"I ...... We don't admit it! Maybe what you said in the previous points is correct, but the weakening of human free will brought about by this 'smart phone' is simply nonsense!"

"Who said that the problems of 'endangering the user's physical health' and 'decreased attention and self-control, and addiction' are also harms unique to smartphones? This is obviously wrong! When I use a computer to play World of Warcraft, I will also become addicted and addicted, and the harm to self-control and concentration will definitely not be less than that of using a smartphone in the future! Besides, how can that broken game on a mobile phone be as fun as a game on a computer? Even according to the scope of 'harm only that only has smartphones' delineated by the opponent's defense friend, these points are definitely not counted!"

The four members of the Jinling University team rose one after another, carrying out the final resistance.

Even the words "I would be addicted to playing World of Warcraft by myself, and I should be electrified, and I was already low in willpower and unable to concentrate before I used my smartphone."

If these words are listened to separately by the audience who were not present at the scene, or who were present but were distracted by their thoughts in the first half, then it would not be unjust to imagine some of the debaters of the Jinling team as scum houses who are "addicted to the Internet and should be electrified."

Being able to say such a thing, it can be seen that the Jinling team is already at a loss of words, and is completely led by the other party, so they can only resist point by point, and fight with each other, in order to exchange for a situation where "this point cannot be regarded as a unique disadvantage of smartphones".

If it weren't for the opponent's signature being too scummy, making people disdain to lose to them, Jinling University would have surrendered at this moment - for example, if today is the final and the opposite side is Fudan, then when it comes to this, there is no shame in passive resistance.

Helplessly, the opposite side is the Normal University, which makes people have to carry it to the end for the sake of dignity.

"We are the top five schools in the country! If we lose to the 211 pheasant scum that may not be ranked in the top 50 in the country, how will we mix in the Jinling academic circle in the future?

This is their inner portrayal at the moment.

It's a pity that this resistance only makes this ** more confrontational and ornamental, and it can't play any other role.

One by one, all of them were broken by Feng Jianxiong's side, and finally in the stage of summarizing and making statements, they completely converged from the trickle into the rivers and seas, and they were unable to resist them.

……

Finally, it's time for the closing arguments.

Yu Meiqin, who combines beauty and wisdom, stood up in a chic manner, took out the outline that she had tempered and optimized on the spot, and advanced her demeanor layer by layer.

Her heart has never been so peaceful as it is now.

“…… To sum up, we say that smartphones have brought so many of the above drawbacks, and these drawbacks are unique to smartphones.Traditional mobile phones, PC computers, and other electronic products that have existed and will be in the future are not as bad as smartphones in terms of mode or degree.

At the same time, in the previous competition, we are also glad to see that the opponent has reached a consensus with us and given up resistance on the unique drawbacks of smartphones, such as battery safety, privacy leakage, social waste, and environmental pollution.

Therefore, I will conclude by focusing on a few other shortcomings unique to smartphones that the other person has been questioning all along.

FIRST OF ALL, IT IS THE HARM OF THE NEW GENERATION OF SMART PHONES REPRESENTED BY THE IPHONE TO THE PERSONAL HEALTH AND PSYCHOLOGICAL QUALITY OF USERS.

The opponents have been emphasizing that computers are also addictive, and long-term use of computers and traditional mobile phones can also be harmful to health, so they insist that this cannot be regarded as 'a unique and unprecedented harm to smartphones'.

However, they did not see that when using a computer, users generally need users to sit upright and sit in a sitting position. However, the advent of smart phones has uniquely expanded all kinds of entertainment and lazy scenes to lying on the bed and spreading out on the sofa. It is foreseeable that bone diseases such as scoliosis and frozen shoulder caused by the use of smartphones will inevitably be innumerable in the future.

And as we all know, we know from elementary school that lying down and looking at things can cause significant damage to a person's eyesight. The so-called 'convenience' of smartphones is actually to stimulate the last trace of laziness in human nature, but it makes people short-sighted and consumeristic, thus paying the price of health.

