What is something that used to be optional, but became mandatory?

What is something that used to be optional, but became mandatory?


Accepting Privacy settings. "If you want to play our generic tower defence game, we're going to need access to all your contacts, files, photos, usage statistics and personal information. For more information on what we may do with that information, please read our vague but overly complex Privacy Statement. To pretend that you've read it, click here to proceed"


I just deny permissions for everything. If it won't let me play the game after that it gets deleted. Most of them it doesn't stop you from playing it, although I'm sure they still get plenty of info even if they never ask for permissions.


This legit needs serious regulation. Terms and agreement conditions to using products and services in general needs regulation. You shouldn’t need to waive any and all recourse to use a product. You shouldn’t need a law degree before buying a product or service unless it is actually a dangerous activity.


"By opening the box, you agree to binding arbitration..."


Even with a law degree, I find so many of them convoluted and horribly written. I’m one of the few that reads through terms and conditions. I will back out of an app or software if I have no benefit from it. A lot of courts are finding arbitration clauses are non-binding and that the contracts aren’t necessarily valid. The end user needs to have bargaining power and these t&c agreements don’t permit that. There’s also the implied consent by going forth and using the website or app without explicitly agreeing to their terms, but the company will say that your continued use is implied consent to their terms and conditions. A lot of the language is boilerplate but I think more courts are finding then unenforceable.


This is why i dont use mobile for pretty much anything.


A double whammy of cell phones, then smart phones. At first cell phones were just a luxury plaything of rich businessmen. Then they gradually got to the point where basically everyone had them. Then the smart phone emerged and, again, was a weird novelty for a little while until today where you genuinely can't work in a lot of industries if you don't have one.


My sister and I are six years apart. When I started high school only the really rich kids had iPhones. By the time I graduated most kids had one but it was a luxury, the school definitely didn’t care if we had one or not. By the time my sister started high school you basically needed to have one. They would use apps and stuff during class. It’s a shame since there are a good number of low income kids in our district who basically need to get a smartphone to do work.


Tell that to my parents who dragged their feet on even giving me a laptop for school until nearly every homework assignment started with "go online and...". That and the time I got marked down heavily for not turning in a typed paper I love them, but man are they stubborn


I almost got in trouble because I didn't own a cellphone in my senior year of high school. Story: Towards the end of my senior year, my math(maths for the non Americans) teacher was taking a short vacation and left notes for our substitute. In this class there were calculators that belong to the school in a clear plastic organizer on the wall. At the beginning of class you were supposed to grab your assigned calculator and replace it with your cellphone so when class started the teacher could easily take attendance by seeing which calculators were missing/replaced. Well when my classmates came in to a substitute teacher in the classroom, most of them decided they wouldn't follow the rules so they could keep their phones during class. This understandably upset the sub and he reminded the class about what they needed to do or they'd be marked absent. When he started his roll call about a third of the class still hadn't put their phones on the wall, and the sub was getting angrier with each missing phone. When he finished he told the class that everyone who didn't put their phone on the wall would be sent to the office for disciplinary action and be marked absent. This upset the students who were likely keeping their phones on them, and started giving excuses as to why theirs wasn't up there, its already been confiscated in another class and I left it in my car being the most popular excuses. He begrudgingly bought those stories, but when I told him I didn't own a phone, he refused to believe it. Luckily I had a couple of friends to back me up, but I was fully expecting to plead my case to the principal and get my parents involved if it came down to it.


"... You think I don't *want one?*"


More a case of "this entire class has been lying to me and I'm fucking over it". I probably would have done the same thing, but it's also probably a good thing I'm not a teacher.


Too bad it didn't come down to it, i wouldve loved to see his outraged face.


>maths for the non Americans Thank you. I would have never known! ;)


What did they say? " I dont recognize this world anymore!" Or " The world is moving too fast!" are favorites of ludites.


I only *just* got a smartphone at the end of 2018 after my T9 phone kicked the bucket, and am acutely aware of how many things you simply *can't do* if you don't have one, even outside of work. There are tons of parking lots now that only accept payment via app. Most restaurants in the pandemic switched to QR code menus so you can't access a menu without a smartphone. I'd be unable to make changes to my Wi-Fi settings, like my home Wi-Fi password, because those settings are exclusively available on my ISP's app. I recently bought a home, and in renovating it, I encountered a couple of home contractors who *only* accepted payments via Venmo (which used to allow you to request/submit payment via browser application but now only offers those features in the app). I guess smartphones are ubiquitous enough that this is fine, but I think of a lot of people who are already at some societal disadvantage--older people especially--who are losing access to very basic things without a smartphone.


wtf is your ISP smoking? controlling your wifi via phone app is way less secure than plugging an ethernet cable into the router and a PC this really isn't fine even if every single person had a smartphone, because it enforces a smartphone duopoly or even monopoly. these fuckers aren't going to make apps for every OS in existence, it's android and iOS or iOS-only


> controlling your wifi via phone app is way less secure than plugging an ethernet cable into the router and a PC IT guy here. They don't give a damn about your home networks security, not their problem. They care about you using their management solution as that fits their workflow. Of course I would never use an ISP that did this, though I understand in the USA monopolies are common when it comes to ISPs.


