iOS 14 turns volume down if it is set to "loud" for too long
twitter.com
twitter.com
The angle on this tweet annoys me quite a bit, though.
> Here‘s my reason to jailbreak as soon as one is out. Do I own my iPhone or does it own me? #patronage
Really? We're going to assign blame to the closed ecosystem here? Really? I love FOSS as much as anyone but the screenshot attached to the tweet shows clearly where the blame should go:
> In certain regions, these notifications cannot be turned off due to regulations and safety standards.
The problem is Big Brother government, the bureaucrats who think that they need to impose on your life to improve your life, and the people who vote them into office and keep them there. Apple is just doing what they're legally required to do.
Hmm, if this can be turned off in Settings (can it?), I think it's still a sensible default. Most people aren't using high-impedance headphones, and this little nudge could potentially save the hearing of a lot of people!
> In certain regions, these notifications cannot be turned off due to regulations and safety standards.
Regulations exist to protect people not to impose their will on you. Fireworks is a good example: some people are qualified to operate and many are not. Countries with lax fireworks regulations (big surprise here) have lots of fireworks injuries.
The problem with libertarian values is that they assume that all people within society are rational, capable of making their own decisions or ones that don’t harm or adversely impact other people.
Want to listen to loud music? No one is going to stop you. In fact, go do it now! But don’t create a political or legal framework where a child or unsuspecting adult could permanently damage their hearing. Or blow their hands off with a firework. Or accidentally kill themselves with a weapon you’re using to live out a constitutional fantasy.
Internet libertarian here. That's not the argument at all.
We could prevent tons of harm by tightly regulating all aspects of life. Banning fast food or cigarettes would undeniably be a public health win, and I don't think many libertarians would disagree with that.
The argument is that it's simply not the government's job to prevent people from hurting themselves, even if it could be done at scale and effectively. It's a question of the role of government, not so much about whether loud music or fireworks cause harm (they do) or if it's enforceable (it is).
If you ban everything that's dangerous or unhealthy, I'm not sure you'd be happy with the culture that results. Humans are experimental by nature, even if sometimes that results in harm. These types of restrictions that can't be bypassed hurt our experimental nature.
In the beginning of the pandemic, and even now, a lot of attitudes were shaped by the lack of government regulation. If the president isn't wearing a mask, and there's no legal requirement for me to wear a mask, then it must be safe to not wear masks... right? That's the kind of thinking that a highly regulated society produces because we've insulated people from danger for so long. At this point, it seems most people feel that if you can do something, it must be safe, otherwise it wouldn't be available for you to do. That's even more dangerous than loud music or fireworks.
That is a very American point of view and look where that’s got you so far.
If GDP is your end goal you are lost.