If smart phones disapeared how would you cope?

Without smart phones it would be a complete pain in the bum as they are now involved in so many aspects of life to improve it and to facilitate things. People as ancient as us have all had experience of living in such a stone age situation but I really wouldn't wish such hassle on anyone.

TheCatWoman said:

What about if the internet got blasted back 15 years and there was no AI, an internet that was smaller but in many ways friendlier and easier to use.

The internet of 15 years ago was not easy to use - I used to have to train staff on how to use it safely and as soon as you went beyond the big companies websites it turned into the Wild West with viruses everywhere that most computers were poorly protected against.

Services were much more basic, consistency between companies non-existant and we used to hace to speak to people all the time to resolve the issues of the rubbish service - something that would be an anathema for most autists.

I use mine for seeing what the weather will be, for maps to work out how to get to a destination, for reviews of restaurants around where I'm visiting and to see the menu, for internet banking (even buying a house on a few occasions), for shopping on the likes of eBay, for translating documents / menus when on holiday, for paying for train tickets (especially the London Underground), for calling my Uber taxi to get around and for tracking my health progress in the gym.

This is lot of benefits it offers me directly.

I notice that there is a tiny minority of adults who have no mobile now - https://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/studies/mobile-statistics/ suggests that this number is shrinking rapidly year on year as the hold-outs are catching up with the benefits of the technology. I suspect within 3-4 years the number of hold outs will become statistically irrelevant to the government in terms of retaining services that cater for them.

I guess the question for you is: if your desire to hold out from the technology will reduce the benefits for the majority of other people, is it reasonable to do so? At what level do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? 50,000 holdouts? 500? 5? 

This is as much a hypothetical question as yours but also relevant to the discussion.

Without smart phones it would be a complete pain in the bum as they are now involved in so many aspects of life to improve it and to facilitate things. People as ancient as us have all had experience of living in such a stone age situation but I really wouldn't wish such hassle on anyone.

TheCatWoman said:

What about if the internet got blasted back 15 years and there was no AI, an internet that was smaller but in many ways friendlier and easier to use.

The internet of 15 years ago was not easy to use - I used to have to train staff on how to use it safely and as soon as you went beyond the big companies websites it turned into the Wild West with viruses everywhere that most computers were poorly protected against.

Services were much more basic, consistency between companies non-existant and we used to hace to speak to people all the time to resolve the issues of the rubbish service - something that would be an anathema for most autists.

I use mine for seeing what the weather will be, for maps to work out how to get to a destination, for reviews of restaurants around where I'm visiting and to see the menu, for internet banking (even buying a house on a few occasions), for shopping on the likes of eBay, for translating documents / menus when on holiday, for paying for train tickets (especially the London Underground), for calling my Uber taxi to get around and for tracking my health progress in the gym.

This is lot of benefits it offers me directly.

I notice that there is a tiny minority of adults who have no mobile now - https://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/studies/mobile-statistics/ suggests that this number is shrinking rapidly year on year as the hold-outs are catching up with the benefits of the technology. I suspect within 3-4 years the number of hold outs will become statistically irrelevant to the government in terms of retaining services that cater for them.

I guess the question for you is: if your desire to hold out from the technology will reduce the benefits for the majority of other people, is it reasonable to do so? At what level do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? 50,000 holdouts? 500? 5? 

This is as much a hypothetical question as yours but also relevant to the discussion.

Iain said:

Without smart phones it would be a complete pain in the bum as they are not involved

You meant "now" instead of "not" right?