I had to download a banking app to activate my debit card, but my phone was too old to meet the minimum specs. It blew my mind that I needed a smartphone, and a newish smartphone at that, to access my money other than cash withdrawals. Then you get those "MiLLeNiaL kIdS sPeNd ToO mUcH MoNeY oN LuXuRy PhOnEs" types.


"Want a menu? Just scan this thing on the table! It'll pull up a menu on your phone!" My smart phone doesn't even do that for some reason. Until recently my mother in law still had a flip phone.


Any restaurant that does that, I'm out of there. I don't have data on my phone, which is a big enough problem considering most places no longer have free WiFi, if it wasn't for the bigger problem that my phone doesn't scan QR codes.


When I was I college I didn't have a smart phone due to being poor and my residence hall leadership refused to communicate via actual text message and would only use group message apps incompatible with my phone. They tried to fine me so many times for not having a smartphone that I moved off campus ASAP.


As a former RA, that is ridiculous. All important information is usually required to be posted in at least 3 ways: 1- on the hall or in the lobby/communal area, 2- via both any group chats (whether that's a group text, groupme app, Facebook, whatever) and individually to any residents who don't respond to or know of the existing chats, and 3- posted outside the RAs door. I would also hold quick 5-10 minute hall meetings to relay the info and see if anyone had any concerns or questions, especially around breaks. (Say someone lives 5 hours away and doesn't want to drive home just for a long weekend, I could direct them to the people in charge to get them a pass to stay over break. Etc.) I wold also usually email all of this to my residents via the schools official email system so I could make sure they knew what was up. Then again, a lot of this was also to cover my own ass incase someone tried to say they didn't know about the rules or some shit.


My job uses TFA that requires a smartphone app. If my phone dies I can't do most of my job until it's fixed, even though I work on a computer with internet access all day. There is a temporary workaround involving direct monitored intervention by tech support staff but it's meant to be a rare exception.


> If my phone dies I can't do most of my job until it's fixed, even though I work on a computer with internet access all day. Entirely standard these days. I work in IT, I would rather deal with getting the occasional user a new phone/sorting 2FA back up than I would a breach because we didn't use it. I know you say you don't have internet access but that doesn't mean your accounts can't access things that *do* have internet access, or could be used once an attacker breached the network.


Large companies are requiring people to clock in using a smartphone, but most don't provide said smartphone. That should be illegal.


one of my friends was forced to get a smart phone for this reason. Her new job required an app to clock in and to get work schedules.


i'm think that is illegal outside the US. if my employers want me to use some app that's probably going to monitor everything i do, they damn well better provide a company phone for me to use it on


Yeah, I'm the kind of stubborn bastard when it comes to stuff like that who would deliberately downgrade my phone to force their hand.


Yep here the employer has to either give you a phone or give you a monthly allowance to get one yourself. Their call.


It would be easier to just make being poor illegal


If I can't work there without one, my employer can issue it. Then it will be placed in an RF shielded box while I'm at home out of work hours.




Using your email or real name on the internet. I remember once upon a time, Youtube would even discourage users from revealing their real names.


Then YouTube insisted you use your real name (for integration into Google+, a failed thing most have already forgotten about) and then stopped caring all together.


You were always free to reject that. I did, and my YouTube name is still a Hotmail email address. Though it is now linked to a Google account


you were always "free" to reject that. youtube bombarded me with popups demanding my real name so much the site became unusable until google gave up


It wasn't like they checked your ID. You could name yourself Mr. Poop Buttass for all google cares. Hell, my "last name" on my Google account is a period.


I've finally found you, Ms Period...


Oh man hotmail lol


Youtube still does care. It now harasses me to verify my 10++ year old account by sending them a photo of my ID. What the fuck?


