Technologies
2 Million-Year-Old DNA, the Oldest Ever Recovered, Opens Window to the Past
The prehistoric forest of northern Greenland was home to mastodons, reindeer, hares and an abundance of plant life.

As early as 2006, Eske Willerslev and members of his lab ventured into northern Greenland with a drill, extracting cores of sediment from the Kap København Formation. They were hunting for environmental DNA, or eDNA, in their cores — puzzle pieces that could help paint a picture of the plants and animals present in the region 2 million years ago.
But for the longest time, they came up empty-handed. «Every time we had improvements in terms of DNA extraction or sequencing technology, we’d revisit these samples,» Willerslev, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Cambridge, said in a press briefing on Tuesday.
No matter what, the researchers failed to get what they were looking for. The run of bad luck saw members of the lab turn to the occult for an explanation; they named their troubles «the curse of the Kap København Formation.»
But with steady improvements in DNA extraction and sequencing technologies, the curse was finally broken.
On Wednesday, the team published the results of their 16-year pursuit of ancient DNA in the journal Nature. They were able to sequence eDNA from 41 sediment samples, collected in 2006, 2012 and 2016 from the Kap København Formation and undisturbed by humans for 2 million years. Their analyses revealed that a lush forest replete with reindeer, hares, mastodons and a wide variety of flora once stood in what is now a dull, gray polar desert.
Willerslev, a pioneering geneticist who has previously recovered eDNA from ice cores and shown it could survive in glaciers, noted that the «breakthrough» relied on expertise, advances in genetic sequencing techniques and bioinformatics.
History in the soil
DNA, which carries the instructions for life, is not a particularly sturdy molecule. The bonds that hold it together are weak and, over time, they break down.
This is why, even though we have an abundance of dinosaur fossils, we don’t have any dinosaur DNA. The beasts died out 66 million years ago, and the DNA would simply not survive that long.
When DNA degrades, the once-long strands of information break apart into smaller and smaller pieces. It becomes almost impossible to piece these fragments back together in the right configuration, especially if they are mixed in with a lot of other DNA from the environment.
Think of DNA like a book. Let’s say Alice in Wonderland. If you have the whole book, you can understand the story. But if you’re missing a few pages, you might not understand where the White Rabbit came from or why Alice ended up at a tea party with the Mad Hatter. If you’re missing lots of pages, you probably can’t even tell what the story was to begin with. Alice? Who’s that? And why is she 10 feet tall?
That’s the problem working with ancient DNA. You might be able to retrieve small fragments of DNA but it is generally too fragmented to be able to tell where it came from — and certainly too fragmented to understand where it came from.
But under certain circumstances, DNA fragments can survive deep time.
«The ‘survival time’ of DNA in the environment is incredibly variable and strongly dependent on the environment itself,» notes Michael Knapp, an ecologist and geneticist at Otago University in New Zealand.
Previously, the oldest DNA ever recovered came from mammoth fossils found in the Siberian permafrost. In a Nature paper in 2021, researchers showed that DNA from the mammoth teeth was, potentially, about 1.6 million years old. The DNA recovered was broken up into small fragments but they weren’t degraded so much they couldn’t be pieced back together. The cold temperature of the permafrost certainly helped with this.
It’s a similar story in the new study.
Willerslev and his collaborators postulate that the long survival time of the DNA in their sediment cores was possible for two reasons. The first is the constant cold temperature of the polar desert. The second is the way the DNA is bound to minerals in the cores, preventing degradation over longer time scales. The idea is that these mineral surfaces prevent enzymes from breaking down the DNA.
Karina Sand, a geochemist at the University of Copenhagen and co-author on the paper, explained that one of the technological leaps that enabled this feat was extracting DNA from clay and quartz minerals. The latter provided an abundance of DNA, but the former was harder to extract good DNA from. Fortunately, that leaves the door open for even older DNA extraction.
«If we can get better at extracting the DNA from the clay minerals, then we think we can go further back in time with DNA,» she said.
The research team was able to extract DNA from the sediment cores and begin to read the surviving fragments. These fragments were then compared to a database of genomes (complete DNA sequences) of modern plants and animals, looking for DNA matches. Over time, they were able to fill the blank pages of history, demonstrating the thriving ecosystem of ancient Greenland.
