How often do you check your phone? Do you feel addicted to it? According to former Google product philosopher Tristan Harris, we check our phones 150 times per day, on average, and yes, we’re addicted. He explains why and proposes a solution in this July 2016 essay in Spiegel Online.
Read it here: Harris, “Smartphone addiction: The slot machine in your pocket”
- Harris concludes his essay by arguing that we should have smartphones that put “our minds, not our impulses, first.” What does he mean? Summarize his argument. Is his argument persuasive? Why or why not?
- Harris mentions more than once that he is a magician. Given his topic and his position, does his status as a magician enhance his authority? Why or why not? Should he have said more about the connection between magic and smartphones? Why or why not? Explain your reasoning.
- A key element of Harris’s argument is the distinction between “time spent” and “time well spent.” What is that distinction? What remedy does Harris propose to ensure that smartphone users’ time is well spent? How realistic is his proposal? Why do you think so?
- Read (or re-read) Nicholas Carr’s essay in Chapter 17 of your text. Does Harris’s essay support Carr’s or could it be considered counterevidence to what Carr is arguing? Why do you think so? Point to specific passages in both essays to support your conclusion.
- According to Harris, “App designers play your psychological vulnerabilities in the race to grab your attention.” Assuming that this assertion is correct and that the situation is undesirable, with whom should the solution lie? Individual smartphone users? App designers and developers? Both? Neither? Write an essay in which you address these questions, using Harris as your They Say.
They Say I Blog 
I think we need phones for safety and communication. That being said we don’t need them to run our lives. Phones connect us but also disconnect us from reality. I love Instagram and snapchat but I don’t feel like I am doing anything when I use it.
LikeLike
I think we all need to take breaks from our phones. We all use our phones, but we need to be careful how we use them. If we release information about ourselves constantly, then we will be pulled in more and more, because of the ay the internet takes our information and uses it. We need to moderate the time spent on our phones to prevent becoming more and more addicted.
LikeLike
The general argument made by Harris in his work, “Smartphone Addiction: The Slot Machine in your Pocket”, is that “we should put our minds not our impulses first.” He writes “We check our phones 150 times a day”. Harris is obviously trying to point out that we get instant rewards every time we check our phone. In conclusion, Harris believes we check our phone and get distracted to easily.
In my view Harris is right because we do spend an awful amount of time on our phones. Checking a phone 150 times a day is outrageous. I also agree with Harris because distracted driving is growing exponentially as well. There were 424,000 deaths from distracted driving in 2014 which is an 18% increase according to http://www.cdc.gov. Therefore I conclude that we are spending too much time on our phones and not enough on our lives.
LikeLike
Overall Harris is saying that technology has become a constant demand for our attention. It forces us to look away from something that has meaning to look at a screen that you can interact with, which is why technology puts impulses before our mind. By being a magician, Harris is establishing that he is a professional manipulator of our attention. He knows how to control our brain and tell us where and when to focus on a specific thing. It is his way of establishing his knowledge on technology. Technology is similar in that it does distracts our mind and controls all of our focus. But are we truly addicted? While technology can seem very addicting, people are not dependent on it internally. What I mean by that is, people need technology to maintain a social status. In todays society it is expected for you to have access to the internet, have a smartphone, communicate via technology. Due to the social expectations around society it appears to be addicting because we need them throughout the whole day. But if we stepped back and really thought about technology, its more of a compulsion, we want to see what is going to happen next. Which relates to a magic show. We are intrigued by the different things that are happening that they end up consuming our attention. If our society didn’t rely solely on technology we wouldn’t have any reason to check our phones constantly, and therefore we wouldn’t be consumed by technology. In conclusion, I do agree that we are border line addicted to our technology but the only solution to stop our “addiction” is to cut technological needs from our society.
LikeLike
The general argument made by Tristan Harris in his, are we addicted to our phones? More specifically Tristan Harris argues that we are addicted to our phones. He writes “We check our phones 150 times a day, on average.” In this passage Tristan Harris is suggesting we cannot stay off our phones and concluding that we do have an addiction.
In my belief, Tristan Harris is right because most people are addicted to their cellular device and technology. For example I see many people walking around everyday with their phone in their hands and not paying attention to the world around them. In my eyes, I would say we are addicted to our phones.
LikeLike
Harris mentioning that he is a magician does enhance his authority. This enhances his authority because he states in his article that, magicians start by looking for blind spots, vulnerabilities and biases of people’s minds, so they can influence what people do without them even realizing it. Once you know how to push people’s buttons, you can play them like a piano. And this is exactly what technology does to your mind (Harris 2016). Harris has the authority to find those blind spots unlike other people that are not even aware that those blind spots are available. With him being able to find those blind spots he knows what to look for and he clearly see that is what smartphone apps are doing to people, grabbing their attention. Many people fail to realize how much a smartphone takes time away, it is almost like a distraction. People are constantly picking up their phones to see what is going on, or what so and so posted, blinding them from what is really going on in reality.
