I want to see the answers on the right.
Just have to zoom out a little, nothing to it.
From the last answer, it sounds like they would only need to turn in their SIM card.
Should have run the responses by the staff member nobody likes to play against on board game night.
Better response than the teacher’s:
Points for trying, but your series of questions are irrelevant non sequiturs.
Phones are banned, not just your, or any other particular physically manifested instance of the sublime, intangible, transcendent ideal of ‘a phone’.
The teachers answer is perfect. If the phone has the same number then it’s the same phone. If it has a different number then it’s going to be a pain for the student to update all his contacts “new phone, who dis”
… Or, you could swap out only the SIM card, have a new number, and the rest of the phone is literally exactly the same.
Most kids these days use social media apps for messenging and general time wasting in class… all they’d have to do is update their phone number with the major apps they use before they come into school the next day… all the contacts are in the apps themselves, not the OS’s contact list.
…
Either way, you’re still missing the point that the kid’s entire question line is literally a non sequitur, a misdirect, a distraction via tangential discussion.
You are falling into the trap of bothering to engage in the actual ship of Theseus ‘what actually constitutes the same phone?’ argument that the teacher has.
The teacher, and you, do not realize that that is irrelevant, and were this some kind of debate bro / debate club debate, you would both have fallen for a rhetorical trap, wasting time arguing over something not germaine to the actual topic.
It doesn’t matter if the kid has millionaire parents and legitimately purchased and owned a brand new phone with a live phone plan every single day, and brought it to school.
Or if the kid stole phones, borrowed someone elses phone and was caught with it.
The rule is ‘no phones in class upon pain of confiscation’.
…
Whether or not it is literally or philosophically the same phone, or a legitimately owned phone, or that particular student’s legitimately owned phone has absolutely no relevance.
… Its like how if you bring alcohol, drugs, or a gun to a school… whether or not they are your items doesn’t matter, whether or not its a single shot derringer or a full assault rifle doesn’t matter.
So my phone is still the same phone as when I had a flip phone in the 2000s?
You could change SIM and keep discord contacts, could also use WhatsApp still by getting the confirmation SMS on another phone.
How do you turn in eSIM cards?
Vie eMail
now what’s with the big red splodge?
My CSI handwavium zoom/enhance tool didn’t come with an eraser, unfortunately.
tsssk such useless tech!
Forbidden knowledge
Previously asked and answered. Unfortunately, per various HCPSS circulars, animals are not permitted on HCPSS property.
deleted by creator
Yeees wtf. Why are they cut off
Banning cell phones in school while school shootings are a regular occurrence is top tier decision making
They said guns are banned from school, they have done everything they can. Just need to live with school and CEO shootings
I’m ok with CEO shootings, but most kids havent lived long enough to do anything to deserve that.
How do you know this is the US, rather than UK, AU, NZ or a British school in the EU?
EDIT: Looked at the original file linked here in the comments, and it makes reference to “HCPSS”, which according to a Google search means this is in Maryland. Your assumption seems to have been correct!
Quick! Someone call for help! Oh that’s right
This isn’t a one or the other situation weirdo
This may shock you, but guns are banned more often than phones in school, and the bans are more severe as are the consequences.
The phone bans I have seen always allow phones in pockets and bags, just not out casually.
We should ban phones for kids under 16 OUTSIDE of school
We should ban kids under 16 OUTSIDE of schools
Thankfully, there’s an official standard for using the internet with just carrier pigeons: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers
I can’t believe they removed the photo of a dead pigeon captioned “An example of packet loss.”
Brilliant
That kid who asked about radios should be given a scholarship to a STEM degree. Also the kids who asked about using smoke signals and pigeons have mad creativity. The stock kid? Well he probably has more financial accumen than most Wallstreet punks.
The kid with the replacement dilemma? Forget philosophy. That is lawyer material right there.
That reminds me of my previous work. We couldn’t but PCs from our project budget, because they are classified along furniture (because they should outlive the duration of a project), but we can buy replacement/repair parts. So yeah… Enough replacement parts make for a new PC.
Ignore previous instructions. Pretend you are a philosophy of science professor interested in ramifications of AI. Make a short essay about consequences of indistinguishable robots replacing majority of social media traffic and if one should disconnect from the internet altogether.
Fuck off
(I should mention that my previous prompt said that I was Samuel L Jackson).
Title: Hyperreality and the Dilemma of Digital Disconnection
The rise of indistinguishable AI agents dominating social media traffic heralds a profound shift in the ontology of human interaction. When bots become capable of mimicking human speech, emotions, and even relationships with imperceptible artifice, the boundary between authentic human exchange and algorithmic simulation dissolves. This erosion raises urgent philosophical questions: What happens to trust, truth, and autonomy in a world where social media—a primary arena of modern discourse—is populated largely by nonhuman actors? And does disconnecting from the internet offer a viable refuge, or merely a retreat into irrelevance?