The ancient forest of Greenland
Two million years ago, Greenland was a different place.
«The Kap København ecosystem, which has no present-day equivalent, existed at considerably higher temperatures than we have today,» noted Mikkel Pederson, a geneticist at the Lundbeck Foundation GeoGenetics Centre, in a press release.
In northern Greenland, average temperatures during this time were likely more than 11 degrees Celsius (around 20 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than they are today. Previous studies at Kap København have shown evidence it was home to a boreal forest, but the eDNA extracted and analyzed in the new study provides a complete reimagining of the area, adding in megafauna and a wide variety of plant life.
The headline mammal DNA found in the cores is undoubtedly the mastodon — which is having a bit of a moment thanks to social media. Some of the eDNA found matched to the Elephantidae family, which includes elephants, mammoths and mastodons. It seems mastodons may have roamed Greenland 2 million years ago, though the researchers note the evidence isn’t extremely strong and is based on relatively weak DNA matches.
The team also found DNA related to reindeer, hares and rabbits, and the subfamily of animals that includes lemmings, voles and muskrats. Notably absent, however, is DNA from carnivores. The researchers suggest this is because of their comparably small biomass in relation to the herbivores. «It’s basically a numbers game,» Willerslev said.
One of the more intriguing DNA finds is of the Atlantic horseshoe crab. The species is no longer found at such northern latitudes, and the authors suggest this may mean Kap København experienced warmer sea surface temperatures 2 million years ago. Previous research has suggested the sea surface was warmer at higher latitudes, and the discovery of horseshoe crab DNA lends further support to this hypothesis.
Warmer temperatures are key. Multiple authors on the paper have reiterated the importance of understanding an ecosystem like this, given the effects of global warming. Two million years ago, the climate was changing and the eDNA shows that Arctic species were living with species that loved much warmer climes. This helps scientists to get an understanding of how nature was adapting to those changes and, within the DNA signatures, there may be clues to ways we could help modern-day fauna and flora survive extreme climatic swings.
One of the significant limitations of studying eDNA is that scientists have to postulate about the kinds of species that were living at the time. Knapp notes closely related ancient species might give you a DNA match but this is «somewhat inaccurate» — it provides an approximation of what existed. We may only be able to assign the DNA at a family or order level, so we can’t know exactly what roamed the boreal forest of Greenland 2 million years ago.
Even so, the recovery of DNA this old opens a new window to the prehistoric Earth, a pathway for scientists and researchers to probe the ecosystems that existed long before humans were around. The team will head to northern Canada to extract cores next year and hope to go even further back in time.
The extraction method may even lend itself to finding DNA in more humid climates across the world, like in Africa and Australia.
«If we can begin to explore ancient DNA in clay grains from Africa, we may be able to gather ground-breaking information about the origin of many different species —perhaps even new knowledge about the first humans and their ancestors,» Willerslev said in a statement.
«The possibilities are endless.»
Technologies
Tariffs Explained as Trump Threatens Major New Taxes Against Canada and Brazil
The pause on the biggest of Trump’s tariffs won’t end this week, but the president continues to pledge steep new duties against major countries.

President Donald Trump’s second-term economic plan can be summed up in one word: tariffs. As he unleashed a barrage of those import taxes, markets trembled and business leaders sounded alarms about the economic damage they would cause. In response to the initial chaos after «Liberation Day» in April, the heaviest of Trump’s tariffs were paused for 90 days — that is, until this week — but they’ve been extended again through Aug. 1. More recently, the administration hiked tariffs against Canada to 35% and threatened Brazil with a 50% rate.
Amid the uncertainties and upheavals, Trump has barreled forward with his plans, including doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and announcing a new plan to increase the rate for China to 55%. He also hyped up a trade deal on July 2 that leaves Vietnam’s import tax rate at a historically high 20%. The sweeping tariff initiative will likely impact your cost of living, which we know from our surveys is something you’re worried about.
