Dude, come on. You can surely see where this line of argument leads. Are you seriously defending a society that continually and arbitrarily raises the barriers to accessing services?

On what criteria are those barriers raised? Those decisions are being outsourced by states -- which (democratic) societies elect to act in their best interests -- to monopolies that have none of those responsibilities. In fact, as your comments illustrate, market pressure and competition provide neat justifications to avoid those responsibilities. They lead to a race to the bottom, not the top.

It’s called progress. You can always become Amish. You make the choice - you suffer the consequences of your choice.

If you can’t for some reason use a smart phone, then yes the college should offer assistance just like most colleges offer assistance for people with disabilities.

Progress implies society is becoming better, more equitable, and a heathier environment to live in. O don't see how mandating smartphone ownership works towards any of those.

Limiting access to services that were previously available is certainly not progress.