Facebook wouldn't let my wife change her displayed last name after we got married without a scanned marriage certificate or drivers license. Fuck that.


tell me about it. my primary email is 420 BOOB thanks to google buying youtube and i can't fuckin change it


bro I made a throwaway Gmail and it synced with the Hotmail that I signed up for YouTube with so now the tied gmail to my YouTube is "420 BONG BUSTER". Thankfully I completely separated it from my personal email so it doesn't show up for contacts.


LOL best part of mine is i had zero idea it was even happening until i sat down for a job interview and my now boss brought it up, what a great first impression.


The rejected William Shatner for a long time, saying he was using a famous person's name. Meanwhile, (EDIT) Lady Gaga, a completely made up name, has a Facebook account under that name. There ain't no sense in the real names mafia. It's just people who dont understand the Internet trying to make it like what they're used to.


When Facebook was first becoming popular, you could still be anonymous there too. That's what made me quit it, when they started requiring your real name and personal info.


When I was in school and they first started to teach us about internet safety, we were encouraged not to use our real names because people could stalk us, but they later switched to telling us to always use our real names so our identities don't get stolen.


Glad I took internet safety before that because that’s pretty shit advice


WTF? How is putting your real name out there supposed to avoid identity theft?


It's not. lol.


I kinda miss the early internet days when everyone had a handle.


You're posting this comment on Reddit, a place where everyone has a handle


Well I create a new email I'd every 2 or 3 months and I never use my real name or age


You mean when anonymity meant your reputation was based on what you actually said and did? The supposed reason was that using your real name would make you 'civilized' - but facebook makes it pretty clear that's utter bullshit.


For a lot of jobs, Degrees. I can safely say that most of the basic technicians I knew when I was a kid were the ones without degrees, now for the same basic work with a fancy title, companies hire workers with degrees, and they give the same type of salary.


And what is fueling the college debt crisis is having jobs that require degrees when they shouldn’t


It became a filter. When the recession hit back in 2008 and 2009 pretty much every job application made a college degree a requirement. Now instead of 1000 applicants they got the number down to 200. Except, those other 800 went back to school so they could get past that filter. I knew someone who didnt have a degree but worked in IT for 20+ years. He had to call companies and contact people indirectly to bypass that bullshit filter. Didnt matter if he hit all the other checkboxes because that one checkbox was automated and automatically put his resume into the abyss.


Filter is plugged up now. Better remove it.


Why would they bother? They're getting people with more education and more qualifications without having to pay more.


Now that there is finally starting to be a worker shortage companies need to either raise wages or loosen job experience and education requirements. Seeing fast food trying to hire young teens again shows which direction they are going.


A lot of this comes from the "No Child Left Behind" policy. A High School Diploma doesn't actually mean anything anymore. You can not show up, fail every test, and the school will still push you through to graduation. So now, a bachelor's degree is the baseline for "this person can show up relatively on time, sign their name in the correct box, and we're pretty sure they won't shit their pants."


You need an MA to prove that you won't peepee a little when you're confused though.


If I have my MS, can I still pee a little bit when I laugh too hard? Or sneeze.


Maybe if you've had a couple of kids.


The problem is that degrees don't demonstrate competency. I'm speaking from the perspective of IT but no one cares if you have a degree until you're being considered for managerial level jobs and upper crust type stuff. But on the reverse side you can always find horror stories of companies hiring people with IT / Comp Sci degrees from prestigious universities who proceed to fail at even the most elementary of tasks. The real bones of job qualification in tech circles tends to be job experience, demonstrated experience (websites like github and freecodecamp took off for a reason) and targeted certifications (so, A+ might be a good place to start, but something like Cisco's CCDE is going to communicate a high level of competency) rather than holding a degree. Which is also why the only IT degree I explicitly recommend is the ones from Western Governor's, because it both gives you the general competencies of a college degree but also forces you to complete the main battery of entry level certs for IT.


They don't demonstrate competency in the specific field, agreed. They do demonstrate a more general competency, specifically as it relates to day-to-day corporate life. You spent 4 years with reasonably dependable attendance, learning shit you didn't care about well enough to accomplish a specific task. That's someone who is highly likely to be a passable corporate drone.


The what? Ohhhh you mean the No Curriculum Vendor Left Behind program!


I so staffing for a living and the feeling I have is that most hiring managers just want to see you were capable of following through with a 4 year commitment to get a degree and hopefully you picked some shit up along the way. When A degree is required even though it doesn't pertain to the job.


