll" part. I hate this "feature"
       | from the bottom of my heart. I also like the "conditions"
       | feature.
       | 
       | However, I'm not a fan of my device analyzing my behavior and
       | bombarding me with notifications and questions every 15 minutes.
       | To me, that's distracting and way too much noise. I like the way
       | Screen Time already works. Leave the consequences to me, but give
       | me an opportunity to check them.
        
       | timdaub wrote:
       | What's even worse is when you start to compare your phone with
       | the operating system of your laptop.
       | 
       | Then you'll realize how much of our lifes are in the hands of a
       | few designers from Silicon Valley. Sure, you can "disable
       | notifications" for an app: But how about I can just "close" this
       | app like I can on my computer?
        
       | chadlavi wrote:
       | This is a joke, right?
        
       | antonyh wrote:
       | Batched notifications: I'd love this. As it currently stands,
       | most of my apps have lost permission to notify because they abuse
       | it. I don't want to be constantly prodded and poked to interact,
       | so there's very few that get it enabled now. That even includes
       | email, and it's so much better. It's reduced screen time
       | massively, and I mostly check email on desktop instead now with
       | my phone as a secondary on-the-go way of communicating.
       | 
       | Turning off autoplay, yes please. Greyscale, interesting idea.
       | The rest of it, meh. I'm not so sure it would have any meaningful
       | impact or that it wouldn't be replaced with other much darker
       | patterns.
       | 
       | Better user-centric control of notifications is what we really
       | need to silence the cry for attention by the apps and would go a
       | long way towards allieviating digital addiction in my opinion.
        
         | bengale wrote:
         | The majority of my apps are set to deliver quietly on iOS so
         | they just go into my notification drawer without an alert.
        
       | bhupy wrote:
       | I like this idea a lot, but I'm no longer sure that the stated
       | premise holds true:
       | 
       | "Its business is not built around ads."
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/modestproposal1/status/13851944692224081...
        
       | punnerud wrote:
       | This work for me on iOS: Keep all the blue apps (Twitter,
       | Facebook, Kindle, LinkedIn..) in one folder. At least one time
       | each week, switch the position between Kindle and Facebook. This
       | way I will subconscious use Kindle a lot more.
        
         | Ivoah wrote:
         | _very_ relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2183/
        
       | nomoreplease wrote:
       | The metrics of "How long did users spend on this app on average"
       | and "Did they think this was time well spent?" is a brilliant
       | idea
        
       | KingMachiavelli wrote:
       | Apple really is in a unique position. However their are a few
       | areas in which they drastically lack and TBH it is not App
       | privacy disclosure - everyone knows Facebook is physically,
       | mentally, and spiritually bad /s
       | 
       | I was quite anti-Apple for a long time on the basis of it being a
       | luxury brand that restricts the freedom of its users.
       | 
       | But it recent years as phone performance has become less of an
       | issue meaning Apple's older phone models are basically just as
       | good as mid-tier current year Android, the luxury label is not as
       | extreme.
       | 
       | Additionally the M1 launch which basically transformed their
       | 'real' computer laptop from being overpriced and literally hot
       | garbage - to the best* dollar for dollar mobile machines.
       | 
       | So basically Apple has the hardware and software polished and at
       | a great value _but_ they have a very integrated ecosystem which
       | means a single flaw breaks the whole cohesion.
       | 
       | Primarily, E2E encryption is broken by design because iCloud
       | backup are not E2E and you can't know if any message recipient
       | has iCloud enabled. Sure you could just use Signal/Matrix/etc but
       | it breaks the cohesion - does your Apple watch get Matrix
       | notification with the same polish as iMessage?
       | 
       | Also iMessage is also still iOS only right? Which is just insane.
       | For a time Blackberry messenger was the best thing but it didn't
       | last partly because it was vendor locked.
       | 
       | Whild I can ignore limits of phone OS's for the sake of security;
       | MacOS is sort of anti-user to the point that third party projects
       | like Homebrew work day & night to fix the ecosystem. Luckily now
       | Nix(OS) on Darwin is an option for a more complete ecosystem but
       | it is still other people fixing Apple's mistakes for free which
       | is just unbearable.
       | 
       | Considering Microsoft runs Github which I believe Hombebrew and
       | NisOS still both use extensively and I believe they do so for
       | free or very cheaply(?) In any case, Apple seems like a poor
       | steward of open source compared to other FAANGM(?) companies...
       | maybe I am wrong but the G, M, & F seem more active than the
       | Apple. Apple did just kill/abandon CUPs etc.
       | 
       | Again, I would just like to be _wrong_. Maybe you can already use
       | Linux with Apple devices very well and maybe turning off iMessage
       | and iCloud solves the E2E problem. But it just seems like Apple
       | is 90% of the way there but refuses to do the last 10%.
       | 
       | I guess what I mean to say is Apple has some real problems to fix
       | of its own before it should critize other apps even more. For
       | instance, does iMessage come with a warning about broken/nerfed
       | E2E? Or that mobile Safari has an anti-user and anti-standards
       | implementation of PWAs (again last I check)?
        
       | xmprt wrote:
       | I really like the idea of having permissions for what kind of
       | experience an app can show. For example, if Facebook had a way to
       | disable infinite feeds and disable videos then I'd be more likely
       | to use it on my phone (whereas right now, I never use it).
       | 
       | We have permission settings for things like camera, microphone,
       | and file system access. Why not go an extra step and add
       | permissions on how apps take up our time.
        
         | aembleton wrote:
         | To disable auto playing videos
         | 
         | In the Facebook app. Click the hamburger menu > Settings &
         | Privacy > Mobile data usage > Tick 'Never Autoplay videos'
         | 
         | Yes, that applies to wifi too.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | Unless those lock outs are non-reversible lockouts, people will
       | get around it. And if they find themselves doing that, they won't
       | even bother to turn it on next time, just like Apples Screen
       | time.
       | 
       | The locks must be strict, but even that may drive people to get
       | another phone, or just use their PC instead. People need to be
       | taught the value of their time and realize those moments when
       | they are actually viewing past a certain point.
       | 
       | Teach a person to fish.
        
       | seanhunter wrote:
       | Some of these suggestions seem great, this "time well spent"
       | popup would be infuriating in use. As is, I hate the way apps,
       | websites and others bombard me with constant requests for
       | reviews, feedback, ratings etc.
       | 
       | When I use my coffee grinder it doesn't ask how I liked my grind
       | (thumbs up/thumbs down/Marks out of 5/rating from "Absolutely
       | satisfied" to "terminal ennui"). I press the button and it grings
       | coffee exactly how I ask it to every time. I want other things to
       | be the same. Just do the thing and stop wasting my time being so
       | needy just because you want to feel good about your analytics.
        
       | ljp_206 wrote:
       | I like the idea behind a lot of these things, but it seems like a
       | ton of overhead, both for software implementers and users. It
       | seems kind of odd to claim these changes could be so profound
       | when it seems like it's really only going to be useful for a
       | superuser who's already aware of their screen time issues and
       | would be excited to be able to choose from X toggle options.
       | Additionally, "you are wasting time on your phone, do you want to
       | lock your screen" seems like a feature that would fly with only a
       | very limited set of users.
       | 
       | Instead of hooking in to Facebook and adding content settings, to
       | me it seems that in this case the "we should increase
       | data/platform interop" line of thought offers a better solution
       | than hoping the Apple ship can steer in this direction.
       | 
       | For that matter, do we know how many people use screenttime
       | tracking/mitigating features anyway?
        
       | danappelxx wrote:
       | This concept is really well put together, and I would love to see
       | it come to life.
       | 
       | That said, this quote made me laugh out loud
       | 
       | > For example if you're struggling to use Tinder responsibly, you
       | could create a condition that you can only use the app while
       | FaceTiming with a friend.
        
         | eyelidlessness wrote:
         | Look it's a pandemic. I don't know if people are still having
         | Tinder parties but they might be having Tinder Zooms?
        
           | dlivingston wrote:
           | It's not a pandemic in the US anymore with the vaccine
           | surplus that we have. Many people still feel that we're in
           | one, though.
           | 
           | In the words of John Lennon: "war is over (if you want it)"
        
             | mjhagen wrote:
             | Send that surplus to countries that need it.
        
               | ddoolin wrote:
               | Pretty OT here but they're (the Biden WH) buying 500M
               | doses to send elsewhere as of the headlines today (6/9).
        
             | eyelidlessness wrote:
             | It was a joke bud
        
       | rho4 wrote:
       | Meanwhile, today Microsoft gifted us a brand new "News &
       | interests" area in the taskbar lobbying for our focus and
       | attention. Successfully... I even had to google how to turn it
       | off, and write this comment.
        
         | LdSGSgvupDV wrote:
         | Unexpected surprise is the reason I still stuck to Win10 1803
         | lol.
        
         | cpeterso wrote:
         | "News & interests" is another avenue for Microsoft to promote
         | Edge. If you click an article in the "News & interests", it
         | opens in Edge, even if your default browser is set to something
         | else.
        
         | iansinnott wrote:
         | Also had to do the same. The method of disabling it, while not
         | immediately obvious, didn't seem intentionally user-hostile.
         | However, the idea of modifying any part of a user's desktop
         | without their explicit input is troubling to say the least.
        
           | bitcharmer wrote:
           | Google started doing this on mobile with their chrome for
           | android. Some time ago they introduced an alternative method
           | of presenting open tabs in a grid instead of a list. They of
           | course made the new setting the default and you have to do a
           | Web search to find out how to revert it to the previous
           | setting. They also disregard your choice upon every update
           | and switch you back to grid view.
           | 
           | Google has become the epitome of bad ux and user-hostile
           | design.
        
           | design-material wrote:
           | Microsoft's recent history with 'forced UI additions' of this
           | sort would imply it is indeed intentionally user-hostile.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | Exactly why more people should switch to Linux on their
             | desktops/laptops.
             | 
             | > _but Linux sucks, it 's ugly, it's broken, it doesn't
             | work, blah blah blah!_
             | 
             | The amount of time people spend complaining about the evil
             | shit their monopolist is doing to them would be better
             | spent learning how to use Linux. It's not that hard.
             | 
             | A farmer isn't going to make changes to their business
             | model because the cattle is complaining. Microsoft is going
             | to keep doing what they're doing until the government steps
             | in (which is unlikely to happen any time soon). Same goes
             | for Apple, Amazon, Google, and all these companies that are
             | immune to competitive forces.
        
         | mackrevinack wrote:
         | my dad was asking me how to get rid of that yesterday because
         | it was annoying him. i noticed that he also had the cortana
         | search box on the left of the taskbar and asked if he ever used
         | it and he said no. all these years it's just been there taking
         | up valuable space and then 'new & interests' appears out
         | nowhere last week and starts talking up even more valuable
         | space. my poor dad had about 8 programs open but there were all
         | squashed into the middle of the taskbar. makes me wonder about
         | how many other people are living in these awful conditions
        
           | mensetmanusman wrote:
           | When you have hundreds of teams of people whose promotions
           | are driven by what gets deployed and seen by the user, it is
           | almost inevitable that we reach this situation.
        
         | cyberjunkie wrote:
         | Yes, I like that I've paid for an operating system that tells
         | me all the affairs someone is having right in my system tray.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | You paid once, yes, but what about recurring payments?
           | 
           | Tongue-in-cheek LotR reference, but, it was pretty clear that
           | Microsoft changed tactics after releasing Windows 10, turning
           | it into an auto-updating evergreen OS without paid updates.
           | They're earning money elsewhere now - Office365 and Azure are
           | their big cash cows, I believe. But other departments are
           | pressured to make money too.
        
         | welfvh wrote:
         | horrible. Same as the news infinite scroll in the Google iOS
         | app
        
       | Grustaf wrote:
       | There are some nice ideas here, and perhaps some of them can even
       | be realised by third party apps using the new Screen time
       | developer APIs?
       | 
       | I don't think the "Persuasive Design" ideas are realistic though,
       | not in the AppStore listing.
        
       | api wrote:
       | Apple is the only company I can imagine doing this. They're
       | really the only remaining PC company where a PC is defined as a
       | computer designed to serve and assist its customer/user instead
       | of treat the customer as the product.
        