Throughout the article, Harris should have said a little more about the connection between smartphones and magic because, he realized that they do have a real connection. He only mentioned that smartphone apps play your psychological vulnerabilities. With the smartphone apps playing with our psychological vulnerabilities, it seems like it is playing with more than that. The apps are specially designed to keep us busy and to have us to want to always go back to it. Whether it is a social media app or just a simple game. It is almost like it becomes an addiction to check our phones and to check what is going on in social media. People do it all the time, every day. Magic has a lot to do with the mind. A magician will do a magic trick and in a way it seems like it is magic is because we become distracted by one thing making us blind to see what is happening somewhere else. Just like a smartphone would do, a smartphone is keeping us distracted, making us blind to everything else that is happening.
Smartphones are purposefully designed to be that way. Apps are purposefully designed to be that way. Our smartphone seem like they could be a magic trick with the way that they distract our minds. It just seems like things are getting worse, they are constantly coming out with something new, something better, and something that everyone has to have. It is almost like magic because you spend all this money on your smartphones just for them to break and then you have to go out and buy a new one. But with all seriousness, our phones do a lot to our minds and people do not even notice it because they are so blinded by these smartphones. Sometimes you have to just sit back and watch and realize what is doing to everyone else before you can realize what it is doing to you.
LikeLike
I think that it is important to not become addicted to our phones. While it is important that they do provide some measure of safety they also carry many risks.
LikeLike
Tristian authority does enhance in the topic of smartphones and magic, him mentioning being a for magician gives us paradox in the article and something he can compare and contrast throughout. Tristian giving his views from being a magician and how they are similar in their abilities of taking advantage of peoples vulnerabilities as he spoke how a magician looks for weak spot in a person which he draws a comparison to smartphones and how a phone application does pretty much the same thing as a notification can take advantage of your vulnerabilities, just by seeing you have been tagged in a picture can distract you from anything and as Tristian brought up in his video that a study it takes 23 minutes for a typical person to get back to what they were initially doing. Tristian didn’t have to make more of a connection with magic and smartphones when there was more to elaborate more on with the phones, his viewpoint from being a magician was good and he mention a couple times more how magic ties in however, magic doesn’t cause as much attention as a smartphone would and its something we use or see everyday opposed to phones that cause a risk of peoples lives or said by Tristian “time well spent”.
LikeLike
In Harris’s essay, He states, ““our minds, not our impulses, first.” What he means by that in the essay, he saids, “The average person checks their phone 150 times a day.” What he means is that pepole are very addicted to their cellphone. Secondly, Harris saids, “When we pull our phone out of our pocket, we’re playing a slot machine to see what notifications we have received. When we swipe down our finger to scroll the Instagram feed, we’re playing a slot machine to see what photo comes next.” Also another reason why people are addicted to their cellphones. I believe that he is correct in that statement, because in my stand point, I’m personally always attached to my phone. Everywhere I go, I see people on their phones.
LikeLike
Harris states in the article that, “App designers play with your psychological vulnerabilities in the race to grab your attention” (Harris). Explaining that app designers hook you with click bait items or suggestions to keep you on the app or returning many times a day. I believe that the app designers have the solution to this problem that we become numb to. They designed to be so addictive they know the solution to cure the addiction we have. A fix could be held with the designers as they would add a prompt to suggestions and news rather than forcing the viewer to see it right away. That way the viewer has to make a choice if they want to see it or not and isn’t given to them right away. Some believe that we are at fault and should become disconnected from our phones and just use the “Say no” method. As that may work, we are already addicted, just like any addiction in the world, it is very tough to say no and just turn off the phone.
LikeLike
In Harris’s essay, he stats that we are addicted to our cell phones, which is true. ” Checking our phones over 150 times a day.” That’s amazing, I agree with what he is saying. It would be nice to have a day of forget your cell phone at home, andwatch people go through withdraws.
LikeLike
in this article, Harris argue that our phones are slot machine because of the fact that it does the same job a slot machine do. we check our phone a lot even if we don’t get no message, according to harris the average person check their phone 150 times a day. According to harris slot machine make more money than game park, movies, and baseball combine. Our phones are slot machine. Every time we check our phones, email, or feed news, we are playing the slot machine to see what am I gonna get. our phone train us to interrupt ourselves, every time we get interrupted to check our phone, we train ourselves to self-interrupt, according to harris it takes 23min to refocus after interruption.
LikeLike
In his article, Harris presents the case for companies that structure their applications to buy the attention of us, the user. A large part of his argument is that he calls for more personal choice on the end of the user, or consumer, of an application so that we can gain a sense of control in our business on our phones.
A choice has both an earned component, our selection, but also a loss, or a foregoing of the opposite choice. I like to think about these choices both as money, as in our choice gain what we want from what we are able to purchase; congruently, time works in this same manner, that we can choose what we want to gain based on our time we allot to our activities.
The author mentions that by downloading and utilizing apps, we are given a menu, and we are blindly led into a recurrent trap and sapping of our time (by the doing of the time-vampiric “empire” of app-companies) and we, as users, deserve better. On a step removed from this visual, we have to realize that we are the ones who pick up our menu. It is a reality for many smartphone users that we can use our devices to waste our time. It should be understood by users that by entering into a market of our attention, and our entertainment, we are actively allot our time ($) to these traps and slotting machines, and we are still in control of our attention.
