It gets me thinking about community agency in technology.
Large scale consumer technology has a lot of central planning in it, by nature of how specialised the skills required to produce many aspects of it are.
But central planning has its tail risks and other downsides as history attests.
I'm curious about how communities can be better empowered to make these choices for themselves, be it how moderation is done on social media, or what features are prioritised in consumer electronics.
I'm interested in a reduced feature phone for myself, strictly to reduce pressure from every bank, pharmacy, clothing store, and supermarket to install their apps. So long as it runs Ankidroid and syncs via CardDav, I'd like a phone with as few features as possible.
The problem is that _my_ two important features are different from _your_ two important features. Almost by definition, no reduced feature phone would be fit for a large audience, unless that large audience has a single common denominator. Like with this Kosher Phone and it's religious target demographic.
Toffler's book Future Shock has some interesting discussion about advanced production techniques allowing high degrees of bespoke customisation with very little additional costs beyond a generic production line.
We're still a long way from there RE smartphones, though projects like the PinePhone with hardware switches for things like microphone, camera, WiFi etc, along with a less locked down OS perhaps show a path to achieving this.
It amazes me how people can compartmentalize their rational brain and their romantic brain and never let the two speak to each other. How can you believe so hard in the supernatural that you feel the need to make a kosher phone, but still be smart enough do it?
Secular society is battling many problems (tech addiction, isolation, burnout, collapse of community etc) which religious society is protected from because of these superficially backwards practices.
As we watch our society grapple with issues that the religious community doesn't suffer from, won't at some point it make sense to question whether we are the rational ones?
To make this point another way, the more people on HN learn about the issues of tech addiction, lack of privacy etc, the more their technological preference "converges" to what you are currently making fun of.
It seems to me that there are two different kinds of "rational" at play here. It might certainly be rational to accept a religious viewpoint and way of life to make use of the positive secondary effects you mention, but this won't make the core belief (here, belief in a god) any more rational, no? I'm interested in your take on this.
// but this won't make the core belief (here, belief in a god) any more rational, no? I'm interested in your take on this.
I actually really enjoy this kind of discourse and happy to connect in some direct way if you are interested. But here's one train of thought.
A rabbi and an atheist are debating whether there is a creator. The atheist says "there isn't. The universe just randomly happened to be."
The rabbi asks if the man reads the NY times and the man says yes. The rabbi says "you know how that got printed, right? In the morning, a paper truck collided with an ink truck and it just happened to come out as the times". The man says there's no way that happened, the NY times is too complex to come out as an outcome of the accident. The rabbi replies: if the times is too complex to occur randomly, how much less likely that the universe, which is infinitely more complex "just happened" to be.
That's just the flavor of the ideas. An animal does not contemplate the origin of the world, neither does a simple man. A lightly educated man can be told that the universe just is, and can accept that. A deeply questioning man is not satisfied with that explanation.
If you are genuinely interested, you can look into Jewish views on science and how much of what for a long time seemed like fairy tales in religion is actually aligned with scientific thought.
Eg on the topic of creation. Science did not know until the 20th century that the universe did not exist one moment and existed the next (the big bang) but religion knew it all along. In fact big bang was first theorized by a Catholic priest. That doesn't prove the existence of G-d as that's a matter of faith, but it speaks to the intellectual rigor of advanced religious thought.
I think Richard Dawkins answered it in the most profound way in his book "The Blind Watchmaker". I don't want to do it unjust by explaining it here with my broken English.
Certainly, I have written you an email to the address used in your GitHub commits. If you no longer use that address, mine should be visible on my HN about.
Indeed, but this is not unique to religious people. I've been deeply religious and I've been very secular, and one of the things I've learned is that smart people can believe incredibly dumb things.
The real hard question we each need to answer is to determine which really dumb things we believe despite our intelligence.
