Let's be clear. It is not the actual smartphones that do this; machines are designed and programmed by humans. Companies can choose to use technology to manipulate our emotions and trigger our reflexes, and many do choose just that, often for financial gain.
I've switched to a CAT S22 Android builder's flip phone, and my usage has dropped significantly. The screen is so small and fiddly that it makes me feel sick using it for extended periods - exactly what you want from an adictive substance like a smart phone. Having to physically open it to use it, and then waiting 5 seconds before it lights up, creates a psychic barrier to just 'quickly checking for updates'. The camera is like an early 2000s cheap digicam - just about good enough for documenting things but it hardly beckons you to want to photograph your life constantly for social media. It's a PITA to use and that's why it's perfect for everyday use.
Notice under “Managing dependency”, the focus is exclusively on technological solutions.
There is no technological solution to this. We have the equivalent of unlimited crack in everyone’s pocket 24/7 with no possible oversight over its use and no way to reel it back in. The genie has been out of the bottle for a while now.
Just like gluttony, there is no solution, only management strategies and they’re all very human.
Sensible education about these things starting at K1. Social and outreach programs for addicts. Etc
But solutions?
Here's my take, will gladly take input (Android):
Two profiles: profile 1 has no notifications, reading apps (ebooks) and shouldn't have a browser (mine does and shouldn't); profile 2 has all apps, inclusively all of profile 1 apps. Idea: have an "offline" phone. Good for battery. Whenever I need IoT or something else, I shrug and change profile.
Use desktop apps/desktop browser: should work. Doesn't much. When I'm on laptop I tend to do terminal stuff, social apps feel like wasting time, do it fast and multitasking mode. Multitasking is not really what I want to train my attention span. Sometimes I turn on notifications but put system notifications in DnD so I can check what's notificated every half an hour or so.
Use Waydroid to have social apps: should work, never worked.
Special profiles on social apps: my current social apps have only institutional accounts being followed. Some decorum is kept, and with it, sanity. Exceptions: Facebook, Bluesky, Mastodon, Linkedin, where I follow regular people. But I really should implement something similar for my LinkedIn account.
Alternate sites/apps/mode of usage: use WhatsApp/Telegram to interact, say hi to some people online on Facebook Messenger, install Discourse; on group chats avoid links or include a short summary written by an human of why people should open your link and a quick "what's on the link" description.
These are my takes to extract some humanness from my machine mobile phone.
Bo Burnham put it succinctly, although he was talking about children on apps: "When they go to sleep at night, they have to choose between all of the information ever published in the history of the world, or the back of their eyelids."
The smartphone is a perverted implementation of the goal that people use to fantasize about back in the early days of the computer revolution: a personal terminal to the world of audio, text, and video information stored in databases across all of humanity. It's of course worth talking about how they compel us to certain behaviors via push notifications, dark patterns, nasty design, etc. but also--obviously we'd be addicted to personal terminals that let us access all the publicly available digitized information in the history of the world.
I don't understand how having faceid, a touchscreen, vibration, gps would manipulate my emotions.
Makes no sense.
Developers using these features to build app that makes you addicted ? Yes. But these features in itself are not manipulatives or triggering reflexes.
I just don't understand the author reasoning...
I don't use addictive social media on my phone and when I receive notification, my phone makes a sound, it vibrates and yet I don't feel urged to look at it.
Some say it's not the phone, it's the app a company makes.
So is it the company that is bad?
Company products and services are a result of the system of regulations. The market is a playground where companies survive, thrive, and die, always trying to maximize total future profit, which is dictated by the shape of what is allowed and what things humans will pay for.
The cause of "bad stuff" like "addiction" to a legal product/service is human nature. If a human will pay for something that is legal, there will be a market for it.
In other words: it's not the company, it's the system.
As someone who actively avoids political rage bait, was trained in rhetoric, was raised by public persuasion oriented public speakers.
