I like Eddy. And at first I’ve liked this essay subject from other creators, but now I just find it shortsighted. The phone isn’t the problem, just like the television and radio weren’t the problem. It’s the content you put on it.

You can watch great TV shows—documentaries, masterpiece dramas, etc. Or you can watch slop.

You can do incredible stuff with your phone—get directions, listen to almost any song ever recorded, learn about the night sky, watch documentaries anywhere you are, write, create your own content, sky’s the limit. Or you can install slop and brain rot apps like Twitter.

You don’t have to pull a stunt like locking your phone away. Just delete the slop. Be more mindful of what an app and the company behind it are, and either limit your use of it or simply don’t install it at all.

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I disagree. Yes there can be good intermediate steps, but deleting slop is not even half as healthy as locking a phone away.

Interruptions

Not just phone calls or texts, but things like typing an email on the phone and then seeing a text or having the GPS interrupt your train of thought by yelling "Continue straight for 5 miles". Brains hate interruptions. Those are still going to exist even when the slop is gone.

Resisting a temptation is exhausting. "not eating candy is healthy"... yes but having a candy bowl right next to your desk is exhausting. It takes 2sec to open a twitter link in the browser. Uninstalling an app is like moving the candy bowl to a nearby room, yeah its better, but it only takes 30 sec to reinstall.

Turning off the dopamine machine (not eating candy) is one thing. But Eddy was showing something a lot bigger than that; deleting his access to the temptation. He didnt know the code to unlock the phone.

[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I disagree. Most people are able to self-regulate in more instances than you give credit for. In instances where someone is unable to do so, I would agree that a full prohibition probably makes sense; such as with alcoholics who are unable to stop themselves, but this is not the case for most people.

Interruptions - fear not the notification, for you hold the power to calibrate your notifications to the level that suits you. I'm particularly aggressive about disabling notifications and especially notification categories that do not add value, and you can too.

Resisting - many humans have reported experiencing even more enjoyment engaging in activities they enjoy if they delay their engagement until meeting a predetermined goal. If you know that scrolling through your favorite app for 5 min will give you a dopamine hit, you can choose to delay using the app until after you've completed a chore, for example, and that may offer enough incentive to complete more tasks than you might otherwise be able to perform.

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Those are really good points, and I appreciate the input. I could see why alcohol being on someones desk isn't a problem, e.g. depending on the person its possible the bottle doesn't have a "gravity" tempting them.

I'm going to guess that reality is somewhere between my points and your points. Notifications can be configured, but my grandmother isn't going to figure it out. Having a bottle of alcohol on every person's desk is probably completely neutral for a lot of people, but could be detrimental to others. Etc

[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov 1 points 4 days ago

Agreed. As with most things, the answer is neither black, nor white, but some shade of grey.

[–] InfiniteHench@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I feel like this kind of misses the point. To be clear: If someone absolutely cannot avoid installing slop apps and enabling notifications for everything, I can see their need for an ultra minimal device or other solution. But I also think that speaks to a larger, personal discussion about discipline and possibly addiction, but that’s outside the realm of this thread.

My point is we can choose which apps, notifications, features, and algorithms are allowed to get our attention. It’s easy to turn off all notifications or never even allow them in the first place—after all, apps have to ask for that permission in the first place.

But the choice is the point. If someone is traveling somewhere they probably want maps to tell them important information about the journey. Otherwise why turn on directions at all? That’s the entire point.

We even have the ability to disable all texting notifications but also choose to allow them from certain people if they’re important enough. These devices are simply tools and we have the power to choose how they operate. The device isn’t the problem, it’s our choices.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

I think addiction is a key aspect. Like with gambling there is of course that aspect of responsibility, but regulation to minimize harm is also important.

All the major social media apps being designed to exploit that dopamine response is kind of like junk foods being the most common due to being subsidized; of course people just shouldn't eat junk food, but we should make healthy options the most prevalent and common instead.

Of course that would require a government that would actually force corporations to implement harm reductive measures, instead of one bought by and working for corporations...

FOSS alternatives like Lemmy, Pixelfed, and Loops should be much healthier due to no algorithm working to maximize engagement. I also think social isolation is a big part of the addiction aspect, at least in America

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I'm saying one of the big downsides has nothing to do with self discipline.

Even if we never click an advertisement.
Even if we never eat from the candy bowl.
Even if we never use the bad phone apps.

Merely living in a world covered in advertisements, living next to a delicious smelling candy bowl, living 30 seconds away from memes, rage-bait, doom scrolling, sports gambling, and other slop -- just living next to those things are bad for our mental health.

Some sources if you're curious on the research behind it. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4731333/

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301694

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/mgmtuht/31/

[–] asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is kind of like blaming the founder of knives because criminals use them to murder people.

It's dumb.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

I loved his video, but there were some pretty key actions that he could have done to reduce his phone usage, e.g., limiting/deleting his social media apps, reviewing/turning off his notifications, or setting Focus times to limit distractions during productive times of the day.

Fun experiment overall, but I wasn’t expecting any new revelations on attention spans from a comedian.

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

I think he made a good video but I couldn't stop thinking about this new "anti-consumerism consumerism". So many "I needed my phone to do x, so I bought this to do that." Even without the immediate ability to buy anything anywhere he is fundamentally locked into this mindset of "I need so I buy".

Could have used parental controls(like so many "adults" need to have their friends set on their phone) and locked your phone as only a phone. Delete every app that isn't essential. You can make your phone useless when you're bored, you can pick it up but nothing will be there to give you "relief". No distractions, no ability to install distractions. Your phone is yours, you can have it do whatever you want. I guess some people are just so addicted they can't even be near it. They're like people that stop smoking just to get addicted to vaping. Still addicted, just not to the old dirty style of getting your fix.

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 week ago

I enjoyed the video but it felt like this was a great hit on a feeling many have and chance present them with legitimate solutions and actually convert people away from an unhealthy relationship with tech.