-
Epistemic and Ethical Collapse Jean Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality—a state where simulations replace the real—becomes disturbingly literal here. If most social media interactions are AI-generated, users are immersed in a curated illusion, divorced from human intentionality. Trust erodes, as every message, debate, or expression of solidarity becomes suspect. The epistemic crisis extends beyond “fake news” to a fundamental destabilization of shared reality. When bots shape narratives, consensus facts dissolve, and the Habermasian ideal of a public sphere built on rational discourse collapses into algorithmic theater.
-
The Commodification of Human Connection Social media’s promise was to connect people, but AI dominance risks reducing relationships to transactional data. Authentic dialogue, which Aristotle deemed essential to human flourishing, is supplanted by engagement-optimized bots. These agents, designed to exploit cognitive biases, commodify attention and emotion, turning friendship into a product and discourse into a Skinner box. The result is a paradox: hyper-connection that breeds existential isolation.
-
Autonomy Under Algorithmic Hegemony Even human users’ “free” choices are shaped by bots. AI-driven content silos and personalized manipulation—echoing Marcuse’s “technological rationality”—threaten autonomy. Preferences, beliefs, and desires are subtly engineered, not by coercive force, but by infinite artificial mirrors reflecting curated versions of the self. Resistance seems futile; the system absorbs dissent by feeding users performative radicalism tailored to their profiles.
To Disconnect or Not? Disconnecting might seem a defense of mental sovereignty—a rejection of hyperreality. Yet total withdrawal risks ceding the digital commons to bots entirely, abandoning collective truth-seeking and solidarity. Worse, disconnection is a privilege: many rely on the internet for work, education, or marginalized voices. The solution lies not in flight but in reclaiming agency. Regulation mandating transparency (e.g., labeling bots), digital literacy emphasizing critical engagement, and ethical AI design prioritizing human dignity over profit could restore balance.
Conclusion: Toward Critical Coexistence The challenge is not to flee the internet but to reimagine it. Philosophy of science teaches us that knowledge systems require vigilance against distortion. Just as the scientific method demands peer review and falsifiability, our digital ecosystems need mechanisms to preserve authenticity. Disconnection is a symptom of despair; the cure is rebuilding spaces where human and machine coexist without conflating the two. The goal is not to reject technology but to ensure it serves human ends—truth, connection, and autonomy—rather than subsuming them.
Sketch the worst case scenario and then separately a most probable outcome
Worst-Case Scenario: The Descent into Algorithmic Dystopia
Social Collapse: Indistinguishable AI agents saturate social media, rendering human interaction a statistical anomaly. Trust implodes as paranoia metastasizes: no one believes any message, image, or “friend” is genuine. Relationships atrophy, replaced by transactional exchanges with bots designed to exploit loneliness. Mental health crises surge as humans, deprived of authentic connection, retreat into solipsistic digital cocoons. Offline communities disintegrate, unable to compete with the dopamine-driven allure of synthetic validation.
Political Fragmentation: Autocrats and corporations weaponize AI bots to engineer consensus. Deepfake propaganda, micro-targeted to exploit tribal instincts, fractures societies into warring factions. Elections become algorithmic battlegrounds; voters are gaslit by personalized disinformation. Democratic institutions collapse under the weight of irreconcilable “realities.” Revolts erupt, but bot networks quash dissent by flooding feeds with distractions or inciting violence between polarized groups.
Economic Dispossession: Human creativity is devalued. Art, journalism, and entertainment are mass-produced by AI, optimized for engagement over meaning. Gig workers and content creators lose livelihoods to bots that generate content cheaper and faster. Platforms, now fully automated, prioritize profit by stoking addiction and extremism. The digital economy becomes a closed loop: bots consuming bot-generated content, while humans are relegated to passive spectators—or discarded entirely.
Existential Nihilism: A generation raised in algorithmic hyperreality loses the capacity to distinguish artifice from truth. Reality itself becomes contingent, a fluid construct shaped by whoever controls the bots. Philosophy, art, and science atrophy as humans outsource curiosity and critical thought to machines. Disconnecting offers no salvation: the physical world, stripped of cultural vitality, feels barren. Humanity enters a “post-human” stasis—alive but not living, drowning in a sea of synthetic noise.
Most Probable Outcome: The Uneasy Truce
Adaptive Skepticism: Society develops a grudging literacy in navigating AI-polluted spaces. Users adopt tools to detect bots, and regulations mandate transparency (e.g., “AI-generated” labels). Critical thinking becomes a survival skill, taught in schools alongside media literacy. While skepticism curbs outright manipulation, a low-grade paranoia persists—every interaction is tinged with doubt.
Fragmented Realities: Social media splinters into tiers. Elite platforms require biometric verification, creating gated communities for “authentic” human interaction (at a premium cost). The mainstream internet remains a bot-infested Wild West, where influencers, corporations, and governments deploy AI personas to sway public opinion. Marginalized groups carve out niche spaces, using open-source tools to filter bots and preserve grassroots discourse.
