Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by VelesDude 800 days ago
All the other comments here make a good point but this is a core problem that I really worry about. Assumption of technology usage. And that eventually you are forced into usage of something you might not want. The amount of businesses and even government divisions that just assume the following.

1) You have a smart phone

2) It is either Apple or Android and nothing else

3) You are happy to use their proprietary app/setup.

I started to become aware of this over a decade back when using Windows Phone. And while I am on an up to date Android phone now, that you are forced to participate.

This is also why Ted Kaczynski was fascinating, An absolute insane lunatic that made some good points about the nature of technology. While his idea about this was a lot more broad, the requirement of phones is just another inch being taken to get to mile took.

"127. A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man’s freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn’t want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster and farther than a walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man’s freedom of locomotion. "

2 comments

Definitely. It applies to multiple levels as well. The massive adoption of banking cards created the expectation that you use one, which then caused cash to not be universally accepted everywhere anymore. Now it's expected that you use an Android or iOS app for said bank. Next up, your banking app expects you to have specific AR smart glasses to use it properly.

It's also an issue with "e-Government" platforms in some European countries. There's this default expectation that you want to use it, which has in some cases made certain tasks more difficult for those whom prefer using regular paper forms. The next layer is those platforms requiring Android/iOS apps, which could very well mean that being able to use healthcare or filing your taxes indirectly requires either a Google or Apple account, and agreeing to their agreements.

I really wish that Kaczynski had found better (i.e. not completely insane and immoral) ways to raise awareness of his ideas. He definitely had some insights into the problems technology causes for society, but I feel like his ideas became tainted by the utter madness he pursued for the sake of his ideas.
If he hadn't done what he had done then we almost certainly never would have heard of him and his manifesto.

"The Kaczynski paradox" is a problem for a number (not all) of terrorists or terrorists groups, where fundamentally they have a good point, but also use unacceptable means to bring attention to these points.

Sure, there's truth to that. Doesn't just apply to a terrorism context, either. I forget which essay it was, but Scott Alexander pointed out that while everyone hates PETA, nobody has heard of the animal rights activism orgs which behave responsibly. Still, even if nobody would have heard of Kaczynski or his ideas, it seems to me like that's better than a world in which everyone has heard of his ideas but they aren't allowed to be taken seriously in polite society because of the association with his actions.