I've been using Android for more than ten years now. I originally chose it in an ethical commitment to open-source software, but it's become less open over time.
Some people might be surprised to learn that I think Apple makes better products. Apple understands usability and user experience better than almost any software company, they pay exceptional attention to detail, and they've done genuinely important work on privacy. Still, they're not perfect. I think Apple too often prioritizes form over function, with the overuse of gestures being a good example, they lock users into their ecosystem, they position their products as status symbols, and they don't play nicely with others. In my opinion, they also market privacy more effectively than they actually protect it.
As an aside, I'm disappointed that Apple has become “the privacy company” when Mozilla should have claimed that title long before them. In hindsight, Mozilla may have been mistaken not to strike while the iron was hot in June 2013. Of course, it's easy to play Monday morning quarterback; it's harder to be in charge. At least Mozilla is doing great work on privacy today.
In any case, I'm considering making my next phone an iPhone, but switching now would be a hassle. Vendor lock-in is real and Google is almost as guilty as Apple. Interoperability matters.
It's 2023. We have incredible technology like DALL·E 2 and ChatGPT, but iPhoto and Google Photos still can't collaborate on a shared photo album. Texting is even worse. Then there's collaborative playlists, collaborative note-taking, videoconferencing, the transmission of large files, and so much more. Any of these things can be achieved if all participants are using the same software, but different applications with similar capabilities refuse to work with one other. If I use Spotify and you use Apple Music… too bad.
This is understandable, but so unnecessary. I can't even imagine how much time and energy we lose to this segmentation. Interoperability matters.
I’ve been an ideologue at times. I’m sure I still am in certain ways, in ways I don’t even notice. Perhaps we all are. Still, I find ideology exhausting and uninteresting. I rarely enjoy talking to people about meaningful issues when I can predict their beliefs. For this reason and others, I’m frequently saddened that our current environment has made so many of my peers so closed-minded. Of course, it wouldn’t be right for me to end this post without blaming social media, and true to form, I do believe the filter bubbles of social media play no small part in this phenomenon.
I dislike when companies treat their customers like free, full-time product reviewers. I don't mind using email filters, but average users shouldn't be burdened to set them up, especially when the list of forbidden phrases becomes as long as mine has:
please review us!
Feedback Request
Please rate your visit
How would you rate the support you received?
How was your recent order?
How was your visit?
How did we do?
Please tell us what you think about
you have a new item to review
you have new items to review
have a minute?
Complete a short survey
We want your feedback
This is just one of many email filters I maintain. I have another for things like privacy policy updates which is almost as long. Then there's promotional email: coupons, limited time offers, and so on. We used to call this kind of thing spam. What happened?
I just encountered a funny Easter egg in the Wask shop of strange objects, darted off a quick email to the owner expressing my delight, and immediately received a response thanking me for noticing. There were no likes, no Retweets, and no comments from onlookers. My reputation didn't improve and I didn't gain any followers. Instead, two strangers connected over a common sense of humor and shared a quick laugh.
Isn't this what the internet was supposed to be about?
I support the the Center for Humane Technology's One Click Safer proposal for safeguarding social media. The concept is simple: instead of allowing users to reshare content indefinitely, social media platforms should remove the share button once a piece of content is two hops from its original source. If people three degrees from the author continue to find the content valuable, they would need to use copy and paste to share it further. In fact, I would go even further and propose that social media platforms remove the share button altogether; it's a simpler proposal that would be easier to explain.
In either case, these ideas make eminent sense to me. Sharing is a kind of chain reaction, and sharing on social media is completely uncontrolled at the moment. Physicists have a term for uncontrolled chain reactions: explosions. Yes, social media is dropping bombs on society daily, bombs of misinformation, lies, hatred, and outrage. Like the control rods of nuclear reactors, which slow fission enough to prevent meltdowns so that useful energy can be harvested, social media needs digital control rods, so that we can harness the power of information without destroying ourselves.
“Twitter and TikTok and all of the engagement economy companies are rewarding people, paying people in likes and comments and influence, for discovering the fault lines in society and inflaming them. That is, they are paid to be division entrepreneurs.”
Although I strive to only relay accurate, evidence-based information, when I'm asked about medical issues or given the opportunity to comment, I nonetheless habitually remind listeners that I'm not a doctor and that my advice should be taken with a grain of salt. I think this is especially important online, where commentary from a medical doctor and commentary from a nutjob are visually indistinguishable.
How many conspiracy theorists and self-certified Facebook epidemiologists do this?
It’s so interesting watching older generations use GPS. My parents treat its directions as just one input into their decision-making process, like the clueless advice of an apathetic gas station attendant, whereas I just do whatever Google Maps tells me. I guess old driving habits die hard.
They might say I'm too dependent on technology. Maybe they have a point.