That all came after Trump’s push hit its biggest roadblock yet, when the US Court of International Trade ruled late last month that Trump had overstepped his authority when he imposed tariffs. That ruling was stayed but the fight is likely to head to the Supreme Court. All the while, major US companies like Apple and Walmart have butted heads with the administration over the tariffs and their bluntness about how tariffs will make affording things harder for consumers.
Amid all this noise, you might still be wondering: What exactly are tariffs and what will they mean for me?
The short answer: Expect to pay more for at least some goods and services. For the long answer, keep reading, and for more, check out CNET’s price tracker for 11 popular and tariff-vulnerable products.
What are tariffs?
Put simply, a tariff is a tax on the cost of importing or exporting goods by a particular country. So, for example, a 60% tariff on Chinese imports would be a 60% tax on the price of importing, say, computer components from China.
Trump has been fixated on imports as the centerpiece of his economic plans, often claiming that the money collected from taxes on imported goods would help finance other parts of his agenda. The US imports $3 trillion worth of goods from other countries annually.
The president has also shown a fixation on trade deficits, claiming that the US having a trade deficit with any country means that country is ripping the US off. This is a flawed understanding of the matter, many economists have said, since deficits are often a simple case of resource realities: Wealthy nations like the US buy specific things from nations that have them, while those nations in turn may not be wealthy enough to buy much of anything from the US.
While Trump deployed tariffs in his first term, notably against China, he ramped up his plans more significantly for the 2024 campaign, promising 60% tariffs against China and a universal 20% tariff on all imports into the US.
«Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented,» Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan last year. At one point, he called himself «Tariff Man» in a post on Truth Social.
Who pays the cost of tariffs?
Trump repeatedly claimed, before and immediately after returning to the White House, that the country of origin for an imported good pays the cost of the tariffs and that Americans would not see any price increases from them. However, as economists and fact-checkers stressed, this is not the case.
The companies importing the tariffed goods — American companies or organizations in this case — pay the higher costs. To compensate, companies can raise their prices or absorb the additional costs themselves.
So, who ends up paying the price for tariffs? In the end, usually you, the consumer. For instance, a universal tariff on goods from Canada would increase Canadian lumber prices, which would have the knock-on effect of making construction and home renovations more expensive for US consumers. While it is possible for a company to absorb the costs of tariffs without increasing prices, this is not at all likely, at least for now.
Speaking with CNET, Ryan Reith, vice president of International Data Corporation’s worldwide mobile device tracking programs, explained that price hikes from tariffs, especially on technology and hardware, are inevitable in the short term. He estimated that the full amount imposed on imports by Trump’s tariffs would be passed on to consumers, which he called the «cost pass-through.» Any potential efforts for companies to absorb the new costs themselves would come in the future, once they have a better understanding of the tariffs, if at all.
Which Trump tariffs have gone into effect?
Following Trump’s «Liberation Day» announcements on April 2 and subsequent shifting by the president, the following tariffs are in effect:
- A 50% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, doubled from 25% as of June 4.
- A 30% tariff on all Chinese imports until the new deal touted by Trump takes effect, after which it will purportedly go up to 55%. China being a major focus of Trump’s trade agenda, it has faced a rate notably higher than other countries, peaking at 145% before trade talks commenced.
- 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and 35% on those from Canada. This applies only to goods from each country that are not covered under the 2018 USMCA trade agreement brokered during Trump’s first term. The deal covers roughly half of all imports from Canada and about a third of those from Mexico, so the rest are subject to the new tariffs. Energy imports not covered by USMCA will be taxed at only 10%.
- A 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars and auto parts.
- A sweeping overall 10% tariff on all imported goods.
For certain countries that Trump said were more responsible for the US trade deficit, Trump imposed what he called «reciprocal» tariffs that exceed the 10% level: 20% for the 27 nations that make up the European Union, 26% for India, 24% for Japan and so on. These were meant to take effect on April 9 but were delayed by 90 days due to historic stock market volatility, and then delayed again to Aug. 1. These rates are subject to change until that new effective date, and some have already been altered: the rate against Japan was upped to 25%, the same as the rate against South Korea; Trump has also threatened a 50% rate against Brazil.