       | overgard wrote:
       | I feel like the people that need these changes are the least
       | likely to turn then on. In general addicts don't want to dilute
       | their drug of choice.
        
       | zimpenfish wrote:
       | Great ideas but can you imagine the uproar if Apple actually
       | tried this given what they get any time they limit what apps can
       | do?
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | I think the largest effect would be a focus on what types of
       | """"news"""" someone as being exposed to.
       | 
       | For example, my experience with Facebook emotionally plummeted
       | after they added the news tab on the right hand side. I don't
       | know what the current status is, because I basically stopped
       | using Facebook because I couldn't help getting pulled into the
       | emotional nonsense of the conflicts that were being artificially
       | portrayed.
       | 
       | Replace news articles with interesting historical or natural
       | wonders on Wikipedia, and I think that would slowly force media
       | organizations to stop relying on conflict and anger to generate
       | revenue.
       | 
       | to;dr the internet should default towards eliciting senses of
       | wonder for the user instead of senses of conflict.
        
       | dionidium wrote:
       | I went into this pretty skeptical, but by the end I was convinced
       | that this is a good endeavor. For example, batching notifications
       | for certain kinds of apps is a truly great idea. I don't agree
       | with every suggestion here, but it's clear to me that thinking
       | about these issues could lead to some more good ideas.
        
       | munk-a wrote:
       | Gosh I wish I had access to this exciting new update -
       | unfortunately I own an offbrand iPad made by this knock-off
       | company called Apple. As such it's locked to only be able to run
       | iOS 10 and lower. I know I made a bad decision purchasing from a
       | hardware company while wishing the software company would support
       | me in perpetuity but I was hopeful the developers behind iOS
       | would actually offer to roll out updates to we Apple customers in
       | addition to their own large customer base.
       | 
       | Next time I buy an iDevice I'll be sure to seek out an iOS
       | approved vendor for my purchase instead of just grabbing one of
       | these rando-Apple devices off the street.
       | 
       | (/s if it's needed)
        
       | alirsgp wrote:
       | I love this. I hope it's pushed thru. I would send this to Tim
       | Cook: tcook@apple.com or federighi@apple.com
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | fumblebee wrote:
       | A lot of commenters are hating on the article -- I fail to see
       | why. Whether all the ideas are good or not is up for debate, but
       | putting control in the hands of users for combatting dark
       | patterns and dampening addictive habits at source is only a good
       | thing. During the pandemic I've seen my daily phone usage soar, I
       | wish I had some form of _iOS 15 Humane_.
        
       | smoldesu wrote:
       | Why would Apple do any of this? Their ultimate goal is to drive
       | user engagement and increase revenue, which is interrupted when
       | they have to remind users to stop using their platform.
        
         | th0rgall wrote:
         | That sounds more like the ultimate goal of Facebook and
         | Twitter.
         | 
         | In contrast, Apple's ultimate goal is to sell more devices and
         | get more people onto their subscription services.
         | 
         | The ideas mentioned in the article don't collide with this
         | goal. They are intended to provide more (not less) value to the
         | lives of Apple's customers. To help you when you yourself
         | recognize you're engaging too much, or in a bad way. They seem
         | to be configurable to the customer's preferences too. If you
         | wouldn't want these features, fine, but others might want them,
         | and prefer Apple's products over e.g. Android phones because of
         | having the option.
         | 
         | The only party who could be displeased with these system
         | interventions are the big ad-based app or platform developers
         | that do rely on user engagement.
         | 
         | Update: Apple has some shared incentives with engagement-based
         | business models, like their revenue stream of App Store
         | (in-)app purchase commissions, but it's still much less than
         | Google/Facebook/Twitter's reliance on that stuff.
        
       | Sudarshan1 wrote:
       | <a href="https://sudarshan-dalavi.blogspot.com/">Sudarshan Dalavi
       | Blog</a>
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | These methods remind me of cruel methods where you tie up a drug
       | addict to stop them from taking drugs, it may work for a while
       | but the underlying problems will likely reel them back in.
        
       | nicbou wrote:
       | I've been aggressively fighting these things for the last year. I
       | tried to filter as much noise as possible, to make it easier to
       | get away from the computer. No feeds, very few emails, very few
       | notifications, and a lot less participation.
       | 
       | Generally, it went well. However, I still wish I had a way to
       | batch notifications. I don't need instant messages to be truly
       | instant. I don't need emails to arrive more than once every hour.
        
         | hughcrt wrote:
         | One of the main new feature of iOS 15 is precisely what you're
         | talking about: https://www.macrumors.com/2021/06/07/new-
         | ios-15-notification...
        
       | pdimitar wrote:
       | The problem with several of these is that most humans are in
       | denial.
       | 
       | - They will absolutely yell at their phone "YES, THIS TIME WAS
       | WELL-SPENT!" even after an absolutely soul-crushing political
       | "discussion" session that can only be equated to a real-life
       | screaming contest with a bunch of others. And even with them
       | feeling emotionally drained, angry and tired, they'll still say
       | the time was well-spent.
       | 
       | You know, sunk cost fallacy and all. The "maximum engagement"
       | industry knows all these phenomena very well and they have
       | weaponized them at least a decade ago, if not more.
       | 
       | - "Finite" feeds. They are still infinite but now have page
       | numbers. Sure that might help a little but but I don't think it
       | will make an impact. Plus "Page #7" means nothing; after 10-20
       | posts from people in your feed it moves to "Page #8" so what's
       | the point?
       | 
       | - Disabling Autoplay is related to the first one -- people are in
       | denial. They'll just nervously tap on the play button. Almost
       | nothing at all will change.
       | 
       | - Hiding certain sections like "Watch Now" is NEVER going to
       | happen. Don't be delusional. That's the way the companies want to
       | further engage you. They'll stop literally everything else before
       | that.
       | 
       | - Greyscale is a cool idea. Didn't know about the reduced
       | engagement with it. I'll try it out!
       | 
       | - Batched notifications are a good idea. Let's go even further: I
       | want to fine-tune which notifications I can receive. I regularly
       | need the notifications from my grocery app (when my wife makes
       | changes to it) but I absolutely don't care about those "17
       | fantastic paleo meals for you to try today!", thank you very
       | much. This has to stop.
       | 
       | - Showing time spent might increase accountability, or it might
       | not. I know it could have helped me 5 years ago but I also know
       | quite a lot of people who scream at their friends "dude, I've
       | been 10 hours on Twitter today, how cool is that!" so that one is
       | likely to be a hit or miss. I can see how it could help some.
       | 
       | - If you tell somebody that they are "mindlessly browsing"
       | they'll uninstall your software the same minute. Don't. There has
       | to be other ways. Even corny stuff like "are you happy how you
       | spent the last hour?" would work better.
       | 
       | ---
       | 
       | I applaud Apple's efforts but as usual, they are waaaaaaaaay too
       | slow and too gradual. The axe has to fall harder and quicker.
       | 
       | Just an example. Open App Store on your iPhone. Just two days ago
       | I had the same dumb "Gaming Essentials" section there that seems
       | to appear fairly regularly, containing big earners like Fortnite,
       | CoD, Candy Crush and several others. Of course Apple wants people
       | to pick up these on a regular basis -- microtransactions lead to
       | income for them as well.
        
       | Sudarshan1 wrote:
       | https://sudarshan-dalavi.blogspot.com/ visit the url for marathi
       | technology information.
        
       | ishitatsuyuki wrote:
       | Things like infinite scroll and autoplay should come with an
       | option to turn them off and I think that's well presented. Those
       | are kind of dark patterns after All. Though, Apple probably isn't
       | in the position to enforce that; we unfortunately need to live
       | with Jailbreak tweaks for them.
       | 
       | But the rest of the post feels so off. Constantly nagging
       | yourself to close social media? Reminding yourself that social
       | media is a waste of time by asking whether the time is "well
       | spent"? No thanks. These are just dark patterns but flipped to
       | the other side. I want control over what I do, not a random
       | program deciding what I should do.
       | 
       | I also have never found Screen Time restrictions to be effective;
       | either I unlock the restrictions by myself, or I just find other
       | ways to waste the time. The reason people waste so much time with
       | social media, I think, is because they simply don't have anything
       | else to do, or they're not motivated enough to do what they
       | should do.
        
         | Dah00n wrote:
         | >Constantly nagging yourself to close social media? Reminding
         | yourself that social media is a waste of time by asking whether
         | the time is "well spent"?
         | 
         | It's a business opportunity for Apple to be able to judge what
         | gets graded as good, bad or a waste of time. That's what this
         | is about in my opinion.
        
         | sneak wrote:
         | Infinite scroll is not a dark pattern. Dark patterns are
         | explicitly designed to conflate or deceive.
         | 
         | Infinite scroll just gives people more of what they want. Turns
         | out, most people, most of the time, want the gorbage.
        
           | donkeyd wrote:
           | Alcoholics want booze, but many of them wake up every day
           | thinking today they won't drink anything, but they still do.
           | 
           | Infinite scroll is a dark pattern in the way it gives you
           | something your addicted brain wants, and therefore you think
           | you might want, but it's actually just a way for them to get
           | more money.
           | 
           | Personal anecdote: I hardly read more than the front page on
           | HN, even though I consider HN one of the least 'time wasted'
           | sites I use, because I usually learn a lot because of it. On
           | Reddit I just keep scrolling even though I often consider it
           | wasted time in hindsight. I don't want HN to get infinite
           | scroll and I deleted the Reddit app from my phone.
        
             | blackoil wrote:
             | HN shows 30 stories on front page. If they reduce it to 5
             | your usage may decrease so are they following a dark
             | pattern? or if they increase the no. to 50 will it become a
             | dark pattern?
        
               | donkeyd wrote:
               | How about 5000? This then becomes a useless discussion of
               | where, between 0 and infinity I will deem it a dark
               | pattern or not. I don't know, but I do consider infinity
               | with the purpose of keeping people engaged a 'dark
               | pattern', as do others of you look at the article I
               | shared. Maybe you don't and that's fine.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | > _Infinite scroll is a dark pattern in the way it gives
             | you something your addicted brain wants, and therefore you
             | think you might want, but it 's actually just a way for
             | them to get more money._
             | 
             | Dark patterns are particular UI patterns that are of a
             | certain objective type regardless of whether or not the
             | user is an addict.
             | 
             | Infinite scroll is not in the list.
             | 
             | Slot machines are addictive and are designed to get people
             | to play as much and as long as possible, but they
             | assiduously avoid dark patterns because people will avoid
             | machines that pull that sort of bullshit and choose ones
             | that don't.
        
               | Nevermark wrote:
               | I think dark patterns include patterns designed to create
               | addiction. I imagine a tremendous amount of slot machine
               | design is about creating addiction.
               | 
               | The line between enjoyment and addiction is certainly not
               | clear, or the same for everyone. But anything strongly
               | designed to repeatedly pull you into repetitive behavior
               | that you reliably find wasteful or harmful afterwards, is
               | dark.
        
               | donkeyd wrote:
               | > Infinite scroll is not on the list.
               | 
               | I you want a discussion of semantics then...
               | 
               | Wikipedia defines dark patterns as: "A dark pattern is a
               | user interface that has been carefully crafted to trick
               | users into doing things". Infinite scroll in many cases
               | obviously fits this category as it tricks people into
               | spending more time in an app. Fast company actually calls
               | it the most prevalent dark pattern in this article:
               | 
               | https://www.fastcompany.com/90369183/deceptive-design-
               | tricks...
               | 
               | Also, implying that slot machines don't apply dark
               | patterns is incredibly naive. I'm pretty sure they do
               | everything to make it seem like they don't. But even
               | using a plastic card in stead of cash can be considered a
               | dark pattern, because it disconnects you from the
               | intrinsic form and it just because a number on a screen,
               | causing it to lose its value while playing.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | Infinite scroll isn't a trick. It gives the user
               | precisely what they indicated they want: more content.
               | 
               | If it took them to a different view, or made a purchase,
               | or caused some negative side effect that the user then
               | has to engage with to cancel, then it would be
               | subterfuge.
               | 
               | Giving the user more of what they explicitly desired (and
               | provided user input to request in the form of a swipe up)
               | is the opposite of a dark pattern.
               | 
               | A good example of a dark pattern is when cancel/confirm
               | buttons swap places from their usual locations on the
               | sale screen, to trick a user into clicking buy when they
               | meant cancel. When a user gives the gesture for "more
               | content" and they get more content, that's simply an app
               | that works well.
               | 
               | It's not the UI that makes social interaction addictive.
               | Second landlines for teenagers "addicted" to social
               | networking was a thing long before Instagram.
        