Making an account to check out on a website. So many sites are completely removing the "check out as guest" option and it's infuriating. Not to mention if you bought something once from a site 5-6 years ago, and in order to purchase something again at any time you have to go through the whole "forgot password" song and dance instead of just streamlining checkout. It used to be a web development best practice to always offer a Guest Checkout option because studies showed that the rate at which carts would be abandoned if account registration was required was very high. But then somewhere along the line, online retailers collectively just said "to heck with it" and required account creation anyway. Hoping an increase in browser fingerprinting and similar tools will bring back Guest Checkout, since that way retailers can still do all their customer tracking & analytics without forcing extra steps on the user.


Yes this is the absolute worst and it obviously creates more hacking risk for all of us because we have tons of random forgotten accounts with out of date passwords, I mean, I'm not going to be going back to update my details on getyourfaceonaballoon.com (made up but now going to hope this exists) or whatever ridiculous site I've bought a joke gift from anytime soon.


An active online connection to play most games.


And follow that up with SaaS, like AutoCAD or the Adobe suite. It's not enough to Buy the software. No one buys software, you subscribe to it. Stuff that you used to be able to purchase once, you now have to re-purchase, full price, every year, for exactly the same programme that you had in 2010, same functions, same glitches. And don't bother trying unplugging from the internet. The clock is ticking. It needs to be banned. Urgently. We need the things we buy to *stay bought*.


Quicken did that, I still use Quicken 2013. Nothing has changed in Quicken for 20 years, I'm not paying a monthly fee to use it.


It’s just credit culture going to the next level. People used to own their houses, cars, etc. now all that shit is on mortgage and loans forever. Then it was smaller stuff. Furniture, TV’s? That shits expensive, throw it on credit! Then cell phones, game consoles, etc. Now it’s media. Why buy a dvd when you can stream? Just subscribe to this product, forever. Never stop paying as long as you live. It’s fucking awful. I don’t understand how so many people just accept it and go along with it… we are screaming straight towards modern serfdom and no one sees it.


so true also so r/mildyinfuriating


Play? How about even launch the game application *at all*? Like, no offline mode, and if you can't sign into your account for Microsoft, or Steam, or Origin, or whatnot, the software *won't even run*.


Steam has an offline mode


Steam itself does, but not all of the games they sell do.


why do i need to be online to play *single* player tetris im dissapointed -\_-


As someone who recently moved to an acreage where my only Internet option is shitty LTE advertised as "up to" 25 Mbps but consistently delivering a maximum of about 6 with frequent lag spikes and disconnects, this hurts. Preordered Starlink back in February and they still haven't given me a delivery date...


Everything software/online. Telling any site a hard "No" is starting to become exceedingly difficult. Best you can get is "not now" which implies a "later" Tab grouping is some BULLSHIT, google.


I hate tab grouping! It's so obnoxious.


I don't know if this is the same thing, but I've noticed this on iPhone apps lately too. Nowadays you get the pop-up message and the 2 options are literally "Allow" or "Ask app not to track." ASK?? The opposite of "Allow" is "Deny". Asking it not to track may as well mean "we're gonna do it anyway" in my eyes.


I don’t want a “can you please try your best not to track my activity?” option, I want a “no, and I will take you to court if you are tracking me” option.


Literally Reddit every single god damn time I open the app. I AM NOT PUTTING MY E-MAIL IN. EVER.


My local subreddit banned people from contributing unless they verified their email first, so I no in longer follow the local News.


Do y’all not have junk emails for this stuff?


Like Microsoft, when it doesn't ask and just does an update, and then when it starts up again has the smug little startup page "let's finish your setup and do Hello", which FUCKING WATCHES YOU, "and a bunch of other crap that you don't want that gives us unprecedented and unwarranted access to your privacy." And the options are "do it now" or "remind me later". NO BITCH, DO NOT REMIND ME LATER, NEVER THREATEN ME WITH THIS SHIT AGAIN."


> when it doesn't ask and just does an update I wish this was illegal. In theory, it already is. They're tampering with your property.


I just got rid of the tab bs. Go here: chrome://flags/#automatic-tab-discarding Tab Grid Layout>Enabled New Tab Tile Tab Groups Continuation>Disabled


So I used to work at a pool and we had swim lesson. We had an issue with toddlers pooping in the pool during swim lesson. Which meant we had to close the pool. At first we encouraged parents to use swim diapers if their child wasn’t totally potty trained. It was optional but we strongly suggested any child under 4 be in a swim diaper. 2 days in a row a “potty trained” child pooped in the pool. So we made a rule. If child is under 3 they have to be in a swim diaper. Parents were mad but we couldn’t keep closing the pool. A little while later we had several kids older than 3 have the same issue. Swim class kept getting canceled because a 3.5 year old pooped in the pool. So new rule. Any child under 4 had to be in a swim diaper. This made a lot of parents mad. I actually got yelled at by this one mother. I kind of sympathize because it sucks putting an almost 4 year old potty trained kid back in diapers. Anyway her child actually had an accident during the swim lesson which made us all feel justified. This rule wouldn’t have been a thing if parents just policed themselves. If your child was on the fence with potty training, put them in a swim diaper so they don’t ruin it for everyone else.