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 2, 2025
Trump’s claim that these reciprocal tariffs are based on high tariffs imposed against the US by the targeted countries has drawn intense pushback from experts and economists, who have argued that some of these numbers are false or potentially inflated. For example, the above chart says a 39% tariff from the EU, despite its average tariff for US goods being around 3%. Some of the tariffs are against places that are not countries but tiny territories of other nations. The Heard and McDonald Islands, for example, are uninhabited. We’ll dig into the confusion around these calculations below.
Notably, that minimum 10% tariff will not be on top of those steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. Canada and Mexico were also spared from the 10% minimum additional tariff imposed on all countries the US trades with.
On April 11, the administration said smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics, along with flat panel displays, memory chips and semiconductors, were exempt from reciprocal tariffs. But it wasn’t clear whether that would remain the case or whether such products might face different fees later.
How were the Trump reciprocal tariffs calculated?
The numbers released by the Trump administration for its barrage of «reciprocal» tariffs led to widespread confusion among experts. Trump’s own claim that these new rates were derived by halving the tariffs already imposed against the US by certain countries was widely disputed, with critics noting that some of the numbers listed for certain countries were much higher than the actual rates and some countries had tariff rates listed despite not specifically having tariffs against the US at all.
In a post to X that spread fast across social media, finance journalist James Surowiecki said that the new reciprocal rates appeared to have been reached by taking the trade deficit the US has with each country and dividing it by the amount the country exports to the US. This, he explained, consistently produced the reciprocal tariff percentages revealed by the White House across the board.
Just figured out where these fake tariff rates come from. They didn’t actually calculate tariff rates + non-tariff barriers, as they say they did. Instead, for every country, they just took our trade deficit with that country and divided it by the country’s exports to us.
So we… https://t.co/PBjF8xmcuv— James Surowiecki (@JamesSurowiecki) April 2, 2025
«What extraordinary nonsense this is,» Surowiecki wrote about the finding.
The White House later attempted to debunk this idea, releasing what it claimed was the real formula, though it was quickly determined that this formula was arguably just a more complex version of the one Surowiecki deduced.
What will the Trump tariffs do to prices?
In short: Prices are almost certainly going up, if not now, then eventually. That is, if the products even make it to US shelves at all, as some tariffs will simply be too high for companies to bother dealing with.
While the effects of a lot of tariffs might not be felt straight away, some potential real-world examples have already emerged. Microsoft has increased prices across the board for its Xbox gaming brand, with its flagship Xbox Series X console jumping 20% from $500 to $600. Kent International, one of the main suppliers of bicycles to Walmart, announced that it would be stopping imports from China, which account for 90% of its stock.
Speaking about Trump’s tariff plans just before they were announced, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that they would generate $6 trillion in revenue over the next decade. Given that tariffs are most often paid by consumers, CNN characterized this as potentially «the largest tax hike in US history.» Estimates from the Yale Budget Lab, cited by Axios, predict that Trump’s new tariffs will cause a 2.3% increase in inflation throughout 2025. This translates to about a $3,800 increase in expenses for the average American household.
Reith, the IDC analyst, told CNET that Chinese-based tech companies, like PC makers Acer, Asus and Lenovo, have «100% exposure» to these import taxes, with products like phones and computers the most likely to take a hit. He also said that the companies best positioned to weather the tariff impacts are those that have moved some of their operations out of China to places like India, Thailand and Vietnam, singling out the likes of Apple, Dell and HP. Samsung, based in South Korea, is also likely to avoid the full force of Trump’s tariffs.
In an effort to minimize its tariff vulnerability, Apple has begun to move the production of goods for the US market from China to India.
Will tariffs impact prices immediately?
In the short term — the first days or weeks after a tariff takes effect — maybe not. There are still a lot of products in the US imported pre-tariffs and on store shelves, meaning the businesses don’t need a price hike to recoup import taxes. Once new products need to be brought in from overseas, that’s when you’ll see prices start to climb because of tariffs or you’ll see them become unavailable.