               | donkeyd wrote:
               | > Infinite scroll isn't a trick. It gives the user
               | precisely what they indicated they want: more content.
               | 
               | I actually added a source that says that infinite scroll
               | can be considered a prevalent dark pattern. I think this
               | will become a useless discussion because there's no
               | clearly defined definition of what is and isn't a dark
               | pattern and I think that in the end it's how the user
               | experiences it. To me it's a dark pattern, because I
               | don't want to scroll infinitely, but I do it anyway. To
               | you it isn't because it gives you precisely what you
               | want. The only solution seems to agree to disagree.
        
           | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
           | > Dark patterns are explicitly designed to conflate or
           | deceive.
           | 
           | Well, yes - normally you are scrolling to the bottom of the
           | page. And when you reach the bottom, you stop, or you need to
           | explicitly click "Next". But with infinite scroll, there is
           | no bottom. You never reach a final or semi-final point. It's
           | designed to maximize your time spent on the website/app, not
           | for your well-being or helping you achieve your original aim
           | - which was to absorb a limited set of information, not
           | scrolling mindlessly forever.
        
             | welearnednothng wrote:
             | But it's only a dark pattern in the right (wrong?) context,
             | no? For instance, my webmail has infinite scroll and it's
             | damn convenient. Yet, I never find myself mindlessly
             | scrolling through my mail. It doesn't increase the time I
             | spend on the site... quite the opposite.
             | 
             | Likewise, I swear Google was playing with infinite scroll
             | in their search results recently, where I didn't have to
             | hit next to see the next page of results. Same result for
             | me - it was convenient and I didn't find myself spending
             | more time looking for/at search results.
             | 
             | But when the context is addictive content, infinite scroll
             | is always there to spoon feed you one more helping.
             | 
             | More often than not, infinite scroll isn't actually the UX
             | pattern you're looking for. But on occasion, it does make
             | sense. However, when combined with insidious content, a
             | dark pattern it does become.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _Infinite scroll is not a dark pattern. Dark patterns are
           | explicitly designed to conflate or deceive._
           | 
           | This comment doesn't deserve to be downvoted. I came to this
           | thread holding this exact view. The ensuing discussion
           | changed my mind. It's honestly asked and respectfully
           | answered, the stuff this community is made of.
        
         | serf wrote:
         | > Those are kind of dark patterns after Al
         | 
         | I think the application should be judged, not the method
         | necessarily.
         | 
         | Example : I have added/used extensions built to allow certain
         | websites (google search, for example) to use infinite
         | scrolling.
         | 
         | I never voluntarily added other 'dark patterns' to my
         | interfaces, thus I think the way such a mechanism is applied is
         | a major factor as to whether or not it's abusive.
        
         | powerlogic31 wrote:
         | Yeah this is cool as an option. but don't make it as a default.
         | A lot of people actually love the automatic feed. Of course
         | they're not here on HN reading stuffs. So you won't know what
         | actual majority of user want.
        
         | Invictus0 wrote:
         | What if the user _chooses_ to turn on the time well spent
         | feature? Then it would not be a dark pattern but just user
         | choice.
        
         | beagle3 wrote:
         | ScreenTime is very useful when you have young kids, are working
         | at home due to Corona, and want to give them a limited time of
         | Among Us / TV.
         | 
         | I had never even considered it as a self-care system - but now
         | that I do think about it, I agree with you.
         | 
         | I have my Mac announce the time every hour, which is very
         | useful to make sure I don't lose track of time - no matter what
         | it is I'm doing
        
         | retreatguru wrote:
         | What if the reminders could be more personalized or something
         | that you write to your future self. For example: "Are you
         | scrolling on the couch again amigo?, stop and hang out with
         | your family!"
        
           | warkdarrior wrote:
           | Even better, Facebook could provide these reminders and
           | prompts, based on the information they collected by tracking
           | your location and web browsing.
        
         | deanclatworthy wrote:
         | > I want control over what I do, not a random program deciding
         | what I should do.
         | 
         | So ask the user once if they want to be reminded? You might not
         | feel like social media is a toxic influence over your life but
         | many people do.
        
           | underwater wrote:
           | Some people feel like television, and phones in general, are
           | bad influences. Should Apple build in reminders for their
           | first party products, too. A popup telling you that talking
           | on the phone for three hours a day is bad for you, or that
           | encourages you to not binge on that TV series?
        
             | Ar-Curunir wrote:
             | Those things all exist...
        
           | martin-adams wrote:
           | I think what they are saying is to remove the addiction, not
           | ask if someone want to be reminded to wake up from the
           | addiction.
           | 
           | The question for me comes down to, is there such a thing as
           | social media without the addiction, where the financial
           | incentives to the company aren't tied to and engagement and
           | behaviour. I'd like to think that's possible.
        
       | srg0 wrote:
       | It's a sad state of things when we on _hacker_ news discuss an
       | open letter to a proprietary software vendor asking to implement
       | pagination in what was supposed to be a web page.
       | 
       | And Android is not much better in practice.
        
       | chimen wrote:
       | Next thing I'd want my router to shut down the internet due to
       | mindless browsing. Also shut it down when it's too late...like
       | 11pm sounds enough.
        
         | Someone wrote:
         | You can do that second part on iOS.
         | https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208982:
         | 
         |  _"When you schedule downtime in Settings, only phone calls and
         | apps that you choose to allow are available. Downtime applies
         | to all of your Screen Time-enabled devices, and you get a
         | reminder five minutes before it starts"_
        
         | gnyman wrote:
         | I'm not site how a router would identify "mindless browsing",
         | but turning off Internet at certain times is a feature many
         | routers have built in, usually under parental control. Worth a
         | look if you haven't checked.
         | 
         | Personally I ended up with a bit different solution, I wanted
         | to do something similar, but needed it to work on my phone also
         | so I ended up using nextdns to block part of the Internet
         | (reddit and Facebook) after 10. Works reasonably well as
         | trigger to stop my worst doomscrolling offenders.
         | 
         | I wrote up a short post on how to do it
         | https://blog.nyman.re/2021/01/10/reduce-doomscrolling-with.h...
        
       | lanevorockz wrote:
       | You are a fool if you don't think that all of Big Tech is not
       | some form of cattle control. They control what you can see, what
       | you can express and what do you do outside of the platform.
        
         | xpe wrote:
         | I'm on a mission here on HN to encourage people to write
         | clearly, with specificity, and without exaggeration. In that
         | spirit, let me show how I would edit the comment above. Here
         | are the parts I would modify (i.e. change X -> Y)
         | 
         | 1. "You are a fool" -> leave it out. Think about your audience;
         | this phrase is unlikely to persuade.
         | 
         | 2. "Big Tech" -> Social Media (e.g. not AWS or Fastly)
         | 
         | 3. "They control" -> "They constrain/frame"
         | 
         | 4. "what you can see" -> "what you see first / what is
         | recommended"
         | 
         | 5. "control" ... "what you can express" -> "your content on
         | their platform"
         | 
         | 6. "control" ... "what do you do outside of the platform" ->
         | [delete]
         | 
         | I would also contrast multinational information / social media
         | technologies with the underlying tools that allow governments
         | to monitor and shape people's activity; e.g. firewalls, packet
         | inspection, etc.
        
       | pedalpete wrote:
       | I wonder if there is an opportunity for an open consortium of
       | apps that could define guidelines and qualify apps that are built
       | with positive impact on the user in mind.
       | 
       | We've recently been discussing how we can be proactive with our
       | user's data, and tell them why we want to use their data, what
       | data, and for how long we'll use it, etc. Because we're likely
       | using the data in health and wellness research, it's not just
       | "hey we want to show you better ads", so we believe there is real
       | benefit to the user here.
       | 
       | Does such a consortium exist? Should one?
        
       | cglong wrote:
       | About 70% of this could probably be implemented on Android today.
       | Might be worthwhile to provide concrete data on the value of
       | these ideas :)
        
       | Saint_Genet wrote:
       | Yes, let a userbase that is dominated by american, white, middle-
       | class people determine what is time well spent. I'm sure that's
       | gonna be applicable to everyone in the world.
        
       | yadaeno wrote:
       | If apple actually implemented these changes, I would ditch my
       | current phone for an IPhone and never look back. I would also
       | help make the switch for family members and anyone else I cared
       | about.
        
       | eloisius wrote:
       | If I could ask Apple for one thing it would be to require
       | approval of every push notification that an app developer wants
       | to deliver. That an app gets either cart blanche to send me
       | notifications or nothing at all drives me crazy. I don't want to
       | miss a notification that my delivery food arrived, but I don't
       | want to be bombarded with daily advertising messages from
       | foodpanda trying to get me to change my behavior. Require app
       | developers to submit a template string (and not "\\(message)")
       | for each notification the app can deliver for approval in the App
       | Store and let me have an on/off switch for each one.
       | 
       | "Notifications" across every platform drive me crazy, because
       | they usually start out as useful, but because people tend to pay
       | them more attention than all the other channels that have already
       | been tuned out, companies start juicing them for engagement. I
       | use twitter rarely, but every time I do I am perplexed why my
       | "notifications" are full of crap about who recently tweeted.
       | Shouldn't that just be in my timeline?
        
         | SergeAx wrote:
         | It is called FilterBox on Android. But Apple will never allow
         | such an app on iOS, no way.
        
         | EGreg wrote:
         | How about just making notifications costly?
         | 
         | Maybe even rev-share with users.
        
         | jaywalk wrote:
         | I really like this idea, but template strings won't work for
         | things like news of any type.
        
         | rpxio wrote:
         | It looks like they're adding interruption levels with iOS 15:
         | https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
         | 
         | See "Helping People Manage Notifications" section.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | That will be abused like crazy. Every marketing notification
           | will be accompanied by an "order now to get 5% off your
           | order" message so it can be classified as time sensitive.
        
             | eloisius wrote:
             | Looks like they address that:
             | 
             | > Never designate a marketing notification as Time
             | Sensitive. For guidance, see Helping People Manage
             | Notifications.
             | 
             | Although I'm not clear on whether this are just HIG
             | guidelines for notifications or if they are enforceable App
             | Store rules.
        
               | iaml wrote:
               | App store rules are a joke, a lot of apps should be
               | banned for violating them, but apple just doesn't give a
               | fuck - and there aren't even proper channels to complain
               | about it.
        
             | irae wrote:
             | Potential abuse is not a reason for not doing this feature.
             | Bad actors will be bad in the current system or the new
             | one.
             | 
             | A couple of years ago: Allow all or no notifications, hard
             | to find settings to turn off
             | 
             | Current: Allow all, but easy to manage from home screen,
             | apps that want to offer a choice of types of notification
             | must figure out how, create config UI, make sure system is
             | stable. Users must find, and each app is different and
             | often report options are not working
             | 
             | iOS 15: A general framework that at the code level, each
             | notification can declare. iOS unifies the UI for managing
             | levels per app. Good actors will have lower costs, bad
             | actors can be detected in device predictions.
             | 
             | I only see benefits, and you can still block apps abusing
             | it
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | It's not a reason for not adding the feature but I'm sure
               | abuse is something they anticipate. Hopefully there's
               | some way to click on a notification and submit it to
               | Apple as a violation of their guidelines and the app gets
               | pulled from the store once a pattern emerges.
        
         | mustacheemperor wrote:
         | I just want the ability to time-gate notifications. It's
         | convenient that I can shut off notifications from Teams when
         | I'm on vacation, but why isn't it possible to disable
         | notifications from Teams between 6pm-6am and on the weekends?
         | Why can't I disable push notifications from my work email on
         | Saturday and Sunday? It's the one single quality of life
         | feature I've most hoped to see in every iOS update since they
         | introduced granular notification control.
        