PS Isaac Newton spent a large portion of his life on alchemy and the hidden mysterious of the Bible. We all have blind spots, we just don't know they're there.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough or didn't interduce myself well, so let me try to fix it. I'm a secular Jew by birth. I was born and raised in Israel. I looked at this project more like a child phone that parents will buy for their kids to be safe and able to call for help if needed, but still protect them from unwanted exposure to an inappropriate Internet content without the required parental guidance. I didn't try to change anyone's way of living. Anyone who knows any orthodox community (there are plenty with many differences, Amish for instance) knows how rigid and inflexible they tend to be regarding technology. In my opinion, this tiny and silly project was just going to help them without compromising their values, something they will not do anyway. It was the time were feature phones and smart phones still existed next to each other, and our customers might have been the few people in the world that were upset from the fact that a device that used to be able to only make phone calls can now be used to browse the Internet. If you want to learn more about the project, I've presented everything back at RECon 2014 https://youtu.be/AMkD75tPRDI
I think there is something in minimalism that is abundantly attractive. To stick with the religious subject, I wonder how the human attraction to simple elegance relates to the concept of divine simplicity. Very interesting stuff.
- the term kosher applies directly to food, not technology; this is a metaphor
- the insularity of a particular subgroup of Jews should not be considered to apply to all the rest of us. Even for most Orthodox Jews, turning off your phone Friday evening and turning it back on Saturday evening is a perfectly cromulent option.
In Israel these phones are referred to as "פלאפון כשר" [1] which most definitely means Kosher Phone, so the name is apt despite the lack of religious rigor. It's definitely aimed at the ultra-orthodox communities.
As someone who grew up Haredi enough that my first cell phone was a so called "kosher phone" but not haredi enough that I would take that pashkevil seriously... who comes up with this stuff? Like... cell phones cause cancer? I thought everyone knew that was women's elbows?? I guess both can cause cancer, but only one can be "enemy #1"
> the term kosher applies directly to food, not
> technology; this is a metaphor
Kosher means "fit for purpose" and is often used for items other than food. For one example, during the Sukot holiday it is customary to erect and eat in tents. Due to shody construction and safety issues, not to mention adherence to biblical prescription of certain tent features, there exist "kosher" tents which one can buy and know that it is fit for purpose.
Yeah, here's the thing: I'll happily use it that way when I'm talking with other Jews.
But most of the world is goyim, and an awful lot of people don't know what they're talking about. They hear "kosher phone" and immediately their minds turn to wondering if there are phones that Jews can't use. I have been asked on multiple occasions if I only buy kosher pickles, and once whether it was cultural appropriation for non-Jews to buy kosher salt.
So when someone decides to label a phone as kosher, I think an explanatory note is in order. There are no halachic requirements for phones that don't also apply to lights and fireplaces.
I doubt you meant to use it this way, but that word is seen by many as an offensive slur against non-Jews. It's frequently used in a way that has racist and derogatory undertones. Googling "goyim" returns some colorful results.
I'm glad you've never heard "goyim" used in a derogatory manner, whereas I have. Tone is difficult to infer from plain text. To avoid confusion, I recommend you use other groups and races' preferred labels when speaking about them in public. This is advice I follow and have found to be a good rule.
Just so you know I'm not making this up; Merriam-Webster lists "goy" as "sometimes disparaging":
I agree that HuffPo chose the wrong term there. There's nothing particularly apropos about Bannon not being Jewish, and HuffPo is not a Jewish organization.
I repeat: feel free to call out people who are being derogatory, no matter what the term. Banning words regardless of context hurts everyone.
so this is my critique of you here. You are talking about the need to "code switch" in terms of talking "jewish" and talking "english". i.e. "kosher" when one talks "jewish" can mean one thing, but when one talks "english" it generally about food. But then, you don't code switch about "goyim" when it should be simply "non-jews" if one is trying to speak "english". And this is where the concept can be insulting. if one is claiming one is speaking english, using the word goyim isn't simply saying "non jews", its about othering them. i.e. you are purposefully not code switching (or am, depending on one's POV) that term. That can be problematic.
I'd also disagree that kosher just means food in plain english. Plenty of non jews are known to say "that's not kosher" (i.e. as in "not right") in things that have nothing to do with food.
"Ha lecha" would mean "the phlegm". "Ha lacha" could mean "the moist", but I think GP tried to use the apostrophe to lengthen the first syllable in the single word "halacha" so it would read HAlacha and not haLAcha.
