Discussion
JavaScript is not available.
recursive: Can't read the twit because I don't have an account.
ggoo: I wish people would stop posting twitter links, they're a coin toss if they're even viewable
engineer_22: This one is viewable
Ucalegon: https://xcancel.com/Suzierizzo1/status/2040864617467924865There you go!
toomuchtodo: Instagram original source: https://www.instagram.com/arozier/reel/DWsHAvDjxeL/
kjkjadksj: Stuff like this should always have an analog failsafe like a printable ticket. I can’t be the only one who has a phone actually die out and about. Especially as this device gets a little old, battery drops maybe 1% every 2 min of screen on use. Even worse in crowded cell service situations like baseball games.
freeqaz: Also a good fallback if your phone screen cracked 2 hours before. But I can imagine part of the challenge they are facing here are scalpers. TicketMaster app 'rotates' the actual ticket every 30 seconds. Can't rotate paper.I'd think that having a 2nd factor like presenting ID that matches the ticket would be sufficient there though.
threethirtytwo: sad, but thats life.
bigstrat2003: The point is it doesn't have to be life. We can make things so that you don't need a smartphone, but we choose not to. That's a choice, not some immutable reality of the universe.
elevation: We need to extend the ADA to protect people who are not technologically-abled.
Molitor5901: This is a really good point. I'm surprised the box office cannot print it for him for a fee at Will Call, which might be the solution here.
bradley13: Parking in my town can now only be paid via smartphone. Yes, almost everyone has one, but: there are still people who do not.
ryandrake: I love it how they can't think of any other way to pay for parking than via smartphone, but if you just park there without paying, they'll offer you many ways to pay the fine.
gnerd00: don't you understand that this means a data trail to your location and government ID ? connecting to your ability to pay a legal fine? You are consenting to that ?
Sayrus: And your car, license and insurance are not such a connection?
afarah1: In Brazil you already can't access some government services without a smartphone, such as paying for municipal parking in various cities. So if you own a car but not a smartphone, you get a fine. Sadly the least of the country's problems.
loloquwowndueo: You don’t need the app itself to get the rotating tickets, the algorithm is pretty dumb and was reverse engineered back in 2024. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40906148You probably still need a device of some kind though.
Aachen: Posted 9 minutes before your comment... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47662987
xvector: We can, but why should we?
bigstrat2003: Because the future will be very dystopian if we place two tech companies as gatekeepers of everything in life. If Google locks your account and won't help you (which happens!), you don't want that to also take away your ability to bank, go to baseball games, etc.
andrewla: Ticket counterfeiting is the core problem that they are trying to prevent. If there's a fallback method then that fallback method can be abused to forge tickets.
pc86: No, it's not. If you are physically incapable of operating a piece of technically, the ADA covers reasonable accommodations for that. If you are simply unwilling to learn how to use a piece of technology, it doesn't and shouldn't cover that.Being a luddite is not a protected class.
drob518: So, everyone needs to have $500 to be able to purchase a smartphone, otherwise they can’t participate in society?
raverbashing: lol not everyone wants/needs an iPhoneAnd yes. People need to get on with the times.In the same way people "need" a power connection in their house. And water plumbing. And used to need a phone line to "participate in society"
pc86: I was referring specifically to the idea that the Americans with Disabilities Act should cover people who simply choose not to utilize or learn a particular piece of technology which has been around for the better part of two decades.The "poor people don't belong in society?!?" trope is completely different (and kind of boring).
BonoboIO: There are 50$ smart phones that could do that …
crazygringo: From my quick research online, it seems they've gone digital-only for season tickets because they don't want people just reselling them to turn a profit. They want actual season-long fans, so now if you transfer too many games they can track it and ban you. This is essentially anti-scalping. There's a legit justification.You can still buy paper tickets at the stadium for a single game. But not for season passes anymore.Apparently they've been making exceptions for him in years past where he was able to pay hundreds of dollars to have them custom printed for him. And this year they've decided to no longer provide that exception.Honestly, this doesn't seem unreasonable to me. At some point, you have to cut off previous technologies because virtually everyone's moved to something better. You also can't buy tickets any more by snail mail with an enclosed check.If this guy has the money for a season pass (!) he has the money for a smartphone. It seems like he just likes the nostalgia of paper tickets. But that's not a reason to add a separate ticketing flow just for him any more, like they had been up till now.https://www.aol.com/articles/81-old-lifelong-dodgers-fan-012...https://www.reddit.com/r/Dodgers/comments/1s5fkni/la_dodgers...