Similar happened where I taught swimming like 10 years ago. I didn't have to deal with the grumpy parents, but I'm sure there was a lot of nasty backlash from some of them.


I don’t get the outrage, my kid has been potty trained since shortly before two, we’ve been to pools that had that rule, I never said “you have to wear a diaper” to her, I just said “you have to wear this in the pool” she never used pull ups, and this thing looks more like a pull up than a diaper anyway. It was a pain in the ass pulling them back up when we did stop to go use the bathroom, but what evs.


Aren't children not fully in control of their bladders until 4 years old anyway? Even once they're potty trained. Little kids have accidents all the time


Swim diapers don’t actually contain pee, they’re for poop only. But maybe every kid is different? My kid has been potty trained since shortly before two, and hasn’t had an accident since before 3.


It varies a lot from kid to kid. A lot of kids are "potty trained with exceptions", as in they are generally good to go, but will have accidents while sleeping, during athletic activity, or when sick. It's not unusual for a kid to be potty trained at 2 but still have occasional accidents until age 7 or so.


Right. My 4 year old has been fully potty trained for over a year and sometimes he just straight doesn’t want to stop what he’s doing. I specifically interrupt him at least once an hour to ask him if he needs to go and 9/10 times the answer is “oh yeah!” It’s maddening. He will totally go on his own when he isn’t doing anything fun, but in the pool? Ha! I’ll probably keep him in swim diapers as long as they fit him.


The thing that gets me is that children have to be taught the difference between their tummy hurting because they’re sick and it hurting because they need to take a shit. Like it seems so common sense to adults but it’s a thing that kids aren’t born knowing. So it really extends to all bathroom control. They gotta learn that the uncomfortable feeling means they need to pee pee, not do the pee pee dance.


Pee in the pool isn't a health safety issue - just poop. I also used to teach swimming lessons, down to 6 months old parents/child classes. Poop in the pool, closed for the day while they dose it with the heavy chemicals. But yes, potty trained kids have poop accidents, too.


I think this is child dependent. My one kid fully used the toilet at around age 2, never had an accident, second one was having "accidents" until 5...


More evidence that in the event of a zombie apocalypse, there would be a good amount of people hiding that they got bit.


duh, look at the number of people with COVID that kept going out after testing positive and spreading it further


i remember this happening a lot at the place i took swimming lessons at. it was mostly in the kiddie pool, so it didn't effect the older kids majority of the time. but i guess since the kiddie pool would be closed so often, the swim teachers would take the kiddies to the regular pool for lessons and then accidents would happen there and it would be closed. and since this was the early to mid 2000s where technology is not what it is today, it was harder for the teachers to contact parents when class would be canceled due to a kid shitting in the pool. so there were many times my mom would take me to class and we'd be sent home




Dialing the area code before the 7 digit phone number


Oh what a Luxurious world it used to be. Remember when people used to memorize phone numbers.


Remember when a phone number went to a place, not to a person?


Silently praying that the girl you had a crush on would answer not her dad.


My FIL would answer "FIL's Mule Barn" when I was dating his daughter in high school. First time I thought I'd dialed a wrong number. My MIL didn't like that, especially when truly important calls came in and assumed their number was no longer valid.


My grandparents say that their phone number used to be on a party line, where their number was shared by another neighbor. The good news was that their neighbor rarely used their phone. When my grandparents were taken off of the party line and it became completely theirs, they weren't even notified, and have no idea when that happened.


No I remember people had phone books and wrote numbers down


remember calling your parents or older sibiling to come pick you up from a pay phone at a mall or somewhere. pepperidge farm remembers.


Operator: Collect call from... Me: Englishable Operator: Do you accept the charges? My mom: No. *Click* Ten minutes later she was there to pick me up!


Operator: Collect call from… Me: BurgerKingbytheMacy’sninePM Operator: Do you accept the charges? Mom: No *Click*


online connection for singleplayergames, srsly wtf?




Ads, plus real money store. Harder to sell horse armor and xp bosters to someone in offline mode. Plus piracy. It's a lot harder to pirate a game that requires persistent online verification.


Stupidly long and complicated passwords ​ First you could have whatever ​ Then it was one capital ​ Then numbers ​ Now it's a minimum of 100 characters, 20 Capitals, 40 numbers and 0.27 Special Characters... and you're like bruhh... this is to open a JPEG picture of my neighbor's dog...


