Last two sentences of your first paragraph are definitely not the sort of thing I was trying to say is okay.

I also don’t think some of the conveniences I talked about have much of a cost. My kids having a cell phone with basic phone and texting capability isn’t a digital sovereignty issue.

And I’m not sure if digital sovereignty matters if the alternative is digital abstinence.

That’s like saying “When you buy a Toyota Camry your life is beholden to Toyota, you should just walk to your destination.” The trade-off isn’t really even, is it?

> My kids having a cell phone with basic phone and texting capability isn’t a digital sovereignty issue.

Of course it is, the first version of Twitter was a texting platform. You can't draw some line and say that this is the end of the baggage that comes with this convenience because that is not how the world works. The inevitability of social pressure means "keeping up with the Joneses" so your kids need to communicate with others, not just you.

Just because it doesn't come in the form of an app doesn't mean it is safe or come without risks.

Car dependency is an excellent parallel. People buy cars on the promise that they should expect freedom of movement, but then they arrange their lives so they can only go where roads have been paved, and arrive where buildings have been demolished for parking lots. They become financially dependent on oil extraction in the Middle East. They become incapable of getting anywhere alone when they lose the ability to drive, due to ailments or age.

So why do we do it? Because we can't imagine living without the convenience of our phones.