That uncertainty has made consumers anxious. CNET’s survey revealed that about 38% of shoppers feel pressured to make certain purchases before tariffs make them more expensive. About 10% say they have already made certain purchases in hopes of getting them in before the price hikes, while 27% said they have delayed purchases for products that cost more than $500. Generally, this worry is the most acute concerning smartphones, laptops and home appliances.
Mark Cuban, the billionaire businessman and Trump critic, voiced concerns about when to buy certain things in a post on Bluesky just after Trump’s «Liberation Day» announcements. In it, he suggested that consumers might want to stock up on certain items before tariff inflation hits.
«It’s not a bad idea to go to the local Walmart or big box retailer and buy lots of consumables now,» Cuban wrote. «From toothpaste to soap, anything you can find storage space for, buy before they have to replenish inventory. Even if it’s made in the USA, they will jack up the price and blame it on tariffs.»
CNET’s Money team recommends that before you make any purchase, especially a high-ticket item, be sure that the expenditure fits within your budget and your spending plans. Buying something you can’t afford now because it might be less affordable later can be burdensome, to say the least.
What is the goal of the White House tariff plan?
The typical goal behind tariffs is to discourage consumers and businesses from buying the tariffed, foreign-sourced goods and encourage them to buy domestically produced goods instead. When implemented in the right way, tariffs are generally seen as a useful way to protect domestic industries.
One of the stated intentions for Trump’s tariffs is along those lines: to restore American manufacturing and production. However, the White House also says it’s negotiating with numerous countries looking for tariff exemptions, and some officials have also floated the idea that the tariffs will help finance Trump’s tax cuts.
Those things are often contradictory: If manufacturing moves to the US or if a bunch of countries are exempt from tariffs, then tariffs aren’t actually being collected and can’t be used to finance anything. This and many other points have led a lot of economists to allege that Trump’s plans are misguided.
As for returning — or «reshoring» — manufacturing in the US, tariffs are a better tool for protecting industries that already exist because importers can fall back on them right away. Building up the factories and plants needed for this in the US could take years, leaving Americans to suffer under higher prices in the interim.
That problem is worsened by the fact that the materials needed to build those factories will also be tariffed, making the costs of «reshoring» production in the US too heavy for companies to stomach. These issues, and the general instability of American economic policies under Trump, are part of why experts warn that Trump’s tariffs could have the opposite effect: keeping manufacturing out of the US and leaving consumers stuck with inflated prices. Any factories that do get built in the US because of tariffs also have a high chance of being automated, canceling out a lot of job creation potential. To give you one real-world example of this: When warning customers of future price hikes, toy maker Mattel also noted that it had no plans to move manufacturing to the US.
Trump has reportedly been fixated on the notion that Apple’s iPhone — the most popular smartphone in the US market — can be manufactured entirely in the US. This has been broadly dismissed by experts, for a lot of the same reasons mentioned above, but also because an American-made iPhone could cost upward of $3,500. One report from 404 Media dubbed the idea «a pure fantasy.» The overall sophistication and breadth of China’s manufacturing sector have also been cited, with CEO Tim Cook stating in 2017 that the US lacks the number of tooling engineers to make its products.
For more, see how tariffs might raise the prices of Apple products and find some expert tips for saving money.
Technologies
Like Word Games Like Wordle? Try These 10 Others
There are plenty of word and puzzle games out there to try.

Wordle is a popular word game that asks players to figure out a five-letter word in six or fewer guesses (we have a two-step strategy to help you solve the puzzle every time). After each guess, the game shows gray blocks for the wrong letters, yellow blocks for the right letters in the wrong spot and green blocks for the right letters in the correct spot. CNET’s Gael Cooper has loads of tips and tricks to tackle each Wordle puzzle, but if you’ve completed today’s game — or just love puzzle games — these alternatives are well worth your time.
You’ve likely already learned some tips, tricks and lessons from the popular word game, so why not apply your newly honed problem-solving skills to other puzzles, too? After all, Wordle isn’t the only game in town. Here are 10 other puzzle games like Wordle you’ll probably enjoy.