There is, however, value in his bold charge to restore freedom to the consumer: we do need more sensible time for our devices. We do need a middle ground between cutting ourselves from that apps that we can spend our whole lives on, or completely blocking our social channels to face to face interaction. The problem I find with this is Harris directs his call to change directly at the developers and architects of these apps; of course, we say, it’s their own doing! However, that is how these developers make their living. It is through very competitive business that applications can win over our time. By calling for these developers to design their products so we use them less, so we spend less of our time ($) providing our data through their interfaces, we are calling for developers to make their applications less competitive. We are, in essence, challenging these creators to make less profitable products, and we call for a framework of compliance that would only be a financial detriment to those making a living.
If we want to end our cycle of care-free and unproductive entertainment, rather than keeping the burden of change on firms who are destined to secure our time, we must keep our time in our own hands, our money in our own wallets, and make the simple choice to just put down the damn phone.
LikeLike
After reading Tristan Harris’s article, I can also agree with Ryann Amey’s response that humans are very much addicted to smartphones in this day and age. I concur with Ryann’s statement that app designers are largely at fault for this worldwide addiction. I feel as though marketing designers and tech companies must benefit themselves by using specific strategies to hook customers into their products, applications, websites, and more. If the tech industry refrained from using these strategies to promote their products, they would ultimately fail and have no success gaining users or keeping people interested in their services. However, I disagree that app designers should stop enticing users as Ryann has suggested in his response. I strongly feel as though people have the capability of avoiding addiction to social media and all of the other websites and smartphone applications that have become so popular. If someone truly values face-to-face communication and real world experiences, he or she will find the means to avoid constant cell phone use. I, myself, designate certain times of the day for viewing social media and applications on my phone. I believe that willpower is the most effective and impactful way for people to combat the smartphone “addiction” today.
LikeLike
Throughout these posts, the same idea is being presented: we are addicted to our phones and this is a problem. The only problem is that no one seems to have a solution to this addiction. Instead, we just hope we have the self-discipline to say enough is enough and turn off the device. The app companies are wanting us to become addicted because that means that we spend more time on their app. But what if the tables could be turned, and apps could be used to prevent being brainwashed into an app? Harris states that one way we could deal with addiction to apps and phones is if “they could empower people to set predictable times during the day or week for when they want to check “slot machine” apps, and correspondingly adjust when new messages are delivered.” This is just one way that we could reduce the addiction we have towards our phones. I do not think that this will completely solve our addiction problem, but I think it is a great start instead of trying to rely on self-discipline.
LikeLike
While I agree with John K’s point to an extent, I cannot fully agree to his conclusion that we need to “make the simple choice to just put down the damn phone”. While John makes valid points in his summary, I cannot accept his final conclusion that our phone usage should be cut down to a minimum and should no longer be used for our entertainment. While Harris argues that “several billion people have a slot machine in their pocket”, Harris overlooks what I consider a fairly important point that consumers do not just check their phones for social media usage. While I concede that certainly a good percentage of my time goes to social media on my phone, making the conscious decision to avoid checking my phone would result in ignoring multiple phone calls from family, email communications from work and from school, and even the development of plans from friends who do not live within shouting distance of myself. Harris underestimates and devalues what is important in society, sarcastically arguing that there is a “one percent chance we could be missing something important.” While Harris makes valid points about smartphone usage in today’s society, his argument fails to acknowledge the counter argument enough to gain credibility and the full support of his audience.
LikeLike
While I do agree with Harris that many of us are addicted to our phones, I do not agree that it is hard to quit. If you are actually majorly concerned with your phone addiction, or your loved ones express that concern, you can easily downgrade your phone to a model that provides less distractions. I don’t think the problem is that people can’t quit, I think the problem is that people don’t want to quit. However, I am concerned with our societies phone addiction. The stat Spiegel gives about checking our phones “150 times a day on average” is terrifying to me. I am not sure if the stat includes looking at the time as “checking your phone”, but if it doesn’t I can’t even fathom how many times that is. It is clear we have a problem as a society, and to cure it we have to go beyond the concept of addiction, but to the concepts of smart phones overall. Are they worth it?
LikeLike
John K points out what I believe is wrong with Harris’ argument, that app developers and firms should sacrifice their bottom line and become less competitive for the sake of easing the burden of distractions on consumers. I agree that the compulsive obsession we have with our phones, apps, and the internet is hurting our ability to use our time wisely and give undivided attention to other things, but restricting app developers and social media platforms from maximizing their profits will lead to less competitive markets and worse products. I think a better strategy would be for consumers to pressure the individual companies in having an accountability system and publicly set ethical limits to their advertising and promotions, especially for apps used mostly by kids. Because everyone has different preferences and needs, I think it’s ultimately the consumers’ responsibility to limit their internet use for their sake.
LikeLike
While I do agree with what Clay has to say about the importance of cell phones in today’s society, I can also see exactly why the author believes we should try to use our cell phones at a minimum. Because we are constantly on our phones, usually so that we can check social media, as the author points out, we miss out on a lot of things going on around us. Harris talks a lot about how social media is designed to get us hooked on them, which is why it can seem like teenagers are addicted to the social acceptance and societal approval that phone applications give us. And while sometimes we are using our cell phones to make important calls and check emails, often we are wasting time trying to see what everyone else is doing because I believe that our generation has a major case of “F.O.M.O.” or the “fear of missing out.” Harris claims that it is difficult for teens to put their phones down, but I disagree. If we make the conscious decision to use phones for important things and not get sucked into the “slot machine” effect of social media, it’ll be easy to put the phones down.