tacticalturtle: I don’t think this policy would pass muster under the ADA though.The guy might not be sufficiently disabled to qualify - but for example if you have a blind person without a smartphone, you can’t tell them they’re out of luck - because you can clearly reasonably accommodate them without causing “undue financial hardship” by giving them tickets at will-call.
tmp10423288442: > “undue financial hardship”If they have already moved away from paper tickets for everyone else, now there is financial hardship, not to mention the loss to the team's economic position from scalping. Also smartphones have supported usage by the blind for years, particularly on iOS.
bigstrat2003: > At some point, you have to cut off previous technologies because virtually everyone's moved to something better.Perhaps. But in this case, they've moved to something worse. Digital tickets have their benefits, but paper tickets are still superior because they don't tie you into big tech relationships and don't require supporting infrastructure to work.
graemep: Paper also does not run out of battery or smash if you drop it.
robin_reala: I think you’d be hard-pressed to find a blind person / person with low vision without a smartphone these days: they’re a near-essential window into services that aren’t accessible though plain paper.
mzajc: For reference, this is the application: https://reports.exodus-privacy.eu.org/en/reports/com.bamnetw...8 trackers, 49 permissions. Whatever reason they gave for requiring the application, evidently they couldn't resist selling out their users in the end. Disgusting.
red_admiral: China's solution: your passport is your ticket. Not great for privacy, but persumably you also want to check that people banned from a stadium for their behaviour don't get in anyway.
jimt1234: Good luck with that under the current administration.
Ucalegon: The problem with this argument is that forcing people to use technology, without proper training and against their will, introduces them to risks as well. Anyone with older parents/family can tell you the harms that come with phishing and other fraud scenarios that cost more than just accommodating people not using technology, both at the micro and macro level. Insulting people and bullying them into technology adoption when there are relatively simple fixes to the problem seem better than increasing risk exposure for no reason other than 'I believe that people who don't use technology are somehow lesser'.
pc86: The worst thing about this entire discourse is the root of the entire "just print this one guy his tickets on-demand" argument is that it assumes, at its base, that once you hit a certain age you immediately become a moron incapable of learning anything new or adjusting your day-to-day life at all.And 80-year old person is just as smart as a 20-year old. He's perfectly capable of learning how to use a $50 smartphone to access his $5-200k/yr season tickets, he just doesn't want to. It sounds like he was told years and years ago they were moving this direction, and they've been printing him tickets as an exception, and they've decided to stop the exception. He's had 20 years to get a smart phone and learn how to use it. The fact that he now has to choose is a prison of his own making.
Ucalegon: Do you know how many old people get scammed per year in the United States because they are using technology that they are trained on, but assume that they have to use the technology in order to function each year with minimal practical gain relative to the costs? Its around 12.5 billion dollars in 2025, up from 10 billion in 2024 [1]. Why is introducing someone to that risk worth it to watch a baseball game?Asserting that individual 'get smart' doesn't actually solve for the actual harms and if it were just simple, we would not be seeing the upward trends in fraud that we are seeing within the elderly.[1] https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/older-adults-ftc-frau...
jjtheblunt: I agree with your assertion, but it made me think of a question.Are Amish and Mennonites religiously protected luddites?
snarf21: Most Amish under 30 have secret cell phones. It would only be the oldest generations without them. There are even lots of wink & nod arrangements where they may even have electricity in some outbuilding but they unplug it when elder comes to visit. It also depends on the Order as some are more strict than others. They generally aren't allowed to have electricity in "the house" but batteries and other workarounds exist.They aren't as isolated these days as they used to be. If you go to Costco, you see them with 3 carts loaded 3 feet high of all the same crap everyone else is buying. A lot of times, they don't even transport it back via buggy but call the "Amish taxi service" which is people who drive them around town in large passenger vans. Even from a work source perspective, a lot have moved on from farm work and work in construction, roofing and other trades. If you go to a gas station in the morning, you'll see work trucks roll up and only Amish rollout to go buy soda and lunches or whatever.[Source: I live in Lancaster and have for many years.]
jjtheblunt: Really interesting!
