It’s been well over a decade since I’ve dabbled in this sort of scene, but it was stupid common for “ecstasy” to be adulterated with other substances (often miscellaneous amphetamines) in my region. Everything, mixed or not, would be sold as ecstasy if in tablet form. You’d generally have to look up the pressing on a third-party site to check for quality, if you didn’t test yourself (my friends were young and broke). This was in a major coastal city in the United States, for reference.

Not trying to say you’re wrong, but just relating why the previous commenter may have had their impression.

deleted by creator

I appreciate the thoughtful response - I haven’t noticed that trend specifically with BI, but have seen the general tendency you’re describing in media at large. For this specific article, I find the concept of a dumb phone more intriguing than “Lifehack: Eat Gruel!” Type stuff – see my other comment in this thread if you’re curious about why – but also did roll my eyes at the person who has three such devices for different purposes.

Thanks for elaborating!

I agree with you in concept, but I think in practice people struggle with the self discipline, and that’s kind of the fundamental problem with apps (and particularly algorithm-based social media). I’ve set timers to limit my usage of certain apps, including my Lemmy app, to encourage mindful use, but I can understand why someone might want or need more of an enforced limitation.

You might not replace your current phone with a “dumb” device, but when it’s time to get a new device eventually, you could ask yourself if less-smart device might meet both your functional and other needs.

Edit: I guess to me this is kind of like: why are people overweight? They can just not eat as much. And while that’s technically true - and advice I follow - it’s apparently not that easy for everyone. If it was, we wouldn’t see problems as pervasively as we do.

Genuine question - can you speak more on how this article would promote a social trend in a “serflike” direction? I’ve been thinking about switching to a “dumb phone” for the same reasons as the person in the article, and I’ve seen it as a potential reclamation of my time and attention to the present moment.

BI definitely publishes a lot of nonsense, but I feel like I’m not fully understanding your meaning.

Beep boop, this is your browser speaking. You have stated that you need a browser that spies on you more one (1) times.

My understanding is that the cotton gin led to more slavery as cotton production became more profitable. The machine could process cotton but not pick it, so more hands were needed for field work.

Wiki:

The invention of the cotton gin caused massive growth in the production of cotton in the United States, concentrated mostly in the South. Cotton production expanded from 750,000 bales in 1830 to 2.85 million bales in 1850. As a result, the region became even more dependent on plantations that used black slave labor, with plantation agriculture becoming the largest sector of its economy.[35] While it took a single laborer about ten hours to separate a single pound of fiber from the seeds, a team of two or three slaves using a cotton gin could produce around fifty pounds of cotton in just one day.[36] The number of slaves rose in concert with the increase in cotton production, increasing from around 700,000 in 1790 to around 3.2 million in 1850."

See also; the cotton gin.

But if you saw where this was going and said it too early, this perspective means you’re responsible for people not taking you seriously now!

Can confirm. Am public employee. My shit is public.

This was an interesting read, thanks for sharing.