A good product must have a sense of social responsibility, and it is not possible to lure users to extreme indulgence (harmony) just for money. There is still a clear distinction between 'convenience' and 'longitudinal (harmonious) desire', and there is still a measure for the intervention of public order and good customs. That measure is whether there is an inducement to harm the health and other abilities of the user. Otherwise, wouldn't drugs also be in the category of 'why should we interfere if society has this demand'?

Second, we talked about the damage that smartphones do to human self-control and free will. You may not have thought of a problem: when a minor who lacks self-control and has an immature mind uses a computer to play games, its concealment is relatively low, and parents can also guide their children on the right path. Once a minor uses a smartphone to play games, the probability of being monitored is greatly reduced, and even in the future, he can play games in the library and study room, and completely degenerate into a waste.

THEN, TRADITIONAL COMPUTERS AND MOBILE PHONES HAVE INPUT DEVICES SUCH AS KEYBOARDS WITH MECHANICAL STRUCTURES, WHILE SMARTPHONES ARE FULL-SCREENS, ESPECIALLY UNSCRUPULOUS ENTERPRISES REPRESENTED BY IPHONES, ARE MORE IN ORDER TO PURSUE THE LONGITUDINAL (HARMONIOUS) DESIRE FOR AESTHETICS, AND GUIDE THE SOCIETY TO 'NO KEYS FOR BEAUTY', LEAVING ONLY ONE HOME BUTTON, AND THE REST ARE FULL TOUCH.

There is no problem with the touch itself, and if it is a large-screen device, you can completely fix the keys. However, the size of the mobile phone device is stiff, but the display area is only so large. At this time, if you still do fixed key input, there will be troubles such as inconvenience to press up, can't see clearly, or need to be dragged frequently. WHAT IS THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM ON IPHONE AND OTHER SMARTPHONES? IS TO READJUST THE KEYS, IRREGULAR, AND THE PAGE CAN GENERALLY BE ZOOMED AND SCALED.

Don't underestimate this design, over time, the mechanism of 'generating independent needs first, then typing the keyboard, and waiting for screen feedback' that human beings have cultivated from the traditional computer and mobile phone era will be replaced by "I don't know what I want, look at the screen first, and choose one of the things that can be pressed and selected on the screen".

This is very terrifying, just like what Mr. Lu Xun said in his "Doctrine of Bringing Things", which will gradually evolve the national character from 'I want it, use my brain, and take it myself' to 'see what foreign garbage is stuffed by foreign adults, and gradually jump from it'. People will become more swayed by recommendations and lists, and lose their free will to think independently.

Coupled with the limited display of mobile phone screens, the future will inevitably lead to the contradiction of narrow selection after the content is greatly enriched. Users are more dependent on the mainstream and the vulgar. In the end, all those who are not strong-willed may be led by Joe Immortal and his ilk to become slaves of consumerism.

Having said all this, some judges may occasionally have the illusion that we are anti-technology, anti-progress, anti-convenience – this is really a misunderstanding. Because we have never been about technology, progress, and convenience. We welcome the added convenience that smartphones can bring.

We are just saying that human beings should wait for the technical shortcomings of all aspects of electronic hardware technology to be made up for before trying to make a new generation of personal terminals, rather than taking out the defective form of smartphones to lure people into consumerism first.

For example, we can wait for a few more years of battery technology to develop, flash fast rush wireless charging, or a multiple leap in energy storage density.

For example, we can wait for low-energy projection technology, or even 3D stereoscopic projection technology to improve, or turn to the maturity of VR panoramic retina display technology. Let the content display volume of intelligent push be greatly enriched, instead of just staring at a few inches of a screen, covering only a few tenths of the area of human binocular vision, and displaying a few pitiful 'most mainstream and popular' content.

