What Do Smart Phones (Partially) Replace?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anorlunda
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Smartphones have significantly replaced various everyday objects, leading to a discussion on their multifunctionality. Items such as clocks, calculators, cameras, and even social interactions have been noted as partially replaced by smartphones. Participants in the discussion contributed to a growing list of over 200 items that smartphones can substitute, highlighting their role in enhancing convenience and portability. The conversation also touched on the balance between the benefits of smartphones and the preference for traditional methods. Ultimately, smartphones have transformed how people engage with technology and daily tasks.
  • #151
More: 1. Scanner Radio (as an app) [includes UHF/VHF radio etc.] 2. Microphone (as an app) [and voice amplifier].
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #152
I thought Mr. Spock still had to be born. Perhaps he will roll over in his cradle?
 
  • #153
65📲🚗🔐🔓 Control the car and rotating its engine
 
  • #154
I didn't see this application on the list of 200, but maybe it's been mentioned since we crossed that goal line.

Recently the EMS company that I work for started using the app "When I Work" to do scheduling and as a time clock to clock-in and clock-out of shifts. It even uses the GPS feature of your phone to make sure you are in the right location to start your shift. That usually works okay, unless you are in a remote location where GPS is shadowed, or there is limited cell phone coverage...

241977


Replaces:

241978
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu and Stavros Kiri
  • #155
Post #154 represents a misuse of technology that is not yet sufficiently developed.
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
  • #156
Other ones:
1) Signal jam detector (app)
2) Mutual [authorised] location [detection] (via GPS) for groups of people (apps)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes anorlunda and jedishrfu
  • #157
Bluetooth enabled card skimmers at gas stations.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Likes Stavros Kiri and berkeman
  • #158
Stavros Kiri said:
2) Mutual [authorised] location [detection] (via GPS) for groups of people (apps)

The word authorized makes me smile. What allows authorized uses and disallows unauthorized ones?

I think Chinese officials in Hong Kong today would authorize themselves to collect the ID of all phones in the vicinity of protests.

I read of crooks in Europe who tracked the location of encrypted signals (phones? radios?) used by police. They didn't need to decrypt, just to detect the signals and locations. They used that to get advanced notice of police raids. I guess the trackers were authorized by the cartel bosses.
 
  • Like
Likes Stavros Kiri and berkeman
  • #159
anorlunda said:
The word authorized makes me smile. What allows authorized uses and disallows unauthorized ones?
In this case I meant mutual authorization among the users (of the app), in the group
("I authorize you [or basically the app (to convey that information to you)] to track my location [via the GPS based app], and vice versa"). In other words WE give authorizations and approvals to who we allow to track us [in a group] ... , and make requests to who we want to track ...
(Useful e.g. in tourist groups, or even best for families [e.g. for the protection of kids, etc.] ...)Another useful category of [GPS based] apps: ~ "Safe & Sound" (in case of emergency, you alarm [or being alarmed], being tracked and helped thereafter ...).
[This works for single individuals as well as for groups ...]
 
  • #160
smartphone is more useful, if to use it only for wi-fi. Then less cheating on you like spying & viruses + prolonged life for battery. :)
 
  • #161
I would've never thought of this one: Welding helmet.

 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes I like Serena, Stavros Kiri, anorlunda and 3 others
  • #162
jack action said:
I would've never thought of this one: Welding helmet.
Is there ever any damage to the camera sensor? I guess the user keeps it all on the move which is the equivalent of a screen saver at the other end.
I have an old iPhone and I could try it It could be better than my automatic welding helmet which needs very strong lighting to allow me to see details before the arc is struck. Otoh, the phone system seems to wash out around the brightest parts of the arc. It could all be down to my eyes rather than the system.
Lovely bit of ingenuity though.
 
  • #163
jack action said:
I would've never thought of this one: Welding helmet.

Isn't this basically use of the camera? (i.e. in that sense already covered ... (?) )
 
  • #164
Not just the same. It uses the compression of the contrast ratio of the camera system as eye protection so I would say it's a significant addition to the applications. There are a lot more tenuous suggestions further up the thread.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron, Stavros Kiri, anorlunda and 2 others
  • #165
sophiecentaur said:
Not just the same. It uses the compression of the contrast ratio of the camera system as eye protection so I would say it's a significant addition to the applications. There are a lot more tenuous suggestions further up the thread.
I get you mean. Agreed
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #166
Stavros Kiri said:
Isn't this basically use of the camera?
Yes but the size and shape also contribute. I think it's very clever.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #167
anorlunda said:
Yes but the size and shape also contribute. I think it's very clever.
True, however as camera alone there can be dosens (if not more) individual, more specialized uses. Are we to count all these separately, as new numbers in the list, or just 'camera, [+video, etc.]'? That's the real question. E.g. one more smart one (if not included already - is it? - I do not recall at the moment): "surveillance camera (e.g. for home, garage etc.) [near control or even remote via e.g. Skype or remote use functions of the phone etc. ...]"
 
