iPhone birth – A new working paper claims iPhones may be “birth control,” but scrutiny of the data and comparison to other early smartphones undercuts the headline. In the same column, Elon Musk’s alleged AI hardware hints at a future where specialist devices—sold as conveni
For a device that first went on sale on June 29, 2007, the iPhone is still finding new ways to get blamed.
This week’s “Sunday Reboot” looks at a working paper raised in the early days of the iPhone era—released on July 1 and circulated through the National Bureau of Economic Research—with a claim that sounds like a tabloid headline: “Is the iPhone Birth Control?” The paper argues that time-use and sexual-behavior evidence from the United States is consistent with the iPhone reducing in-person interactions. increasing pornography use. and reducing sexual frequency.
On paper, the story practically writes itself. The column’s framing is clear: when you hear the claim, you can see why people might nod along and move on. But then the assumptions start to wobble.
Scrutiny lands on the details. AppleInsider William Gallagher reviewed the report and pointed to catches in the implied conclusion. The first is that this isn’t truly an iPhone-only phenomenon. Back when the device was new, multiple other gadgets were already capable of being used in illicit ways.
The bigger problem is the dataset. The paper focuses on AT&T users between 2005 and 2011. That range includes two years before the iPhone existed, and it also overlaps with the period when the iPhone was exclusive to AT&T.
There’s also the matter of what AT&T was actually selling. The column notes that AT&T sold plenty of early smartphones besides the iPhone—Blackberries. the HTC-based AT&T Tilt. the Nokia N75. and others were all available from the carrier. not just iPhones. Even the working paper acknowledges this in part. saying it does not claim the iPhone was the sole cause of the post-2007 decline.
What the report does, the column says, is provide estimates that imply the modern smartphone played a “sizable role” in the decline of U.S. births. That leaves critics with an opening to challenge the story the headline seems to tell.
Then there’s the graph used as proof. The column describes a pattern where searches for “porn” surged in 2014, then fell back to almost 2009 levels again by 2024. The implication drawn in the column is that the “novelty” effect of accessing specialist content wherever people wanted may have faded—making the evidence less clean than it first appears.
Put together, the criticism is sharper than it sounds at the top. The working paper, as described here, is trying to make a point but lands with too many asterisks for it to be taken as decisive proof.
The column ends up asking what kind of paper this really was. Was it clickbait aimed at grabbing attention during downtime?. Or was it a bid to secure grant funding?. Maybe, it suggests without claiming certainty, it was even an excuse to work with adult material without running into HR. The punchline is simple: Betteridge’s law stays intact.
And in the same breath, the column turns from iPhone “effects” on society to another kind of device debate—whether the next wave of AI hardware will actually help, or just arrive because someone wants it to exist.
The “Sunday Reboot” points to a story about Elon Musk’s xAI and a prototype that was supposedly shown to investors for an AI device. Musk later called the claim “utterly false.” The column treats that denial as meaningful less because it proves something. and more because it underlines the appetite for specialist AI hardware in general.
The Humane AI pin and the Rabbit R1 are used as recent reminders that these bets can crash hard. The column notes that Humane required a $24 per month subscription for the AI bit, and that it ultimately failed. The Humane pin’s crash-and-burn matters because it sets the tone for why consumers—and budgets—should be wary of a third attempt.
Even so, the column suggests the hardware side may not be the hardest part. Rumors and patents point to Apple continuing down an AI-focused path with non-standalone items. including the possibility that AirPods could get cameras to support Apple Intelligence running on an iPhone. The detail that matters most in the column is how the workflow would be structured: the AirPods or smart glasses wouldn’t have to be “smart” on their own as long as they could pass data to the iPhone. described as the “brain” of the operation.
That same logic, it argues, makes it easier to imagine AI access packaged into dedicated gear—without requiring each device to do everything locally.
Humane’s failure still looms in the background, though. The column contrasts subscription resistance in 2023 with a 2026 reality where people are already closely aware of what they pay for access to major AI services. It’s the kind of shift that can make a previously unpopular price model feel normal.
The column then draws a direct line to what it expects could happen next. It says it would be “not hard to imagine” OpenAI releasing hardware that taps into paid services like ChatGPT. It even adds that you wouldn’t need to imagine it all, because an LLM could talk about hardware work with Jony Ive.
For Musk, the column returns to the idea that it would be “astounding if one wasn’t being actively developed,” even with his denial about xAI’s alleged prototype. Putting Grok access on a device like that is described as a natural progression—something his companies could build toward quickly.
The closing worry. aimed like a slow-moving warning rather than a headline. is that future devices could end up being blamed for social outcomes again. The column jokes about the risk of headlines in 20 years time about Musk’s prototype lowering the birth rate—because. for better or worse. the pattern of turning new technology into an all-purpose explanation is already well underway.
And if the iPhone case shows how quickly claims can outrun the evidence. the rest of the column makes the same point with different stakes: whether the hardware is a pin. a ring. a headset. or a pair of AirPods with cameras. people will eventually ask the same question—what exactly is the device supposed to change in daily life?.
iPhone AI devices Humane AI pin Rabbit R1 xAI Elon Musk Apple Intelligence AirPods rumors birth rate pornography search trends AT&T smartphone market National Bureau of Economic Research