Humans are interesting creatures. We develop addictions to so many things that I’m thinking of changing my Masters program. There must be more money treating addictions than building business presentations. Let’s take the case of iPhone addiction as an example.
People are addicted to their iPhones, yet iPhone represents a minority of all smartphones sold, so why did Stanford students protest outside the Palo Alto Apple Store on University Avenue? Apple is an easy target. Have you ever seen a Samsung employee? A Samsung store?
The student protesters claimed that Apple is failing to take steps to curb technology addiction. They also demanded that the company adjust software features to mitigate users’ constant focus on their devices.
Uh, what? Turn it off, you little twerps. Or, protest equally. Where is your noise against Samsung or Google?
Stanford student Sanjay Kannan of SSAAD (Stanford Students Against Addictive Devices):
We felt that this is the kind of change that a lot of consumers have to demand before Apple takes sustained action… We did some research into how prevalent the problem was, and we realized that 50 percent of teens are addicted to their phones, and 69 percent of adults check their phone hourly.
Why protest against Apple? Isn’t Google’s headquarters just down the highway? Doesn’t Google’s Android OS make up about two-thirds of all smartphones on planet earth? Where’s the equality?
Apple’s response to the issue of addiction?
We think deeply about how our products are used and the impact they have on users and the people around them. We take this responsibility very seriously and we are committed to meeting and exceeding our customers’ expectations, especially when it comes to protecting kids.
Come on, Apple. Tell those spoiled and overprivileged noisemakers to, 1) get a life, 2) protest with equality, and 3) show people how to use their phones to prevent addictions.
Historically, Apple has been the one [company] to popularize new features and make them something that every phone consumer expects. Face ID is a good example. Other companies did it before Apple, but once Apple did it, it’s like [it became] something we all need to have.
Need? Or, want? They are not the same.
Sure, Apple could put in some kind of user monitoring system to tell you which apps consume the most screen time, and maybe even give you settings to prevent actual usage during specific time periods of after x-amount of usage, but you know what those spoiled little creatures called humans would do?
Overide the controls. And then complain about it.
We are going to go work for these different companies and we need to have some sort of ethical footing. I’d say this is one of the more uncontroversial issues out there. I think a lot of people agree that people are addicted to their phones.
Ethical footing? You’re going there?
Do-nothing elected officials or state-run television news is not controversial or unethical? Of course, those Stanford tweenies would have to travel farther off campus to protest something truly worthwhile like that, but nobody would pay attention.
Apple is good link bait material. Note to students everywhere: If you want to protest something evil start with politicians, then move to Amazon and Google.
This is not Apple’s problem, folks.