People without smartphones face increasing disadvantages in daily life as essential services like banking, healthcare, and parking increasingly rely on app-based access. Campaigners argue this digital exclusion unfairly penalizes vulnerable groups, including the elderly, disabled, and low-income individuals who may not be able to afford or operate a smartphone. This "app tyranny" limits access to basic services, creating a two-tiered system and exacerbating existing inequalities. They call for alternative access options to ensure inclusivity and prevent further marginalization of those without smartphones.
The IEEE Spectrum article argues that the current trajectory of 6G development, focused on extremely high frequencies and bandwidth, might be misguided. While these frequencies offer theoretical speed improvements, they suffer from significant limitations like extremely short range and susceptibility to atmospheric interference. The article proposes a shift in focus towards utilizing the existing, and largely underutilized, mid-band spectrum for 6G. This approach, combined with advanced signal processing and network management techniques, could deliver substantial performance gains without the drawbacks of extremely high frequencies, offering a more practical and cost-effective path to a truly impactful next-generation wireless network.
HN commenters largely agree that focusing on 6G is premature and driven by hype, especially given 5G's under-delivered promises and niche applications. Several express skepticism about the need for the speeds 6G promises, arguing current infrastructure improvements and better utilization of existing technologies are more pressing. Some suggest focusing on improving coverage, affordability, and power efficiency instead of chasing higher theoretical speeds. There's also concern about the research itself, with comments highlighting the impracticality of some proposed technologies and the lack of clear use cases beyond vague "future applications." A few commenters point out the cyclical nature of these G cycles, driven by marketing and telco interests rather than genuine user needs.
Summary of Comments ( 252 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43137488
Hacker News commenters largely agree that over-reliance on smartphones creates unfair disadvantages for those without them, particularly regarding essential services and accessibility. Several point out the increasing difficulty of accessing healthcare, banking, and government services without a smartphone. Some commenters suggest this trend is driven by cost-cutting measures disguised as "convenience" and highlight the digital divide's impact on vulnerable populations. Others discuss the privacy implications of mandatory app usage and the lack of viable alternatives for those who prefer not to use smartphones. A few argue that while some inconvenience is inevitable with technological advancement, essential services should offer alternative access methods. The lack of meaningful competition in the mobile OS market is also mentioned as a contributing factor to the problem.
The Hacker News thread discussing The Guardian's article, "The tyranny of apps: those without smartphones are unfairly penalised," contains a robust discussion with various perspectives on the increasing reliance on smartphones for everyday tasks.
Several commenters echo the article's sentiment, highlighting the exclusionary nature of app-dependent services. They point out how basic functionalities like parking, accessing government services, and even banking are increasingly migrating to app-only platforms, creating significant barriers for those without smartphones, particularly the elderly and low-income individuals. Some share personal anecdotes or stories of family members struggling with this digital divide, reinforcing the real-world impact of this trend. The discussion touches upon the loss of choice and autonomy for those who prefer not to use smartphones or cannot afford them. The idea of "digital redlining" is brought up, suggesting that this reliance on apps disproportionately affects vulnerable populations.
Conversely, some commenters argue that smartphones are now ubiquitous and affordable enough that this isn't a significant issue. They contend that the benefits of smartphones and apps outweigh the inconveniences for a small minority. These commenters suggest that adapting to technology is a necessary part of modern life, and that resisting this shift is impractical. A few point to the increasing availability of low-cost smartphones and data plans as evidence that the barrier to entry is minimal.
A middle ground is also presented, with some acknowledging the problem while suggesting solutions. These include advocating for alternative access methods alongside apps, such as web-based interfaces or phone-based systems. Others propose regulations that would require businesses and government services to offer non-app options. The discussion also explores the potential role of feature phones or simpler devices that could bridge the gap without requiring full smartphone adoption.
A recurring theme is the concern over data privacy and security, with some arguing that the push towards app-based everything increases the collection and potential misuse of personal information. The trade-off between convenience and privacy is discussed, with some expressing skepticism about the motivations behind the push for app-only services.
Finally, some commenters offer more nuanced perspectives, suggesting that the issue is not solely about smartphones but about the broader trend of technological advancements leaving some behind. They argue for a more inclusive approach to technological development that considers the needs of all users, regardless of their access to or comfort with the latest technology. The discussion also briefly touches upon the environmental impact of constantly upgrading smartphones and the potential for e-waste.