For example, we can wait for the advancement of motion capture technology, including the corresponding sensors, or for the maturity of speech recognition input. We can use human language to command the future personal hardware to operate accordingly, or to the virtual keyboard projected out of thin air, to carry out volley hand operation, without looking at the keyboard, blind typing, let the motion capture sensor capture the human hand movements to identify what words they typed——

All this can help human beings reap the convenience of scientific and technological progress while avoiding the harm of the defective mode of smart phones to human free will, self-control, privacy, and health. Therefore, to sum up, we believe that the emergence of smartphones is really doing more harm than good, thank you!"

The long-lasting applause of "Whoa, Whoa, Whoa......" does not need dubbing at all. All the audience, the judges, were completely impressed.

The big hats of "anti-intellectual" and "anti-technology" should have been powerful weapons for the Jinling University team, but they were "turned around" by the other party, and they returned the favor with the other way.

Even opposing a new technology product can be so chic and free.

The cameraman of CCTV followed Yu Meiqin's tone and frustration throughout the whole process, and it seemed that even the camera had a soul to breathe.

"It's so exciting, I guess it's completely out of play. One of the best games of the year can't be compared to anything before. Yu Qiuyu and Luo Fatzi both thought so.

Because the positive side starts first and then summarizes, after Yu Meiqin finishes speaking, Tennesie on the positive side has to say another four minutes. It's a pity that no one thinks that there will be suspense in the game.

It's just that for the dignity of the former world runner-up and the top five domestic universities, Tennesie must fight until the last moment.

In this sense, Jinling University is worthy of being the strongest opponent Feng Jianxiong has encountered so far.

In her final closing arguments, Tennesie did not use those clichés to passively resist. After exchanging words with her main teammate Meng Dana on the spot, she came up with some new ideas and resisted.

For example, the following passage:

"Marcos once said, 'When the market creates a demand, it can promote the progress of science and technology more than ten universities', so no scientific development can be a castle in the air. Without smartphones, how would it be possible for humans to discover the unique drawbacks of these smartphones through trial and error, so as to avoid these problems in the next generation of personal intelligence hardware in the future?

Therefore, all the disadvantages are still only temporary problems in the process of development. The opponent's repeated use of a mechanical, rigid point of view to look at a development that should be viewed with Marcos' attention to development is itself a metaphysical error.

Therefore, we believe that all the scientific and technological progress, experience accumulation, and demand momentum brought about by human beings in the process of development and trial and error of smart phones are part of the 'benefits' brought by smart phones, and they cannot be viewed separately. Nor can we deny the valuable accumulation of human experience through trial and error just because humans will be able to get rid of the 'drawbacks' of smartphones in the future......"

"Therefore, we insist that all these 'advantages' are counted, and the emergence of smart phones is obviously 'more beneficial than disadvantageous' for all human society!"

After this summary statement, Jinling University can be regarded as worthy of its own signboard and dignity.

Although, it can only be done in the summary statement to make some vague and unsubstantiated shouting, and the probative power is no longer enough to save the overall situation.

It turns out that in the audience and judges' questions after the game.

The value of this view is also attributed to trial and error, "If all the experience accumulated after trial and error and the benefits of progress can be attributed to trial and error." Wouldn't it be that the patients who were poisoned to death by the new drugs that ventured into clinical trials also died as they deserved?"

It is true that mistakes can be learned, but experience does not have to be solved by making mistakes. Otherwise, why do human beings need so much risk control and learning?

The die is cast.

After five minutes of intense deliberations, Yu Qiuyu made a brief comment on behalf of the jury, in which he also mentioned the above sophistry and considered it to be one of the important points lost by the Jinling University team. Of course, the more pages of the review are almost praising the accuracy and subtlety of the tactical entry points of the division and brigade.

“…… All in all, it was one of the best games I've seen this year. Sometimes I even think that if today's team can qualify for the Group B final of last year's Sing Tao, they will definitely win the championship - of course, just a joke. Now, on behalf of the jury, I would like to submit the results to the moderator, who will officially announce the results of the competition. ”

After that, Yu Qiuyu handed an envelope to the host of CCTV with both hands.

"Now I announce: The best debater in this competition is the second debater of the opposing side, Feng Jianxiong!"

"The jury's verdict is: 1:4, the Jinling Normal University team wins!