           | Bluecobra wrote:
           | The Teams iOS app already has this. Go to Settings >
           | Notifications > Block Notifications > During Quiet Time, then
           | specify what hours you want the app to be quiet.
        
         | alickz wrote:
         | >I don't want to miss a notification that my delivery food
         | arrived, but I don't want to be bombarded with daily
         | advertising messages from foodpanda trying to get me to change
         | my behavior.
         | 
         | This is exactly what the Android notification channels allow
         | you to do, and it actually works really well.
         | 
         | For UberEats I have the Delivery notification channel enabled,
         | but the Marketing channel disabled. It's really the best of
         | both worlds. And even more surprisingly it seems most apps
         | support this, instead of putting all notifications under one
         | channel.
         | 
         | I'm surprised Apple hasn't followed suit; NIH syndrome maybe?
        
           | kamilner wrote:
           | In UberEats (and many other apps) you can configure which
           | push notifications you get. Is that functionally different
           | than channels for the purposes of turning off marketing
           | notifications? Both seem to rely on the App developer
           | allowing you to turn off the notifications you don't want.
           | 
           | The problem I have are the apps which don't allow that, which
           | presumably also wouldn't allow to separate them into channels
           | for the same reason they don't let you turn them off.
        
             | anchpop wrote:
             | A difference is that there's a unified UI for disabling
             | channels, and app developers don't have to do anything
             | except annotate each notification with the channel it
             | belongs to and list the channels somewhere in their
             | manifest (IIRC). If you get a notification you don't like,
             | you long long-press it and a menu appears showing you the
             | different notification channels and prompting you to enable
             | or disable them.
        
               | eropple wrote:
               | I haven't used Android in a while. What stops a developer
               | from not categorizing notifications and effectively
               | saying "oh they're all General notifications, ha ha ha,
               | you can't get the thing you want without all the slop"?
        
               | derefr wrote:
               | Nominally, the Play Store QA process. (As if there was
               | such a thing.)
        
               | perryizgr8 wrote:
               | Bad apps do this. Some even create a new channel for each
               | individual notification so you can't possibly block it.
               | Except for a blanket ban which you can always do. So it
               | does depend on the developers goodwill.
        
             | alickz wrote:
             | >Is that functionally different than channels for the
             | purposes of turning off marketing notifications?
             | 
             | I don't think so, it's just built into the OS which I
             | personally prefer.
             | 
             | >The problem I have are the apps which don't allow that,
             | which presumably also wouldn't allow to separate them into
             | channels for the same reason they don't let you turn them
             | off.
             | 
             | I think Apple is in a good position to enforce this though,
             | given how strict their review process can be. They could
             | easily reject apps that didn't use notification channels
             | properly. I'm sure some would find a way to abuse but I
             | think that would be a minority.
             | 
             | As I said I was surprised on Android by how many apps
             | actually used them, despite not being enforced. I can only
             | imagine they would be even better on iOS, which is why I'm
             | so confused as to why Apple hasn't.
        
             | dahfizz wrote:
             | > Is that functionally different than channels for the
             | purposes of turning off marketing notifications?
             | 
             | The key feature for me is that, as soon as I get a
             | notification that annoys me, I can long press on the
             | notification and disable that channel or notifications from
             | that app altogether. I don't have to go into the app and
             | dig through a settings menu; it takes me all of 3 seconds
             | to do what I want.
        
           | kpozin wrote:
           | And then there's the Audible app for Android, which puts both
           | ad notifications and their playback control widget into a
           | single "Member notifications" channel, so that you can't
           | disable the ads without losing access to playback controls.
        
             | complexworld wrote:
             | Sounds like Audible believes the benefits outweigh the
             | downsides of abusing their customers
        
           | monkeynotes wrote:
           | Wait, so iOS doesn't let you fine tune your notifications? I
           | don't know how I could deal with my phone unless I could turn
           | off, or turn down notifications.
        
             | nanidin wrote:
             | In iOS one can turn on/off notifications per app at the OS
             | level. Some apps have fine grain control for types of
             | notifications, but this type of fine grain control does not
             | exist at the OS level.
        
             | Tagbert wrote:
             | Apple is adding a lot more fine grain control in iOS 15
             | 
             | https://9to5mac.com/2021/06/09/how-to-use-iphone-focus-
             | mode-...
        
           | smoldesu wrote:
           | Absolutely this. Android's notification channels are a
           | lifesaver for apps like Snapchat, Instagram, or any of the
           | other social media apps that only serve to suck you in. It
           | makes it super easy to disable all notifications except for
           | DM alerts (which is what I typically do for most apps). It's
           | crazy how many apps actually support it, and it's even
           | crazier that Apple hasn't followed suit yet. Even with iOS
           | 15, Apple's notifications are still a last-gen mess.
        
             | graeme wrote:
             | Not a replacement, but for anyone who doesn't know about
             | it: you can configure Instagram notification types even in
             | the iOS app. Surprisingly good system.
             | 
             | Would be great if iOS copied Android and had systemwide
             | channels.
        
           | cuddlybacon wrote:
           | That sounds neat. Does the developer chose which message goes
           | into which category?
           | 
           | I don't recall getting marketing notifications from Uber
           | Eats. What infuriates me are the follow up notifications
           | (paraphrased):
           | 
           | "How was $RESTAURANT_NAME? Please rate and tip!"
           | 
           | "How was $PERSON_NAME's delivery? Please rate and tip!"
           | 
           | "$PERSON_NAME says thanks for the tip!"
           | 
           | I imagine Uber Eats would categorize them under Delivery so
           | you can't opt out of these without opting out of the
           | notifications that are actually useful.
        
           | Tagbert wrote:
           | Apple has made changes in the upcoming iOS 15 where apps have
           | to categorize their notifications into categories like
           | "marketing" and functional categories. Users can then use the
           | more granular controls to block notification categories
           | either for all apps or app by app. This can also be mapped
           | into the new Focus modes where users can setup different
           | modes such a "work", "sleep", "driving", etc. Different apps
           | can be allowed or blocked in different focus modes.
           | 
           | https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/07/apple-refines-
           | ios-15-notif...
           | 
           | https://9to5mac.com/2021/06/09/how-to-use-iphone-focus-
           | mode-...
           | 
           | [added additional external reference]
        
           | treszkai wrote:
           | > And even more surprisingly it seems most apps support this,
           | instead of putting all notifications under one channel.
           | 
           | Maybe because developers want to do the Right Thing, and they
           | can implement these notification groups with no effort and
           | without the marketing department noticing it?
        
           | villasv wrote:
           | > I'm surprised Apple hasn't followed suit; NIH syndrome
           | maybe?
           | 
           | Because this is something apps should have been doing
           | themselves. But I guess Android will prove (or has proven, at
           | least to me) that it's necessary to enforce this.
           | 
           | After all, nothing is stopping apps from providing a single
           | channel, right? It all comes down to providing developers
           | with a basic framework, making it easier to do the right
           | thing.
        
         | Abishek_Muthian wrote:
         | Notification pollution is real and I'm glad Apple is taking
         | real steps to address it in the form of the new focus feature
         | which lets the message sender determine whether to alert the
         | user.
         | 
         | I've been asking for this for a long time[1], But it shouldn't
         | be only for 'Do Not Disturb' but rather for every message.
         | 
         | I don't want to be alerted for meme or forwarded messages,
         | Letting the users determine the notification level - Delayed
         | (to be notified when I check the phone) or Immediate can go a
         | long way to habituate message etiquette.
         | 
         | As for non messaging apps like you mentioned, They should be
         | shamed in the 'Notification Pollution' panel.
         | 
         | [1]https://needgap.com/problems/59-notification-pollution-
         | mobil...
        
         | 00deadbeef wrote:
         | This kind of thing is already against the App Store Review
         | Guidelines:
         | 
         | > Push Notifications should not be used for promotions or
         | direct marketing purposes unless customers have explicitly
         | opted in to receive them via consent language displayed in your
         | app's UI, and you provide a method in your app for a user to
         | opt out from receiving such messages. Abuse of these services
         | may result in revocation of your privileges.
         | 
         | Apple has now introduced a way for developers to report other
         | apps that break the guideiness. Rest assured I will be making
         | reports every time an app sends me advertisement notifications
         | that I did not opt in to.
        
         | tristor wrote:
         | Agreed with this entirely. The worst offender to me is
         | Booking.com which will pop notifications and badges (I'm a
         | compulsive badge clearer) on my device for marketing stuff,
         | when I really only want notifications for messages in app
         | around reservations. It also has added insult to injury during
         | this pandemic season as Booking has continued to run promos and
         | pop them when there's no reasonable way I could travel.
        
         | drewg123 wrote:
         | The food apps are so bad that I typically uninstall them when
         | they send me a spammy notification, and then re-install them
         | when I need to use them again.
         | 
         | The natural outcome of this is that the first app which does
         | NOT send me spam will be the one on my phone when I want to
         | order food, and will be the one I actually use.
        
         | k3liutZu wrote:
         | > I don't want to miss a notification that my delivery food
         | arrived, but I don't want to be bombarded with daily
         | advertising messages from foodpanda trying to get me to change
         | my behavior.
         | 
         | Yeah, this really drives me crazy.
        
           | rattray wrote:
           | I use Android, which lets you enable/disable particular
           | notification categories.
           | 
           | I've simply uninstalled all food delivery apps that send
           | promotions using the "General" category (IIRC Grubhub was the
           | work offender).
           | 
           | Uber Eats and DoorDash categorize their promotional
           | notifications appropriately, so I never see them (and do get
           | notifs about my deliveries).
        
         | asiachick wrote:
         | agreed. my dating apps I obviously want to leave notifications
         | on so I get notified of a new match but the company uses
         | notification to try to get me to use the app more and I can't
         | turn those off.
         | 
         | Similarly the Meetup app has started spamming me with
         | Meetup.com blog type info with no way to turn it off but I need
         | the notifications on for meetups . this one in particular is
         | odd given than the Meetup app has some of the most granular
         | notification settings of any service out there.
         | 
         | The Lyft app does this a few times a year as well.
        
         | cheph wrote:
         | > If I could ask Apple for one thing it would be to require
         | approval of every push notification that an app developer wants
         | to deliver.
         | 
         | Personally I would ask them to stop glad-handing with china and
         | using their slave labour. But that is just me.
        
           | eloisius wrote:
           | Okay, fair. I'd ask for an iPhone that was not dependent upon
           | China's labor and supply chains first, then to give me
           | granular control of notifications.
        
         | wilde wrote:
         | Apple also abuses push notifications to sell their services so
         | I don't see this ending any time soon :(
        
           | FearlessNebula wrote:
           | When does Apple ever send push notifications other than
           | software updates?
        
             | manmal wrote:
             | For Apple Music:
             | https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/18/18229492/apple-music-
             | push...
        
             | JrProgrammer wrote:
             | I recently switched from Android to iOS and it irritates me
             | that Apple push their own product multiple times a week. It
             | might be because my account is new but at least once a week
             | I get notifications of the free year of apple tv and apple
             | arcade without any way to disable this (if you guys know of
             | one please respond)
             | 
             | Besides the notifications I think it's a dark pattern from
             | Apple to actually show a red number badge above the
             | settings app when there is no actionable item except the
             | two things mentioned above.
        
           | Ensorceled wrote:
           | I can't remember an Apple push notification that wasn't
           | transactional or an update notification (which is also
           | transcational I guess).
           | 
           | Do you have an example?
        
             | eloisius wrote:
             | "Helpful" tips when you get a new iPhone for one example. I
             | also think I vaguely remember being very surprised that
             | Photos advertised to me about being able to buy printed
             | photo albums or something like that once? But I may be mis-
             | remembering it with Google Photos.
        