LikeLike
I agree with Fyfon H’s assertion that people are addicted to their cell phones due to the constant demand for our attention. He draws this point from the main article’s overall topic, that cell phones are like slot machines in our pockets. To further Fyfon’s ideas that people are dependent on their social status based off of social media, I am bringing forward the fact that people use second hand apps to buy themselves followers or likes on various social media apps such as Twitter or Instagram. All of these apps were targeted at the people addicted to their smart phones. I agree with Fyfon’s point due to this because some people go to extreme measures just to have 500 likes instead of 200. All of this comes from, in my opinion, the glorification of Instagram or Twitter famous people, ie the people who get thousands or millions of likes on their posts, where one is sure to find a person commenting something along the lines of “can I be you.” This adds to the peoples addictions so they can compare themselves to their social media idols, and some people will not stop until they have achieved a point where they view themselves as on par with their idols.
LikeLike
While I do agree that in today’s society we place too much importance on cell phones, I don’t think that it is an addiction. I think that when it is needed, we are able to put cell phones down and ignore them for as long as necessary. I also don’t believe that our “choices are manipulated upstream by menus we didn’t choose in the first place” as Harris says. While we do rely on our cell phones more than we should, I think we are able to make decisions for ourselves and put our cell phones down when they aren’t needed.
LikeLike
Harris’s article addresses a major complaint against the tech-savy and computerized world we live in today: the addiction to smartphones and social media sites that causes lack of connection to the real world. The main argument the responses to this article make is that we are indeed to in touch with our smartphones, and as Harris calls them, “Slot Machines” in our pockets. As a Computer Scientist, I fully believe this opinion, though widely held, is conceptually wrong and pessimistic, as it only analyzes the negative effects of the smartphone. Consider someone born almost 30 years ago, and telling the teenage version of them that one day they would have a phone so powerful it could not only fit in their pocket, but also connect them to the world around the and give them access to all the information they could possibly calculate. Harris calls it an addiction as many of the comments siding with his point do, but I see it as an innovation, connecting us to the world in ways we could never experience without it.
LikeLike
In Harris’ article, he makes the claim that cell phones are like slot machines in regards to the addiction that he believes people have. While I agree with his point that developers and companies strive to make people want to feel connected and involved in the online world, I disagree that it is an addiction. I agree with Ruan Penland that people are still capable of putting down their phones and are capable of making conscious decisions that aren’t completely influenced by the online medium. I feel that technology has become an integral part of our society. Our phones and computers make our lives easier and help us to be more connected. While these things are important and useful, they do not control the lives of the users. That may one day be the case, but I do not think that it has come to that yet.
LikeLike
I believe that Harris is right we do check are phones to much. There are more car accidents each year from people being on their phones well driving. I believe the reason people are on their phone is because of all the games and rewards on those games. your phone shouldn’t control your life your phone should be used to make your life easier.
LikeLike
Harris saying that we put too much towards our phones, and not to our everyday lives. We should spend more time trying to concentrate on our lives rather than have our attention towards our phones. His argument is persuasive because he gives us examples on how easily get distracted by our phones. Such as,’When you receive an invitation from someone to connect, you imagine that person making a conscious choice to invite you, when in reality, they likely unconsciously responded to LinkedIn’s list of suggested contacts’. (Harris, Tristan. ” The Slot Machine in Your Pocket” Spigel Online 27 July 2016 A4. Spigel.de Web. 31 October 2016). He also made good statements on how lose precious time by giving so much of time to our phones. Tristan Harris article was a very persuasive article he gave good points on how we spend our time on our phones and suggested we shouldn’t do that.
LikeLike
I completely agree that we are compelled to look at our phones because we are sucked in by the interaction with other people- seeing another Instagram photo, Tweet or Snapchat story. I think that Basil Beauvais brings up a good point by saying that this directly correlates to the amount of deaths due to texting and driving, and how it increases every year. I do think that we are addicted to looking at our phones and staying up to date with what the rest of the world is doing. I agree with Emma H’s comment that app designers should not be compelled to make their sites less addictive. I think that this ties into the argument with many other things that concern the health of the public- people have to want to change, you can’t force positive change on the masses.
LikeLike
I agree a lot with what Ever says. When we use our smart phones too much, we can miss out on so much going around us in daily life. People want to document everything they do at every second and see what everyone else is experiencing rather than focus on the amazing things they see around themselves every day. At sporting events, people are often occupied to take pictures to tell people they are there, rather than simply experience it and tell them later. That property of smartphones and social media is detrimental to society and results in an addictive quality of smart phones. It is very clear from the article and from daily life that humans are addicted to their smartphones because of the gratification we get from a notification. People need to experience life outside of a screen, and while you still get notifications, don’t make that your biggest priority.
LikeLike
After reading Harris’ article, I concur with Ruan that we are not actually in fact addicted to cell phones. In his writing, Harris often referred to phone use as an “addiction”. While many use their phones way too often, I would not consider this to be an addiction. Smart phones have some very beneficial features that make life much simpler, which in turn makes us use them more. By using them often, that does not mean that we are addicted. When needed, most people have the ability to turn off their cell phone or put it down for the time being. In his writing Harris asks, “Do we want a world where we either use smartphones and constantly get hijacked, or we can’t use them at all?” I think that this question is extremely exaggerated and over dramatic. While Harris made some interesting points, overall his article seemed way over the top, which is why I agree with Ruan that our cell phone use is not an addiction.