The idea that the most resonant rage bait that exists at any given moment is instantly, algorithmically, propagated to our public officials and the politically engaged is insane.
All this while culture has now been trained to blindly celebrate bias, has been inculcated with a learned helplessness toward bias, have become poisoned against the idea that anyone has the goal of accuracy or objectivity and really does just wants accurate models of the world.
Everything we interact with has an emotional impact. And smart phones trigger our reflexes because they are literally tools for communication.
> Most of these features were developed decades ago for other uses. GPS was created by the U.S. military in the early 1970s, then was adopted by hikers and sailors to both navigate and to allow others to locate them if necessary.
> Vibration alerts were created for pagers in the late 1970s for professionals — from hospital staff to travelling salespeople — to notify them of an important phone call.
> Sound alerts became more widespread with Tamagotchi and other 1990s digital pets. Those toys are especially significant when discussing today’s psychological dependency on portable devices.
> sharing biometric data through pre-loaded health and wellness apps.
I've been thinking about finally getting a smartwatch to keep tabs on my sleep and encourage me to do more exercise, like jogging for a certain amount of time or something. Suggestions for privacy respecting, ideally FOSS solutions?
To me, smartphones are a godsent. I use mine to communicate, get public transport information, have text read to me, describe pictures, get a GPS fix and help me navigate the city as a pedestrian, use devices where I wouldn't be able to read the displays, and so many other things I can't even list right now. I even met my partner of 14 years via Messenger. I occasionally scroll through facebook to find events I might go to, and amuse myself over comments on various divisive and not so diviseve posts. I am blind. My life would be clearly less fun without them. Tools are just that, tools. What you make of them is your call.
Sometimes I wonder if I’m using my phone, or if it’s using me.
I know things like notifications and vibrations are designed to grab my attention, but the phone always seems to know exactly when I’m at my weakest.
The moment I feel even a little bored or empty, my finger just taps open that familiar app before I even realize it.
Have any of you found ways to break out of this cycle of being led around by your phone?
That's like saying we should ban knife because it could kill people. Please. Every adult can make an informed choice on what "manipulates" them. If they can't, if they prefer convenience over critical thinking, then you don't stand a chance and will be exploited by the capitalistic overlords.
> also an issue of privacy
Welcome to the age of obsessive and relentless mass surveillance. Want privacy? Impossible unless you have discipline and patience to not give in to the digital overlords
"Short of powering off or walking away, what can we do to manage this dependency? We can access device settings and activate only those features we truly require, adjusting them now and again as our habits and lifestyles change."
I think this is how some people feel about the dating apps. They promise love, affection, and future, but only manipulate our emotions.
I always feel conflicted when I see this problem phrased as "smartphones". I understand why but at the same time I wonder how much, if any, it detracts from solving the actual problems.
The article discusses the usual surveillance capitalism and social media stuff[0] that we're probably all pretty familiar with here. But where I feel uneasy is the blaming on the device or technology itself. Smartphones, and even social media, could be amazing technologies. We use them poorly, but that's a different issue in of itself. It is their utility that is a big part of why they won't go away. But that also makes them ripe for abuse. Anything with value will be such a target. So even though I know "smartphones" is a shorthand for "surveillance capitalism and 'engagement based' social media", I do worry that it abstracts the problems too much, making it just seem like by getting rid of our smart phones we could fix everything.
We've been using this tactic for years and tbh, I don't think it has had any meaningful success. Maybe it is time to try a different approach? I think the average person can handle a little nuance. And by breaking it down a little more we might be better at addressing the real issues. No one wants to give up the GPS in their pocket, but in 2025 do we really need that data to leave our device (except when explicitly sharing with someone like friends and family)? We don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
[0] To anyone who works on feed ranking systems and engagement:
I'm genuinely curious, are you seeking to better measure engagement and look at ways to optimize different kinds of engagement? From the outside it seems like only the lazy measurements are being used, and let's be honest, arguing on the internet generates more comments and misinformation as well. Any bad comment that gets lots of responses falls down the ranking (top viewing), only to end up being replaced with similar comments which causes the process to repeat. Brandolini's law, right?