             | jacurtis wrote:
             | They push Apple Music promos from time to time. They also
             | send notifications via the Apple Store app about new
             | product releases.
             | 
             | To be fair, they don't ABUSE it to the extent that it
             | happens frequently. But they are still promotional messages
             | I didn't want. I'd say they send 6-8 per year.
             | 
             | The Apple "Tips" app sends TONS of messages too. Granted
             | that can be fixed by deleting the app. But people like my
             | Mom still gets those messages to this day because she
             | doesn't realize they are tied to that app and I don't
             | believe they are opt-in, I think they are opt-out, meaning
             | they are enabled on new phones by default (like Messages
             | app and your Phone app). I know everyone here has deleted
             | that app, but I bet most of our parents or children still
             | have it installed and still get those messages.
             | 
             | The funny thing about this comment in general is that many
             | people probably don't realize they get notifications from
             | Apple either. But as I mention examples they probably
             | think, "Oh yeah, I've gotten those too". That is the
             | biggest problem. We get so many notifications that many of
             | us simply forget them. You get a notification that the new
             | Macbook Pro is released and you simply read it on the
             | backthread of your brain and dismiss it without much
             | intentional thought. That is how Notifications have become
             | for people. I tried to get my mom to clear up her
             | notifications recently and she simply doesn't think about
             | it anymore. It is just something you deal with if you own a
             | modern phone. It isn't something you control. Like how you
             | don't really control the billboards that you see while
             | commuting to work. You can't disable billboards (other than
             | actively driving to avoid them). But you brain doesn't
             | dwell on them either. You are aware of their presence, but
             | don't expel energy to digest every one. Notifications have
             | become the same way. But they shouldn't be that way. We can
             | (technologically speaking) disable them and the tools to
             | disable them or control them should be granted to
             | smartphone users.
        
               | elliekelly wrote:
               | Every time I get one of those Apple Music notifications I
               | think there must be a way to turn them off and I spend a
               | few minutes poking around in settings trying to find the
               | toggle before I lose interest. Your comment prompted me
               | to figure it out once and for all! They can indeed be
               | turned off but the setting is hidden pretty well and not
               | at all where I would have expected to find it:
               | 
               | 1. Launch the Music app.
               | 
               | 2. Select the "For You" tab at the bottom (little heart
               | icon) this will take you to an advertisement page trying
               | to get you to sign up.
               | 
               | 3. Towards the top of the page and to the right of "$date
               | For You" there's a profile icon. Select it to bring up a
               | tab called "Your Account".
               | 
               | 4. Select "notifications" and you can toggle "New Music"
               | off.
               | 
               | Oddly enough, mine was toggled off when I checked and I
               | know I've gotten these notifications in the very recent
               | past. I wonder if it changed to default-off in a recent
               | update in anticipation of iOS 15's new "focus" feature
               | and Apple's newfound commitment to battling notification
               | pollution?
        
               | Ensorceled wrote:
               | > They push Apple Music promos from time to time.
               | 
               | Ah, I _have_ Apple Music, that would explain why I don 't
               | see these.
               | 
               | Yeah, that ain't right.
               | 
               | > That is the biggest problem. We get so many
               | notifications that many of us simply forget them.
               | 
               | And it's a game of whac-a-mole to turn them all off. And
               | keep them off.
        
             | wl wrote:
             | I've gotten activity challenge notifications about special
             | events, despite me turning off all notifications for
             | activity.
        
         | jasonkester wrote:
         | Personally, I just want a global setting for "Apps can send
         | notifications" that I can turn off.
         | 
         | Every app that I install, I have to go through the same routine
         | of finding and killing all the various types of notifications
         | it tries to send me. But I don't want apps to notify me of
         | things. Ever. I'll check my email a few times a day, and the
         | various messenger apps once every few weeks, and they will have
         | a list of new messages.
         | 
         | I'm fine with the phone ringing when one of my contacts calls.
         | But that's the full extent of where I'm prepared to allow it to
         | distract me.
        
           | joenot443 wrote:
           | On iOS, apps needs to ask permission before they send
           | notifications. If you missed that, there's also a single
           | toggle in Settings -> Notifications for each app. There's no
           | situation where you should have to "kill all the various
           | types of notifications". While I agree a global "Disable
           | Notifications" toggle would be nice, I don't think it's too
           | much work to just tap "Don't Allow" when an app initially
           | prompts you?
           | 
           | The iOS notification ecosystem is actually miles better than
           | it was in the iOS 4-10 days, I think it's fairly user
           | respectful now.
        
             | manmal wrote:
             | There are also trial notifications, which only show up in
             | notification center. Every app can just do that without any
             | permission.
             | 
             | https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications
             | /...
        
           | sxg wrote:
           | Am I misunderstanding? Isn't this already possible on iOS?
           | You can either disable notifications for individual apps or
           | just turn on Do Not Disturb mode and leave it on. Fairly sure
           | there is a setting to allow phone calls.
        
         | sonofhans wrote:
         | Ooh, I agree. Amazon does this, too. I had notifications
         | enabled in their mobile app for a while. I work in a cottage
         | behind my house, so it's useful to get a notification when
         | something's delivered.
         | 
         | Sure enough, after about half a dozen deliveries they started
         | spamming me with promo messages as well. I quickly turned off
         | notifications.
         | 
         | As usual, spammers ruin everything.
        
           | DrBenCarson wrote:
           | Try https://shop.app it's absolutely great for the use case
           | you described! You can even login to Amazon directly from the
           | iOS shop app.
        
         | bengale wrote:
         | Something really should be done about this. The food delivery
         | apps are worst for this, they seem to know you can't turn
         | alerts off without losing a key feature, but then use it to
         | advertise. They should be made to split this out so you can
         | turn one off without the other.
         | 
         | I'd love to customise the alert level for news apps. I would
         | leave on actually important breaking news, but I have to turn
         | it all off because they bombard me with worthless stuff. I want
         | to know if the PMs head explodes, but I really don't care which
         | royal has had another baby.
        
           | eloisius wrote:
           | Agreed. It seems short-sighted of Apple to let notifications
           | become an advertising channel. It works against their
           | customers. A start could be requiring developers to
           | categorize their notifications as transactional or
           | advertising, but I'd really like the granularity to switch
           | certain types of notifications on and off from the Settings
           | app, or on the "manage" menu of the notification itself have
           | the option to not get notifications like this one anymore.
        
           | latch wrote:
           | > The food delivery apps are worst for this
           | 
           | My bank, which is otherwise great, does this. Critically
           | important push notifications and a pretty steady stream of
           | meaningless advertisement.
        
             | andai wrote:
             | What kind of important notifications does your bank send? I
             | don't think I've gotten a single notification from my bank
             | about anything. They do still send paper mail though.
        
               | mattkrause wrote:
               | I get notifications for large or anomalous transactions
               | that must look "weird" but not quite fraud-like to some
               | system.
               | 
               | So far, they've all been purchases I authorized, but I
               | like knowing that I'd get a heads-up if something shady
               | were going on.
        
               | alex-yark wrote:
               | Several of my bank apps will send me push notifications
               | when a payment requires 2fa so I can authorise in app, a
               | much better process than the SMS based 2fa most do.
        
               | Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote:
               | How often does your bank flag your transactions? I've
               | been called once in a decade to authorize a tx.
        
               | dm33tri wrote:
               | In my country we confirm every transaction with 2FA, if
               | the site supports secure payments (almost every website)
        
               | alistairSH wrote:
               | Sigh. I wish the US would encourage this. It would make
               | me feel so much more confident about fraud prevention.
        
               | 05 wrote:
               | EU caps card interchange fees (.3% credit .2% debit), so
               | the baseline is lower. US has comparably huge card
               | rewards, those have to come from somewhere, so with
               | 1.5-3% interchange fees the incentive to implement 2FA to
               | cut, say, 0.2% off commission is just not there..
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Why would Visa/MC/Discover/AmEx or the banks issuing
               | credit card accounts have to lower commissions? They can
               | implement 2FA to reduce their fraud costs, but they can
               | pocket the difference unless they feel competitive
               | pressure. But if there exists enough savings from 2FA by
               | preventing fraud such that they can offer more rewards to
               | credit card users, then it would be a competitive
               | advantage.
        
               | alistairSH wrote:
               | The US doesn't even do chip+PIN, just chip. I have to
               | assume the US is fine with a higher baseline level of
               | fraud than the EU. I don't know how the economics make
               | that work.
               | 
               | And online, the validation/authorization isn't any better
               | - as long as somebody has the card number and my zip
               | code, they can do as they please (until/unless some
               | banking anti-fraud algo picks it up).
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | It's crazy to me too. A few years ago, all the card
               | networks told merchants that any in person merchant who
               | does not use chip transactions will automatically lose
               | chargebacks, so whatever in person merchants have not
               | converted to chip are simply not willing to invest in
               | updating their systems.
        
               | alistairSH wrote:
               | They've pretty much all moved to chip at this point, at
               | least IME. It's the lack of PIN that confuses me. All the
               | terminals have pin pads already, but whether they request
               | the PIN is pretty spotty (seems to be bank card vs true
               | credit card?).
        
               | BiteCode_dev wrote:
               | Not OP, but every time I do a purchase online with a new
               | shop, my bank does this. Also every time I spend more
               | than x euros in one transaction.
               | 
               | Before that they sent an SMS code, I much prefer the app
               | notification.
        
               | ilikehurdles wrote:
               | I started using M1 Finance, and while they send useful
               | notifications about when transfers and rebalances occur,
               | they use those same permissions to send marketing type
               | notifications that you can't disable: nagging me to take
               | out a loan from them or refer friends to their platform.
               | It's obnoxious. These should never be notifications, let
               | alone ones you can't even selectively opt out of.
        
               | alistairSH wrote:
               | I have my banking/credit card apps push notifications
               | every time a transaction occurs (transfers, deposits,
               | withdrawals).
               | 
               | Sure, 99% of them are expected, but it's nice to confirm
               | deposits from my employer were on time, automated
               | payments triggered as planned, etc. Plus, it catches
               | anything nefarious (we had one card hacked a few years
               | ago).
               | 
               | My credit cards also send reminders when payments are
               | scheduled or due (1-2 are set to autopay, but 1-2 are
               | manual pay).
               | 
               | Edit - none of my banks send junk notices. And most of
               | them are configurable for which notices I want, with $
               | thresholds as well.
        
             | FearlessNebula wrote:
             | That's a great way to get people habitually ignoring the
             | important notifications
        
           | neither_color wrote:
           | I get around this by only enabling notifications when I order
           | food, and then disabling notifications after delivery. It's a
           | few extra steps but worth the serenity.
        
         | grishka wrote:
         | It's more interesting in Android. There's no notification
         | _permission_ , as every app is able to send notifications by
         | default. But, there are notification categories. You can turn
         | them off individually. Yes, the app developer is supposed to
         | specify them themselves. And most actually do. Those who don't
         | drive me nuts tho. I'm very careful with what I receive
         | notifications about.
         | 
         | Apple could definitely copy that. Right now the iOS
         | notification system is useless because of how overwhelmed you
         | get with everything and how notifications disappear by
         | themselves when you unlock the phone.
        
           | andai wrote:
           | >notifications disappear by themselves when you unlock the
           | phone
           | 
           | I get a bunch of messages from my friend on Steam, so I tap
           | to read them, but if I tap the wrong way it opens the app
           | instead, makes all the messages disappear, and I have to wait
           | until I get to a place with internet again before I can see
           | what he said.
        
             | Cheetah26 wrote:
             | I'd partially blame this one on the Steam app too. If it is
             | able to receive the message and give you a notification, it
             | should also let you see that message in-app without
             | internet.
             | 
             | Discord is the same way and it drives me mad, especially
             | considering how fussy it can be about connecting. Snapchat
             | on the other hand handles it right. If I get a notification
             | (for an actual chat at least), I am able to open it anytime
             | later regardless of whether or not my phone is still
             | connected.
        
             | grishka wrote:
             | I've been using Android for around 10 years. I'm very much
             | used to using the notification shade like a to-do list: I
             | often leave non-urgent notifications to hang in there to
             | deal with them later.
             | 
             | Another thing that drives me absolutely nuts in iOS, and
             | that stems form its lack of a usable notification system,
             | is that it considers it okay to interrupt your train of
             | thought with modal alerts. When your battery gets low, you
             | get an alert in your face. When there's a system update,
             | you get an alert in your face when you unlock the device
             | (and then an annoying, very dark-pattern-y "enter your
             | passcode to install overnight" screen). When there's any
             | number of things about Apple services you couldn't care
             | less about, you get an alert in your face, too. On (stock)
             | Android, all these things are notifications that can be
             | ignored for as long as you desire.
        