Good source, an even better source is the very first Mishna in Tractate Sukkah [0] which uses the Hebrew form of the word kosher several times to refer to a Sukka. It's used as both an adjective ("כשרה") and a verb ("מכשירין" - using the Aramaic form of pluralization).
Interestingly, the opposite of kosher in this mishna is פסול, which I'd translate as "invalid".
Also interesting is the apparent relationship between the word כשר and the modern Hebrew מכשיר, meaning "device", or "thing that does something specific".
Edit: took me another moment to realize the root is used a lot in modern Hebrew, such as in the word כושר (ironically pronounced like the English kosher), which means (physical) fitness.
How is the rule of not using your phone during that time managed when someone has to be on call in a company? And as a doctor? (I guess that the restrictions are different)
sabbath observant jews generally aren't on call for tech matters. Doctors are on call, and will answer their phone, but that's because there's a fundamental difference between tech on call and doctor on call. one is directly about saving lives, the other is not.
It's common to see orthodox jewish doctors who are on call, walk out of a synagouge while praying to take a call. Or for emergency medics to have a walkie talkie that they can be buzzed on if they have to go to an emergency call.
We could get into a discussion about the details of what that means and how a society can function when people would die if certain things aren't taken care of (say maintaining the electrical grid), but that's beyond the scope of this forum. At the most simplistic level, I'd equate it to round the world tech support. We don't need people in one place being able to stay up 24/7 to provide 24/7 support, we can have people located in many different parts of the world handing off the baton as planet rotates. So the same would be true for the sabbath observant techie on call. Most likely its possible for someone else to do it. Of course, this is more complicated in Israel (than say in the US) where the person doing the call will more likely be jewish, but again, that's getting into the weeds and beyond the scope of this forum. In the US, you'd probably see orthodox jewish tech coworkers doing sat night/sunday calls but not friday night/saturday calls for weekend calls.
This may be lost on you but perhaps can be clear to others. You woke up on a Saturday morning, made a new account, just to post an anti religious/anti Jewish comment.
What's your life/set of priorities/spiritual balance like?
My mother is Israeli. I’m an atheist in New York pissed off at how many of “my people” live off the welfare while the rest of us bust asses to put a roof over our head.
The haredim live fat off of our taxes and put targets on our backs. They literally have jack booted thugs, “private security” walking around new york keeping non-haredim out of their enclaves.
Wherever you are, if an orthodox jew has a dollar or a scheckel to spend, 9/10 times it came from public assistance. These “kosher” phones designed to help haredim hide from the outside world are paid for by your tax dollars.
// These “kosher” phones designed to help haredim hide from the outside world are paid for by your tax dollars.
Would you feel comfortable saying in polite society "whenever you see one of these (insert race/group) talking on their Obama-phone, these are paid for by your tax dollars?"
Whatever your background, you are spewing vitriol that says much more about you than anyone else.
> Would you feel comfortable saying in polite society "whenever
> you see one of these (insert race/group) talking on their
> Obama-phone, these are paid for by your tax dollars?"
You don't need to take offense for some other demographic that you are unfamiliar with. Different cultures have different values, and some stereotypes based on these different values are true.
In this case, it might not be 9/10 but GP is correct that a significant fraction of the people that GP is condemning live off of donations and government subsidies. It is part of their culture.
Don't be so afraid to identify the negative aspects of some cultures. They exist.
> In this case, it might not be 9/10 but GP is correct that a significant fraction of the people that GP is condemning live off of donations and government subsidies. It is part of their culture.
Excuse my ignorance...but is this true? The bit about their culture including living off donations or subsidies etc.. I had not heard that before - could you share some more information about that?
From what I've been told - not by members of the community but from those who oppose them - these people believe that they don't have time to work. They are too busying studying Torah.
You should know, these people are a very small minority in our country and do not represent the rest of us. It is a small part of my taxes that go to these people, but obviously many people take issue with it.
It is a non sequitur that negatively generalizes Jews as guilty of the actions committed by a very small subset of Jews. This is anti-Semitic. It is similar to coming into the comments of a post about Ramadan and declaring that Muslims are terrorists.
