In a series of books by Charles Stross, there is a pervasive surveillance state in the US for security theater. All cell phones are monitoring your conversation at all times watching for key words. You can take the battery out–but all cell phone batteries are required to contain miniature cell phones that monitor all audio when they are removed from the phone…
Go into the distant past (say 1980) and tell people that in the future everyone can carry in their pocket (for a few hundred $ or less) a telephone, library, VCR, radio, jukebox, extremely high resolution camera and movie camera, tape recorder, audio and video editing studio, street-level map of the world, compass, alarm clock, video game console, calculator, flashlight, newspaper stand, and more–how many of those people do you think would predict that some people in the future would rant about how much they hate it?
OP, you’re on the SD forums. Wouldn’t you like the ability to access the Dope while you’re on the go, like waiting in line at the doctor’s office or the DMV? Or check the weather forecast? I’m 68, and I worked my way up through a slew of flip phones and fat candy bar phones until I got an Apple phone, and I’d never go back.
Why do they call it ovaltine? The can is round. The mug is round. They should call it ROUNDtine!
Edit: Duplicate
When I think of “bulky/heavy,” I think of a desktop PC with a 43" monitor. My phone, which slips comfortably in my pants pocket, is most definitely not what I would consider “bulky/heavy”.
As for the rest of your remark - I’m confused, what’s the con? I’ve got a device in my pocket that lets me communicate with anyone anywhere via several means (email/voice/text/internet message board), and access a universe of new and old information from anywhere. I can capture (and send) high quality audio, video, and still images. I can download apps that turn my phone into a sound meter, an audio spectrum analyzer, a video game console, an airplane boarding pass, a news reader, an HP-48 (an awesome calculator for engineering students in the 80s/90’s), a foreign-language instructor, a diagnostic device for my car, a navigator that routes me around traffic, and about a million other neat tools.
But you’re telling me that I should feel like I’m being fleeced? :dubious:
Hey, the OP only has 40 posts so far on the SDMB, so, cut them some slack. Who can say what level of attachment has yet been formed to this forum?
…Though I will note without further comment that in one of those posts, the OP states a strong preference for keeping analog POTS service because they enjoy the unfiltered background noise that digital systems usually actively work to filter out. They also like using fax machines instead of “scanning and emailing attachments”, pining for the days when analog-based, truly “full duplex connections” were the norm (instead of digitally time-sliced, simulated two-way duplex connections, I suppose).
Huh.
I’m going to make an educated, cohort-based guess that the OP also prefers the warm, accurate sound of vinyl records to digitally transformed and compressed music, as no matter how high the bitrate or compression ratio, “it’s just never the same!” and “I can definitely hear the difference!”
(I will draw a line, however, and NOT guess that super-expensive, $1000+ short-run speaker cables are also in the mix.)
Well, you have had the wool pulled over your eyes.
d&r
Most of them. Humans naturally like to complain about anything and everything. Read what people were saying when telephones were first introduced - they will destroy everything that’s good in this world!
Hey, the OP only has 40 posts so far on the SDMB, so, cut them some slack. Who can say what level of attachment has yet been formed to this forum?
…Though I will note without further comment that in one of those posts, the OP states a strong preference for keeping analog POTS service because they enjoy the unfiltered background noise that digital systems usually actively work to filter out. They also like using fax machines instead of “scanning and emailing attachments”, pining for the days when analog-based, truly “full duplex connections” were the norm (instead of digitally time-sliced, simulated two-way duplex connections, I suppose).
Huh.
I’m going to make an educated, cohort-based guess that the OP also prefers the warm, accurate sound of vinyl records to digitally transformed and compressed music, as no matter how high the bitrate or compression ratio, “it’s just never the same!” and “I can definitely hear the difference!”
(I will draw a line, however, and NOT guess that super-expensive, $1000+ short-run speaker cables are also in the mix.)
When texting became a thing, people warned that it was the end of civilization, because nobody would talk to each other anymore.
When telephones became a thing people warned that it was the end of civilization, because nobody would write to each other anymore.
When modern postal services became a thing, people warned that it was the end of civilization, because nobody would talk to each other anymore.
You forgot to say “I KNOW - I was THERE!”
I have a palm top that does not have a removable battery.
I can talk faster than I can type, and there is no delay on sending voice messages.
Texting and driving is becoming a leading cause of vehicle accidents.
Of course, when the device is implanted in my head, I won’t have any problems anymore. Resistance is futile!
That’s been true for a long time. When I worked for AT&T when cellphones were still fairly new, the size of the phone was determined by the size of the keypad, nothing else. Making it thin was the challenge.
My S8 is neither bulky nor heavy. And I use it far more often to check my mail and get directions and listen to music than to call people.
Sure you can. Any magazine with a more elderly audience carries ads for simple phones that pretty do nothing but calling and maybe texting. They do tend to have large keypads.
Turn off your location setting and businesses won’t bug you. Or you can turn the phone off. Or put it in airline mode.
Smart precedes phones. Smart weapons had some computation ability and self-navigation built in, for example.
Some time ago, 20 years or more, the big issue in electronics magazines was the fight for pocket space. We all had cellphones, pagers, iPods, and GPS systems for our cars. The smartphone combined all that stuff and added more features. That’s why it’s so popular.
Sounds like someone who the phrase “ok boomer” was invented for.
Utter baloney, with all due respect. There are countless thousands of non-fiction, non-obsolete books, and trillions of pieces of relevant knowledge that are not online, anywhere.
They’re smartphones because they outwit their users. I agreeably recall an early critique of the first Macs (which MrsRico and I beta-tested) as “designed by geniuses to be used by idiots.” I know my IQ has dropped; my Android phone outsmarts me constantly.
Quite. We’ve [del]donated[/del] tossed many of our murdered-tree volumes. But besides big (carto)graphical works we keep shelves of crank literature, books from local (natural) historical societies and extinct tiny presses, trivial old travel and technical guides, etc. Out in the larger world, much proprietary or suppressed info that has been digitized lies behind data barriers beyond Google’s grasp.
But those aren’t completely dumb. I recently upgraded to one of these.[sup]1[/sup] Previously, I did have a truly dumb phone, designed around 1996 or so. When the battery started to go, I couldn’t find another for sale. So I bought the cheapest phone I could find, which was an Alcatel flipphone for $30. But as I said, those aren’t completely dumb. It has a camera, for example, which the dumb phone did not. And some digital assistant, which I did my best to shut down. When I activated it, my provider started continuous charges for data services even though I wasn’t doing anything on the phone. I had to call them to shut that off. That made it a dumb phone.
[sup]1[/sup] I think I jumped at least two generations of phone tech with the upgrade. I’m still at least five, maybe more, behind current technology.
I feel compelled to point out that vinyl sound may be ‘warm’ (ie the top octave is pretty much missing) but it cannot be accurate because of all the limitations of a needle wiggling in a groove. It will almost certainly have been compressed in some way to fit the music into the limited dynamic range of vinyl.
Digital sound is accurate and not ‘transformed’ in any way.