But what are the issues? Is sentiment analysis just not good enough? Is a lack of desire? Momentum?
I would seriously like to understand. Feel free to respond with an anonymous account. And please don't downvote responses, even if you disagree. Maybe we all can have an understanding that we can use votes to express our interest in the conversation (upvoting honest but disagreeable responses, downvoting quips and "mic drops") rather than our to express our agreement with a particular comment? We get to decide what votes mean, right?
[1] Follow-up
Can we at least tone down notifications? It is absolutely insane how complicated it is getting. I need to leave my bank notifications on to ensure I get notified of a fraudulent charge but that same notification system is being used to advertise to me savings bonds and referral bonuses. Same thing happens to emails. Let's be honest here, too many false alarms makes people ignore true alarms. Alarm fatigue is a real thing. If you don't believe me, watch what people do with a faulty smoke detector in an apartment. They just remove it!
Smartphones manipulate our emotions and trigger our reflexes
(theconversation.com)193 points by PaulHoule 26 October 2025 | 142 comments
Comments
There is no technological solution to this. We have the equivalent of unlimited crack in everyone’s pocket 24/7 with no possible oversight over its use and no way to reel it back in. The genie has been out of the bottle for a while now.
Just like gluttony, there is no solution, only management strategies and they’re all very human.
Sensible education about these things starting at K1. Social and outreach programs for addicts. Etc
Two profiles: profile 1 has no notifications, reading apps (ebooks) and shouldn't have a browser (mine does and shouldn't); profile 2 has all apps, inclusively all of profile 1 apps. Idea: have an "offline" phone. Good for battery. Whenever I need IoT or something else, I shrug and change profile.
Use desktop apps/desktop browser: should work. Doesn't much. When I'm on laptop I tend to do terminal stuff, social apps feel like wasting time, do it fast and multitasking mode. Multitasking is not really what I want to train my attention span. Sometimes I turn on notifications but put system notifications in DnD so I can check what's notificated every half an hour or so.
Use Waydroid to have social apps: should work, never worked.
Special profiles on social apps: my current social apps have only institutional accounts being followed. Some decorum is kept, and with it, sanity. Exceptions: Facebook, Bluesky, Mastodon, Linkedin, where I follow regular people. But I really should implement something similar for my LinkedIn account.
Alternate sites/apps/mode of usage: use WhatsApp/Telegram to interact, say hi to some people online on Facebook Messenger, install Discourse; on group chats avoid links or include a short summary written by an human of why people should open your link and a quick "what's on the link" description.
These are my takes to extract some humanness from my machine mobile phone.
The smartphone is a perverted implementation of the goal that people use to fantasize about back in the early days of the computer revolution: a personal terminal to the world of audio, text, and video information stored in databases across all of humanity. It's of course worth talking about how they compel us to certain behaviors via push notifications, dark patterns, nasty design, etc. but also--obviously we'd be addicted to personal terminals that let us access all the publicly available digitized information in the history of the world.
Makes no sense.
Developers using these features to build app that makes you addicted ? Yes. But these features in itself are not manipulatives or triggering reflexes.
I just don't understand the author reasoning...
I don't use addictive social media on my phone and when I receive notification, my phone makes a sound, it vibrates and yet I don't feel urged to look at it.
We now know the causes are instagram/tiktok or may be even the new llms even though less likely. Why not just say that?
So is it the company that is bad?
Company products and services are a result of the system of regulations. The market is a playground where companies survive, thrive, and die, always trying to maximize total future profit, which is dictated by the shape of what is allowed and what things humans will pay for.
The cause of "bad stuff" like "addiction" to a legal product/service is human nature. If a human will pay for something that is legal, there will be a market for it.
In other words: it's not the company, it's the system.