LikeLike
I agree with what Tristan Harris is saying with smartphone addiction. I think that people of this day and age depend on their phone too much. I bet if you asked any teenager or adult to go without their phone for one day they wouldn’t be able to do it. In the article he says that we should have smartphones that put “our minds, not our impulses first.” By that I think he means that we should have something that works our brain and makes us smarter. Instead of having a phone that we check on impulse to see who tweeted or texted us. I feel that we have depended on our phones for so long that we check our phone just to check it. Not to see if we received an important email or if a family member/boss tried to get in contact with us. All in all, I think that Harris was trying to say that technology and smartphones are in a sense ruining our minds. We have become blank to the world and we see it through a glass screen. It saddens me that most of us cannot put our phones down to enjoy a sunset. We have to take a picture of it first.
Tristan Harris’ argument is persuasive. He states that “We check our phones 150 times per day, on average” I was shocked by this! He is being persuasive by giving us facts and showing us how much we are letting technology affect our daily lives. When he says “When we pull our phone out of our pocket, we’re playing a slot machine to see what notifications we have received. When we swipe down our finger to scroll the Instagram feed, we’re playing a slot machine to see what photo comes next.” Its making us relate to what he’s saying. By him being relatable, we are forced to listen. If you see yourself doing that, you may have second thoughts on how much you use your phone, which is exactly what he wants you to think about.
LikeLike
Smartphones are one of the most life changing inventions. Imagine all the technology that can fit into a pocket. However, the luxury of having a smartphone is definitely abused. When Mr. Harris said that we look on average at our smartphones 150 time per day, I was shocked. Imagine all the wasted time we spend! Like most things, smartphones have pros and cons. In my experience, smartphones are really helpful when I get lost on the road because then I can just pull up Waze or Maps and… poof it’ll show me where to go! On the contrary, spending and hour flipping through Instagram makes me feel terrible because then what have I accomplished?…an extra follower or a like on my selfie? Life is short, and I don’t want to spend my life being sucked on my phone. After reading this article, I am more motivated to stay away form unnecessarily using my phone. I think of it now like using a slot machine. I am manipulated to think I am winning, but in reality the companies are winning. Therefore I am losing, and I don’t like to lose! I believe other phone addicts would feel the same way. I think the message made in Mr. Harris’ article should be spread because it could perhaps create change.
LikeLike
After reading both the article and the comments to the article, I agree with the author that our society has grown to highly addictive and can be a huge distraction in our lives. Like Elissa Taylor stated, “the luxury of having a smartphone is definitely abused.” I was also shocked like many other commenters that the average person checks their phone 150 times a day, which is just a testament to how much time we waste on this technology. I find it ironic that many of us use this technology in order to stay in tune with what is going on around us, but by looking at our phones all day, we find ourselves losing sight on what is around us in the world.
LikeLike
I agree with Jack’s comments that we don’t overuse our phones as much as people think. The technology is so advanced and has improved the world so well that people shouldn’t stop using it now. Our world is centered around a cellphone, and I don’t honestly think that it’s a bad idea. Cell Phones provide humans with so many resources and information at the tip of their fingers, it’s truly incredible. On top of all that the it provides us a sense of safety wherever we’re at, because we can always call someone in case of emergency. Overall I think cell phones have drastically improved our way of life, and should not be used less, because the older generation doesn’t agree with the technology.
LikeLike
In this article, Tristan Harris claims that smartphone app developers are using different methods to attract users. This methods create an addictive experience that can draw in users for many points throughout the day. It has become controversial if the practice of drawing in a user is very ethical or a fair business practice.
The claims laid on in Harris’s article are extremely interesting. The fact that app designers have gotten social interaction down to a science is brilliant. As others have pointed out, I agree that it may not be 100% the user’s fault for becoming addicted to their cell phone, but it is important to remember the user has full control over the situation and can dictate what they do. This is not a situation where the app is forcing the user to perform any action. I disagree that the app’s should be prohibited from enticing the user because it is their right to create a app that people want to use. The information that Harris presents is important for others to learn and it could teach the tech world that apps can become very addictive if they are not careful and exercise moderation.
LikeLike
In Tristan Harris’ essay on Smartphone addiction he makes many valid points on how new technology is robbing us of precious time. When Tristan ends his argument in creating smartphones that put our minds first before our impulses he is advocating for the creation of a smartphone that allows us to use it in our best interest rather than a company’s. Many companies create their apps based off of us checking our phones constantly, if they were to create a phone that allows us to only use our phones for important calls and such we would have a higher attention span. I believe that it would be difficult to create a phone with a service provider that does not have the interest of creating more money and more technology-obsessed people. That is how these carriers get their money, by allowing their customers to access information and social media sites using their cell phone towers. If we created a phone that would allow for people not to access them, it would be a service that would fail tremendously. The problem is not the phones here; it is the people. We have become obsessed with checking on our news feeds and texts messages and emails that we cannot go a day without it. Instead of trying to seek out an option that does not allow for the access of these applications how about we all practice a little bit of free thinking and will power? It is completely free and will also leave you to discover so many things around us and even learn more about the people in our lives. True, we have become reliant on social media and emails but there are still some of us who can go without. Not all of us need these things attached to our hips, all it takes is turning off the power and disconnecting.