> It is a non sequitur that negatively generalizes $X as guilty of the actions committed by a very small subset of $X. This is anti-$X.
Welcome to the Internet, and welcome to the club! This is a significant fraction of all social activity, it seems. People are into tribes, evidently.
2.
This whole thing depends on how the relevant categories are perceived. I think things are different in Israel than they are in, say, the United States.
In Israel, the ulta-orthodox are a distinct category, and mainstream/centrist/reform people will criticize them.
In the United States, people see the categories from further away, and they blur together into "Jewish", which causes both anti-Semitism, and reflexive defense of "my people" (even if they are not actually your people).
Second-generation kids from all manner of immigrant backgrounds have similar problems. They'll identify with extremist elements of "the homeland", because they think $MAJORITY/$NATIONALITY is the important dichotomy. When really, in the "homeland", there is some other political dichotomy which is actually important. And which they have been able to ignore, because they've lived in the United States.
A good example is a particular generation of Irish-Americans, who supported the IRA. Current examples include ABCs and ABDs. The relationship between them and those who stayed is complicated. Eventually the latter becomes a kind of mascot adopted by the former: "Notre Dame: The Fighting Irish!"
The best cure for this is to let people spend time visiting "the homeland", so they can come to realize that they're not from there any more.
This applies now to the situation in Israel. Peoples' allegiances are based on imagined categories, and those allegiances are not always reciprocated.
3. To emphasize my philosophical point:
> It is similar to coming into the comments of a post about Ramadan and declaring that Muslims are terrorists.
This implicitly requires an answer to the question: What -- or, I should say, Who -- is a Muslim? Who is a Jew? Who is a Gentile? This expands to every category.
4.
Similar questions now plague the United States. Who is Of Color? What does it mean to be White? Are you Black or are you Kanye?
There are a lot of boundaries. Circles cut around a collection of individuals, in the mind, to mark them.
> A Kosher phone would be an adapted feature phone to the “special” needs of a certain community of the Ultra Orthodox Jews. The community in target asked for a phone that is more dumb than the dumb phone, a phone that suffers from complete retardation. The general idea is that they don’t want to be open to the outside world in any way, but they still want a means to communicate between themselves without breaking the strict boundaries they made.
An interesting challenge. I imagine the market is large enough to support such a device.
If the (admittedly dramatised) TV shows are to be believed, half of them also have non-kosher phones on the sly. Religion is part pretence. (edit: word)
> Religion is part performance
Yeah...? Religious people want to build a society which fit there view of how things should be, of course they "perform" actions which reinforce it. Literally everybody, every single person, does this.
"Shtisel", my favorite show of this genre, just released its third season on Netflix. Seems like every ultra-Orthodox character in the show had a flip phone. I didn't get the impression that the phones were prohibited, though. Either way, great show that I highly recommend.
There's a need for services that get around this kind of censorship in the same way we have VPNs for state censorship. But the challenges are very different, obviously.
I remember helping a family member still in the community, but after I had left, using an email-as-the-browser service to get around the kosher phone some time back (not sure if this is still possible with the current kosher phone version). I realized something like that must exist so I found https://www.labnol.org/internet/receive-web-pages-by-email/1... for them. But that service doesn't seem to work anymore.
A different family member works on the opposite side, people call him to whitelist websites from their kosher filtering software so they can visit it. He has to check it out and then allows it if it is ok. But having these filters is a requirement for having a PC.
There are plenty of ultra-orthodox people with smartphones and then there are those with no phones at all...
They have a severe lack of information which brings them to rely upon their leaders (rabbis) for every single piece of advice, even not pertaining to their religious needs directly.
Ultra-orthodox people (I hate that term, in Israel they self identify as Haredi) are not a monolith. There are many communities with different standards, and there is a spectrum of behavior within most of those communities. There are things they all agree on, smartphone use is not one is them.
I'm not Jewish, or any sort of expert on Judaism, but I understand that Judaism has a very different conception of the relationship of man, god, and law than Christianity.
The Christian god wants people to behave in a certain way, and has made laws accordingly. Following the letter of the law but not the spirit is defying god, and is bad.