The idea that the most resonant rage bait that exists at any given moment is instantly, algorithmically, propagated to our public officials and the politically engaged is insane.
All this while culture has now been trained to blindly celebrate bias, has been inculcated with a learned helplessness toward bias, have become poisoned against the idea that anyone has the goal of accuracy or objectivity and really does just wants accurate models of the world.
We are lighting ourselves on fire.
Everything we interact with has an emotional impact. And smart phones trigger our reflexes because they are literally tools for communication.
> Most of these features were developed decades ago for other uses. GPS was created by the U.S. military in the early 1970s, then was adopted by hikers and sailors to both navigate and to allow others to locate them if necessary.
> Vibration alerts were created for pagers in the late 1970s for professionals — from hospital staff to travelling salespeople — to notify them of an important phone call.
> Sound alerts became more widespread with Tamagotchi and other 1990s digital pets. Those toys are especially significant when discussing today’s psychological dependency on portable devices.
Seriously???
I've been thinking about finally getting a smartwatch to keep tabs on my sleep and encourage me to do more exercise, like jogging for a certain amount of time or something. Suggestions for privacy respecting, ideally FOSS solutions?
Lol. What a way to steer understanding from the cause of this phenomenon.
Smartphone is merely a tool used by organisations for achieving own most often financial goals.
It's like to say "TV manipulate people's emotions" while talking about tv advertisement industry.
> also an issue of privacy
Welcome to the age of obsessive and relentless mass surveillance. Want privacy? Impossible unless you have discipline and patience to not give in to the digital overlords
I think this is how some people feel about the dating apps. They promise love, affection, and future, but only manipulate our emotions.
The article discusses the usual surveillance capitalism and social media stuff[0] that we're probably all pretty familiar with here. But where I feel uneasy is the blaming on the device or technology itself. Smartphones, and even social media, could be amazing technologies. We use them poorly, but that's a different issue in of itself. It is their utility that is a big part of why they won't go away. But that also makes them ripe for abuse. Anything with value will be such a target. So even though I know "smartphones" is a shorthand for "surveillance capitalism and 'engagement based' social media", I do worry that it abstracts the problems too much, making it just seem like by getting rid of our smart phones we could fix everything.
We've been using this tactic for years and tbh, I don't think it has had any meaningful success. Maybe it is time to try a different approach? I think the average person can handle a little nuance. And by breaking it down a little more we might be better at addressing the real issues. No one wants to give up the GPS in their pocket, but in 2025 do we really need that data to leave our device (except when explicitly sharing with someone like friends and family)? We don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
[0] To anyone who works on feed ranking systems and engagement:
I'm genuinely curious, are you seeking to better measure engagement and look at ways to optimize different kinds of engagement? From the outside it seems like only the lazy measurements are being used, and let's be honest, arguing on the internet generates more comments and misinformation as well. Any bad comment that gets lots of responses falls down the ranking (top viewing), only to end up being replaced with similar comments which causes the process to repeat. Brandolini's law, right?
But what are the issues? Is sentiment analysis just not good enough? Is a lack of desire? Momentum?
I would seriously like to understand. Feel free to respond with an anonymous account. And please don't downvote responses, even if you disagree. Maybe we all can have an understanding that we can use votes to express our interest in the conversation (upvoting honest but disagreeable responses, downvoting quips and "mic drops") rather than our to express our agreement with a particular comment? We get to decide what votes mean, right?
[1] Follow-up
Can we at least tone down notifications? It is absolutely insane how complicated it is getting. I need to leave my bank notifications on to ensure I get notified of a fraudulent charge but that same notification system is being used to advertise to me savings bonds and referral bonuses. Same thing happens to emails. Let's be honest here, too many false alarms makes people ignore true alarms. Alarm fatigue is a real thing. If you don't believe me, watch what people do with a faulty smoke detector in an apartment. They just remove it!
We could all stop any time we want, but we don't. :(