LikeLike
In Tristan Harris’ article, Smartphone Addiction: The Slot Machine in Your Pocket, he argues that technology, like cellphones, more specifically, and apps, have been designed to take advantage of the public’s weakness. He argues that people to check their phone more often without the conscious decision to do so. He compares phones to a gambling slot machine, because whenever someone checks their phone, there is the chance of an instant reward. A reward that could come in the form of a text message or another notification that requires our approval and dismissal; there is a reward whenever these notifications come up that enable one to continually keep checking their phone. In his argument, he suggests that the general public tends to guide and abide by the suggestions they see on social media. Most social media like Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram tend to send notifications when there is an attempt to connect you to someone who’s phone number you have in your contacts, or by people you share mutual friends with. Harris’ argument says you are more likely to add said people, even if you do not consciously decide to, because of such suggestions. Toward the conclusion of his article, Harris talks about the idea of a public unison in order to protest technological design for a more realistic use, and not to feed off of our mind’s blind spots in decision making. Harris also suggests that the time spent on smartphones, computers, and the apps could be spent more productively; because at the moment, they are taking up time that could be “better spent”.
My argument against this is that perhaps the public does not truly want to make certain decisions for themselves for fear of taking the responsibility for the wasted time. Ideally, yes, people generally like to have control over their decisions; though there are still instances that could negate such wish. For example, when there is something in need of someone to take responsibility for it. When someone is questioned as to how their time was spent, self-induced or from an authoritative figure, there is less of a chance for someone to take responsibility for not having spent said time in a better manner. There will be excuses made, regardless, and I do believe that we are forced to check our phones so regularly to stay connected to others, and for fear of missing out. To say that we check our phones because of rewards is not invalid reasoning, there is just more beyond that. I do not believe cell phones are being checked more regularly because of the “rewards” we get from notifications. My belief on the subject is that there is a fear of missing out and feeling left behind. Another possibility is for avoidance, we check our phones to avoid acknowledging someone, or being approached, etc.
LikeLike
The article wrote by Tristan Harris “The Slot Machine in Your Pocket” brings on an interesting perspective on how tech companies have developed methods to keep our brains hooked to technology. In this article Harris does not blame phones, computers, IPads, but instead calls out the tech companies making the website and apps people are hooked on. I agree with the article and feel that Harris develops great arguments on how these companies are keeping us hooked to different types of technology by comparing it to a slot machine. Harris also talks about how there should be an FDA for technology so that these tech companies can start developing apps that put “our minds, not our impulses, first.”
When Harris says “our minds, not our impulses, first” he wants a FDA like company for technology, which can limit these addictive techniques to keep us hooked to certain apps and websites. I am guilty of constantly refreshing my email or Instagram posts every minute to keep track of any new information that has come about. Although I am consciously aware that I am wasting my time by refreshing a page, I do it unconsciously because I am addicted. According to the article written by Harris, these actions we unconsciously choose to make resembles that of a slot machine. Harris claims that “Addictiveness is maximized when the rate of reward is most variable.” Tech companies implement ways to reward us every time we refresh a certain app on our phone or refresh our webpage, which keeps us hooked.
Another interesting way tech companies keep people constantly hooked is by the use of notifications. Whenever a person tags you in a Facebook, Twitter, Instagram post, your phone automatically notifies you instantly so you can respond to these notifications. Notifications of ourselves being tagged in certain things can make us feel relevant and sociable, which can be addicting to us. A good example that Harris brings up is when people change their profile picture on Facebook. Facebook has algorithms that automatically puts you on the top of peoples news feeds so that they can like and comment on your photo. This makes people more interactive with the website and keeps them coming back after each notification.
Harris’s closing argument is the distinction between “time spent” and “time well spent”. “Time spent” is when people are mindlessly browsing the depths of YouTube, or watching an extra episode on Netflix just because it is auto playing and counting down the next episode for you to watch. There should be certain regulations for technology that help us avoid making unconscious decisions, which is what Harris refers to as “time well spent”. Although I agree with Harris’s plants to regulate technology, I feel that it will be difficult since tech companies use these tactics to make money.
LikeLike
I agree with what Tristan Harris is saying about technology addiction. People are very attached to instant gratification, even if they are not aware of it. When playing a game, seeing the bright, colorful rewarding messages encourages the user to keep playing and playing until eventually it has been hours. Even in Psychology, where they do the Marshmallow Test, they are measuring the desire of delayed gratification, and even then it is almost impossible to assume that more than one kid will “pass” the experiment. People all look for approval within some type of group, and the instant connection that cell phones give causes that group to be all the friends added on that social media platform. People will never opt for being bored, over being able to stare a shiny lit-up screen, and that is the case of many all over the world.