The Jewish god has made laws as a test of faith. Following the letter of the law but not the spirit is creative, and is fine.
There's an interesting conversation to be had about different conceptions of God and the reasons for religious law and whether loopholes in the law should be exploited or not, which would be relevant if this was an article about eruv or prozbol or selling land during the shmitta year.
But I fail to see how this is relevant to kosher phones. How is God being tricked? The claim is that God desires purity, which is damaged by unfiltered exposure to the outside world, and so adherents who want cell phones must purchase models that will not give them easy access to temptation.
It's a pretty reasonable position if you accept the initial premise. It's like not buying heroin because you know it's harmful.
It was a bunch of years ago, but my first cell phone was a "kosher phone". A feature phone with no camera, no sms, no internet. It had the word "מאושר" (approved) engraved on it.
it's arguably much easier (nowadays) to use an off-the-shelf app like TimeLimit[0] to achieve the same kind of functionality on smartphones, without ever having to flash custom firmware using undocumented/unsupported techniques. Granted, back in <=2014 this probably made more sense.
as an aside, why do all the jewish religion topics always get posted on the sabbath when most readers of HN who live the life related aren't around to reply?
76 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 125 ms ] threadLarge scale consumer technology has a lot of central planning in it, by nature of how specialised the skills required to produce many aspects of it are.
But central planning has its tail risks and other downsides as history attests.
I'm curious about how communities can be better empowered to make these choices for themselves, be it how moderation is done on social media, or what features are prioritised in consumer electronics.
The problem is that _my_ two important features are different from _your_ two important features. Almost by definition, no reduced feature phone would be fit for a large audience, unless that large audience has a single common denominator. Like with this Kosher Phone and it's religious target demographic.
We're still a long way from there RE smartphones, though projects like the PinePhone with hardware switches for things like microphone, camera, WiFi etc, along with a less locked down OS perhaps show a path to achieving this.
Secular society is battling many problems (tech addiction, isolation, burnout, collapse of community etc) which religious society is protected from because of these superficially backwards practices.
As we watch our society grapple with issues that the religious community doesn't suffer from, won't at some point it make sense to question whether we are the rational ones?
To make this point another way, the more people on HN learn about the issues of tech addiction, lack of privacy etc, the more their technological preference "converges" to what you are currently making fun of.
I actually really enjoy this kind of discourse and happy to connect in some direct way if you are interested. But here's one train of thought.
A rabbi and an atheist are debating whether there is a creator. The atheist says "there isn't. The universe just randomly happened to be."
The rabbi asks if the man reads the NY times and the man says yes. The rabbi says "you know how that got printed, right? In the morning, a paper truck collided with an ink truck and it just happened to come out as the times". The man says there's no way that happened, the NY times is too complex to come out as an outcome of the accident. The rabbi replies: if the times is too complex to occur randomly, how much less likely that the universe, which is infinitely more complex "just happened" to be.
That's just the flavor of the ideas. An animal does not contemplate the origin of the world, neither does a simple man. A lightly educated man can be told that the universe just is, and can accept that. A deeply questioning man is not satisfied with that explanation.
If you are genuinely interested, you can look into Jewish views on science and how much of what for a long time seemed like fairy tales in religion is actually aligned with scientific thought.
Eg on the topic of creation. Science did not know until the 20th century that the universe did not exist one moment and existed the next (the big bang) but religion knew it all along. In fact big bang was first theorized by a Catholic priest. That doesn't prove the existence of G-d as that's a matter of faith, but it speaks to the intellectual rigor of advanced religious thought.
The real hard question we each need to answer is to determine which really dumb things we believe despite our intelligence.
PS Isaac Newton spent a large portion of his life on alchemy and the hidden mysterious of the Bible. We all have blind spots, we just don't know they're there.
- the term kosher applies directly to food, not technology; this is a metaphor
- the insularity of a particular subgroup of Jews should not be considered to apply to all the rest of us. Even for most Orthodox Jews, turning off your phone Friday evening and turning it back on Saturday evening is a perfectly cromulent option.
