advertisement


Just a phone...

Mike Hughes said:
I’ve never been interested in what other people take for granted. I’ve survived not having Facebook, Insta and WhatsApp since they were created. If you can’t ring, email or text me then you don’t get my business. I’m paying you to work for me and not to dictate how I access you.
Click to expand...
That’s fine with them. The good ones have more than enough work to be getting on with. Cherrypicking which form of 21st century communications you use is of no consequence to someone who has work, nose to tail, for the next 18 months.
 
Jezzer said:
Luddites corner.
Click to expand...
Cheapshot ignorance corner actually. I’m an MCSE with multiple Comptia qualifications too. I’ve previously been a system admin and Im very comfortable with technology. The three sites in question breach GDPR and multiple other legislation in terms of the data they gather, share and sell. Having been given a first hand demo by a university of how that so-called anonymous data can easily identify me, not that I was ignorant before the demo, i want nothing to do with them. That’s before we get onto accessibility. My VI requires fairly basic accessibility provision. All three provide none of it. Been discussed at length with all three. They really don’t give a flying one so… no thanks.

Tony Lockhart said:
That’s fine with them. The good ones have more than enough work to be getting on with. Cherrypicking which form of 21st century communications you use is of no consequence to someone who has work, nose to tail, for the next 18 months.
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely but, locally in GM, it’s been interesting to see older people with limited capital actively deserting those who decide how you must communicate and then watching that filter down to their relatives saying “actually I’ve ruled you out because of the way you treated my parents“. Two GM local authorities actively doing work with traders to explain that they’re losing market share and long term business by excluding certain forms of communication.

My roofer was a Which recommendation. Booked up for big jobs to 2025. Now finding he's lots of gaps inbetween as his ratings have dropped dramatically after a local news story about how an 80 year old declined to pay electronically or communicate by Facebook. The sympathetic letters in the local rag over the next few weeks didn’t take the side of the trader. Gist was “answer your effing phone”. Our roofer is one of the good guys too. Great work; no BS; sensible pricing. Cherry picking isn’t the appropriate term here. What you’re actually doing is refusing to acknowledge entire communities of people who may be digitally excluded for all sorts of reasons.
 
Last edited:
Mike Hughes said:
I’ve never been interested in what other people take for granted. I’ve survived not having Facebook, Insta and WhatsApp since they were created. If you can’t ring, email or text me then you don’t get my business. I’m paying you to work for me and not to dictate how I access you.
Click to expand...
Admirable principles, which I entirely share. But which, possibly because of weakness of charecter, I find hard to apply when I've been grovelling and begging for weeks for a plumber to grace me with his presence. But you are absolutely right!
 
Mike Hughes said:
Cheapshot ignorance corner actually. I’m an MCSE with multiple Comptis qualifications too. I’ve previously been a system admin and Im very comfortable with technology. The three sites in question breach GDPR and multiple other legislation in terms of the data they gather, share and sell. Having been given a first hand demo by a university of how that so-called anonymous data can easily identify men, n-t that I was ignorant before the demo, i want nothing to do with them. That’s before we get onto accessibility. My VI requires fairly basic accessibility provision. All three provide none of it. Been discussed at length with all three. They really don’t give a flying one so… no thanks.



Yes, absolutely but, locally in GM, it’s been interesting to see older people with limited capital actively deserting those who decide how you must communicate and then watching that filter down to their relatives saying “actually I’ve ruled you out because of the way you treated my parents“. Two GM local authorities actively doing work with traders to explain that they’re losing market share and long term business by excluding certain forms of communication.

My roofer was a Which recommendation. Booked up for big jobs to 2025. Now finding he's lots of gaps inbetween as his ratings have dropped dramatically after a local news story about how an 80 year old declined to pay electronically or communicate by Facebook. The sympathetic letters in the local rag over the next few weeks didn’t take the side of the trader. Gist was “answer your effing phone”. Our roofer is one of the good guys too. Great work; no BS; sensible pricing. Cherry picking isn’t the appropriate term here. What you’re actually doing is refusing to acknowledge entire communities of people who may be digitally excluded for all sorts of reasons.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. However, I’m not going to swim against the tide, and while I’m able to, I’ll use whatever is needed. We had our kitchen replaced a month ago, and emailing was their preferred means of comms. Suits me, no problem. Twitter is my first choice when contacting customer support at large companies. Emails are usually ignored, phoning often takes up too much time and can be fruitless.

At least we don’t have to send letters very often!
 
I’m struggling to think why you’d would want an old Nokia nowadays given how flexible modern phones are. If you don’t like Facebook or Whatsapp, that’s fine, plenty don’t.

My parents are 83 and 85, both really like using their iPhones and my mother is a total tech luddite.
 