Tristan’s idea for “maximizing” the time spent on a cell phone is actually a good idea. Whether it is a social networking site or a game, people check their phones excessively through the day. Sometimes it is justified, for emergency purposes. However, all the other swiping and TMZ-esque news updates, are not necessary in everyday life. Instant communication is a convenience in modern times, but it also makes one feel obligated to respond to any messages as quickly as possible, even if they are busy. Spending time with people in person is better than any text message can be. The age of texting and messaging has been present for a while, but it keeps causing more and more distance within relationships. People then rely on these communication applications, instead of face-to-face interaction, when it is possible. Instead of trying to make people have tunnel vision with their technology, they should look for technology in times of need, for help.
LikeLike
Tristan Harris makes the claim that human beings are addicted to smartphones. He argues that human beings check their phones 150 times a day and they are making conscious choice every time when they check their phones. Every time a person get distracted by your phones, he will need 23 minutes to refocus on your original idea. Tristan Harris also metaphors the smartphones as the slot machines because human beings spend lots of time on the smartphones and they never know what will be on the screens in the next second. What Tristan Harris wants to tell his audiences is human beings should spend their time on their smartphones correctly. People get addicted to their smartphones for these reasons. First, to reduce the pressure from their job or their academic studies, people love playing phone games, using app to chat with friends, watching movies and listening to music. By doing that, people can easily forget their problems temporarily. Second, just like the metaphors Tristan Harris made, smartphones are the slot machines. There is always something new that pop up on the phone. Users may get a new message, a new email or a new notification from their smartphone at any second to distract them. Even though some might be good and some might not, but people always want to know what will be popped up on your screen in the next second. Some people are just wondering what is happening around them; therefore they check their phones frequently. When people spend too much time on the smartphones, they don’t have enough to focus on what they supposed to do. In my opinion, human beings should take smartphones addiction seriously. We should not be distracted by our smartphones when we are focusing on something important. For example, we can turn off our smartphone when we need to focus on writing a research paper. I agree with the ideas in Tristan Harris’s article and we definitely could make a new chat app to prevent interruption.
LikeLike
Our reliance on technology has increased due to the quality of the technology that we have available to us. Most businesses now depend on some variety of digital platform from which to trade, and there’s a multitude of communication apps that are available to enhance how we interact with people in the digital world. We need to remember that we are still relatively new to the amount of information that we can receive in seconds from our handheld pocket-computers, and we are still learning how to use it. Sure, there is the trap of spending real money on fake money to expand your virtual Kingdom, or the feelings of obligation to respond to a mistakenly ‘looked-at’ message. And of course there are people that fall in to these traps, but there also exists a breed of human that does NOT spend real money on fake money OR feel the obligation to reply in an instant to a ‘looked-at’ message. These humans use skills such as ‘avoidance’, or perhaps some expertly planned out phase known as ‘clicking-off’ of those temptingly shiny, ‘cheap’ gold bars occurs on a regular basis, followed by a pinch of self restraint for when times get tough. For as long there is pressure to connect and communicate from digital franchises, there will always be those that wish to find their own way, on their own terms.
We are slowly learning how it all works…
LikeLike
I understand why Harris thinks we need a smartphone that “puts our minds first, not our impulses.” I don’t necessarily agree with him. I get that apps do whatever they can to keep us glued to our phones, but most of the things listed in this article are features that I enjoy. I think the matter is more that we need to practice self control. I know when I’ve been on my phone too much it’s time to put it away for a while. We have to take responsibly for our actions and control ourselves. Parent’s also need to pass this along to their children and teach them how to limit their time using cell phone apps.
LikeLike
In Harris essay he compares slot machines to us using our smart phones . Harris says we consistently check our phones to see what type of rewards we have received through out the day. The average person checks their smart phone 150 times a day, we have become addicted to our phones.Technology has hacked our minds by keeping us distracted and entertained through out the day. we get attached to social media because it gives us some sense of belonging. Social media makes us feel like we need social approval from others. Smart phone app’s play you psychological vulnerabilities to keep us busy.
LikeLike
Phones are becoming something that is running the world. When he says this, he means that our smartphones need to help us become smarter in a living sense vs. controlling the way that we do things is a bad way. His argument is very persuasive because he explains how social media is running our lives. When he says that he is a magician he is saying that because he understands what smartphones are doing to us today. The difference between “time spent” and “time well spent” is that time spent is the business advertising aspect running the way that you use social media but time well spent is when using valuing the time that you spend on social media for family and friends and keep your mind from getting hijacked.
LikeLike
Harris argues that technology is completely taking over. He points out that technology has the ability to control what we see and what we click. We think we are in control but actually we are not. I know this to be true. There is so many times in a day that I will grab my phone and open Facebook for no reason at all. Sometimes I open it even after I literally just closed it. I open it partly out of habit and partly for the need to be rewarded as Harris says. Harris’ argument is very persuasive. His argument is persuasive because he brought up many points that I personally have experienced to be true, as well as, provided many examples of how our psychological vulnerabilities are a vehicle for their success.
LikeLike
Harris tells us how app creators can in a sense, control our mind. He compares it to himself, being a magician, and knowing how to look for people’s blind spots in the minds. He also talks about how many times a day the average person touches their phone, 150 times. That’s amazing to me; almost unbelievable, but I absolutely can see that it’s true. While I’m embarrassed to admit it, I’m one of those people who regularly checks their phone. It does interfere with our day and distract us from the real-world.