[1] Pashkevil from an ultra-orthodox community warning people off the internet and not to use non-kosher phones: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%98%D7%A8...
Source: דובר עברית
But most of the world is goyim, and an awful lot of people don't know what they're talking about. They hear "kosher phone" and immediately their minds turn to wondering if there are phones that Jews can't use. I have been asked on multiple occasions if I only buy kosher pickles, and once whether it was cultural appropriation for non-Jews to buy kosher salt.
So when someone decides to label a phone as kosher, I think an explanatory note is in order. There are no halachic requirements for phones that don't also apply to lights and fireplaces.
I doubt you meant to use it this way, but that word is seen by many as an offensive slur against non-Jews. It's frequently used in a way that has racist and derogatory undertones. Googling "goyim" returns some colorful results.
I suppose one could use it derogatorily, but that's not my experience.
I assure you that context is everything. When Jews say "Jews", we just mean Jews. And when lots of goyim say "Jews", they mean "sub-human monsters".
Please feel free to censor your own language. And if you see me use "goyim" to be offensive, feel free to call me out on that.
Just so you know I'm not making this up; Merriam-Webster lists "goy" as "sometimes disparaging":
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goy
Use of this word in 2017 got Huffington Post in trouble with the Anti-Defamation League, and others who felt it was over the line:
https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/huffpost-bannon-headlin...
I repeat: feel free to call out people who are being derogatory, no matter what the term. Banning words regardless of context hurts everyone.
I'd also disagree that kosher just means food in plain english. Plenty of non jews are known to say "that's not kosher" (i.e. as in "not right") in things that have nothing to do with food.
The equivalent in Islam is sharia and fiqh.
The equivalent in Catholicism is called canon law.
Interestingly, the opposite of kosher in this mishna is פסול, which I'd translate as "invalid".
Also interesting is the apparent relationship between the word כשר and the modern Hebrew מכשיר, meaning "device", or "thing that does something specific".
Edit: took me another moment to realize the root is used a lot in modern Hebrew, such as in the word כושר (ironically pronounced like the English kosher), which means (physical) fitness.
[0] https://he.m.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%94_%D...
Everyone here is discussing Hebrew and semantics but I see what you did.
They aren't supposed to be using the internet, speaking to people of other genders... sending and receiving multi-media, etc.
It's common to see orthodox jewish doctors who are on call, walk out of a synagouge while praying to take a call. Or for emergency medics to have a walkie talkie that they can be buzzed on if they have to go to an emergency call.
We could get into a discussion about the details of what that means and how a society can function when people would die if certain things aren't taken care of (say maintaining the electrical grid), but that's beyond the scope of this forum. At the most simplistic level, I'd equate it to round the world tech support. We don't need people in one place being able to stay up 24/7 to provide 24/7 support, we can have people located in many different parts of the world handing off the baton as planet rotates. So the same would be true for the sabbath observant techie on call. Most likely its possible for someone else to do it. Of course, this is more complicated in Israel (than say in the US) where the person doing the call will more likely be jewish, but again, that's getting into the weeds and beyond the scope of this forum. In the US, you'd probably see orthodox jewish tech coworkers doing sat night/sunday calls but not friday night/saturday calls for weekend calls.
Enslaves palestinians
Collects welfare checks for your 15 children
Lets you sit around reading the talmud, paid for at the expensive of responsible tax payers
90% of ultra orthodox jews have their entire lives paid for by taxpayers. The true welfare queens of our world
What's your life/set of priorities/spiritual balance like?
The haredim live fat off of our taxes and put targets on our backs. They literally have jack booted thugs, “private security” walking around new york keeping non-haredim out of their enclaves.
Wherever you are, if an orthodox jew has a dollar or a scheckel to spend, 9/10 times it came from public assistance. These “kosher” phones designed to help haredim hide from the outside world are paid for by your tax dollars.
Would you feel comfortable saying in polite society "whenever you see one of these (insert race/group) talking on their Obama-phone, these are paid for by your tax dollars?"
Whatever your background, you are spewing vitriol that says much more about you than anyone else.
In this case, it might not be 9/10 but GP is correct that a significant fraction of the people that GP is condemning live off of donations and government subsidies. It is part of their culture.
