Slashdot Log In
When Does Technolust Become An Addiction?
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Jun 21, 2007 05:55 PM
from the right-about-here dept.
from the right-about-here dept.
An anonymous reader writes "According to a CNet article, an incredible one in three people aged 16 to 24 in the UK would not give up their mobile phone for a million pounds. 'The phone-centric survey, called Mobile Life, was carried out across the UK and questioned 1,256 people aged 16 to 64 on a variety of topics ... So young people really like having a mobile phone and we all love buying gadgets. But before you dismiss this research as stating the bleeding obvious, think about this -- if someone had told you even ten years ago that people would be taking out second mortgages to buy flat screen TVs, would you have believed it?' Is this just the result of deliberately skewed marketing dressed up as research, or is this another indication of western culture's obsession with communication and technology? How much is too much tech?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
When? (Score:5, Funny)
Say it with me: it's only a phone...it's only a phone...
Re:When? (Score:4, Insightful)
To answer the question in TFA (which is just a repeat of the Register's finding that teenagers would rather give up SEX than their phone for a month) is when you are with another human being and fail to put the phone on vibrate/let everything go to voice mail. Voice Mail, SMS, and E-mail are SUPPOSED to be asynchronous forms of communication- that means you can put the phone down and drive, or actually talk to other people once in a while. USE the technology, don't let the technology ABUSE you.
Parent
Re:When? (Score:5, Insightful)
And the rest of the gadgets? Leave 'em at home. Now, part of this is that most of my vacations involve camping (drive up camping, I'm too fat and lazy to backpack anymore, and the only one of the people I go with who would consider doing it); and the last thing I need, when I am trying to get away from civilization, is some idiot blaring a reminder of that crap a few hundred feet away. The forest/desert have very nice and interesting sounds if you just stop and listen to them. And anyone bringing a laptop/TV/DVD player deserves a beating with a stick. I enjoy sitting around a camp fire watching the flames and hearing the sounds of the sap popping and good conversation with friends, music detracts from that.
Lastly: teenagers would rather give up SEX than their phone for a month
Either they aren't getting it anyway, so it's not a loss for them; or they only asked prudes. If my choice in High School had been talking on the phone or sex, I'd have been pants-less before they finished asking the question.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong way around (Score:3, Funny)
No, that's when we'll find out if people will give up a million pounds for a mobile phone.
Re:When? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
hmmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
maybe they value communication with their friends and family more than money...
I initially expected just to agree with "this is deliberately skewed marketing dressed up as research," but that's actually an interesting point when you think about it. The survey asked people aged 16-24 "whether or not they would sacrifice being able to own or use a mobile phone ever again" according to TFA. If you are 16-24, then probably all of your friends communicate with each other by cell phone. By not having a phone, you'd miss out on a lot of social life. People are going to the movies? Oops, couldn't reach you, maybe next time. Meet a cute girl or boy? Give 'em your landline and hope they call when you're at home (and your parents don't answer and embarrass you, or your stoner roommate doesn't answer and forget to take a message). Hey, guys, what's everybody laughing about? What are you texting each other about? Etc.
Maybe the bigger surprise is that supposedly materialistic youngsters actually recognized the value of friendship over money.
Parent
If you have a million pounds, she'll find you. (Score:3, Insightful)
Really, if you're worth a million pounds, she'll find you.
Friends will understand that you don't have the access that they do ... but that you have WAY more money.
Believe it or not,
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anybody remember the sleazy guy in the library in the old Discworld PC game. He said he wouldn't give up his gold banana earring for all the gold in the kingdom, but quickly changes his tune when Rincewind actually turns up with all the gold in the kingdom.
We guessed that people would think twice when presented with the actual cash/cheque.
We also noted the exchange rate - in the mind of US/AU people, a million dollars isn't quite enough to live comfortably and never have to work again. We had to remind
I'll take it. (Score:3, Insightful)
My current phone is so crap (Score:3, Funny)
Re:My current phone is so crap (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Easy Deal (Score:3, Funny)
You've got a good job (or no job?).
