There are elements to life that have drastically changed for the better, to name one example how about not just being able to hear your local radio stations, but radio from anywhere in the world.

The fact that I can tune in live to... say BBC Radio 6, and be listening along to the exact same thing they're listening to in a city like London, makes a measurable positive impact in my night-owl life. It emotionally makes me feel more connected to the outside world from where I am, and that's one station out of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. I can explore the world.

Another example is that now understand (to the extent that each step makes sense to me) the physics theories and laboratory experiments that have changed our paradigm of reality itself, thanks to a whole bunch of science content creators on YouTube; it is incredible what can now be explained in relatively (ahem) simple language, and it is, by people doing the explaining as as labor of love.
People have found ways to express in mostly non-technical language what a couple of decades ago felt like abstract numerical gibberish wherever one looked. I find this spectacular. And inspiring.

These new tools that have been put in our hands are astonishingly powerful and profound. Yet of course, they can be both either used or abused. Here, I am focusing solely on the "used" side.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 1 points 7 months ago

I think people are misunderstanding my point. It's not the existance of the internet, or YouTube, phones, cameras, etc. It's the fact that we're connected 24/7 and people tend to treat you like a weirdo if you disconnect. My question is if we're truly better of with technology where one device does it all (creating the expectation of constant connectivity), or if we'd be better with having a phone that's just a phone, a camera that's just a camera, etc.

To be clear, I can see arguments both for and against it. If phones didn't come with cameras, then cameras wouldn't be as widespread. It's because of how widespread cameras are that people have become more aware of police brutality. Additionally, because phone cameras are so common, it makes it easy for people to get into photography or filmmaking as a hobby. So in that sense, having a camera in every pocket is a good thing.

On the other hand, people have this weird expectation that, because you have a smart phone, you should always be reachable. The result is that people get worried or weirded out when they can't reach you. They want to know why they went straight to voicemail, or why it took you a while to respond to their texts.

It's also a lot easier to get addicted to things like social media when stuff like that can follow you wherever you go. On the one hand, it's nice to have my friends in my pocket. On the other hand, my pocket rectangle regularly causes me anxiety due to the constant stream of news. I could disconnect, but then I'd be "living under a rock".

Another pro, on the other hand, is that my handheld minipc is able to stream music, movies, TV shows, etc wherever I have a cellphone internet connection. That's pretty awesome. I don't need an iPod to listen to music, a portable DVD player to watch a movie, or a laptop to watch YouTube.

So I mean, I'm not really opposed to having an all-in-one device that fits in my pocket; I'm just questioning if they're really that healthy. Like, is the trade-off worth it?