Jezzer said:
Luddites corner.
Click to expand...
Don't know which side you are on, but if we have Luddites on one side, we also should have a name for people who automatically embrace anything new simply because it is new and because "the system" tells you you should do so, with no reflection on how it will actually affect the quality of life.
The other day I heard a "technology expert" on the radio, he explained how wonderful driverless taxis will be. "You call it with an App," he explained, "And write in your destination, the driverless car arrives, the door opens and you get in and are taken to your destination."
Then he added, "No need to talk to the driver, you can relax and look at your smartphone."
Not "you can look at the scenery," or "you can read a book," or "You can kiss your girlfriend for 25 minutes." No! Those would be a sinful waste of time! Much better to go into your 'phone for 25 minutes.
Incidentally, yesterday saw a report by the Italian Ophthalmology Association that said eye complaints are drastically rising for all ages, but especially myopia among children and adolescents. And I bet they can't climb trees anymore.
 
stevec67 said:
I just checked out the Voda Payg options, it tends to be all about data but for calls you pay max £1 for any day when you use it , nothing the others. Once you have spent your £1, free calls until midnight.
Click to expand...

That would still work out far more costly than my current 'few pence per call about once a week'. Because the calls are short as well as so few.
 
Uncle Roach said:
Why not buy a sim free Nokia 105 4G new generation (2023) for around 25 quid and find a cheap plan from one of the providers. I got one for a family member and added EE for only £8.00 a month with unlimited calls and 10g of data. And you get FM radio and well.;)
Click to expand...

Noted. One point I can make is that I'd want to transfer the sim and hence account from my 3310. The possible snag being that the sim card is ye old full size and can't be cut down. So I'd prefer any new phone to have a slot for full a size sim card. Means I just continue with my current 'deal' for calls.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
That’s fine with them. The good ones have more than enough work to be getting on with. Cherrypicking which form of 21st century communications you use is of no consequence to someone who has work, nose to tail, for the next 18 months.
Click to expand...

Well, despight using emails to deal with them, I've had a variety of plumbers, etc, in recent years and they ALL were crap. Main signs were work NOT being done as claimed AND creating NEW problems as they messed about. Seems like *anyone* can be a plumber if they can put up a web page saying they are!
 
JezmondTutu said:
I’m struggling to think why you’d would want an old Nokia nowadays given how flexible modern phones are. If you don’t like Facebook or Whatsapp, that’s fine, plenty don’t.

My parents are 83 and 85, both really like using their iPhones and my mother is a total tech luddite.
Click to expand...

That;s fine with me. Most people use 'doze'. I don't. You choose what suits you, not 'everybody else'.
 
gintonic said:
www.bbc.com

Why short-sightedness is on the rise

Soaring rates of short-sightedness in children are alarming parents and doctors around the world. Can we turn the tide?
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...
Just read that. It seems to mainly blame traditional education, reading in a classroom. Which I am sure is true. But doesn't give much attention to computers and "smartphones."
I am not an ophthalmologist, but I do know that the human eye focuses by muscles that alter the curve of the eye "lens" according to the distance. So I would think that if for the past 10 years children and adolescents have been focusing for most of their time at a distance of 12 inches, the eye muscles will develop accordingly.
I'm always amazed when I see tourists walking around Rome, and notice that most are not looking around, but staring into their 'phones. They will walk into the Pantheon or the Colosseum, not looking up or around at the architedtural marvel they have travelled far to see, but at their 'phone. I would think that if an eye is never exercised to look at the horizon, or even at something 50 meters away, that eye will gradually lose the ability to do so.
 
PaulMB said:
Don't know which side you are on, but if we have Luddites on one side, we also should have a name for people who automatically embrace anything new simply because it is new and because "the system" tells you you should do so, with no reflection on how it will actually affect the quality of life.
The other day I heard a "technology expert" on the radio, he explained how wonderful driverless taxis will be. "You call it with an App," he explained, "And write in your destination, the driverless car arrives, the door opens and you get in and are taken to your destination."
Then he added, "No need to talk to the driver, you can relax and look at your smartphone."
Not "you can look at the scenery," or "you can read a book," or "You can kiss your girlfriend for 25 minutes." No! Those would be a sinful waste of time! Much better to go into your 'phone for 25 minutes.
Incidentally, yesterday saw a report by the Italian Ophthalmology Association that said eye complaints are drastically rising for all ages, but especially myopia among children and adolescents. And I bet they can't climb trees anymore.
Click to expand...
Just being facetious.

I don’t sit on any particular side of the fence. Each to their own. That’s what I say!

My view is that we can become over reliant on technology. Take my car’s sat nav for example. It’s way too easy to use it on trips which I should be familiar with, use the road signs, rely on my (oft failing) memory… but it’s oh so easy to fall back on the tech instead of the old grey matter…

… and the Chinese are absolutely doing the right thing by limiting the time kids are allowed to spend online!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top