LikeLike
I do not think that him being a magician makes him more likely to use his phone. If anything he would be less likely to use his phone. Time spent is when you are using your time but not very good, like you are wasting it. When it is time well spent then you are using your time wisely and know how to manage your time.
LikeLike
In the article by Tristan Harris, “Your personal slot machine” he argues that the addiction to Iphones is not due to our own personal faults but to the set up of the Iphone, which is meant to hijack your attention. He compared the way the iphone is set up to a slot machine- you swipe and receive a “prize”. I do agree to a certain extent. I do know that phone companies and makers of the Iphone have a plan to get more and more people to buy, to keep updating, to have the best. They achieve this by finding ways to bring attention to the phone and get you to never take your eyes off it. But also at the same time, the people are to blame for letting themselves get completely corrupted by the Iphone. They should not let so much of their attention be stolen by a phone.
LikeLike
Harris argues in his essay that businesses are wrongfully capitalizing on “slot machine” apps when instead they should be held responsible in “converting to less addictive designs.” We agree that the “slot machine” apps have evolved into a major issue in today’s society, but instead of focusing the blame on the companies who produce them, we think the blame should be shifted to the users.
The users are to blame because businesses are only supplying to the demand of their customers. As Harris points out, “the ultimate freedom is a free mind.” While he states that this is possible through the help of technology companies, we argue that the only way to reach a truly free mind is in the hands of the user. Because after all, technology, which is inanimate, should not be able to control our lives.
LikeLike
I believe that in the future anthropologists and sociologists will point to introduction of the “highly beguiling, totally programmable, hand-held Pavlovian device” known as a smartphone as the start of the decline of the human race!
At this point in time, we have no idea of the extent of the deleterious effect this technology has on the future of childhood development and society as a whole.
For more than twenty-years I have been warning children and adults that our brains have not been prepared to resist the powerfully addictive qualities of “closed-loop”, action / response characteristics of visual / aural stimulating electronic portable computing devices. My pontification on this subject is usually met with blank stares or push-back to the point that in some cases I’ve became persona non grata with parents!
Just to let you know, I’ve been self-employed for more than 44-years as an inventor / designer and manufacturer of technical tools used for creativity and productivity by professionals working in the fields of electronics, mechanics and optics. For the past 20-years I’ve marketed my products and services via the internet but I do not have a computer in my home! My creativity requires the elimination of external stimulation so that my “minds-eye” imagination, contemplation, introspection and examination can take place in order to design the tools that my customers need for their work.
Sadly, if the majority of our society is constantly being externally stimulated by these electronic devices spewing out mindless distractions, who will design the future?
If your interested in learning more about my insights and observations on this subject feel-free to contact me at my Van Nuys business @ 818-994-2449 or on my cell @ 818-314-7275 (not a smart phone!). David Riddle
LikeLike
My feelings on the issue are mixed. I do support Harris’s position that smartphones and apps associated with them can be perceived as addictive and attention demanding, but I find Clay Sellers argument about the importance of technology as a means of communication and entertainment to be equally persuasive. I agree with Sellers point that Harris’s article was too much towards an extreme, talking about cutting all entertainment based smart phone usage. This idea is radical, especially in today’s society. In a current society that has entangled itself with social media and technology, smartphones have given access to a world of knowledge at a moments and fingertips notice. I disagree with the idea that smartphones and apps are addictive and dislike the comparison between smartphones and slot machines. It is not so much that smartphones have become addictive, but it has more become a discussion about how the amount of access has changed over the last decade. Moving as fast as hardwired computers, smartphones can download and receive information from across the country in a matter of seconds, linking people from around the world with news, gossip and conversation. Current smartphones have facilitated the ability to download thousands of different apps, whether it is for informational or an entertainment purposes, is ultimately determined by the user. The user holds the responsibility; the responsibility to remain in touch with biotic reality is solely up to the user and their ability to compartmentalize parts of their life.
LikeLike
I believe that the essay, “The Slot Machine in Your Pocket”, by Tristan Harris is correct in that technology companies should have an obligation to do right by their consumers. Tristan Harris’ background given at the end of his essay made this an interesting perspective because he is actually, “a magician and an expert on how technology hijacks our psychological vulnerabilities. Until 2016, he was a product philosopher at Google, where he studied how technology affects a billion people’s attention, well-being and behavior.” This is important to realize while reading this essay because he actually has experience working for these companies he is talking about in his essay. Google is one of the biggest technology companies people use today. Harris is able to give an interesting perspective on how he views technology. I believe that he is correct in his statement that we do not need to unplug to be able to see these changes in society, but we all must become self aware of the addictions that these companies try to get people to fall victim to. There is a psychological explanation for why people are so addicted to their cell phones which is interesting to consider how different people will be years from now psychologically. These instant rewards people are used to in their applications on cell phones can change the way people connect with one another in the future. Harris talks about how these companies should have a ‘bill of rights’ for their consumers they need to abide by in order to do right by them. This is an interesting concept because the world could potentially be headed towards this. There are already laws against cyber bullying, so these companies could instate a way to protect their users in the future. I think this essay gave a fresh perspective that did not give the typical solution of just unplugging from technology. Harris provided interesting solutions to where technology will lead this new age of people.
LikeLike