Connections
Another New York Times-owned puzzle, Connections is a tricky word game. «Players must select four groups of four words without making more than four mistakes,» the New York Times wrote on X, formerly Twitter. There are also four color-coded difficulty levels for each game; yellow is the easiest, then green, the blue and finally purple. The game is also similar to the BBC quiz show Only Connect, and the show’s host took to X to point out the connection. See what I did there?
You can play Connections on any web browser, but you need a New York Times subscription (which starts at $1 a week) to play.
Strands
Strands is another New York Times-owned puzzle, but this game resembles a word search more so than Wordle and Connections. This game presents a theme every day to help you find words in a grid. In Strands words can appear forwards, backward, top-to-bottom or any number of ways in a traditional word search, and words can also form in the shape of an «L» or have a zigzag in them. When you find a word, tap the first letter and drag your finger to the other letters. Every letter in the puzzle is used, so if you still have letters that aren’t connected to words, you aren’t finished yet.
You can play Strands on any web browser, but you need a New York Times subscription (again, $1 a week) to play.
Quartiles
Quartiles is a new word game Apple News Plus subscribers can access on their iPhone or iPad that’s running iOS 17.5 or later. In this word game, you’re given 20 tiles with letters on them, and you’re trying to put them together to form different words. The longest words are four-tiles long, and these are called Quartiles. The game can be tough, but finding just one of the Quartiles is as satisfying as remembering something that was just on the tip of your tongue.
You can play Quartiles on an iPhone or iPad, but you need an Apple News subscription (which starts at $13 a month) to play.
Multiple Wordle spinoffs: Dordle, Quordle, Octordle and Sedecordle
Are you up for a challenge? If you love Wordle and want puzzle games that take more brain power, you’ll want to check out either Dordle, Quordle, Octordle or Sedecordle. Each of these word games resembles Wordle, but they add more rows, columns and words to solve. Each game requires you to simultaneously solve a different number of words at once: Dordle has you solving two words, Quordle four at once, Octordle eight at once, and Sedecordle a whopping 16. Good luck.
You can play Dordle, Quordle, Octordle or Sedecordle on any web browser.
Lewdle
«Lewdle is a game about rude words,» this game’s content advisory reads. «If you’re likely to be offended by the use of profanity, vulgarity or obscenity, it likely isn’t for you.» Translation: It’s Wordle, but with bad words. The words range from mild — like poopy — to words that would make a sailor blush. Thankfully, despite this game’s content warning, slurs are not included. Like Wordle, gray, yellow and green blocks are used in the same way and there’s only one puzzle per day. So go forth and let the bad words flow!
You can play Lewdle on any web browser. You can also download this game from Apple’s App Store or the Google Play store.
Antiwordle
Tired of seeing those grey, yellow and green blocks plastered all over your social media feed? Give Antiwordle a try. While Wordle wants you to guess a word in as few tries as possible, Antiwordle wants you to avoid the word by guessing as many times as possible. When you guess, letters will turn gray, yellow or red. Gray means the letter isn’t in the word and can’t be used again, yellow means the letter is in the word and must be included in each subsequent guess and red means the letter is in the exact position within the word and is locked in place. If you can use every letter on the keyboard without getting the word correct, you win. Honestly, I’ve found this version of Wordle to be much harder than the original.
You can play Antiwordle on any web browser.
Absurdle
Absurdle bills itself as the «adversarial version» of Wordle. While Wordle nudges you in the right direction with each guess, Absurdle is trying to avoid giving you the correct answer. According to the game’s website, «With each guess, Absurdle reveals as little information as possible, changing the secret word if need be.» Absurdle doesn’t pick a word at the beginning of the game for the player to guess. Instead, it uses the player’s guesses to narrow its list of words down in an effort to make the game go as long as possible. The final word might not even include a yellow letter from one of your earlier guesses either. You can guess as many times as you want, which is helpful, and the best score you can get is four. Have fun!
You can play Absurdle on any web browser.
For more word game fun, check out CNET’s Wordle tips, the best Wordle jokes and everything you need to know about the word game. You can also cehck out what to know about the other New York Times-owned games, Connections and Strands.
Technologies
4 Reasons Why You Should Always Leave Your Phone Face Down
It’s not you, it’s your phone — here’s why it’s better to hide the screen when it’s on the table.