  • #168
Stavros Kiri said:
Are we to count all these separately, as new numbers in the list, or just 'camera, [+video, etc.]'?
I think you may be giving this question an over-rigorous PF-type treatment. It is only a bit of fun so don't get too worked up about it. If you want really good, endless entertainment with a topic you can really get your teeth into, just follow the aeroplane lift discussions.
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
  • #169
sophiecentaur said:
I think you may be giving this question an over-rigorous PF-type treatment. It is only a bit of fun so don't get too worked up about it. If you want really good, endless entertainment with a topic you can really get your teeth into, just follow the aeroplane lift discussions.
What kind of a peply is that?! (and also endorsed with a like by the OP, who also happens to be a mentor ! ... ...)

Watch for a minute what you're saying:
"I think you may be giving this question an over-rigorous PF-type treatment."
We're always supposed to be doing this on PF, aren't we? (otherwise we're going to e.g. have mentors come after us ...) This is engineering forum, not e.g. general discussion forum (but even there they demand within topic accuracy etc. - they even can remove jokes on a jokes thread, for god shake), and the rules for the topic SET by the OP said not to double count, for example (etc.) ...
I think I'm just trying to be consistent, that's all, I'm not just trying to play here! ...

"It is only a bit of fun so don't get too worked up about it. If you want really good, endless entertainment with a topic you can really get your teeth into, just follow the aeroplane lift discussions."
What am I being "accused for"? For being rigorous or for wanting to have fun?! I THINK YOU'RE BEING CONTRADICTORY yourself.
And what are you suggesting exactly?! I don't understand! And what does the "aeroplane lift discussions" have to do with it?! (possible interpretation: that you're being sarcastic. Are you?)
Or is it "being rigorous" a way of having fun? (It could be, I do not object, but that's not the point or my point here, which is staying and being consistent [and PF consistent] with the rest of the thread and topic and rules set by the OP himself etc.)

My reply (this one) is friendly of course (i.e. I am not irritated or offended in any way), but instead somebody could have better answered my initial question instead, which was perfectly on topic! (and had subquestions in it). That's PF rules.
 
Last edited:
  • #170
I agree with @sophiecentaur . We have no rigorous definitions in this thread. It is mostly just fun.

Perhaps this topic should have been under general discussions, but it's late for that now.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #171
anorlunda said:
I agree with @sophiecentaur . We have no rigorous definitions in this thread. It is mostly just fun.

Perhaps this topic should have been under general discussions, but it's late for that now.
I think the topic is fitting well here, as smartphones are important tools by now, everywhere ...
 
  • #172
Stavros Kiri said:
I think the topic is fitting well here, as smartphones are important tools by now, everywhere ...
Hammers are important tools, too and the Physics of hammers is actually very absorbing - and good Physics. Things that you can use hammers for has a bit of mileage - momentum, kinetic energy and levers. But hitting blue nails or red nails would have limited appeal and would probably not take 179+ Posts. 😉
No one should get upset about a small fun-poke here.
 
  • #173
sophiecentaur said:
Hammers are important tools, too and the Physics of hammers is actually very absorbing - and good Physics. Things that you can use hammers for has a bit of mileage - momentum, kinetic energy and levers. But hitting blue nails or red nails would have limited appeal and would probably not take 179+ Posts. 😉
No one should get upset about a small fun-poke here.
Welding helmets do have more appeal though, and I liked that idea too (truly brilliant, innovative and useful), as already agreed.
Not upset. Of course. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #174
Stavros Kiri said:
I get you mean. Agreed
Correction (typo): "I get what you mean. Agreed"
 
  • #175
sophiecentaur said:
Not just the same. It uses the compression of the contrast ratio of the camera system as eye protection so I would say it's a significant addition to the applications. There are a lot more tenuous suggestions further up the thread.
Using that same smart idea I used my phone as protection etc. to view the recent solar eclipse. So, here's one more: Solar [Eclipse] Glasses ...
[It worked + taking pictures too ...]
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #176
Stavros Kiri said:
Using that same smart idea I used my phone as protection etc. to view the recent solar eclipse. So, here's one more: Solar [Eclipse] Glasses ...
[It worked + taking pictures too ...]
That system may not always be safe for the poor old sensor. A camera with a shutter and mechanical aperture stop will limit the possible damage to a sensor but phones don't have that. Otoh, the lens is small so perhaps the power flux is safe. Not like an f1.7 50mm SLR lens!
 
  • #177
sophiecentaur said:
That system may not always be safe for the poor old sensor. A camera with a shutter and mechanical aperture stop will limit the possible damage to a sensor but phones don't have that. Otoh, the lens is small so perhaps the power flux is safe. Not like an f1.7 50mm SLR lens!
I just put the camera in 'Auto'. As far as I know it's safe. I've never seen any damage on any phone with that, and I take pictures with sun on the back or center all the time (& with a variety of phones) ...
This has also been discussed (I think) in an eclipse forum, a while ago.
 
  • #178
Stavros Kiri said:
I just put the camera in 'Auto'.
I don't think that would help because the sensor is not covered by a mechanical shutter. It has to be because the lens is so tiny - a fraction of the power going in, compared with a big camera.
Yep, I remember that solar imaging item. The problem with solar photos is that, for anything other than very basic images, you need a very narrow band Hydrogen Alpha filter which involves an etalon and lots of money. Sunspots are doable though, if you can force a much reduced exposure value.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #179
sophiecentaur said:
I don't think that would help because the sensor is not covered by a mechanical shutter. It has to be because the lens is so tiny - a fraction of the power going in, compared with a big camera.
Yep, I remember that solar imaging item. The problem with solar photos is that, for anything other than very basic images, you need a very narrow band Hydrogen Alpha filter which involves an etalon and lots of money. Sunspots are doable though, if you can force a much reduced exposure value.
(Sorry for the delay in replying) I'm not very familiar how phone cameras and sensors work (you probably know more), just out of practice.
How much of what you say also becomes a problem too though in the original welding helmet idea? ...
 
  • #180
Stavros Kiri said:
How much of what you say also becomes a problem too though in the original welding helmet idea? ...
Clearly it's not a problem cos we can see it working and not for the first time on the video. But the flux density from the arc, viewed from a distance of a few tens of cm will probably be less than the Solar constant, anyway. A bigger risk is to get some molten steel droplet landing on the lens. A glass / plastic screen would probably be a good idea. Those spatters get everywhere - hands, clothes and anything else on the bench.
 
  • Like
Likes Stavros Kiri
  • #181
sophiecentaur said:
Clearly it's not a problem cos we can see it working and not for the first time on the video. But the flux density from the arc, viewed from a distance of a few tens of cm will probably be less than the Solar constant, anyway. A bigger risk is to get some molten steel droplet landing on the lens. A glass / plastic screen would probably be a good idea. Those spatters get everywhere - hands, clothes and anything else on the bench.
It makes sense
 
  • #182
https://www.wired.com/story/smartphones-ukraine-civilian-combatant/

Ay ay ay. I never visualized this one. Below are the plus and minus sides of the same news item.
  1. On the positive side, civilians with smart phones can aid their country's forces using smartphone apps. One app, said to be used in Ukraine, looks for images of the enemy. When spotted, it transmits the coordinates back to their country's automated artillery. A salvo of shells could start landing on the enemy in just seconds. That's very lethal. What citizen could resist helping?
  2. On the negative side, since almost every citizen carries a smart phone, every citizen may be presumed to be a combatant. The Geneva conventions that say you can kill combatants but not civilians is rendered moot. Mass executions of smart phone owners are no longer a war crimes. OMG, what a horrible result.
In a different, but related case from Ukraine, all soldiers in war zones are strictly forbidden to carry cell phones, but some do anyhow. Policing that rule is impossible. The report is that Ukraine detected Russian soldiers phoning home. They then made their own phone calls to the soldiers' mothers saying, "Do you know what your son is doing?" That sounds very amusing, but it can have lethal consequences in a war zone.
 
  • Wow
Likes russ_watters
  • #183
anorlunda said:
Below are the plus and minus sides of the same news item.
The whole notion of a civilised war is paradoxical. The 'rules' of war have always been crazy - like the initial ban on using crossbows to kill christians, because the injuries were so horrific. Civilians are very vulnerable because they don't make the rules of the time.
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
  • #184
sophiecentaur said:
The whole notion of a civilised war is paradoxical. The 'rules' of war have always been crazy - like the initial ban on using crossbows to kill christians, because the injuries were so horrific. Civilians are very vulnerable because they don't make the rules of the time.
Concur. The ban on crossbows during warfare refers to publications by Pope Innocent II before his papacy while representing the Catholic church at the Concordat of Worms and later as disputed pope. Crossbow bolts produced injuries consistent with other war weapons at that time but extended the carnage to knights wearing armor.

Cynics and pragmatists argue these weapon bans restricted common soldiers and yeomen using handheld weapons that neutralized prior advantage of expensive body armor. Twelfth century steel crossbows fired bolts tipped with steel 'warheads' that penetrated contemporary armor. Fourteenth century firearms pressed this advantage of the common soldier against armored aristocracy.

Bans on communication devices as civilian weapons appear consistently throughout history, even crazier than attempting to vilify carrying smart phones. Some overeager 19th C. campaigners in Southwest US and earlier in Mexico tried to capture anyone traveling with a heliograph or mirror fragments as potential spies relaying troop movements to the enemy. WWII bans on radio transmitters and even telescopes/binoculars in civilian hands repeated these strictures.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes russ_watters, sophiecentaur and anorlunda
  • #185
Smart phones replace - other topics of discussion. 184 posts to prove my point.
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Likes anorlunda and Tom.G
  • #186
We always forget the brick when you can no longer charge it or it no longer gets updates because its obsolete.
 
  • #187
jedishrfu said:
We always forget the brick when you can no longer charge it or it no longer gets updates because its obsolete.
Here is not a strictly mathematical relationship but if I spend $100 for a mobile devise, it better last no less than 5 years. If I spend $300 then it better last 13 to 16 years.
 
  • #188
Five years is about right no matter the price. Mobile technology marches ever forward and your phone just can't keep up.
 
  • #189
Makeup mirror.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes anorlunda and jedishrfu

Similar threads

Replies
116
Views
21K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Back
Top