       | retreatguru wrote:
       | This is brilliant and would help just a little bit to bring us
       | back from our global phone addiction. It's a start at least.
        
       | josiahpeters wrote:
       | This is somewhat off topic. I have read through other people's
       | comments about good and bad experiences with push notifications
       | on Apple and Android. People use them as Todo lists and for a
       | number of things.
       | 
       | For something so critical, why has Apple or Google not created a
       | push notification log on your device? Some of us live by our
       | notifications and the fact that I accidentally swiped an
       | important notification away or I thought I saw a slack
       | notification come through but couldn't find it gives me anxiety.
       | 
       | As important as push is to our daily lives, you would think there
       | would be more innovation in managing these notifications.
        
         | patrickserrano wrote:
         | I'm surprised this isn't more of a thing. From what I
         | understand this is coming to Android 11 though
         | https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/03/20/android-11-tweaks-h...
        
         | strogonoff wrote:
         | One of the effects of a truly feature-complete notification
         | center would be that messenger/social media user may lose any
         | incentive to open that app.
         | 
         | Which I personally would be fine with; but which goes somewhat
         | counter to the currently-mainstream model of "free" ad-
         | supported social media and messaging platforms.
         | 
         | This ties into my long-standing argument that we should
         | normalize paid social. We should be allowed to pay a fee just
         | for the pipe. A paid platform would be incentivized to provide
         | its users with all the flexibility, APIs and integrations,
         | including third-party GUIs such as OS's built-in notification
         | center.
        
       | whywhywhywhy wrote:
       | I've honestly grown to hate my iPhone.
       | 
       | It hit me during a particularly stressful work period about a
       | year ago that this device doesn't bring any happiness to my life
       | and only brings anxiety, stress and saps my energy like a
       | parasite.
       | 
       | Once that stressful period was over the feeling didn't go away
       | though and now I can't even get rid of it because all my friends
       | use apps to communicate rather than SMS so it's either I allow
       | this parasite in my life or I just go disconnect almost
       | completely.
       | 
       | and I don't think what I'm saying is ridiculous and I think Apple
       | knows its bad otherwise they wouldn't be creating things like
       | screentime tracking and focus modes.
        
         | kaba0 wrote:
         | May I ask you what are you doing on your iPhone that you
         | consider unhealthy?
        
       | albertTJames wrote:
       | That must be one of the more interesting blog post I have read in
       | a long time. We need more solution driven people, great insights.
        
       | hypertele-Xii wrote:
       | Such a complicated solution. Here's a much simpler one: Stop
       | using Facebook. Problem solved.
        
         | gwd wrote:
         | How do I keep contact with relatives -- like cousins, aunts and
         | uncles, etc -- who I care enough about to want to chat with /
         | see what's up in their lives, but not enough to call on a
         | weekly basis?
        
           | Skinney wrote:
           | Call/text them on a _monthly_ basis?
        
           | murrayhenson wrote:
           | iCloud photo sharing? Works with people that do and do not
           | have iPhones/Macs. At least I know that non-Apple users can
           | see photos in a shared album; I don't know if they can add
           | photos to a shared photo album as well - I've never tried
           | that.
           | 
           | Several years ago I got tired for Facebook and quit it. My
           | parents, in-laws, and siblings have an Apple shared photo
           | album for "general" content and we occasionally set up albums
           | for the same group of folks when there's a big
           | event/trip/etc.
           | 
           | We occasionally Facetime or use chat via Messages. Email's
           | are in the mix as well.
           | 
           | I feel that it works reasonably well.
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | In a conversation with someone the other day, I said I tried to
         | participate in my community without using Facebook and it was
         | difficult. They laughed.
        
           | bennyp101 wrote:
           | I 'solved' this by creating a new account, under a different
           | name (yes, I know it's 'against the rules') that is purely a
           | member of the local groups. It has no friends, no timeline
           | posts, just for staying up to date with community events.
           | 
           | I have no real reason to check it, as there is not really
           | anything posted, but I can hop on once or twice a week to see
           | what is coming up.
           | 
           | Unfortunately, that's the best way I've found to know what
           | goes on in the village vs not actually wanting to participate
           | in Facebook
        
         | johnfn wrote:
         | Your solution has been around since the dawn of Facebook and
         | has had no affect on the majority of Facebook users. The
         | proposed solution actually could. Sometimes, it turns out that
         | the best solutions are in fact complicated.
        
         | jjice wrote:
         | While tricky, I agree in concept. It's hard to stop using
         | social media, and as much as I'm proud that I don't use
         | Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter any more, here I am, commenting
         | on a post on HN. They're different for sure, and HN causes more
         | thought and more learning, but there are still days that I
         | spent too much time and end up on page 3 of Ask HN.
         | 
         | Part of the fix is having something else to do. If I'm waiting
         | on a code review, I might slip into HN or Reddit. I guess a
         | solution would be having very flexible, productive tasks to do.
         | Duolingo seems like a good one, but I personally don't have too
         | much of a want to learn a new language.
        
         | raptorraver wrote:
         | I deleted my Facebook account last year. Next week I found
         | myself mindlessly scrolling Reddit. I blocked Reddit on my
         | phone. Next week I was scrolling Linkedin (sic!). Humans just
         | haven't adapted to this new era with endless information in a
         | packets that are designed to be as addictive as possible.
         | 
         | I think I should just get rid of my smart phone, but that's
         | easier said than done.
        
         | CPLNTN wrote:
         | This gives me "If you are homeless, just buy a house" vibes
        
         | paulintrognon wrote:
         | How do you explain, with a such simple solution, that there are
         | still billions of people using facebook? Are they just stupid?
        
           | hypertele-Xii wrote:
           | Simple =/= Easy
        
         | protoman3000 wrote:
         | And stop using Instagram or WhatsApp or TikTok or LinkedIn. But
         | can you, though?
         | 
         | Can you be the one single weird person in a group of 50 that
         | says "I'd rather not have pictures of this event with my face
         | on them posted on Insta, please"?
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | Sounds like you might be a fan of abstinence-based sex
         | education programs.
        
         | glitchcrab wrote:
         | In the same way that an alcoholic can just stop drinking and
         | then they're no longer an alcoholic, right? That's not how
         | addiction works.
        
           | junon wrote:
           | Habitual addiction and chemical addiction are not the same
           | things. Cutting Facebook cold turkey has few if any of the
           | side effects cutting alcohol cold turkey has.
        
             | Ma8ee wrote:
             | It has the effect of the existential dread of being alone
             | with your thoughts.
        
               | junon wrote:
               | That has nothing to do with addiction.
        
               | philosopher1234 wrote:
               | I disagree, i think it's the basis of a lot of addiction.
        
               | kaba0 wrote:
               | There is psychological addiction and chemical addiction.
               | Both suck, and you are likely better off gradually
               | decreasing the activity/drug in both cases, but there is
               | a real difference that in the latter case you _must_
               | gradually decrease it, else you will have very severe
               | side-effects, for example with alcohol it is called
               | delirium tremens.
        
               | Ma8ee wrote:
               | Of course it has. Just because it isn't directly based in
               | a physiological reaction doesn't make it less real. And
               | it is in general a mistake to make a clear distinction
               | between what is mind and what is matter. They are the
               | same.
        
           | LudwigNagasena wrote:
           | Do alcoholics overcome addiction with "Time well spent"
           | metrics?
        
             | vitro wrote:
             | Probably not. But what about "I felt well in my body after
             | getting drunk" metric?
        
             | bengale wrote:
             | Perhaps alcohol is a bad example because you can quit it
             | completely. That's not really the case with something like
             | a smart phone, so perhaps the better comparison is food.
             | You can't stop eating food completely if you struggle with
             | addiction, but you can learn healthier habits.
        
               | kaba0 wrote:
               | You can buy a non-smart phone though.
        
           | vincvinc wrote:
           | Even worse, it's more like "if you don't want to drink, just
           | don't be around alcohol! Just stop meeting people!"
        
           | bb101 wrote:
           | True. Planned impediments can help, just like making sure
           | alcohol never enters your front door.
           | 
           | I've used my phone's parental features to limit usage of
           | social apps to one hour. It's protected by a somewhat
           | randomly chosen PIN that I don't memorize but store in my
           | password manager. If I want to override the time limit, I
           | have to go and look up the PIN. Most of the time... too hard,
           | move on to something more productive.
        
         | nielsbot wrote:
         | Sure--but it's not just Facebook. And how do people learn they
         | should stop using Facebook?
        
       | stef25 wrote:
       | For me the only situation I consider "ok" for mindless browsing
       | is while keeping and eye on the kids. Reading a book or anything
       | else that requires concentration is impossible because you have
       | to look up / intervene every x minutes.
       | 
       | The whole mobile online experience has become so bad, it's soul
       | destroying. I don't go near social media anymore and prefer to
       | just read interesting things. While not signed in to Google
       | (because f*ck that), every search I do is met with a Google
       | disclaimer I have to tap 3x to reach the bottom and tap once more
       | to "agree" (no idea what I'm agreeing to). If you tap the wrong
       | way (too quickly?) it zooms in and you have to use two fingers to
       | zoom out again.
       | 
       | Then whatever site you end up has a cookie disclaimer, an "enter
       | your email" popup and often even a third one with some promo
       | crap. So often it's more than 5 fiddly taps just to get to the
       | content and then you have to hope there's no paywall.
       | 
       | Infinite scroll is a complete horror show. I find myself
       | mindlessly doom scrolling through job and real estate sites,
       | tapping likes while I'm not even looking for a job or a house.
       | 
       | I can't quite live without smartphone (GPS, music, audiobooks
       | ...) but I almost wish they were never invented.
        
         | GordonS wrote:
         | > While not signed in to Google (because f _ck that), every
         | search I do is met with a Google disclaimer I have to tap 3x to
         | reach the bottom and tap once more to "agree" (no idea what I'm
         | agreeing to)
         | 
         | Oh, this drives me nuts - it's every.single.time I open google
         | in a private tab! I mean, they _know* that _nobody_ is reading
         | this before hitting  "I agree".
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | welfvh wrote:
       | OP and co-founder of Potential here, AMA!
        
       | lewich wrote:
       | Would be really nice to have this, but what are the chances? I am
       | still thinking it would be better to be off-facebook (already got
       | off twitter, instagram and other networks), but keeping in touch
       | with local community is not possible then.
        
       | fudged71 wrote:
       | iOS 15 is already doing some great things for ADHD. These
       | recommendations look even better!
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Out of all these I like the conditional app unlock
       | 
       | They should extend it to certain urls too!
        
       | cromwellian wrote:
       | Another option would be to ship a feature phone, or a feature
       | phone _mode_. So you know, your $1000 device can only make calls
       | like most of us used phones for 20 years ago.
       | 
       | iOS 15 Humane - your phone is just a phone.
        
       | deanclatworthy wrote:
       | I love this, but do we really think that Apple also isn't using
       | engagement with your phone as an internal success metric? If
       | people use apps less often, they are probably using less apps. If
       | people use less apps, Apple's revenue drops.
       | 
       | Unlike Apple's attack on privacy which makes them a
       | differentiator in the marketplace, only at the expense of others,
       | I don't see what's in it for Apple to do this?
        
         | dannyw wrote:
         | Apple still primarily makes money from hardware sales. They'd
         | rather get you working out, buy an airpod pro, and subscribe to
         | fitness+ than spend time on Facebook.
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | True, but there are still people who don't use their phone
           | much, and therefore don't really mind if they have a 5 year
           | old iPhone.
           | 
           | Apple intentionally making that group of users bigger could
           | be very bad for revenue
        
           | deanclatworthy wrote:
           | Apple made 72.3B revenue from app sales in 2020. This is not
           | an insignificant amount of money, regardless of where it
           | stands next to their hardware sales.
           | 
           | Furthemore, if people are using smartphones less maybe
           | they'll realise they don't need an expensive smartphone to
           | check whatsapp...
        