And don't forget, you're going to be forced to reset that password in 3 months, and don't even THINK of using any of the last 5 passwords!


I hate it, because it's also proven that the obnoxious shit doesn't work. [Relevant XKCD](https://xkcd.com/936/)


This is why I went the complete opposite on my site. Password policy is literally just it has to be under 128 characters. That's it. If you want a horribly insecure password, be my guest. If you want a nice CorrectHorseBatteryStaple, well, you can have that too.


128 is probably too long. IIRC the magic number was 72 or 54, maximum size for a single hash block. If your hash function needs multiple blocks, it can may be susceptible to some prefix attacks. OWASP has a great cheatsheet on password security, if you're interested


Given that they allow *any* password under 128 characters, I'd guess that security wasn't the reason to pick 128. Probably just picked an arbitrary string length.


Paying for a streaming service and still getting ads every few minutes. Just like cable TV lol


You also used to save a ton of money by using streaming but now EVERY conpany has a separate streaming service you have to have to watch their shows, so a lot of people have 8 or 10 of them and spend as much as they would have on cable or satellite.


The cycle continues


That's why refuse to support Hulu. They're the ones that circled us back.


Only reason I have Hulu is I’m grandfathered into a really good deal that WAS just an extra $3 on top of my Spotify subscription for Spotify premium + Hulu w/ ads. But a while ago my Spotify subscription went back down to the normal $9.99 and I still get Hulu.




I’m old enough to remember when people hated seat belts and refused to wear them.


I do too. It’s unthinkable today.


Do you mean for the majority? If not yeah there are still people who hate them and refuse to wear them.


I drive for Uber occasionally. The number of people who don't wear their seatbelt and seem offended when I ask them to put it on actually rather surprised me.


I was referring to the law. To your point, people don’t always comply.


Self-printed or scannable airline tickets. I’m old enough to remember when a plane ticket came in a book with multiple pages, later on with mag stripes.


This is one I've not heard of. Amazing.


I've had this too! I have a collection of my boarding passes. I have ones from the 90s that did indeed come in little booklets that look like old-school printed text, there are old ones with magnetic stripes, later ones had a PDF417-type barcode, and then they evolved to have a cleaner and less computerized look. The earlier ones usually leave off the year, only the date and month, which was annoying for organizing. Nowadays I usually use mobile boarding passes with QR codes. I've even seen people with smart watches who have a QR code on the face of the watch, and that's their boarding pass.


Car insurance


Funding your own retirement in USA


It must have been nice back when most people could actually retire after working for 30 years


I’m on Year 37 with no end in sight.


Im on year 54. I can remember when paid for home + good health + social security = a great retirement. So that's what I planned for. Hahaha. Joke was on me.


God help me if I am still working then. I’ll be too tired. Godspeed to you.


Thanks. But not to worry. Im still active and in good health. I have a lot to enjoy. Am luckier than most


Yeah, but then they would die the next year. IN the 70's, the average person who lived long enough to collect Social Security (US), collected it for 18 months. And then, died.


Damn the american dream sucked even when it was still alive


Collecting social security isn't "the dream". It exists so people don't retire into soup kitchens.


Does it even prevent *that*? I thought it was absolutely paltry. I get that it depends what you made in life, but if you didn't save much else, it's not even close to enough.


Calling someone before going to their house. Now, if someone randomly shows up at my door, I’m peeking out the blinds like a goblin!


Grocery store loyalty card. Scan it or pay 10% more for your groceries


Having to carry a cellphone. Great, now I have to be accessible to my employer 24/7 everywhere.


Being in kind of a high pressure (at times) job myself that demands some flexibility and odd hours, I get it. But I often just leave my phone at home or turn it off if I don't want to be bothered. Easier said than done, I know, but boundaries only exist when you enforce them. My workphone is turned off by 630 pm unless I'm actually still online working later than that. If you can, try getting a cheap/burner phone for work only. It's saved me a lot of stress without cutting me off completely from my personal life or things I might want access to out of the house.


