[sgc]

I think many people would find intellectually boring your position of absolute personal freedom with no objective measure of excellence, along with your aggressive defense of such. But there is also objective information which would support OP's position for someone who considers objectivity in the personal sphere of little value: heavy computer and mobile use has been linked many times with psychological difficulties, including anxiety, depression, stress, etc. Please don't pontificate on other's allusion to human well being by presenting your own moral code to be imposed.

[jancsika]

> And we all use them just to rant at each other about political things that we in reality are totally misinformed about ... and otherwise just waste our lives.

You're certainly free to find the relevant response to that intellectually boring. But it's quite a leap from OP's totalizing statement of despair to implicitly fill in that ellipsis with "allusion to human well being."

I'd like to be generous in my reading, but I don't see any room in there for a discussion of "heavy" vs healthy device use.

[Erlich_Bachman]

Many deep profound things are intellectually boring. For many people that's a big obstacle to overcome in order to learn them. I can't see how "being boring" is any substantive argument for or against any question discussed here.

The original author used his "objective measure of excellence" as an argument for not developing quantum computing technologies to be used in personal devices. In this specific instance, in this practical regard (even though it's probably 50 years too early for this question) - I argue that yes, the position of personal freedom (to use quantum computing in cell phones, exaggeratedly) does indeed trump the other position which is to actively exclude quantum computing from phones for the vague fear that people might waste their lives on it, by failing to fit into some objective measure of excellence.