Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonnycomputer | Hacker News Reader

My big worry with the disappearance of public pay-phones is for the homeless and other poor. However, I recently learned that there are often programs to assist them with getting cellular devices. All in all, a mobile device is probably much more useful than a public payphone (as long as they can keep it charged). I'm a little under-educated on what the actual reality of this situation is, tbh.

View on HN

It is a helpful program. With minimal paperwork, you get a device with calling and data service. The phone hardware ranges from basic to decent. They typically have much less crapware installed than your average store phone.

Several challenges with the program exist, compared to payphones.

a) It is difficult to hold on to anything when you live on the street, even without any bad habits. Without a place to keep your things, they regularly get lost, stolen, etc. If you have a habit, you may also be tempted to pawn the device for a few bucks.

b) The paperwork and process is minimal, but is still a barrier. For example, some programs do not give you a device on the spot, but it must be mailed to you. I had mine mailed to a post office and it got lost. I never received the device, but I was marked as having ordered one in the system. From that point on, even years later, I could never qualify for another one.

Compare this to a stationary device that's always there that doesn't have to be maintained by you, and the advantages are clear.

New York has a pretty good system of LinkNYC kiosks, which provide basic calling service, and are maintained reasonably well (about half work at any given time.) They were better when they allowed browsing the web, but that functionality was taken away after Reddit raised a stink about someone browsing porn on them.

Reasonably well = half work?

they get a lot of use and abuse, so I imagine it's difficult to keep up with repairs.

Homeless and poor can get free phones in many municipalities. I'm a technical consultant for the BigBurg app [http://www.informingdesign.com/bigburgh] and getting free phones into people's hands in part of the project. It actually saves the municipalities money - which makes sense in our digital society. They are able to deliver social services more directly and at lower cost.

Hopefully those free phone booths also have a USB port for charging.

... that then get stolen (and make it difficult to use for 2FA).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33120534

Critics often call the free phones Obama phones

Which Lifeline phones started in 1985 under Regan.

https://www.fcc.gov/general/lifeline-program-low-income-cons...

But it's easy to blame Obama.

It was a relatively memorable moment of the 2012 election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio

I had a note in this comment on fraud, but it looks like there was probably a consistent pattern of waste/fraud for a long time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Waste_a...). There were some proven accusations of fraud in 2012 as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY4cy95VFes

Obama Phone Lady as evidence of fraud.... laughable.

I used to sell Lifeline phones into certain carriers back in 2009 - 2012 when I worked with various phone OEMs. I can see where some phone resellers could create some fraud.

But the government is not involved. They merely subsidize the program.

Just to be clear, I was not claiming that Obama phone lady was evidence of fraud. I was only pointing out it was a memorable moment during the 2012 election because that clip was replayed ad nauseam at the time. So I think people call them "Obama phones" because of a fairly successful campaign at pinning their existence or popularity on Barack Obama (where this woman credited her free phone to Obama), and this particular video clip was shown quite a bit at the time.

The fraud remark in my comment was about the other news video I linked and also a link to wikipedia. Free phones and phone plans are really, really low on my list of things I care about in terms of examples of bad governance in the US.

Around the time Obama became president is when they started giving cell phones from the program instead of just subsidizing landline phones. It happened before he was president but given the recession that took place while he was president it was regarded as the Obama phone because he was president when the majority of people got them.

Such a strange twist of language.

As someone who thinks free phones to those who need one is a good thing, and thinks Obama was generally a pretty good dude, I wouldn't automatically ready negative sentiment into those words.

Indeed, it should be a very good thing. In wise societies, the most honored are those who are poorest because they've given away the most to the people who need it (and are best at obtaining the resources to give away).

Gut to the right wing in today's society, anything that might be giving someone (especially non-white someones) a helping hand is basically a slur. See "Welfare Queens", "Obamacare", etc.. God forbid one tax penny go to help someone else, and they don't know and don't care whether any such helping programs actually help reduce costs.

(yeah, let the downvotes begin)

>because they've given away

>God forbid one tax penny

One of these things is not like the other.

Yes.

One is from a wise society that values every member, and shuns those who hoard resources, recognizing their poverty of spirit.

The other is from a society which is far less wise but still knows enough to understand that a society where everyone contributes some resources to common goods will always build a better society than can result from any anarchy.

And then there are the people in the latter societies who somehow think that the benefits of everyone else's taxes, such as roads, legal system, public education system, clean food and water regulations, national defense, etc. are simply natural resources existing for their benefit and that they shouldn't have to contribute.

Those people are called freeloaders, and are recognized as a problem, so contributions are compulsory, and called taxes.

If you don't like taxes, it might be best go find a country that doesn't have them.

A quick search turns up none, but you can get close; there are five countries where the total tax revenue is less than 5% of their GDP: Syria (1.30%), Cuba (2.40%), South Sudan (3.10%), Nigeria (4.10%), and Burma (4.20%) [0].

I notice no exodus among the many people who claim to despise taxes to go to these places where taxes are minimal.

This is proof positive that the benefits that come with taxes (e.g., a working system of infrastructure, law, education, etc.) far outweigh the "freedom" from taxes.

Have you picked up an moved to a near-zero tax country? If not, maybe stop being a hypocrite whining about taxes and start appreciating the benefits that a higher tax and higher service society brings, of which you obviously prefer to take advantage.

[0] https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-countries-with-the-l...

Supporters often call the free phones "Obama phones" too. Just like Obamacare started off as a slur towards ACA, the party saw Obama's name as a way to link a benefit to Democrats and détourned it. It's like the Bush tax rebate or the Trump stimulus.

Having common phones around at predictable public places is good for everyone in the sense that it prevents people from feeling obligated to carry a tracking device everywhere just to be prepared for emergencies.

Every hospital I have ever been have a free phone in the ED waiting room. It’s common to see a homeless person using it. Has a list of numbers for shelters, taxis etc posted along side it.

Their cellphones tend to get stolen 2-4 times a year.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com