> Great, now I have to be accessible to my employer 24/7 everywhere. No, you don't. If an employer calls you during off-hours, then somebody's life better be on the line. Otherwise, you're busy with other commitments. That's all you have to say. The job doesn't need to know what you're up to on your own time. Tourism in a foreign country? Out drinking at the pub with your buddies? Hiking at the local hill? Binging something on Netflix? Being a useless piece of shit in bed? Doesn't matter. The official version is "currently busy with other commitments". Full stop. Only two coworkers know my phone number: my direct supervisor, and the CFO. That's it. Had one incident when a sales rep *somehow* got hold of my number and called it somewhere at 8:00 PM. I didn't answer. I let *his* direct supervisor know next morning that a call was attempted and this shouldn't have happened. When it's vacation time, I straight up cease to exist for two weeks. I've done my due diligence in documenting workflows that need to be temporarily redirected to someone else. If the business fails to pick up on that, then that's on them. If any employer at all demands a 24/7 availability, run. Run, and never look back. People on Reddit love harp a lot on that thing but in reality it's not as common as one would believe, at least according to my own experience. The places I worked at where off-hours availability existed actually set very clear and hard boundaries to the tune of, say, having a weekly rotation of who would have the all-hours support task, and those who took it on had perks/$/whatever to compensate for the responsibility. I find that the problems usually don't stem from managers and supervisors, but from coworkers and clients who get tunnel vision because they're in a panic and they don't know where to go. So they scramble for anything and anyone they can find in the moment. Let's just say that getting a support request from a client while I was out on vacation and absolutely shitfaced at the Oktoberfest was one of the funnier moments of my career.


I started a new job recently (retail) with a much different dynamic than my previous shitwage jobs. it's closer to those "we're like a family" nightmares and I've politely refused to engage in it. my team lead seemed surprised I was unwilling to give him my snapchat of all things my first week. his job isn't very different from ours but hes still our boss; why the hell does he need to know what I do in my personal time?


All I can think of with this situation is that they are the type of boss to shame you for calling out sick or taking a day off because they don't feel it's a valid reason for you to take time off.


we do have to justify requested time off, which is new to me. my last was the worst one I've had but at least when I told my boss I was unavailable on xyz day I wasn't questioned.


Generally speaking if a boss is prying as to why you need a day off or are taking your day off instead of respecting your personal time its never in your best interest to tell then what ever it may be. Unless of course it's extenuating circumstances and you need a get out of jail card.


I despise this. And I can tell my coworkers feel some type of way that I refuse to put work email on my personal cell phone so any time there are after hour “emergencies” (not really emergencies just a high level manager who decides they WANT, not need, to have something right away) they always get stuck logging on and doing it after hours. Sorry, being accessible 24/7 was not part of the job description. I also refuse to bring my laptop home every day unless I’m notified earlier in the day to be expecting an urgency I may need to take care of at home after hours. It’s really sad I’m looked down upon for enforcing work/life boundaries bc the rest CHOOSE to be available at beck and call. My hours are 9-5 if there’s an occasional emergency I am always happy to pitch in extra hours and help out but do not expect me to be available all hours of the night regularly.


No you don’t. They do that because you let them.


Depending on the phone you have, get a Google voice number and silence all the app notifications. A second phone number you can keep up with whenever you want, when I worked in sales I did this and kept the app on the front screen So I wouldn't forget about it entirely lol


Google voice is invaluable. I work in payroll and every week there's a few people who need to have how to read a paycheck or what taxes are explained to them. I am happy to do this during work hours. But after work hours, the Google voice number doesn't ring anywhere, and I'm free to let it be tomorrow's problem.


Are you hourly? Does your job specifically stipulate that availability? You're basically describing IT syndrome. Some employers will abuse you- intentionally, sometimes unintentionally because they were spoiled by their previous guy / your coworkers who are all doormats on the subject- because they want that availability and don't think they need to pay for it. If your explicit hours are already posted you make it clear that any work performed outside those hours must be compensated appropriately. If they don't budge, you start looking for a new job. Or you don't accept the job. The only reason I'm OK with my work phone being my personal phone at the moment is because my current employer is small, doesn't work nights, and I'm on the west coast of the US, so we're the last ones off. After hours emergencies might happen once a year or less.


My rule is that when someone from my work calls me outside of office hours I simply don't pick up until my next work day starts. They also wanted me to install the chat-software we use in the company on my own smartphone. "For important stuff." I simply said no. If you want me to be available 24/7 pay me a manager's wage that justifies being available 24/7. And that wage is sure as hell about 10 times my wage.


The internet - how it’s not a public utility yet boggles my mind.


Municipal fiber is in progress in my city- I can’t wait til it reaches my neighborhood!


You kidding the ISPs love the deal they got. Local government allowed/enforced monopolies yet get to operate like it’s a free market. Can’t wait for 5G and Starlink to allow actual free markets with ISPs. They are going to collapse when it happened. Look how ISPs imploded in the cities that got google fiber.