         | alwillis wrote:
         | Apple did announce ScreenTime API, which enables developers to
         | do some of the things mentioned in the article.
         | 
         | Plus Apple's revenue isn't based on app engagement; it's
         | hardware and services primarily. Using some apps less doesn't
         | impact the big picture of subscriptions (Music, iCloud+, News*,
         | etc.) or hardware purchases like a new iPhone, AirPods, etc.
        
       | irae wrote:
       | The article has a few brilliant ideas, for sure. In particular
       | asking if the time was well spent. This can be truly valuable and
       | it makes sense inside the "screen time" feature apple already
       | provides. Including the score in the app store could be a good
       | idea, specially if sharing your "well spent" opinion is opt-in
       | and only local on the device by default.
       | 
       | On the other hand, Apple is not and should not be punishing
       | anything for being persuasive or any other subjective measure,
       | and should not ever have a method of punishing anymore
       | financially. Any rules to tax or otherwise punish based on
       | opinion can also be used as censorship, and not company should go
       | there.
       | 
       | Yes, it is Apples interest to help us manage our preferences with
       | ease. This is providing a good service. It is not Apples duty or
       | right to impose a view/opinion on its users, neither is their
       | role to be our savior or bastion on the mess the internet is
       | becoming.
        
       | th0rgall wrote:
       | I really like the ideation here (and in the HN comments!).
       | They're not the first to come up with most of these ideas though,
       | the Nudge extension (https://nudgeware.io/) already has nudges
       | against infinite scroll & other interventions for
       | Twitter/Facebook/, and there are plenty of "app blocker" apps out
       | there (for App Conditions). Still, I liked to see concrete
       | designs on how Apple could make improvements that only they have
       | the power to implement: the persuasive design settings, the Time
       | Well Spent/Regret Tax.
       | 
       | But the problem is broader and more systemic than Apple can
       | address I'm afraid. "persuasive design" is a direct result of ad-
       | based attention-seeking business models. We need purposeful
       | social apps like https://readup.com or Strava, whose business
       | model incentives are directly aligned with our wellbeing. I'm
       | spending 4-10 hours reading on Readup weekly, and I invariably
       | consider that Time Well Spent (https://readup.com/@thorgalle).
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | natedubyah wrote:
       | Im interested to know if the preliminary thoughts of these new
       | ios features were at any all influenced by the pandemic, theres
       | a-lot of stuff that would have been really cool during that time
       | that is now rolling out.
        
       | spython wrote:
       | The article wants Apple to save us from mindless browsing, but I
       | see mindless browsing as unavoidable. Not because of some
       | technical or legal thing, but because mindless browsing is a good
       | thing. We need it. Mindless browsing is like a walk through the
       | woods, just looking for what is happening, navigating a huge
       | amount of information that is hardly important at the moment -
       | oh, the cherry tree is blooming - but could be important later.
       | 
       | The 'outside' is made up of myriads of tiny details - wind is
       | moving the leaves, slowly and irregularly, the birds are singing,
       | insects flying through the air, the earth feels soft and damp and
       | smells of freshness after the rain, the movements of clouds and
       | the sun are inexorably changing the lighting. We are, however,
       | spending time in concrete boxes where nothing ever moves, and
       | even seal off the sounds and air flow from the outside. Within
       | those boxes we sit and lie and enter other, flatter spaces of our
       | screens, which nonetheless offer us the possibility of some kind
       | of change, movement in the world.. Of course we will browse those
       | changes mindlessly.
       | 
       | Since mainstream social media has turned into a manipulative
       | toxic landscape, I find myself retreating to more niche and
       | better moderated sites, devoid of hate and over-strained
       | emotions. I also find myself wishing for a digital space, be it a
       | game or a website, that would feel similar to a walk in the woods
       | - where a lot is happening but not much is important. Like
       | watching the breaking of waves on the beach. Like sitting at a
       | campfire. Like watching the tree tops move in the wind.
       | 
       | I like mindless browsing. I enjoy it. Just give me the right
       | space for it.
        
         | andrepd wrote:
         | A walk through the woods is not engineered by Las Vegas casino
         | designers backed by petabytes of user data to be as addictive
         | as possible.
         | 
         | There's taking an aimless stroll and there's compulsively
         | opening reddit or facebook at 3am.
        
           | spython wrote:
           | Yes, of course it has a lot to do with information hygiene.
           | We need to be more particular about what we let into our
           | minds, we just don't have the tradition for it yet.
           | 
           | Browsing facebook is more like taking a walk in a dystopian
           | junkyard than a forest, and a sign by Apple saying "you might
           | be browsing a junkyard" would just add to this dystopia. This
           | is why the proposal is to design better spaces for mindless
           | browsing, since we apparently need it.
        
         | mark_l_watson wrote:
         | Mindless browsing is nothing like walking randomly in the woods
         | or on the beach, communing with nature. One thing saps our
         | humanity and the other enhances it.
        
           | spython wrote:
           | My argument is that we need some kind of movement, some kind
           | of change that is happening outside of us. It feels great to
           | sit in the backyard and watch the chicken quarrel, but who
           | has chickens anymore? It can be enjoyable to sit in a cafe at
           | the town square and just witness life happening around you,
           | but most town squares are losing this community side.
           | 
           | Since the immediate 'outside' - my home and office - mostly
           | lacks this tiny uninterrupted movements that I describe, this
           | continuous stream of life happening, I begin to feel isolated
           | and turn to the screens around me. They provide a similar
           | feeling of being connected to life, even if much less
           | fulfilling.
           | 
           | Sure, I could work on changing the social life of my city,
           | reviving the town square and planting gardens, but here, on a
           | hacker news site, I like to dream about some technological
           | solution that might fulfill the need of seeing myself
           | embedded in a perpetual movement on life.
        
         | brailsafe wrote:
         | Mindless browsing does have it's place, but it's often not in
         | it's place, and it's certainly not a walk in the woods. A walk
         | in the woods either allows the sounds of your brain to rest or
         | for them to come to light and allow you to work on them. The
         | pointless information cacophony is the opposite imo; it
         | temporarily tranquilizes them, never letting them be addressed.
         | Where a walk in the woods can be stress-relieving and possibly
         | actually social, mindless browsing just throws your stress into
         | a garbage bin, that just gets taken to a dump; you're pretty
         | sure you dealt with it, it's not here anymore right?
        
         | johnfn wrote:
         | Mindless browsing is in no way a walk in the woods. Just
         | observe your mood before and after a walk in the woods, and
         | then your mood before and after mindlessly scrolling through
         | facebook. One makes you feel better, one much worse.
        
         | toomanyducks wrote:
         | It's well past midnight, I've been interacting with apps
         | designed to maximize 'user engagement' since 8 PM. I don't have
         | coherent thoughts, I'm opening irrelevant tabs habitually. This
         | is not healthy. I have a problem. That problem is mindless
         | browsing, and it feels engineered.
         | 
         | Not saying you're wrong, just that your ideas don't work for
         | me.
        
           | josho wrote:
           | A trick that helped me was to put time limits on my apps.
           | Then I set the access code to a random number and wrote that
           | number down and put the paper in an inconvenient spot (eg. My
           | basement cellar).
           | 
           | The result is there is just enough friction that I don't
           | bother going to get the number. But if ever I _need_ access I
           | can alway go get it.
        
           | heroHACK17 wrote:
           | This was exactly me last night. After four hours I realized
           | I'd had a headache the whole time (from four straight hours
           | of screen-time), and yet, my lizard brain snatched the reigns
           | right back before I could make a decision to put it down or
           | continue scrolling.
        
           | scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
           | That's because the internet is no longer a walk through the
           | woods. It's now a stumble through a confusing poorly-lit
           | casino.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | alistairSH wrote:
             | Well said. 100% agreement.
             | 
             | Last year, I found myself in an unusually unhappy place.
             | Partly COVID lockdowns, partly changes at work, partly
             | politics (US resident). My wife noticed and told me to get
             | off Facebook/Twitter/etc - they were making me visibly
             | agitated. As I weaned myself off those platforms, my
             | happiness and stress levels improved.
             | 
             | I'm glad to be (mostly) off the platforms. It's been a
             | massive improvement.
             | 
             | Facebook was the biggest culprit. I unfriended anybody I
             | didn't know in meatspace. I unfollowed anybody I hadn't
             | spoken to live in a year or more. My feed is now mostly
             | photos my parents post, a few cycling groups, plus some
             | marketplace activity. I no longer feel the need to check
             | daily (or more) - once a week is plenty.
             | 
             | I do find I use Instagram more now. But, because it's "just
             | photos", it doesn't stress me out like Facebook.
             | 
             | Twitter only gets visited when somebody links me to an
             | interesting thread from elsewhere (here or other forums). I
             | never go on my own.
        
               | Applejinx wrote:
               | I outright deleted Facebook and Twitter (or at least, my
               | established profiles on 'em, to the best of my ability).
               | Also ditched Instagram while I was at it, as I felt like
               | I 'should' post stuff to it, not because the things I saw
               | there were bothering me.
               | 
               | I made a twitter account specifically to not have any
               | friends and not do anything, and treat it the same way
               | you're treating it.
               | 
               | Same reaction: it's been a massive improvement. I
               | wouldn't go back. Looking at that stuff from the outside
               | now, it feels like a trap. Amazing how they can turn
               | making you miserable, into an addictive behavior.
               | 
               | We are apparently, as a species, more driven by panic
               | than pleasure, and the algorithm optimizes for this.
        
               | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
               | > Facebook was the biggest culprit. I unfriended anybody
               | I didn't know in meatspace.
               | 
               | I stopped using it because I was getting cross-ways with
               | people I otherwise highly respected, over political
               | comments which invited open disagreement. I didn't want
               | to be at odds with these people, but Facebook has
               | designed the service to facilitate this, and has
               | engineered the degradation of personal relationships
               | because of it.
               | 
               | That's strike one. We all know how to avoid difficult
               | conversations in real life, because we can feel them
               | creeping up on us, and we change the subject. On social
               | media, you state the whole argument, and then people feel
               | free to do the same, and put their spin on it.
               | 
               | For thousands of years, people have ebbed and flowed
               | through life, met new people, and stopped seeing others.
               | A very large part of the problem with Facebook is that it
               | destroys this natural flow of life, and tempts you to
               | connect with every human being you've ever said 2 words
               | to, and then keep that connection forever.
               | 
               | That's strike two. When you compare this situation to how
               | humans have lived for thousands of years, it's an almost-
               | grotesque abrogation of the natural order of things.
               | There are relationships that SHOULD fade away, and others
               | you should ACTIVELY eliminate once you know where they
               | really stand. All social media platforms are designed to
               | treat your follower number as the end-all-be-all sacred
               | metric.
               | 
               | I don't have a strike three. That was enough for me.
        
               | potatolicious wrote:
               | Couldn't agree more - I still have FB but honestly time
               | on it just makes me more agitated than happy, and I
               | should really just get off of it completely.
               | 
               | FB's problem is fundamental in the way that you described
               | but I'd add a few points to it:
               | 
               | Not only does FB artificially try to revive relationships
               | that have run their course (and also gives all of these
               | past relationships permanent access to your thoughts),
               | IMO FB fundamentally misunderstands "connection" - that
               | or they understand it fine but are utterly cynical about
               | it.
               | 
               | In what way is mindlessly thumbing through a high school
               | classmate's wedding photos "connecting" people? People
               | who you haven't spoken to in a decade or more? The
               | primary uses of FB seem to be passively perusing the
               | musings of people you don't care much about, which
               | despite what FB PR insists, isn't making me care much
               | more about them.
               | 
               | The FB news feed is one of the _least_ social things I
               | can think of! It is consumed passively, nearly always by
               | yourself, and doesn 't actually create any interaction
               | between myself and others besides simple "likes".
               | 
               | I keep waiting for the arrival of social networks that
               | actually meet their own lofty claims - software that
               | actually facilitates the development of meaningful
               | relationships.
        
               | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
               | > In what way is mindlessly thumbing through a high
               | school classmate's wedding photos "connecting" people?
               | People who you haven't spoken to in a decade or more?
               | 
               | I'll do you one better. I deleted my account back in
               | 2016, in the run-up to Trump's election (cause I just
               | didn't want to hear it). Just before I did, there was a
               | whole rash of connection requests from my high school
               | classmates. Facebook blasted out that one person had re-
               | connected with me, and a dozen others suddenly thought
               | that would be a good idea too. I graduated THIRTY years
               | ago, and hadn't spoken to ANY of the others since. Most
               | of the requests were coming from people I wouldn't even
               | have called friends AT THE TIME. That's just not normal,
               | but on Facebook it is!
        
             | sodality2 wrote:
             | Reminds me of the song, "Welcome to the Internet":
             | 
             | "Could I interest you in everything
             | 
             | All of the time
             | 
             | A bit of everything
             | 
             | All of the time
             | 
             | Apathy's a tragedy
             | 
             | And boredom is a crime
             | 
             | Anything and everything
             | 
             | All of the time"
        
               | handrous wrote:
               | This features in Bo Burnham's latest comedy special
               | (though with Burnham, maybe comedy belongs in scare-
               | quotes, since his last two specials have leaned much
               | harder on wry commentary than actual laugh-out-loud
               | humor) produced largely on his own and filmed almost
               | entirely in what looks to be a one-room guest house of
               | his. It's on Netflix and I'm sure the part with that song
               | is on YouTube somewhere (hahaha).
        
               | sodality2 wrote:
               | Yep- it's totally different from his previous work but I
               | absolutely loved it. Especially "Welcome to the
               | Internet", because I can see firsthand what the song is
               | about.
               | 
               | Here's the video on Bo Burnham's own channel:
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1BneeJTDcU
        
               | welfvh wrote:
               | Excerpt from a poetry slam I did 2 years ago:
               | 
               | What are we paying, when we're paying attention?
               | 
               | We pay with what we could've done and what we could've
               | learned. We pay with the people we could've met, and the
               | conversations we could have had.
               | 
               | We pay with every future us, that we could've been, We
               | pay with the values we did not live by, We pay with the
               | goals we did not reach, We pay with every opportunity to
               | become more fully alive, that is now gone.
               | 
               | We pay with the moments of joy that never happened, We
               | pay with the peaceful sleep, and the refreshed feeling in
               | the morning, that we didn't get.
               | 
               | Because we were busy paying... attention.
        
               | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
               | I regret that I have but one upvote to give to this
               | comment.
        
             | welfvh wrote:
             | We'll make a wall with attention poetry and this will be on
             | it
        
           | kaba0 wrote:
           | Unfortunately, I'm also prone to this. I don't even notice
           | when I click skip on the time limit setting.
           | 
           | But unfortunately it is a human problem (exploited by apps,
           | but still a human one), and anything done by another app is
           | just treating the symptoms without treating the underlying
           | issue.
           | 
           | I recommend the book titled Atomic Habits. For short term
           | "solution" you may try rearranging app icons like reddit, fb
           | to some obscure position to make it just a bit harder to find
           | them (do not totally hide them since you will just revert
           | it), and I read that turning on grayscale also deceases the
           | "joy" we get from addictive apps. But I found the last one
           | way too limiting on usability.
        
           | cout wrote:
           | I did the same thing for years, mindlessly browsing well past
           | a sane hour. What changed is I started going to bed early and
           | getting up early, before the sun rises. I still browse
           | mindlessly on occasion, but my after-coffee morning browsing
           | is a lot more directed than my drowsy evening browsing.
        
             | itsthejb wrote:
             | Another solution is no phones (chargers) in the bedroom.
             | Have your "charging station" in the living room
        
             | welfvh wrote:
             | for me listening to audiobooks, music or podcasts is really
             | helpful to keep the mind stimulated but slowly wind down in
             | the evening
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | headmelted wrote:
           | Even at that, Downtime is already a feature. Personally I'd
           | want the mindless browsing feature on all the time, but it
           | would be fairly trivial to assign it to Downtime same as
           | other quality-of-life features already in the OS.
        
           | threatofrain wrote:
           | FB may try to maximize whatever appeal they have, but does
           | persuasive design really stack up against persuasive friends?
           | What is the fundamental ammo behind FB's ability to
           | manipulate FOMO?
           | 
           | Isn't it friendship and social delight?
        
             | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
             | Except that many FB friends aren't really friends. We don't
             | have a word for "People we don't talk to about anything
             | important but who also enjoy cat videos."
             | 
             | If we did, that's where FB would live. It's a kind of
             | friendship surrogacy - noisy and occasionally entertaining,
             | but facile and shallow.
             | 
             | And that's the definitive effect of ad tech. It makes
             | _everything_ facile and shallow.
             | 
             | Politics becomes polarised and infantile and hostile to
             | nuance. Social interactions become gamified ("Follow me and
             | I'll follow you back to help both of us reach
             | 1,000/10,000/100,000/millions!") Clicking Like becomes a
             | displacement activity which avoids real political change.
             | Relationships become performative. Businesses become all
             | about engagement and persuasion - using the same old
             | template of techniques and page designs - and not about
             | social value.
             | 
             | I think it's naive to expect Apple to push against this,
             | because Apple are part of the problem. Apple World is a
             | shiny place which includes exactly the correct number of
             | minorities and age demographics all living the officially
             | approved clean, smiling, sunny, fit, healthy, efficiently
             | organised, and brightly decorated middle class consumer
             | lifestyle that Apple products try to personify.
             | 
             | This isn't even about technology. FAANG (and Microsoft)
             | have created a shockingly undiverse collection of
             | overlapping online worlds which define too many elements of
             | work time and personal space - and all with a 1950s tone of
             | optimised conformist consumption, mandated self-
             | improvement, and transactional time trading.
        
               | travisgriggs wrote:
               | Facebook/messaging app/etc creates a sense of friendship
               | that minimizes risk. It allows us to control the level of
               | engagement so that it optimizes our own personal
               | Goldilocks zone of immediate comfort.
               | 
               | Because it wasn't an issue yet, our mothers didn't put an
               | arm around our shoulders and say "aw honey, the
               | ingredients of friendship include awkward movements,
               | inconvenience, sacrifice, vulnerability. You can't do it
               | without those essential ingredients."
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | Applejinx wrote:
             | No, it is not. It is panic and fear of something harmful
             | just out of sight. That drives WAY more engagement than
             | 'friendship'.
        
           | spython wrote:
           | I totally get it and often find myself doing the same. Mostly
           | when I missed out on winding down in the evening in a better
           | fashion. Then I visit the sites with the 'engineered
           | engagement' and polarizing content and find myself quite
           | literally taken for an emotional ride.
           | 
           | It's hard to find content that doesn't overstimulate you in
           | that state. Sitcoms and chill twitch streams work so well
           | exactly because the extent of what is happening is safe,
           | predictable and confined, yet the process is slightly
           | different every time.
        
         | hollerith wrote:
         | Browsing the web without a goal feels to me more like
         | daydreaming than it feels like walking in the woods.
         | 
         | Sometimes I daydream _while_ walking in the woods, but I am
         | more likely to daydream while staring at a blank wall or while
         | waiting for a bus on a boring street with nothing but concrete
         | and asphalt rectangles to look at.
         | 
         | In fact, my whole purpose in walking in the woods is to stop
         | the mental chatter, including the daydreaming. If I find myself
         | daydreaming during the walk, I consider that a failure and tell
         | myself that next time I walk in the woods, I should take along
         | a friend or a dog to make the walk more engaging and
         | consequently more effective at stopping the chatter -- or that
         | I should find more interesting woods.
         | 
         | This comment could be extended greatly by introducing the
         | concepts of "focused attention" and "involuntary attention".
         | Very briefly, focused attention is how we pay the bills and
         | contribute to advancing our civilization and all, but focused
         | attention eventually tires the mind. The best way to recover
         | from the tiredness and to restore the ability to focus the
         | attention is to do things that engage "involuntary attention",
         | e.g., taking a walk in the woods where there are things that
         | attract attention involuntarily (without raising the blood
         | pressure like the sirens and the horns of the city tend to do).
         | That will restore the ability to pay focused attention (to
         | whatever the person choose to focus on) faster than would being
         | in a room alone and staring at a blank wall. Some people advise
         | spending as much time as possible either engaging in focused
         | attention or recovering the ability to focus one's attention
         | and advise against daydreaming and aimless browsing of the web
         | because those are sub-optimal ways of restoring the ability to
         | focus attention. (Spending time with friends or walking in the
         | woods with a dog are much better ways.)
        
         | gerardnll wrote:
         | The article offers you the choice to keep mindlessly browsing.
         | What we have now it's not really an option. This would be like
         | nutritional warnings for apps.
        
         | indigochill wrote:
         | This is why I enjoy hanging out in the tildeverse
         | (https://tildeverse.org/). It's just a loose group of public
         | boxes you can SSH into and chat on (some of them share mailing
         | lists, but others don't). Some people make websites or games or
         | tools or whatever. But none of it is organized. It's just
         | people hanging out online.
        
           | foobarbecue wrote:
           | Thanks, tildeverse looks fun! Just found the first clear,
           | simple explanation of Makefiles I've read on there.
        
           | spython wrote:
           | This seems just wonderful!
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | I disagree. Exercise and walks in the woods feel like taking my
         | brain to the dog park. Mindless browsing keeps my mind just
         | busy enough to prevent me from thinking about anything or from
         | being bored. It's like fast food for the mind.
        
         | bipson wrote:
         | I disagree wholeheartedly.
         | 
         | Mindless browsing will occupy my attention, keeps me
         | _distracted_ and on the edge, draining my energy and mental
         | capacity, makes me jittery - even if this realization took me
         | quite some time.
         | 
         | A walk in the woods is refreshing and my mind is focused,
         | wandering maybe aimlessly, but well-paced, on its own time,
         | makes me relaxed and open-minded.
         | 
         | We like distraction, our mind craves it, often we don't want to
         | think about what bothers us. But allowing all the random itches
         | that bother us is the only way to address them and let them go.
         | 
         | Also, I have zero, _NIL_ creativity after mindless browsing, I
         | am drained.
         | 
         | Alone with myself and my thoughts on a train or a walk the
         | thoughts are no longer buzzing, they are forming, transforming,
         | becoming real ideas.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | blitz_skull wrote:
         | This comparison is apples and oranges. Fresh air and sunlight
         | actually has tangible physical benefits. Staring at a dim blue
         | screen while contorting your thumbs isn't doing you any favors
         | physically.
         | 
         | To say NOTHING of how infuriating anti-social it has made us as
         | a society.
         | 
         | Nature is mostly good. Mindless scrolling is mostly bad.
        
           | Kiro wrote:
           | I don't want fresh air or sunlight. I want to sit in a dark
           | basement with a big Unix beard. I hate this "lifestyle and
           | health" dogma that has poisoned hacker culture.
        
         | mjrbrennan wrote:
         | I am not sure if this is entirely what you mean, but for a game
         | Red Dead Redemption 2 can scratch this itch. The natural
         | environment, ecosystem, and weather effects are amazing. You
         | can easily just avoid the main game and just wander around the
         | environment, and there are a lot of woods to walk in!
        
         | pizza wrote:
         | When I walk through the woods, it's like the environment scrubs
         | my mind of accumulated exposure to mental poisoning. When I
         | scroll a news feed, the platform tries to jam my mind full of
         | the most saccharine palaver possible. I end up feeling less
         | like a prism, and more like a pack animal.. Perhaps there's a
         | midpoint
        
         | Jenz wrote:
         | This is the most comforting thing I ever have read (and right
         | now, I needed that).
        
         | flohofwoe wrote:
         | I wouldn't compare it to a walk through the woods, more like
         | walking through a busy street with angry people and
         | advertisements screaming at you all the time ;)
        
       | ospohngellert wrote:
       | I actually really like apple's screen time limit capabilities.
       | Being able to limit my time on twitch/youtube has been really
       | helpful for me. However, one thing I would like to see is
       | limiting the number of times I can open an app. Even if I limit
       | email to 3 minutes, I can still open it 15 times a day :D
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-10 23:02 UTC)