Separate Devices

In 2007, Apple introduced the iPhone in what would redefine the phone as a multi-purpose machine. Steve Jobs introduced it saying:

“An iPod, a Phone, and an Internet Communicator…These are not 3 separate devices. This is one device. And we are calling it iPhone.”

Back then, it seemed revolutionary to have a device that can work as a phone, a music player, and an internet browser. Today, phones can do much more than that, they are essentially mobile computers.

But did we need a multi-purpose mobile computers computer in 2007? Does it make a big positive difference in most people’s lives? In hindsight, do the drawbacks of smartphones now outweigh the benefits? Should we keep using smartphones?

The idea of a multi-purpose technology (also called general-purpose) is an old one. It simply means that a technology can be used for different purposes. Electricity, for example, is a multi-purpose technology that can power many products. The automobile can also be considered a multi-purpose technology that serves several purposes including commute, tourism, cargo, and law enforcement. Similarly, computers are also multi-purpose machines. We can use computers for a multitude of tasks, whether that is for productivity or entertainment. It can be said that the ultimate invention in this space would be a super-intelligent AI system that can do anything, one that is multi-purpose.

However, what works for computers does not necessarily work for people. We usually tend to work best when it is one thing at a time, we find it harder to focus on different things at the same time. Unlike computers and AI software that can consume and manage multiple things well all at once, most of us cannot afford to do that with our current biology. Just because a technology is designed to be multi-purpose, it does not mean we should make use of this feature.

Let’s look at this more closely. When we sit in front of our computers to complete a specific task, our attention would be dictated by our intention. If it is a quick task, one could get a way with it spending little to no time on anything else. However, the more complex the task is, the more likely we’re going to get distracted by other purposes or tasks the device is designed for. This distraction is always present in a computer or a smartphone – the email app, Youtube, and Twitter are always there. There is almost no effort required to switch context. One or two clicks and we are at the mercy of the algorithms and our instincts, a point at which our attention is no longer dictated by intention.

There are multiple issues with this type of digital distraction. First, our attention is unscalable. It is not something that can be enlarged or divided equally. Most people can consciously focus only on one thing at a time, whereas computers can focus on many things running in parallel and switching between tasks does not cost as much as it does for people. Once we are interrupted doing a certain task, it can be a bit harder to rebound.

Second, completing tasks on computers generally do not require any noticeable changes to the body or the surrounding environment. If my work mostly involves looking at the screen, then writing a report is similar to watching a Youtube video because it is likely that it is only my brain that is being engaged. Compare this to cooking, where I need to use different parts of my body to make a meal. I think these almost nonexistent changes to the body or environment (i.e. additional sensory and motor feedback) when working or casually browsing on the computer makes it harder for us to differentiate between our intended task and distractions, between work and play.

Third, the more we repeat a certain behavior the more likely it will become an ingrained habit. We have been using computers and smartphones in both universal and personal ways. Everyone checks their phone notifications once in a while, but few mute all their notifications altogether. We have probably developed some habits over the years that we are trapped in and find it difficult to break out of. If we take distraction as an example, there are many simple fixes we usually encounter, many of which tend to be productivity software promising better time or information management. But it seems that patching a problem introduced by software with another piece of software is not the best way to go ^[1]. It is probably better to reduce the amount of software or experiment with a solution that does without it.

Fourth, digital platforms’ best interest is to acquire and retain users. This means we are not just resisting our instincts and our tendencies to get distracted; we are also going against companies that work hard to convince us to continue using their software. It is always important to remember that what is in the best interest of a user is not always in the best interest of whoever sells the product or service.

Let’s revisit the idea of a multi-purpose technology to reflect on some certain things we can do. In the previous discussion, we saw that the iPhone or any other multi-purpose computer does not necessarily help in completing complex tasks most efficiently. The activity of making a phone call or writing an essay usually includes other accompanying activities such as checking notifications, browsing social media, or replying to messages.

One approach that can help address this issue is the idea of a single-purpose machine, one that mainly has one purpose. The iPhone, as an example, can be easily configured back to a single-purpose machine, back to a phone. Most people probably do not need anything else in their iPhone except the basic features of calls, messages, and I will throw in GPS for adventure. No need for cameras, browsers, emails, music, or social media.

With home computers or laptops, it gets a little bit tricky as most tasks require being online ^[2] . One might have two user profiles on their computer – a profile for personal use and another for work. If you can afford to have two computers, then it might be even better. The hard part, however, is to make it effortful to switch back and forth between personal and work profiles (or laptops) and ideally have a dedicated space that is specifically for work and includes only work-related material.

Another approach is to rely less on software. There are many simple ways to replace activities we do digitally with ones that can be done offline. For example, substituting e-books for printed books, or printing items to read or scroll through such as an article or even social feed. Other ideas can include taking more notes on paper, dedicating sometime to think on paper rather than by looking at the screen, and any other activity that might be easy to take offline.

There are many ways to go about a single-purpose machine or relying less on software. Regarding the former, the suggestion here is to have such a machine where one would only configure and associate it with one particular purpose or function. It is probably a simpler way the brain can handle.

Generally, the way each machine is configured is going to depend on its user, some might find it easy to have more apps in the same machine, while others might find it much better to just have one or two apps. The important part is to make it effortful to get distracted by making it harder to switch tasks or change an environment.

As for introducing substitutes for activities done digitally, it will depend on what kind of work or entertainment one intends on doing and context. For example, if I am traveling, I can allow myself to ‘pack’ all apps in my smartphone, but once I return home I would have to unpack my device and only keep the essentials. Sable Lake has listed many activities that can be done offline, but each person might find more that are relevant to their own context.

---

[1] The main issue here is that self-control is hard. In most cases, one can override any restrictions introduced by a certain routine or software. Maintaining self-control while keeping distractions a click away seems impossible.

[2] At the moment, I think AI chatbots and search engines like ChatGPT and Perplexity provide benefits that can make the web less distracting. One could keep up with the news and search for information quickly without the need to go through ads or other distracting material. But the bigger promise I can see happening is making AI operating systems, where one can just interact with an AI agent that can manage the user’s environment for them, making it easier to separate leisure from work. Tricky, but promising.