The Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity (2017)

Other days I work on the lawn and property.

It seems to work unless I pick up side gigs programming, then I end up spending the whole day behind a laptop anyway, but at least it's all constructive work and not pissing away time on the internet.

Kindle: read books

Nintendo Switch: play games

TV: watch films and shows

Getting into the "mental mode" to do one of those things requires using the device built for it, and putting away my general-purpose phone/laptop. The great thing about focused single-purpose devices is it's impossible to get "lost" clicking around and wasting time.

If I'm on my Kindle, I'm not scrolling through the news. If I'm on my TV, I'm not getting lost down some YouTube recommendation rabbit hole.

The more I started turning my laptop into single-use (cutting out social media, focusing on productivity), the more "bored" I was at first, but then I realized that's actually a good thing. In addition to all the above I have my piano I can practice on, too.

Being bored is good. The modern web and especially social media vehemently disagree, and so our incentives have diverged.

I took this approach when I was in grad school because I find it much more enjoyable to read and take notes directly on a physical copy.

The problem with this is that you end up with giant stacks of papers that take up a good amount of physical space. Every physical copy becomes a subsequent judgement of whether you need to keep it or recycle it. It's easy to accumulate a large stack of papers: (1) that you _intend_ to read, or (2) mediocre papers that create a sunk cost situation because you've invested time in printing out and taking notes on it.

On the face of it, a tablet reader seems like it would solve this problem, but I've never had the desire to invest $300-500 in one.

>Non-Personal Information collected through your use of the browser extension and desktop app includes:

>Browsing history information (URLs/domains visited) Internet Protocol address – but note that we permanently delete and hash the last portion of your Internet Protocol address before storing it, thus preventing us from having the ability to use it to transmit any information to your device or to otherwise identify you.

I think it'd be easier to just build the extension yourself considering the needed functionality is pretty straightforward (webrequest blocking + a minimal interface to add/remove URLs).

I'm pretty sure that the "bang for the buck" slope is pointed in the other direction. Thus, I'd re-consider your "nor can it deepen" conclusion.

I was more explicit: screens time is the problem. We interface with all manner of technology in our daily lives that I don't find myself attached to, including electronics. Everything we use, all our tools, is technology. Colloquially we use the term to refer to computers.

I can reframe the problem in other ways, e.g. what would allow me to achieve certain things without screens?

> You want to get away from the screen? Then get away. You want to go socialize with people in-person? Then just do it.

I already do this, as described. I spend more time on screens because more of what I actually want to do requires it.

There are types of interactions besides socializing for its own sake. Technology already bridges gaps with the likes of meetup websites. I think something conducive to collaborating on projects in person would be welcome.

> It doesn't have to deepen.

Well Luddites are not suddenly going to gain traction.

> Nor can it deepen, because the resource requirements for producing and powering higher technology come at an ever-increasing cost, subsidized by the environment and future generations.

Innovation by nature will ultimately reduce costs, though an increasing rate of adoption by the population could outpace it.

Every person has an environmental footprint, and it's greater in the West. Between transportation both public and private, a residence, food, gadgets, etc it adds up and were this something to be curbed, taking devices away would be woefully insufficient at making the difference. The population rate just needs to drop, which can be alleviated by eliminating global poverty. The popularized push for minimalism while watching the population explode is a race to the bottom.

I think people often overestimate their need. People act like they can't live without Google Maps, but 90% of them take the same route to work every day. I would argue if you aren't traveling outside your local area, you have zero need for a mapping app. It's true you may not be notified of a slightly faster route because of some unforeseen event, but the difference is probably a couple minutes at most, and you should know your local streets well enough to get along anyways.

There was the rare event where I couldn't participate in some restaurant's rewards program because they only did it via iOS/Android app, and that was annoying, but it also led me to just use that business less.

- 2FA codes, but a self-hosted Bitwarden and a Yubikey solved that well enough

- Maps. This is a legitimate sacrifice, especially for someone with as poor a sense of direction as I have. But between the mapping application in my car and looking things up before I leave somewhere on my laptop, it's not been a huge problem.

I have an LTE-enabled tablet, so if I'm going somewhere totally unfamiliar, I'll throw it in my bag just in case I need to look up some information. Otherwise you just have to plan your outings in advance - like we always did prior to 2008 or so.

I have a Garmin GPS mounted in car for road trips, which I honestly prefer since it doesn't tempt me to fiddle with it while driving like a smartphone does. I also carry a semi-nice digital camera sometimes. It's obviously not as convenient as a smartphone camera, but I find I am more thoughtful and appreciative of the photos I take as a result.

I use more paper items (small paper notebook for grocery lists, transit tickets instead of using the app, etc). This can be somewhat freeing, as I've missed my ferry a handful of times because their app glitched out.

My personality tends towards obsession and analysis paralysis, which can be good for programming but sometimes bad for real life. I no longer obsess over which restaurant has the best looking pictures or online reviews, I just walk inside and try it out. Sometimes this is for the better, sometimes for the worse, but it's definitely a more human experience.

Without the smartphone, I also find I am much more inclined to talk to random strangers, since I can't just whip out the phone during awkward silent moments.

With lack of FOMO, I am also much more present with family and friends, which is probably the biggest benefit.

There's a phone at home and one in my office for emergencies, but other business gets done by email, on my terms.

I live in a (non-US) large city, walk or bike to work every day and don't own a car. We have a pretty good public transit system which I used to use a lot, pre-covid.

The biggest inconvenience of not carrying a cell phone was that I didn't have access to live bus and subway schedules, so I would sometimes take a suboptimal route to my destination.

My schedule is done on paper in a pocket schedule book that I always carry. I also carry a pen, a simple watch, a Swiss army knife, and a small flashlight, all of which I use at least once every day. I also always have a book in my bag, for reading while waiting for the bus, the doctor, or other things and people.