If I had a million pounds I wouldn't need a cell phone. One catch - I get to rid myself of the Treo by smashing it on the concrete the next time it resets while I'm doing a web search.
second mortgage? (Score:5, Interesting)
That sounds like a really bad deal (for the closing costs alone). Why wouldn't you just take out a personal line of credit from the bank?
(Obviously, the best solution is: don't buy it if you can't pay for it that month, but we're talking about the lesser of evils)
Re:second mortgage? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:second mortgage? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Tsk tsk tsk. My family financed our trip to Disneyland (well, Disney World) the old fashioned way: We sold off our beanie babies.
(Seriously. We hit it right at the peak, sold some for $200 apiece and many for $50. What was that about people spending far too much money on frivolous things?)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I think it sounds more like a nation of naive people who don't understand that (a) credit is just another word for debt, (b) house prices are not guaranteed to continue rising at double-figure increments per year, and indeed may fall sharply if the bubble gets too big, and (c) the comb
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For context, I'm in the UK.
Credit is debt until you pay the bill. If you buy a nice TV using a loan or mortgage, you are in debt until you have repaid that money.
Home prices have shown absurd growth here in the UK in recent y
I'd give up my cell phone for a million pounds, if (Score:2, Insightful)
Hardly surprising (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If some marketing person asks me ...
I generally answer with I'M ON THE DO NOT CALL LIST, SO FUCK OFF (note the emphasis) and slam down the phone. That seems to answer their questions quite effectively.
Re:Hardly surprising (Score:4, Interesting)
Disclaimer: I used to work in market research as an analyst, so I know what I am talking about.
The surveys cost a lot of money to generate. So they have a value from that perspective.
The surveys are paid for by major corporations and governments and health organisations.
Governments determine policies, and corporations design products and price points based on the data within the surveys. They are referred to constantly within parliament if government owned, and taken as gospel. Health surveys are used to allocate funding and tackle major medical issues affecting the population.
Based on those facts, I cannot support your theory that the surveys are worthless.
Now, as for the reliability of the data, that is another question entirely. Sample sizes are often small enough that you'll see "bad" figures like the million-dollars-for-a-phone factoid this article is about. So what does that mean? That the survey, even if bad, is worthless? No. Quite the opposite. Even if the data is bad, we can see the data is being used to generate articles and who knows what else within the corporations churning over the data.
I'd say this is a pretty clear example as to why it's important to be honest in a survey, and why participating in a survey gives you (a very small) influence over government and corporation. Would you be so quick to dismiss this?
Parent
Re:Hardly surprising (Score:4, Insightful)
However, surveys are far from scientific studies, and should never be accorded the same respect.
First, there is no trusting the actual source of the data. Humans lie for amusement. Humans lie for profit. Humans lie because they're lazy. Humans lie to computers because computers don't know the difference. When taking a survey, some people I know answer "C.", because we all learned in school that C is usually the right answer. Others pick the most outlandish answer. Look at the 2001 New Zealand census -- 1.5% of all New Zealanders are practicing Jedi. (OK, some of them are Reformed Jedi.) Does that mean you throw away those 1.5% from your data? Does that mean the other 98.5% are telling the truth? Did the Jedi answer other questions faithfully? Strangely enough, the New Zealand census removed all references to Jedi from their published figures, masking the very existence of the false data and making it that much harder to understand.
Second, the source of data is skewed. You may think it's a random sampling of the population, but there is an increasingly large percent of well educated, affluent people who have demanded to be added to "do not call" lists. They have neither the time nor the inclination to answer some random series of questions, and so have removed themselves voluntarily from the pool. That's going to skew answers in the direction of the uneducated poorer segments of society. Are the surveys adjusted for shifts like these? Hardly, as advertisers typically aim "low", and these skewed surveys provide only confirmations of the answers they want to hear, rather than the data they deserve. The answers might be fine if you're researching whether you really need Clydesdales to sell Budweiser or if you could get away with airbrushed appaloosas, but might be horribly misleading if you're selling Lexuses (Lexii?)
Science is about observation. Surveys are about asking opinions. Statistics are used to try to give surveys the air of science, but they're still originated on false premises.