9rx: > If this guy has the money for a season pass (!) he has the money for a smartphone.Right, but he is wanting to choose the season pass over the smartphone. If he buys a smartphone then he won't have the money for a season pass anymore.
crazygringo: It does, however, easily get lost or left behind.Phones, on the other hand, can be charged. And if they're smashed, you can just log into your account on a friend's phone if you haven't replaced yours yet. If you can't even do that, you can go to the ticket window and they can look up your account information and verify your ticket.
sdeframond: My late mom couldn't receive the verification SMS from her bank. After investigation, it appeared it was actually an MMS that required a smartphone.She could still go to her bank counter but service there degraded considerably for everyday things, and she was always told to do things online.In the end the bank rep was kind enough to give her an old smartphone. But, for her, it sucked because it was much more complicated, had to be charged constantly and so on...As a technologist, it is eye opening to do the tech support of loved ones...
daedrdev: Im going to be harsh, sorry.In this case nobody is forcing them to buy a dodgers ticket. It’s a completely optional and absurdly expensive luxury good that is purely for leisure. They can simply not but a ticket if they don't want to accept conditions of sale.
tracker1: Yeah... I mean, who says I should have to put in wheelchair ramps for my ballpark that seats tens of thousands? I mean, so few people use/need them, I should just be able to refuse service to those people. Right?/sarc
MandieD: My 75-year-old, retired construction worker dad’s fingers are nearly useless on capacitive screens; half a century of handling cement apparently has that effect. His deep East Texas accent was still only semi comprehensible to Siri the last time I had him try with my phone.He recently missed several notifications from his truck’s dealership that the part they ordered was in and ready for installation, because they sent text messages that he didn’t read, instead of ever calling and leaving a message when no one responded to the texts. I’m terrified that there’s going to be a doctor’s office sometime that does the same, with more serious consequences.He’s fine flying as long as one of us can buy the ticket for him and he just needs his ID at the airport; I dread the day airlines start requiring their stupid apps.
mrweasel: There's an amusement park we like to go to. We get season passes, which normally means renewing the small plastic card we got the first year. They've switched to app only this year, with the option of getting a card, if for some reason you cannot or will not use the app. I believe there's a small fee for issuing the card.I believe their reasoning is much the same. They have some types of tickets, which can technically be handed over to others and abused. Think weekend ticket, where you hand the tickets to someone else for them to use on Sunday, or tickets that can be converted to season passes, if you do it the same day.Blaming scalping doesn't seem entirely plausible to me, because there was always the option of making the tickets and season passes non-transferable. There are other methods. Especially if you're only issuing paper tickets as an alternative, e.g. yes we will sell you a paper version, but understand that it is absolutely non-transferable and non-refundable.Some people might not want to bring a phone to these types of events and venues, which I can completely understand, neither do I, but I can live with it. The thing that bugs me is the lack of an alternative, which isn't really that expensive and which most won't even use. Because to some, the app really don't provide value and in those cases they solely exists for the benefit of one company. If you're paying the price of season passes to pretty much anything these days, I think you're entitled to some small level of personalized service and customization.
crazygringo: > Blaming scalping doesn't seem entirely plausible to me, because there was always the option of making the tickets and season passes non-transferable.That's not desirable either. You often can't make it to all the games, so they want you to be able to give some tickets to friends, etc.They're trying to prevent people who purchase the season pass to almost exclusively resell tickets to individual games.So you really do need data to tell the difference -- are a third of the tickets mostly going to the same 5 other friends (OK, desirable), or are 95% of the tickets going to a different random person each time (scalping)?
jjulius: >They're trying to prevent people who purchase the season pass to almost exclusively resell tickets to individual games.Why do you need a smartphone to do this when a white list checked against ID at the door would suffice? As the other respondent says, you either generate a badge for the passholder, or have an approved list of guests that can use the season pass if the passholder chooses to offer it to others.
moondance: Have you had the pleasure of coaching a technologically illiterate grandparent through the process of learning how to use a smartphone? It’s a never-ending job and disheartening for all parties involved. Modern mobile UX is not designed with accessibility for the elderly in mind, and it is constantly changing in a way that demands constant re-learning. Not to mention the disabilities and neurological conditions often involved.
SoftTalker: Now have your grandparent try to teach you something you aren't interested in and don't really want to learn, and see how it goes.
mrweasel: But you can do that the same way you do with the app. The does this by tying you ticket to your season pass, and to you. If you want to give the ticket to someone else, call the ticket office, ask them to re-register the ticket to your friend. If the ticket office notices that X number of tickets tied to that season pass has been re-registered, just refuse, or better, have the system refuse.Fans can pick the easy option with the app, or if they really want, the expensive option where they need to go pick up the re-registered ticket if they want to give them to a friend. You can do this without the app, it's just more work, which isn't much of a hassle, as most won't pick this option and the passes are expensive enough that you can justify the extra handling cost of maybe 5% of the tickets.
nwallin: The last time I had a season pass to something, they printed me the equivalent of an employee id badge with my face and name printed on it. The badge was the ticket. How do you resell an individual ticket?
shevy-java: > If this guy has the money for a season pass (!) he has the money for a smartphone.This misses the point.The question is: why would a smartphone be required, to watch a local game?
hypeatei: I agree, this is a good way to stop scalping and reduce costs by not having to print physical tickets. It's interesting to see the negative sentiment here given other threads about scalping overwhelmingly suggest we need government regulation to stop it. Well, here's a private solution to that problem but apparently that's also bad and requires threats of government action via the ADA... incredible.
jjulius: Nothing's perfect. Some ideas to fight against things we don't like will come up, and then we'll see the collateral and go, "Oh, maybe that's actually not the best way to do it". That's okay! That's the way life goes! It's not "incredible" or hypocritical or whatever else you're trying to imply. What you're seeing is merely folk working through things.Are we supposed to always jump at the first "solution", consequences be damned?
shevy-java: It's like having a chip implanted. That is, the addiction to requiring a smartphone.Next step is to re-use the body parts, just as in Soylent Green.
thinkingtoilet: >They have some types of tickets, which can technically be handed over to others and abused. Think weekend ticket, where you hand the tickets to someone else for them to use on Sunday, or tickets that can be converted to season passes, if you do it the same day.This is not abuse. If they sell a ticket for days worth of resources and you use two days of resources it's not abuse at all. That is a very consumer hostile attitude. If their business model relies on you not using what you paid for then they need a new business model.
rchaud: At airports and drugstores, the magazine racks will usually have a "Guide to iPhone/Android" type publication with a ton of pictures that are aimed at this market. I picked one up and realized while flipping through it that there is way too much for a brand new user to be able to absorb. The gestures needed on iOS to pull up options that are otherwise invisible in the UI will be nonsensical to someone who's never used one before.
Analemma_: There are various extensions you can get to automatically redirect Twitter links to xcancel or something, very much recommended.I don't like that these get submitted either, but unfortunately people do post worthwhile stuff there and only there, and I don't want to just categorically forbid those posts.
mixtureoftakes: I like these being submitted.Twitter still does have quite a lot of unique content that either appears there first or isnt accessible anywhere else at all, unlike paid article websites, previews without logging in actually work for the most part, and xcancel as you said is a thing. Which extension are you using for redirects?
Lammy: > At some point, you have to cut off previous technologies because virtually everyone's moved to something better.I don't agree that it's better. Why should I have to worry about my ticket running out of battery power or being such a high-value pickpocket target once I'm already in the venue?The latter is a huge issue at music festivals for example:- https://old.reddit.com/r/OutsideLands/search/?q=phone+stolen...- https://old.reddit.com/r/electricdaisycarnival/search/?q=pho...- https://old.reddit.com/r/coachella/search/?q=phone+stolen&in...Can't just leave it at home if you need it to get in to the thing.
mschuster91: > Honestly, this doesn't seem unreasonable to me. At some point, you have to cut off previous technologies because virtually everyone's moved to something better. You also can't buy tickets any more by snail mail with an enclosed check.The problem is, in the end it leads to a society where you NEED a smartphone to enjoy basic human existence - and yes, access to cultural and sports events is a fundamental part of being a human.That in turn almost always means: your smartphone must be either Apple or a blessed Google device. And that in turn means: no rooting (because most apps employ anti-root SDKs these days), no cheap AOSP phones, no AOSP forks like Graphene OS. And that is, frankly, dystopian when your existence as a human being depends on one of two far too rich American mega corporations. Oh and it needs to be a recent model too, because app developers just love to go the easy route and only support recent devices on recent OS versions.And that's before we get into account bans (which particularly Google is infamous for), international sanctions like the one against the ICC justices, or pervasive 24/7 surveillance by advertising SDKs or operating systems themselves.
ttfkam: Visually impaired people use smartphones too. If the app isn't supporting the accessibility features of the platform, it should still be held liable under the ADA.(Unfortunately it won't as was found when Southwest Airlines was sued over this. Congress hasn't updated the ADA to include web sites since the ADA precedes the web and so it wasn't enumerated explicitly. Also unfortunately, the GOP who have never been huge fans of the ADA have blocked any attempts at patching that hole.)But check out the settings on your iPhone/iPad or Android device. Whole sections dedicated to accessibility, especially for the visually impaired.
tacticalturtle: Visual impairment was just my naive example - but maybe there’s a better one that still persists.Regardless, maybe there’s a path to legislation forbidding smartphone requirements for huge monopoly businesses like national professional sports leagues. I’d hate for ownership of a consumer device to become codified as a requirement for participation in activities like this.
rrr_oh_man: > I’d hate for ownership of a consumer device to become codified as a requirement for participation in activities like this.What is your reasoning for that sentiment? (I don't disagree)
9rx: It is not required to watch a game. At least not unless you are not using it as some kind of vision aid — although even then there are likely reasonable alternatives.It is required to satisfy the desires of a vendor wanting to sell something. They make a smartphone a part of satisfying their desires because it makes their life simpler as the vendor. Same reason they won't accept your 12,000 bushels of wheat. If you don't want to play ball, so to speak, they are happy to sell their product to someone else who will.
jjulius: I genuinely don't think people making the, "Get a smartphone or be left behind," arguments really understand the magnitude of the assertion.
mrweasel: I'm in my 40s, there is a shit ton of modern UX I struggle with. Basically anything gesture based for example, but really a lot of apps are just shit and have no sensible UX design behind them, so you need to try to click everything and hope you don't mess something up.To me it's easy to see how someone over 70 might simply refuse to use an app. Especially if it doesn't support scaling the UI to well.
doubled112: The first time I used iOS I noticed a lot of things it considers "normal" are completely undiscoverable unless you know.Swipe down from the top. No, the other top.Click share, now click "find in page". Wait, that doesn't share at all?
KumaBear: Generating badges has loopholes. (Trust me I’ve used them). And IDing every person can be a mission on itself. Pretty sure they will just start using biometrics in the next decade with or without your consent.
Ucalegon: They already do! See Madison Square Garden [0] and The Intuit Dome [1]![0] https://www.npr.org/2023/01/21/1150289272/facial-recognition...[1] https://stadiumtechreport.com/feature/intuit-dome-leaning-on...
polski-g: Well he has no responsibilities. His entire calendar is free, for the past two decades. They came out 17 years ago. He can go get one and learn how to use it.
nslsm: I have absolutely no sympathy for people who choose not to get with the times. We all took our time to learn how to use a smartphone. He could have too but chose not to. Probably refused to learn to use touch to pay, ATMs, etc as well. You chose to opt out of society; that’s too bad.
loire280: This happens to everyone's fingers to some extent because the fingertips dry out as you age. It's a huge source of frustration for elderly folks since it adds to the confusion around using touch interfaces. My family members have had some success moistening their fingers with a wet paper towel periodically as they use their devices, though of course that is impractical on the go.
trollbridge: So what's next?Do they also need to have an age-verified Facebook account?Plus an attested age-verified operating system on that phone?Are they allowed to use GrapheneOS or do they need to use only the vendor's stock ROM image?Is it OK if they turn off surveillance on the device or is that required too to "participate in society"?
tomwheeler: > If this guy has the money for a season pass (!) he has the money for a smartphone.Maybe it's not about the money. Maybe he does not want the negative consequences that come along with having a smartphone. Maybe he has dexterity issues that make using a smartphone difficult. Maybe he doesn't want to install their invasive app. Maybe he finds that paper tickets are easier to manage. Maybe he recognizes that the vendor made this change to benefit themselves at the expense of the fans, as it allows them greater control of the resale market.I own a smartphone but prefer paper tickets. Luckily I can (and do) still get them at my team's stadium, although I have to pick them up in person.
LadyCailin: I’m not sure how exactly this should be worded in law, but I really wish they would pass a law requiring supporting people without smartphone apps. Obviously there would be some exceptions where justified, even for things other than “the app is the whole point” and those need to be thought through, but in this case and plenty of others, there’s just no reason they can’t accommodate non app users. “It costs more to support non app users” is not a sufficient justification.
EvanAnderson: > “It costs more to support non app users” is not a sufficient justification.For sure. If that was true the answer would be "charge the non-app users a nominal fee to cover the cost".Invasive tracking is the point, not the cost. It's anti-consumer.
trollbridge: There are large populations of Amish who don't use cell phones, landline phones, or anything. The closest they'd get to a phone call is asking a neighbour to call 911 in an emergency (assuming they're even willing to do that).One group I am aware of will only use a payphone in the nearest town. They actually filed to force AT&T to keep a payphone there because the relevant tariff required AT&T to do so, and were the only people who ever bothered to make AT&T do this. So there is one payphone in that town that they go to and drop their quarters in to make phone calls.There are no "secret" cell phones there.
radiator: Look at how conveniently you chose to ignore the fan's age, attributing his behaviour to unwilling or luddite! Or do you really have absolutely no idea, what it means to be 81 years old? Still, I would bet you have met at least some people of such an age.
trollbridge: They don't really receive special accommodation for not using technology outside of being allowed to submit some required tax forms on paper instead of e-filing them, the logic being that the government requires them to do so under pain of punishment, so the government has to find a way to let them do it without violating their religious beliefs.But there is not a general accommodation provided.
Raed667: He can get a smartphone dedicated to the ticket app if it is such a huge piece of his life/hobby
jedberg: The Dodgers could have so easily turned this into a huge win. After 50 years they could have just awarded him a paper lifetime pass. Scan this and get in for any game! It would have been so easy.Or if they really wanted him to go digital, just buy him a smart phone and install the app for him!
tosti: No smartphone. A cheap wifi-only Android tablet without a lock screen and their stupid app on the home screen.
layer8: > you have to cut off previous technologies because virtually everyone's moved to something better.It’s hard to argue that having to manage a smartphone and its ever-changing apps and UI flows for purchasing and handling tickets, is simpler than buying a paper ticket with paper money. Is it really better?
comprev: It's better for the company not the customer
TeMPOraL: This. It's just another form of hidden inflation at play.
dmitrygr: This is probably the most heartless thing I have read all day. I worry about the future of the world if this is the norm
Triphibian: I daily drive a Light Phone III, haven't had a smartphone in years and would rather never use one again. Our local concert venue requires an app for tickets, so I have just given up on the idea of going to major concerts or seeing our local hockey team play.
moondance: This guy has a flip phone. Seems like that was the last “new” thing he could learn. Its user flows never change and he’s memorized it. The idea that the average old person is so obstinate that they would refuse to learn the new technology if it was easy to do so is not something I can accept. Not being able to communicate and interact with the modern world on its terms isn’t fun for anyone.
SoftTalker: There's an older guy at my office who often says "if you don't want to do something, don't learn how" and I think this attitude is common. It's not that they can't learn this smartphone stuff, they just don't want to use it.
this_user: That's their choice, but they also choose to suffer the consequences. Expecting the world to cater to your needs specifically is such a typical boomer attitude and should no longer be tolerated.
mwigdahl: While we're at it, let's get rid of the ADA. Those disabled people expecting the world to cater to their needs specifically are so abusive to those of us with perfectly functional bodies and flexible minds.
raw_anon_1111: The ADA forces reasonable accommodations. It doesn’t mean that car manufactures have to build cars for blind people.
SoftTalker: And, expecting people who are happy with what they already have and have already paid for to switch to your newer, more complicated, more expensive system so that your numbers go up is another attitude that should not be tolerated.
raw_anon_1111: I am sure that you also think they should have a place for his horses to feed because he doesn’t want to deal with a car.
NooneAtAll3: I still despise whoever decided that swipe-from-top needs 2 versions somehow
TeMPOraL: "Share" is one of the worst inventions of all. What it does in phones is random across apps and platforms, and usually has nothing to do with what the word "share" means in any other context.
jjulius: Paper doesn't spy on you.
crazygringo: If you don't give the app any permissions, it doesn't spy on you either.It doesn't have any more information than the info you give it to buy the tickets in the first place.
M95D: > If you don't give the app any permissions, it doesn't spy on you either.What about the other apps? What about the phone itself?
crazygringo: The guy already has a phone. Flip phones still track your location.If you don't want other apps, don't install other apps.
jjulius: >The guy already has a phone. Flip phones still track your location.Locations from flip phones have to be triangulated. Smartphones track more precise locations and a lot more than just location data.
hombre_fatal: "Cheap android phone" on Google Shopping shows options for $30. Didn't even know they get that cheap.
slackfan: Having to own anything beyond the money to buy something to buy something, is, in fact, unreasonable.
kleiba: My wife and I had an appointment last week to apply for a line of credit. We talked it all through with the clerk and decided to go for it, so he started the whole process on his computer.His jaw dropped half-way through when he asked for my wife's and my phone number, and I had to tell him that I don't own a smart phone.Turns out you must have a smart phone because the system sends you some kind of code to verify your identity. Let that sink in: I am sitting in front of the clerk, but in order to identify me, he needs me to give him some phone number.The only way we could finalize the application is by me asking my mother whether I could use her phone number briefly to get this over with. She forwared the code to my wife's phone. That worked in the end -- but so much for "identifying me".
michaelt: > Maybe it's not about the money. Maybe he does not want the negative consequences that come along with having a smartphone.In my country right now there's a lot of hand-wringing about the impact of social media and smartphones on teenagers' mental health and education. We've got schools banning phones, and the government wanting to introduce age checks for social media. Infinite doomscrolling in your pocket, endless brainrot short-form videos, it's not healthy and we need to get smartphones out of the hands of the young.So there are good reasons people might choose not to get a smartphone.Then exactly the same government also proposed people wouldn't be allowed to work without a 'Digital ID Card' - making smartphones (and google/apple accounts) mandatory.
raw_anon_1111: And that will slow it down for everyone. Not to mention that HN users will then whine about the surveillance state
jjulius: It could slow it down for everyone, or just the season passholders. If it does, oh well - there are worse things than taking an extra 10-15 minutes to get into a stadium.>Not to mention that HN users will then whine about the surveillance state.Pretty sure, given the comments in this very thread, that HN collectively understands there's more surveillance happening on your phone than with another person making sure the name on your ID matches the name on your ticket, or that your badge photo matches your face.
the_snooze: I'm not a fan of the "something better" phrasing myself. It's very much anti-systems-thinking.Engineers should be honest that everything is a tradeoff. For the up-front convenience you get with phone tickets, you impose additional failure modes, dependency chains, and accessibility issues that simply weren't a problem with paper ticketing.The "phone-ification" of everything will probably bite us in the behind in the future, just like the buildout of out car-centric environments does now.
MiddleEndian: >For the up-front convenience you get with phone ticketsEven as a person who does have a smartphone, I feel like phone tickets are anti-convenience because they rely on terrible apps like TicketMaster. It's only a positive trade-off for venues or whoever. If they texted or emailed me a QR code, that would be a positive tradeoff (and a texted QR code would probably work for this guy's flip phone too)
