Smart Phones and future of technology

It is said that the smart phones are facilitating our transition into the fourth industrial revolution, where more and more of our life (time) becomes dependent on technology, and one can certainly see it happening even today. It’s actually quite alarming to see just how dependent we are becoming on smart phones, but what is even more alarming is just how fast all of this is happening before our eyes. Of course, the majority of people seem to be excited and openly welcome this new frontier, but there are also some concerns about the effect that technology has on the quality of our lives, and on us; and that is, by making it more convenient for us it is also making us more addicted and dependent on it. And most people don’t even notice it, or dismiss it as irrelevant. The gain seems more than loss. But is it? What is gained and what is lost? I really think that with time, people are going have even less and less will power, or actual choice, in this matter; in other words, technology will eventually completely control people, and not the other way around.

I had a conversation about this once, and the guy was actually looking forward to living in virtual worlds, ala matrix, in which all senses are incorporated completely. I think he may be expressing the view of the majority of people, too. In his counter argument, he questioned reality itself and dream states, comparing the two. (How do you know you are not dreaming now, or not in a simulated world, etc?) Scary stuff, and scary because it can become reality for many, people living in virtual worlds, declaring all realities as possibly virtual, including own concept of self. Who or what is even talking? Who knows? And so my point is, how is this different from becoming a drugged up slave?

Another question is to what degree it is by choice, or are we that helpless in this process? I mean, will there be a point where technology, in its “race to the brain stem” will reach a sophistication level where a person would have no chance of saying no, or have any sort of free will? Will it be like waking up inside a dream, or saying “no” without any actual difference happening, or eventual re-routing back to virtual world? And what can we say of such person? If a wolf chooses to eat man’s food, does he also choose to become a dog? Who knows, maybe we’ll come to the point where people will be born addicted to technology, or even to particular brands (how soon can you start conditioning human beings?) Remember this Ford ad? Why not go even further, say to a fetal level? What would then be difference between brand loyalty and branded slavery, or who will own whom? And why not go go down on biological level (maybe even genetic level), I mean, brand loyalty on genetic level…why not? Might we eventually become like Chihuahuas and poodles of the canine world, bred for a particular purpose? This is a possibility because the principle is the same, the Pavlovian reward, and people blindly go for it, consenting.

Anyway, here are some videos addressing the issue of smart phone addiction epidemic:
youtube.com/watch?v=MacJ4p0vITM
60 Minutes had an episode on it too:
youtube.com/watch?v=AqFxCf_0sW4

This guy, Tristan Harris, is offering an alternative in technology design that he believes will give people more choice and control over technology. Although it sounds like a good idea, I also can’t help but think that he also may be trying to create a new market niche, the “organic” or “humane” version of technology. So, in the end, will this be like choosing between Naked Juice and Pepsi? Will he just open a new door in the same house? I mean, could this just become a new, alternative addiction, or brand loyalty?
youtube.com/watch?v=jT5rRh9AZf4

What Tristan Harris is talking about is what I have been calling “MIJOT”, the attempt to maximize the quality of one’s life and actually measuring it to make sure (“If you want to improve something, learn to measure it.”). Unfortunately the end result in the direction that he is talking about will be that people will be coerced into having to do things in particular ways because (for example) Microsoft ran a study and it was determined that you, personally, are better off doing things in the way prescribed with very limited choices, much like your current phone.

What is bad about that is that all such priorities are necessarily compromised into what is best for Microsoft, for “the system” because it is manifest by the system. Alternatives and options will be limited to those that guide all people toward the socialist ideal. And much like The Matrix scenario, the individual actually has no control over what is going on at all … but they don’t know that (much as it is right now, today).

When will you be permitted to know how little control you have over anything? Why would that concern ever gain actual priority within “the young designer’s” goals (as Harris refers to them)?

The quality of life of the individual has never had significant say in any major social decision since the beginning of humanity. “It is for you” has always been merely a ploy used to gain more power by those who already have more than others. And as what you call “humans” or homosapiens are led to a complete end through technological displacement, that low priority standing will get even lower. The end contribution to the system will always be more relevant to the system than the means by which it is obtained. The system supports the addiction to technology and the system. The system is a mechanism of supporting the system, nothing else. That is the very essence of Power (also referred to as “The Social Singularity”).

The only thing that can be called “good” about it all is the fact that current and very near future people will not know it. And realize there is no “we” or “us” involved because we won’t be there as they are gradually displaced, erased, and replaced without having any idea that it is happening. It was named “The Vanishing” some decades ago. Homosapian shall pass away in his sleep.

How much control do you have over society right now, you ask?
$$0+$$

The purpose is power. This power is meant as mono-power over all others; and this mono-power is, economically said, a monopoly and, politcally said, a monarchy.

The other point is that humans are more and more replaced by machines, thus less and less needed (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=185562).

Now, guess what the conclusion is.

this is a bit off topic but when it comes to smart phones and preserving the power of the individual, i’d like to stop seeing “features” i dont want nor need nor want to pay for

among things i despise about modern phones:

-non-removable batteries (harder to control/fix your own device)
-fingerprint scanners (police can forcibly take your fingerprints, however, they cant force you to speak your password)

How near are we to witness such a spectacle, as above described? The projection of quantum computer applications is maybe a few years away.

But think of the benefits to people who are private, shut in, lonely, people to whom any kind of reality out of their range, may be like the new experience of seeing ,having been visually constrained most of their life

To them perhaps the delineation of distinguished real and simulated reality may never become an issue, as long as they are aware of possible impractical implications of that kind of altered reality.

There is quite a bit of social pressure to buy a smartphone. There is no way to resist it unless you can isolate yourself socially. And if you isolate yourself socially, there is no way to remain alive. Even if you don’t have money to buy a smartphone, others will insist to buy you one. People don’t like to be criticized. You must never suggest they are doing something wrong. And if you have no smartphone, and you are not willing to buy one or receive one as a gift, they will treat you as an enemy. Even people you thought would never buy one end up buying one. The disease is too strong for any individual to fight it off on their own.

youtube.com/watch?v=xTT_3DhTMI8

Windows Mixed Reality is here. What do you think is going to happen next? Companies will now compete over who can make VR experience more immersive and real-like.

I wonder how appropriate it would be to wonder if the exact same thing was thought about the spinning wheel?

Except we already know it was the exact same reaction.

Total hypnosis under the guise of education for the children.

Yes, it’s being done already.
youtube.com/watch?v=hg_pb-Mxisk

We do?
I dont.

Do tell.