Parent
Re:Hardly surprising (Score:4, Interesting)
I do that frequently when websites force the user to fill out a profile for whatever lame reason. I am usually an 70+ year old female CEO or CFO of a fortune 1000 company who makes purchasing decisions for 100,000+ person departments, my hobbies are usually woodworking, knitting, and fly fishing, and my annual income is always stated (for the purposes of maximum database poisoning) to be less than 15,000 per year or more than 250,000. Does anybody answer such surveys honestly anymore? Do the advertisers actually believe that this information is accurate? They should just save their money and dump the survey companies.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I used to work in market research as an analyst, so I know what I am talking about.
See, I think you lost most people there.
But then, just in case, you followed it up with:
The surveys cost a lot of money to generate. So they have a value from that perspective.
And that's just freaking hilarious. Do you really honestly believe that?
I could spend a bucketload of money creating something, and it might still be worthless. The only intrinsic value something has based on the cost of producing it is a negative value. The produced goods or services have to actually be useful/beneficial in some way in order to overcome that initial negative value.
Suddenly a lot of things
My mind reels (Score:5, Funny)
It's just a CPH press release (Score:4, Interesting)
Other stories under this heading mostly include "Dixons announces that will no longer be stocked in their group stores".
How many of the people mugged for this "survey" actually thought that the herbert with the clipboard was actually going to give them a million quid?
errr... (Score:5, Funny)
2)buy new mobile
3)profit!
I wouldn't need the numbers from my old mobile as obviously
I'd be disowning my friends and family for hot coke bitches...
How did they phrase the question? (Score:2)
Well. (Score:2)
Most people think that every free inch of their home must be covered with jubilant decorations. Their couches must be the best they can possibly afford, same with their beds, light fixtures, silverware, cups, papertowels, etc.
They will pay double the price for 1% extra cleaning power on toilet paper.
Technology is just the new realm of home itemization. You want the best cell phone. The biggest SUV. The biggest latte. The biggest TV and fastest computer. You want a palmtop with 2 gigs o
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think part of the reason is that advertising has become so pervasive, and so effective. Many people think that they need these things to be happy, and it's a view that is constantly reinforced on TV.
I think another reason is that people consider collecting stuff to be an acheivement. People's homes look like showrooms, equipped with the latest tect, the trendyist furniture, and everything is accessorised. Much of this spending is fueled by debt.
They spend much of their free time thinking a
Wealth? (Score:3, Interesting)
You mean the problem is people don't know how to think for themselves?
Perhaps part of the reason for this is that we have become (well, the middle class, anyway) much wealthier in the last 10 - 15 years... buying crap they don't need, with money they don't have
Wait, you lost me - are we gaining wealth or debt?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We have gained wealth as a society. There are still many people who don't have the same amounts of wealth, but feel the need to pretend they do, to compete with (or emulate) the Joneses.
Hope that clears things up for you.
Re:Well. (Score:5, Insightful)
I know someone who makes less than $30K a year yet saw fit to buy a $4K bed. We don't say people have an "expensive furniture addiction." I've met non-rich guys whose car rims cost $1.5K each. Why is this any different than with plasma screens or cellphones? We all buy what we want, and beyond food/shelter/clothing/medicine, almost all of it is luxury.
Parent
I doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, I wouldn't give mine up
Obligatory - retarded premise (Score:5, Funny)
Homer's Brain: 20 dollars can buy many peanuts.
Homer: Explain how!
Homer's Brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services.
Homer: Woohoo!
s/Peanut/Cell Phone/g
s/20 dollars/1 million/pounds/g
Parent
I'm not addicted (Score:3, Funny)
No, really.
After I get a new Macbook. And we need a flat-panel TV for the den, and some kind of media server. And oh yeah, I want a GPS for the car.
But I'm not addicted. Really.
I believe the 2nd mortgage line... (Score:3, Interesting)
I worked at a cable company (our company was doing a trial of Internet over Cable-TV before cable modems), and people would have their phone turned off before their cable. As a side benefit, this made it difficult for the CSRs to reach them about paying their cable bills once they couldn't pay those either.
