Skip to main content

They're Called Cell Phones Because The Phone is of Out Hot Cell Eat The Phone

    (The title is a reference, if you don't understand, don't worry about it.)

    These two articles are a bit more linked than normal, as one is a direct response to the other. Though aside from the fact that they both talk about phones and are written in English, there aren't many comparisons I can make, they differ from each other quite severely.
    First, and most obviously, their stances on cellphones are direct opposites. The one titled "Have Smartphones Destroyed A Generation?" Is, shockingly (not really,) thinks that the impact smartphones have on the youths is negative overall, whereas the response, "No, Smartphones are Not Destroying a Generation" thinks that this is not the case (another shocking revelation, I know)

    There are also some more minor differences in format, for example, the response is much shorter than the paper it's responding to, which I appreciate greatly because my attention span is garbage. The sources the original work links to are, most often, other papers about this subject, whereas the response mostly links to... definitions of words. Well, okay, there are a good few number of links to actual sources, but I don't think I needed one for the word "teen."

    One thing I found odd from the initial paper was its pseudo-idolization of stuff like teen pregnancies and underage substance abuse. It called out that this was a good, thing but it's still sends mixed messages when you're trying to write about how it's bad teens aren't doing as much anymore and half of the stuff you point to are things they probably shouldn't be doing.

    There's also this line from the original article "There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness." that seems like it's overgeneralizing just a TAD. Like, really? ALL screen activities are linked to less happiness? ALL nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness? "Well I learned that a meteor is about to crash into earth and kill everyone, but at least I read it in a newspaper! If I had learned about it on my phone I might've gotten more upset, thank goodness I dodged that bullet!"

    For my own experience with cellphones, my friends have pretty tight schedules, so the most we can really "hang out" together is by texting. I don't have Snapchat, Instagram, Tiktok, Facebook, or Twitter on my phone. I mostly just browse Tumblr and chat on Discord, so if I gave it up for a day I would definitely be inconvenienced, but I don't think I'd be particularly affected beyond that.

    As for an ultimate lesson? I suppose it would be that cell phones are alright, certainly not the greatest but not the worst, either. I'd say that the number one rule of data can be applied in this situation: never confuse correlation with causation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another blog about the virus-book

1: "I'm a man of my word," Jeevan said. At that point in his directionless life he wasn't sure if this was true or not, but it was nice to think that it might be.  And ...and then one night Jeevan opened his eyes at two a.m. and the news-room was empty. Everyone had left. He stared at the empty room on the screen for a long time. I chose the former because it's a somewhat comforting line, the idea that we're better than we maybe are. It doesn't come across as egotistic/self-serving in my eyes, but more hopeful. Hopeful that you can be a better person. I chose the latter because I can just imagine it so vividly, a slowly dwindling news-source eventually reduced to nothing. It's pathetically miserable, how it just gradually peters out instead of being violently destroyed in its prime via. a meteor or something. Powerless to stop as the momentum carrying civilization is gone. 2: I'm writing the utopia part, so I plan on writing about good infrastructu...
Post a Comment
Read more

Forget this book, let's talk about Early Modern English!

-It's nice that they have a traveling acting troupe in the post-apocalypse. -I hope Jeeves died. Not because I dislike him, but because it would be narratively interesting. We get to learn about a person: their past, their hopes and dreams, their struggles... only for their story to be cut-short by the virus. -The farther we get from Shakespeare's time the more incomprehensible plays of that time become. "The safer sense will ne'er accommodate his master thus"?? What does "thus" mean in this context? In modern English it's used like "[cause] thus [effect]," you don't just end a sentence with it! And even if thus wasn't there to muck-up the whole line, what does it mean for a safer sense to not accommodate something? My best guess on what "safer sense" means is caution. Like, "Oh I would go play on the highway but I have a safer sense for that." or something. Does this mean that the person doesn't think cautio...
Post a Comment
Read more

Utopia? I hardly KNOW 'eh!

Okay so my answer to this question depends on how realistic I'm allowed to be. On one end of the spectrum I could just say "everyone is happy and healthy all the time and there's no conflict because I say so." and on the other end I would say "I don't have a deep enough grasp of infrastructure/socioeconomics to describe a society that would for-certain be better." Assuming I'm constrained to modern day tech, but at the same time I don't have to take every single detail into consideration, here's what my Utopia would be: The Great Commune of Shlorpth (named because I like the sound "shlorpth" makes.) There would be UBI (universal basic income) for everyone at/over 18, tax-subsidized necessities (food, water, shelter, education, healthcare.) A reliance on nuclear energy over fossil fuels. Corporations would have elected managerial positions (discouraging the exploitation of workers, because then the person probably wouldn't be re-...
Post a Comment
Read more