Comment by zackmorris | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zackmorris | Hacker News Reader

One thing to consider is that a larger percentage of data normally stored in our brains is now being stored digitally than ever before. In a very real sense, part of the child's "self" in this article is only accessible via technology. Not just her memories and the deep thinking part of our brains we would call the "zone", but her senses as well - new stimuli like being pinged by someone or having a constant data feed that works a bit like hearing, alerting us to new developments.

I grew up playing Atari at a family friend's house, and saw my first real computer (a Mac Plus) around age 8 or 9 which I feel was maybe my first transcendental experience with technology (drawing with the mouse in MacPaint). I can't even imagine what effect a fully-connected smart tablet would have had on my intellectual and emotional development.

I'm just going to throw this out there, that we shouldn't be thinking of this as internet addiction, but more like, I dunno, asking a kid who grew up in space to live with gravity. Old folks like me (gen x) see kids on tablets and feel this understandable sense of concern, but forget that they are dabbling in their own little infinite universes just like we did. That doesn't release companies from their ethical responsibility of treating children with utmost concern though.

I was an assistant for a study that tested people's memory and 'digital memory'. We showed people info on a computer and said they'd need to recall it. Half of those people were told they'd have access to the computer to reference it. Sometimes we changed the location of the data so they'd look where it is but it was gone.

I don't remember the exact set up, but the result was effectively that people remembered where the info was stored, rather than the info itself. So like you explained, the computer is just external memory. It would make sense that its also external inputs, outputs, etc.

We store information all over the place, on paper, in other people's brains and now on our digital devices. When we need to handle more information about the world the last thing I want to store in my brain is someone's cell phone number. I'm sure you ask your family members, roomates, work peers similar questions over and over because you know they are the keeper of that answer, they essentially act as off site storage for your brain. Now we're just taking that concept and strapping it onto a rocket but it's probably the only thing keeping us from information overload.

Just so.

> But then, surprising everyone in the room, she cried, “They took my f...ing phone!”

> The first was that Kelly’s unhealthy attachment to her phone continued, causing almost constant tension at home.

So for her, it's not just a phone. It's a substantial chunk of her reality. It probably feels not that far from forcible lobotomy. Or at least, being isolated from her friends and interests.

There's also the autonomy issue.

Like it or not the physical and digital world will continue to meld. Just think what these kids are gonna get in the future with AR/VR everywhere, smart/IOT objects all over the place and some national ID system. We're worried now but they're preparing for a future where losing your digital access keys more or less shuts you out from participating in the world. Still, doesn't mean we can't teach more responsibility and encourage healthier behavior.

Agreed. I was just trying to see it from her perspective.

But that doesn't mean that I'm blowing off concerns about kids having their minds pwned. It's a hugely serious issue.

And still, "no phone for you" was a harsh, and ultimately counterproductive, intervention.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com