What Addiction Is (Score:5, Insightful)
Alcohol addiction is the classic: alcoholism. It's not just that one "drinks too much". Or too often, or the wrong stuff. Those are ways to tell someone is an alcohol addict. The alcoholic does not have self control over their drinking. Perhaps they need a drink to destroy their limits, or perhaps there is no initial barrier. Even recovering alcoholics cannot take a single drink, because the effect of that drink on their self control leaves them with no resistance - or is so likely to that they cannot take the chance. But even those not taking any drinks are still alcoholics, because they lack self control over taking it. They are behaving like they have some self control, but it's really gained by a huge, constant effort plugged into social structures, including regular meetings, and lots of conscious training, like 12 step programs.
Techno addiction is rarer, but still happens. There are compulsive shoppers to whom technology, especially media devices, have a stronger appeal than their own best interest. You can tell when people are addicts because they miss rent or meals, but have every new game.
These are all consumption disorders. Americans have them in epidemic proportions. Partly because we consume alcohol, drugs, toys, clothing, food and everything else to feed a desire really created by something else. Usually "spiritual", but most often caused by a family problem, especially early in life. And, as a buddhist will tell you, feeding the desire just makes it stronger. The resulting attachment to the material forces us further from the spiritual, which increases the desire, more consumption - the Wheel of Living [wikipedia.org].
Interesting. (Score:3, Interesting)
For most people, this is relatively mild - by overusing one and only one solution, a person can lose touch with the reality that other solutions exist. This creates a psychologically-maintained monopoly which is not subject to market forces or anything else. A certain Redmond-based corporation is often connected with this issue, but it's really only one of many companies that have an unhealthy mindshare, and any company that makes use of advertising is - in some way - exploiting this particular human sickness.
Note, however, that the problem is one of psychology and NOT one of technology. The technology merely happens to be the instrument used in some cases. It gets more press because tech companies are rather more prominent than breakfast cereal manufacturers, but the problem is universal. Kellogs didn't change their marketing strategy out of kindness, and the UK egg board didn't pull plans to reuse 1950s adverts for reasons of cost. Tech is easy to blame, but in this type of case it is not the subject that is the issue at all.
In a few, very few, cases there is a much more serious problem. These people have an actual biochemical or neurological disorder that creates disproportionate and dysfunctional cravings. As before, these attach to something external for a whole host of reasons, but what they attach to is generally unimportant. If something is addictive, it worsens that disorder, but it is still the disorder that is the issue and not the subject. Tech is not addictive, so although it can be the target of such cravings, it is merely the innocent victim. If it wasn't tech, it would be something else. Those with such disorders are guaranteed to latch onto something.
So, am I saying that tech isn't a problem? Yes and no. It is NOT a problem in the way that is talked about in the article or the summary. It is a problem in that there is so little innovation and true invention that we get into solution monocultures. This is a danger, if something goes wrong (see: Day of the Triffids for details, or indeed any of the mass power or phone blackouts that have occurred over the years). I would much prefer people to be aware of multiple ways to get the same result, because that is far more resilient to the inevitable problems in life. It is also a problem in the special case where the throw-away mentality produces steadily inferior products (see: Hitchhiker's Guide, shoe event horizon).
In neither of these cases, though, is tech the real culprit. It merely enables society to make very bad decisions, but ultimately society itself is at fault for making the decisions, the tech didn't force them to do so.
DUH (Score:5, Funny)
Gadget Deprication (Score:4, Interesting)
While I myself love gadgets too and always have the newest computers/phone/ipod/laptop etc me & my fellow geeks have to accept the cold hard truth: it is money thrown down the drain.
Not technology - people (Score:5, Interesting)
And the cell phone means that I can take a walk in the city when I don't have work and not miss a job offer from my customers. God, how I hated sitting next to that landline phone, waiting for work!
So I'm not addicted to technology, but the people it brings me. You simply cannot compare a cell phone to a flat screen TV - the latter is a dead one way channel.
Rene Kita
Artist, noise musician, freelance translator
Wow (Score:3, Funny)
Re:These surveys are bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope they'd find that a sufficient answer.
Parent
Because these idiots are trying to get karma. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent