Hacker News Reader

> Not to mention, there are plenty of people who are religiously or ideologically against new technology.

Why should I go out of my way because someone made a choice to inconvenience themselves?

This is just as bad as all of the bans on alcohol sales on Sunday because of religion.

> Why should I go out of my way because someone made a choice to inconvenience themselves?

Why should I go out of my way because someone decided that I now must own a smartphone (often iPhone or Google Play required) to do things that we all used to be able to do before without one?

This is just as bad as adding unjustified bureaucratic and procedural requirements to actions that used to be able to be done freely and without hindrance.

> Why should I go out of my way because someone decided that I now must own a smartphone (often iPhone or Google Play required) to do things that we all used to be able to do before without one?

You don't. You are free to make any life choices you want and suffer the consequences of your life choices as long as they don't affect me.

Why do you get to impose "consequences" for my life choices? Why can you make the choice to require an app to pay for your parking lot depriving me from the ability to pay in cash —affecting my positive freedom of movement—, while I however must calibrate my life choices so they "don't affect" you?

Is it because you are a business and I'm a mere citizen?

> Why do you get to impose "consequences" for my life choices?

I'm not "imposing" anything. We are both making choices that fit our own priorities.

> Why can you make the choice to require an app to pay for your parking lot depriving me from the ability to pay in cash —affecting my positive freedom of movement—, while I however must calibrate my life choices so they "don't affect" you?

We are both making choices. I am choosing not to do business with you on the terms that you find acceptable and you are choosing not to do business with me. Should I also accept pesos in the US because you don't want to exchange your pesos for dollars?

I see. If it's all choices, would you accept the consequences of me interfering with your business operations as much as legal when you unjustifiably expect me to use a smartphone (holding up the line, making a fuss, refusing to tip, etc)? This may slow down income, put off other potential customers, and result in a more stressful workplace resulting in lower staff morale. It appears to be the only choice I have left...

...or I will simply use the power of the state to defend my ability to live a normal life without needing a smartphone, as I live in a country where the people have chosen that consumer protection can be imposed on businesses by Law.

Yes, because choosing to use the power of the state to impose your belief system has never had bad consequences...

It's hard to believe you are really this "consequences for thee but not for me" about life in general, considering your comment just up-thread, but I suppose it makes sense that such people would exist and be so self-uncritical as to proudly and openly pronounce such beliefs.

If I choose not to sell a product or service in a method that some subset of customers don't find acceptable, I'm losing some amount of revenue. I must think that tradeoff is worth it. If you choose not to use a phone -- but you are obviously capable of using technology if you are posting here -- you are choosing not to do business with me.

At the same time, in this hypothetical scenario, you're choosing not to do business with me. It's always going to be a two-way street. Supply and demand are both equal partners in transactional economies.

Isn't that what I just said? If I open Scarface's Pork and Spirits, I'm choosing not to do business with observant Muslims. We are both making choices using our free will.

Indeed if you reread your own comments, that's not what you said. You're attempting to put the onus solely on the consumer.

In either case, I chose to make business decisions that are good for the target demographic that I want to go after.

Do you also complain that there isn’t a number that you can call to get an Uber ride and you have to have a cell phone?

Or that you can’t call Amazon to place an order like you could when they first came online in the 90s when people were afraid to pay over the web?

If either company misses out on few Luddites on HN wearing tin foil hats, their business will go on fine.

Attempting to retcon your arguments when your previous comments are in plain view is brazen, and essentially bullshitting to avoid admitting any kind of incoherence or mistake on your part. But keep going off, I guess.

What have I said any different in this entire thread? Both the business and the consumer are free agents. The business gets to decide how they want to conduct their business and the consumer gets to decide if that’s acceptable.

Have you ever thought that you might just not have been able to comprehend that argument?

You said “consequences for me but not for thee”. We both “suffer” from the consequences of our actions. I lose business from people who don’t want to use a phone and you lose the chance to get a good or service you want

I don't think anyone is calling for a ban on these new digital checkouts and QR code menus. We're just asking don't make that the only way.

And I'n saying the business should have the right to decide whether the marginal cost of providing alternate methods is worth the marginal revenue to gain customers that choose not to partake in something expected in modern society in 2023.

> There are plenty of disabilities that don't allow people to use technology

What I meant is that the majority of people don’t have a disability that would prevent them from using technology. The ones who do, should and do get assistance

> Not to mention, there are plenty of people who are religiously or ideologically against new technology

If your religion or ideology is to live in an ancient world, by all means do. Just don’t come to the 21st century and complain that you cannot enjoy the modern society

In practice "use the app" means "use an Apple or Android phone". If "modern society" means "please make these ethically dubious companies in a duopoly that produce devices I don't even like even richer", then I will gladly be "ancient". I have serious problems more or less forcing people to give money to one of these two 100% for-profit companies, especially when it's for public services. It's fundamentally and profoundly anti-free market.

For all the hate the web and browsers get here, at least that's an open platform that you can run on more or less $any system of your choice, or even re-implement from scratch (which, while still a large project, is quite as hard as sometimes made out to be).

That's fine. Do they get to not pay taxes too?

do you realize how degrading it is having to ask for help everytime because of a disability?

we should be empowering people to be independent, and that is even more important for people with disabilities.

> There is no physical or mental disability preventing people using modern technology.

> It's absolutely abhorrent that you would begin to think this. There are plenty of disabilities that don't allow people to use technology

Actually, yeah, this is a good point. Ever watched somebody with a nerve issue try to use a touchscreen? Their hand shaking all over the place? You're lucky if they can do it without somehow texting gibberish to random contacts.