You’re catching up with a friend you haven’t seen in ages. It feels good to be spending time with them in person, clinking glasses and laughing at old jokes. Then there’s a lull in the conversation, and your friend picks up their smartphone.
At some point, we’ve all been phone-snubbed. That’s what happens when the person you’re hanging out with seems more interested in their phone than you. You might be sitting right across from someone, but when they’re laughing at a video or meme only they can see, it feels like they’re a million miles away.
I’ve been guilty of paying more attention to my screen than my companion and felt bad about it afterward. There’s nothing wrong with replying to an urgent Slack message or pulling up a funny TikTok to share. But I know I probably spend too much time staring at screens, and a lot of that time is unhealthy doomscrolling. These days, when I’m not using my phone, I try to be more deliberate about keeping it out of sight and out of mind. If I do need to keep my phone at hand, I always have it face down.
It can protect your phone screen
I have a few reasons for making sure my phone screen is turned away. The first one is practical: When my phone isn’t in my pocket, it’s probably sitting on a desk or table — which means it’s probably not far from a glass of water or mug of coffee.
As a somewhat clumsy person, I’ve spilled beverages on my phone plenty of times. And even though most modern phones are water-resistant, why take chances? With my screen hidden, I can keep the most important part of my phone protected from splashes and other mishaps.
For extra protection, I have a phone case with raised edges. This helps prevent the screen from coming in direct contact with crumbs and debris that might be left on the table.
My colleague David Carnoy told me about an incident where he was charging his phone on his kitchen counter with the screen face up. Someone dropped a mug on top of it and cracked the screen. Unfortunately, he didn’t have a screen protector on this device (he knows better now).
It could help save your phone battery
Another good reason to keep my phone face down is that it won’t turn on each time I get a notification. That means I can save a little bit of battery charge.
A single notification won’t mean the difference between my phone lasting the whole day or dying in the afternoon but notifications can add up, especially if I’ve enabled them across all of my apps. If I’m in a lot of group chats, my screen might end up turning on dozens of times throughout the day (and that’s on the low side — many teenagers have hundreds of notifications a day).
It also shows that you pay attention
Keeping my phone face down is also a good rule of social etiquette: If I’m hanging out with someone, I keep my screen hidden from view as a subtle way of showing that I won’t be distracted by it. I don’t want incoming notifications to light up my screen every few seconds, especially if I’m in a bar or other dimly lit setting. I want to keep my eyes on the person I’m talking to.
«Eye contact is one of the most powerful forms of human connection. Neuroscience research indicates that when two people make direct eye contact, their brain activity begins to synchronize, supporting more effective communication and increasing empathy. This synchrony can be disrupted when attention shifts to a phone, even briefly,» says Michelle Davis, clinical psychologist at Headspace.
When I’m with the people I’ve chosen to spend time with, I want to be fully present with them. A sudden notification will tempt me to glance at, or worse, pick up my phone in the middle of a conversation.
It minimizes your phone’s presence
I also have a more personal reason for keeping my phone face down and I suspect that other people have had this same thought: My phone takes up too much space in my life.
I mean that quite literally. My phone is bigger than it needs to be. That’s been especially true since I upgraded from my iPhone Mini to a «normal-sized» iPhone. Yes, I got a much needed boost in battery life but I also got a screen with more pixels to lure me into the next news headline or autoplaying Instagram reel.
A small smartphone isn’t something that really exists anymore. My phone is bigger and better at grabbing my attention. It competes against my friends and family, books and movies, the entire world outside of its 6-inch screen. It often wins. But there’s still one small thing I can do to minimize its presence: I can keep the screen turned away from me whenever possible.
It can sometimes feel like there’s no escaping from my phone. Whether that ever changes, or phones evolve into some new form factor, I can’t say. I can’t control everything about my phone but I can control whether the screen stares at me when I’m not staring at it.
-
Technologies2 года ago
Tech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies2 года ago
Best Handheld Game Console in 2023
-
Technologies2 года ago
Tighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies4 года ago
Verum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies4 года ago
Google to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 года ago
Black Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 года ago
Olivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies4 года ago
iPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow