From Paula Rogers
Catherine de Lange’s look at the growing influence of smartphones lamented the removal of chance and choice in our lives by technologies like GPS and recommendation services (25 August, p 46), and went on to commend alternative apps like Serendipitor that can give us back some whimsy.
Her comment about how “strangely exhilarating” it is to be told to carry out “random activities” made me shudder. Who picks these activities and what criteria do they use? The choices might be benign today, but the habits they form could be hijacked by those who wish to promote less benign activities tomorrow.
Is it, in any case, wise to encourage people to undertake random activities at the behest of software, on the promise of a momentary buzz?
Sunnybank, Queensland, Australia