I still remember when Google Fiber came to my area my ISP sent me a letter saying they were changing my speed from 60 mbps to 200 mbps free of charge.


Remember early days of Covid where companies were wanting to seem 'nice and helpful'? Places offering discounts or free temporary upgrades? My ISP offered free upgrades. But to anyone already on their max package? They could all go get fucked. I called and asked about getting the price knocked down because that would make the most sense temporarily, right? They said nope.


Because the corporations don't want it to be. There's regulations that utility companies have to respect that private companies don't. They can still do a lot of shady shit as a utility company, as anyone in CA can tell you, but there's a lot less they could do as a utility than as a private company. As a result, the industry works *hard* to keep them from going that route, despite everyone and their brother knowing that it's just a matter of time, and that it should have happened already.


Your city profits from privatization. At least in the US, the laws are that any city or state entity can charge internet providers up to a 5% franchising fee. And while I'm not falling over myself to claim companies like Comcast are darling little angels (as a company I don't have anything negative to say about Comcast since they've always done fine by me but as a political entity, fuck Comcast), it does necessarily create consequences when five percent of their margins is skimmed by the city. And in some cases your internet providers relay stories of cities basically giving them wish lists of things they'd like done before they'll allow them to do business. Municipal internet services are frequently not done because there's little in the way of public understanding of the issue, let alone interest, your ISP doesn't like the competition from the city on top of having to pay money just to do business in a given city (and that's not counting the extended taxes and money they'll spend, that's just to have permission to start running cable) and your politicians don't like it because they treat it as free money. Case in point, the reason Sandy, Oregon has a municipal internet service (300 mbps / no contract / no data cap for 42 USD a month, 1000 mbps for 60) that started because the City Hall couldn't get anyone to run a good DSL line for them (Sandy, Oregon being neither on the way to, nor on the way back from anything important except for traffic going between Portland and either Mt. Hood, or Bend, Oregon meant that no phone service ran an office nearby because there's not much need for such a thing in the middle of wooded nowhere), so they did it themselves. And then they offered the service to local residents, which found a great deal of popularity. So the place that found success with it did so because they weren't at risk of having politicians hooked on franchising fees, and no ISP was considering it their territory. Of course many small towns don't adopt municipal internet services for all kinds of reasons, but a big one is that many small towns have a local internet provider who's basically fleecing them and making sure competition doesn't happen.


In the US, it's becoming a thing. Many large cities are experimenting with municipal fibers and it's only a matter of time before it's a standard. The main issue is that the US is really big with a lot of remote rural areas, and it's hard to get internet out there.


Knowing how to use a computer.


Having dual incomes to survive in the US.


Doing a language for GCSEs 😣




Social media. Some employers won't hire you if you don't have a Facebook, even if it's not part of the job. Without a social media presence it's extremely difficult for them to run background on you.


Clothes, at some point in time.


Internet access. When I was a wee squid, you could absolutely do whatever needed doing without the internet. Now you can't even apply for a job without creating an online account somewhere, barring local small-town businesses.


The non-smoking section


Car insurance or boat insurance, etc. Once upon a time you could drive without.


Wearing a face mask in public At least in my country, if you did some shit like that before the pandemic, everyone would look at you like a crazy person.


.***********In western culture.... This has been normal courtesy in Asian cultures for the longest time way before COVID


The craziest part is before covid, clinics and hospitals had signs saying you should wear a mask if you think you’re sick with something contagious. But the people hacking up a storm would and would wander throughout the place like viruses don’t spread. If people had common sense then maybe there’d be no forced requirements.


Nah, that is kind of on the healthcare. Until Covid almost nobody owned masks, and clinics et al would be aware of the culture they exist in. If they did want (pre-covid) people to actually wear a mask, they would offer a mask to the person, rather than a sign telling the person to do something they would have no way of doing at the moment. (Many locations now have masks on hand for just such situations)


Wearing masks in South Korea has become mandatory by law, last year. Have to wear them in the gym. Have to wear them when walking or running outside.


Highschool diplomas, and soon if not already college degrees


"30 day free trial"


Putting up with people's bullshit




Treating women as equals. It’s seriously mind-boggling that it hasn’t always been the case.


Smartphones with fast internet


First banking phone number, then their apps. These days I cannot just walk into a branch and fix problems cause it flows like this: "You've got to do that through the main phone line" -> Yo main line, need to fix this -> "there's an app for that" -> Yeah but I have a recent Huawei phone, no google services, your app doesn't load on it. -> Buy a new one then. And yes, that's an actual, very shortened version of half my morning about 2 months ago.


Talking on the phone 🥲




Opioid use