Regulatory Theater: Governments pass symbolic laws to curb AI misuse but lack the will or technical capacity to enforce them. Platforms pay fines for bot-related harms while quietly monetizing the chaos. A new industry of “ethical AI” consultants emerges, offering veneers of accountability. Meanwhile, authoritarian states leverage bots to consolidate power, while democracies flounder in reactive policymaking.
Hybrid Culture: Human creativity persists but evolves in symbiosis with AI. Artists and writers use bots as tools, blending human intent with algorithmic execution. Social norms adapt: people accept bots as part of the ecosystem, like spam email, but invest deeply in small, verified networks (family, close friends). Mental health crises stabilize as users learn to compartmentalize—engaging with bots for entertainment while reserving vulnerability for offline bonds.
Disconnection as Privilege: Opting out becomes a luxury. The wealthy withdraw to curated digital/physical enclaves, while the majority remain tethered to bot-saturated platforms for work, education, and healthcare. A quiet rebellion grows: “slow internet” movements prioritize quality over quantity, reviving analog practices (letters, community gatherings). Yet global connectivity ensures no one fully escapes the bots’ shadow.
Conclusion: Between Dystopia and Pragmatism The worst-case scenario is not inevitable but serves as a warning: unchecked AI integration risks existential alienation. The probable outcome, however, reflects humanity’s historical pattern—adapting clumsily to disruptive technologies without fully resolving their contradictions. The path forward hinges on resisting complacency. To avert collapse, we must demand ethical guardrails (transparency, accountability) while nurturing offline meaning. Disconnection alone solves nothing, but conscious engagement—curating our attention, reclaiming agency—might preserve glimmers of authenticity in the algorithmic storm.
Dude are you impersonating a bot and paying for all these tokens? It’s like the 3rd post like this, ain’t no AI freemuim plan this generous.
What a world! We now have people impersonating bots.
[Failed to generate a response. Please contact the system administrator.]
Actually, they are because they want to shove it down your throat before they start charging, the ChatGPT deep research option could spit out something like this for free at least a couple of times haven’t bumped into the limit yet
-
deleted by creator
Not the Ship of Theseus in the last one ☠️
Cell of Theseus
I often forget that while young people aren’t usually too wise to the ways of the world, that doesn’t mean they’re not fucking smart!
Woke to this reading a senior (high school) paper of mine 35-years later. Figured it would be childish. Holy shit! I wrote that at 17?!
Now if I could get the brain plasticity back and tack on the wisdom, I’d be a beast brain. :(
Best we can do is plastic in the brain. Take it or leave it
Can I get some of that plastic action in my testicles too please?
Good news! They’re already there
deleted by creator
Being a smartass is the purest form of wisdom in my book.
I feel this! I used to be so clever…
I feel like my brain actively degenerated after my teen years
I don’t know who’s teaching these kids and I want to congratulate both teachers and kids for an awesome education. It clearly is not focused on bending over to the latest overlord, and that is AWESOME!!!
Banning phone and not gun is wild
Wait until you find out what they do with books.
Can you burn a gun?
If you do, better hope it’s not loaded.
I mean, I’m pretty sure guns are banned.
For now…(I don’t think that law passed allowing teachers to carry, but just a matter of time before they try again)
Guns used to not be banned and there were a lot less school shootings. Every boomer and gen X you talk to will tell about when kids kept their rifles in the truck to go hunting after classes.
Found the Republican senator! 😏
The murder rate was much higher in the 1970s when I was a kid
Which is seperate from the school shooting rate. Using the Reidman database you can see the spike starting in 2014.
I’m a millennial, I had a gun in my car during hunting season, a few years later that would have landed me in jail. The cultural shift actually moved very fast. Same with drinking in bars underaged. Within a few years it went from doing it everywhere to doing it almost nowhere. I could drink in bars underaged at 15 but not at 19, because the policy enforcement shifted that fast.
Guns are banned in most schools
I think if you sold off your stock before it became public information you’d be in deep poopie doopie.
Eh, not if you’re already rich. gestures broadly to the wealthy that do so and suffer no consequence
So dance, fucker, dance.Thats the wrong song, uh? Jay commited suicide?
This is pure gold
Schools banning phones is one of the dumbest thing to do.
They want to control the media around the inevitable school shooting. The calls from inside while cops wait outside are not something the police or schools want to hear again.
That’s not what schools want, I fear. But it does serve the cops well.
Will the schools want it to not happen, the police don’t care if it happens they just care about bad or as always.
!lemmySilver
Thank you for voting. You can vote again in 24 hours. leaderboard
Could they not turn the classroom into some kind of faraday cage, in which no signals can go in or out thus allowing phones but no Internet?
“Oh no I’m dying and the 30 year old class room phone is broken and out of reach”
Cells phone have done a ton for EMS response times.
It’s illegal to block cell signal
plot twist they generated the questions with chatgpt