Don't be so afraid to identify the negative aspects of some cultures. They exist.
Excuse my ignorance...but is this true? The bit about their culture including living off donations or subsidies etc.. I had not heard that before - could you share some more information about that?
You should know, these people are a very small minority in our country and do not represent the rest of us. It is a small part of my taxes that go to these people, but obviously many people take issue with it.
It is a non sequitur that negatively generalizes Jews as guilty of the actions committed by a very small subset of Jews. This is anti-Semitic. It is similar to coming into the comments of a post about Ramadan and declaring that Muslims are terrorists.
> It is a non sequitur that negatively generalizes $X as guilty of the actions committed by a very small subset of $X. This is anti-$X.
Welcome to the Internet, and welcome to the club! This is a significant fraction of all social activity, it seems. People are into tribes, evidently.
2.
This whole thing depends on how the relevant categories are perceived. I think things are different in Israel than they are in, say, the United States.
In Israel, the ulta-orthodox are a distinct category, and mainstream/centrist/reform people will criticize them.
In the United States, people see the categories from further away, and they blur together into "Jewish", which causes both anti-Semitism, and reflexive defense of "my people" (even if they are not actually your people).
Second-generation kids from all manner of immigrant backgrounds have similar problems. They'll identify with extremist elements of "the homeland", because they think $MAJORITY/$NATIONALITY is the important dichotomy. When really, in the "homeland", there is some other political dichotomy which is actually important. And which they have been able to ignore, because they've lived in the United States.
A good example is a particular generation of Irish-Americans, who supported the IRA. Current examples include ABCs and ABDs. The relationship between them and those who stayed is complicated. Eventually the latter becomes a kind of mascot adopted by the former: "Notre Dame: The Fighting Irish!"
The best cure for this is to let people spend time visiting "the homeland", so they can come to realize that they're not from there any more.
This applies now to the situation in Israel. Peoples' allegiances are based on imagined categories, and those allegiances are not always reciprocated.
3. To emphasize my philosophical point:
> It is similar to coming into the comments of a post about Ramadan and declaring that Muslims are terrorists.
This implicitly requires an answer to the question: What -- or, I should say, Who -- is a Muslim? Who is a Jew? Who is a Gentile? This expands to every category.
4.
Similar questions now plague the United States. Who is Of Color? What does it mean to be White? Are you Black or are you Kanye?
There are a lot of boundaries. Circles cut around a collection of individuals, in the mind, to mark them.
An interesting challenge. I imagine the market is large enough to support such a device.
If by "them" you mean religious community as a whole, this statement is true.
If by "them" you mean actual users, this statement is a lie
This kind of devices are forced on users by community leaders as a method of limiting access to independent information.
Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. --Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Give us a child till he’s 7 and we’ll have him for life. -- St. Ignatius / Jesuit saying.
He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future. - ...
I remember helping a family member still in the community, but after I had left, using an email-as-the-browser service to get around the kosher phone some time back (not sure if this is still possible with the current kosher phone version). I realized something like that must exist so I found https://www.labnol.org/internet/receive-web-pages-by-email/1... for them. But that service doesn't seem to work anymore.
A different family member works on the opposite side, people call him to whitelist websites from their kosher filtering software so they can visit it. He has to check it out and then allows it if it is ok. But having these filters is a requirement for having a PC.
They have a severe lack of information which brings them to rely upon their leaders (rabbis) for every single piece of advice, even not pertaining to their religious needs directly.
The Christian god wants people to behave in a certain way, and has made laws accordingly. Following the letter of the law but not the spirit is defying god, and is bad.
The Jewish god has made laws as a test of faith. Following the letter of the law but not the spirit is creative, and is fine.
After all, "it is not in heaven": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai
But I fail to see how this is relevant to kosher phones. How is God being tricked? The claim is that God desires purity, which is damaged by unfiltered exposure to the outside world, and so adherents who want cell phones must purchase models that will not give them easy access to temptation.
It's a pretty reasonable position if you accept the initial premise. It's like not buying heroin because you know it's harmful.
AMA
[0]: https://timelimit.io/en/