I look things up on the Internet at home.

I'm not saying I will never carry a phone, but it seems that not having a phone is the right choice for me at the moment.

I'd have details settled with friends before leaving my connection to the group chat. I'd plan out my route in google maps and try to memorize where destinations were and how to get to them.

Of these two, only the lack of maps is a real step back. I've come to appreciate the need for clear planning that comes out of not having my group chats with me constantly.

The feature phone was doomed from the start, since it only had a 2G connection which is going away. But then that phone broke after a rainstorm, and I got a Nokia 2720 Flip running KaiOS. It has 4G, can work as a wifi hotspot, and has a version of Google Maps that is surprisingly not-terrible. With that, I lost my only real pain points. AND I have a cool retro looking satisfyingly flippy flip-phone.

I highly reccommend it to anyone who wants to listen.

I also have a Kindle, and instead of reading on the computer I use the "Send to Kindle" extension so I can read them in depth later. It's just too hard to focus on the screen, especially because I'm usually browsing articles as a means of procrastination anyways.

People find it bizarre and hilarious when I explain my smartphone setup, but compared to a few years ago the reactions are much more understanding, because even non-tech people these days recognize that they have a problem. It has also done wonders for my attention span. I wonder if the reason public discourse has gone to shit is because people struggle to consume info longer than a tweet.

I have several smartphones but don’t use them as phones, and don’t carry them on my person. For cell service I have a dumb phone (Alcatel MyFlip) I keep on me.

I’ve operated like this for years and find no loss of convenience at all. Whatever I need a smartphone for (2FA codes, podcasts, Discord, etc.) I can do at home with Wi-Fi. Everything else I can do on a computer. The only thing mildly inconvenient is having to ask people for directions sometimes (which is really only inconvenient for them, because of their embarrassment at not being able to explain how to get to their own house).

Overall, it definitely helps with social etiquette and living in the moment. It makes you more in tune with other people.

Having to keep a smartphone on you at all times to function is a burden, instead of the other way around. It’s a burden placed on you by corporations and governments.

I know the prefix is for all of my key numbers like kids schools, hospitals and simply don’t pick up if the prefix is not right.

If I'm busy then I'll let it go to voicemail and call back.

I put an estimated cost by each item on the grocery list, total it at the bottom, and note whether the real prices are higher or lower than the estimate as I get things. It's never happened, but I can at least know if the register total is at odds with expectations.

I don't use it, as I am not a heavy phone user, but I can see where it may be helpful for some people.

2. They're just bluetooth ear buds, they work with every phone that supports bluetooth.

While I definitely agree that one shouldn't be overly dismissive without reading the underlying paper, the abstract can actually be surprisingly predictive.

"Beyond statistical issues, it strikes me that several of the studies that didn’t replicate have another quality in common: newsworthiness. They reported cute, attention-grabbing, whoa-if-true results that conform to the biases of at least some parts of society. One purportedly showed that reading literary fiction improves our ability to understand other people’s beliefs and desires. Another said that thinking analytically weakens belief in religion. Yet another said that people who think about computers are worse at recalling old information—a phenomenon that the authors billed as “the Google effect.” All of these were widely covered in the media."

No one is actually replicating the mass of research, they are trying to replicate highly cited results. Of those its half.

The vast majority of social science research is unreplicable, primarily because it uses dramatically under-powered association modelling to make causal claims. It's dressed-up astrology.

But we should be dismissive of any new results from psychology, it just doesn't have systems in place to validate claims. There is some cool stuff in psychology that has been replicated 20 times, across different cultures, and over time. But the chances of a headline psychology paper being true are, generously, 5%.

To be far to the authors, they are in a bit of a bind. In order to get their Phd, and progress in their academic career they have to do "original" research.

For psychology for the last 40 years, this means do stuff like this. Get cohorts together and test claims. When one is statistically significant, publish. They really didn't have much of a choice other than drop their career. They are probably nice people who just want to teach college classes. Misinforming people is an unintended side effect and more an indictment of academia than of them.

They need to hold themselves to more serious standards, this makes science itself look bad

A paper like this would look pretty good on your resume if you're applying to a social media company.

I can't agree with those statements. No one, not your spouse, not your significant other and not anyone else is obliged to provide sexual satisfaction to you or anyone else.

What's more, while consent is never optional, pleasing one's partner should be a joy, and if your partner desires objectification or even what you (note that what you think and believe doesn't apply to everyone else) term "sexual abuse," that's between consenting adults.

Your judgement as to what is "moral" is an individual judgement that applies to you. There are more things (as well as kinks and fetishes) in earth and heaven than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

And just so it's crystal clear, consent is never optional and no one, regardless of relationship status is obligated to provide sexual satisfaction to anyone.

In the absence of genuine conversation or a close social relationship, this may be a stop-gap.

Like Wilson in Castaway. It's a crutch to get someone through the long, lonely times.

But exactly the same is true for regular communications, especially for teenagers, whose whole life is making impression on their peers.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23778254

Conversely, if you're optimistic, then you might imagine that all the people trying to save the planet are using the coordination and information that cellphones enable to gain more influence and achieve that.

Five hundred years ago, I'm sure people made the same arguments about books -- that they kept our concentration from the immediate present, and could be used to achieve bad things. I'm pretty sure books turned out to be a net positive. I feel the same way about cell phones.

Walking somewhere? Reading at the same time. Cooking? Reading. Eating food? Reading. Walking through the supermarket? Reading. Sitting on a bus? Reading. Lying down in bed, because I'm feeling tired? Reading.

If my phone had been waterproof I would've probably read in the shower/bath as well.