[HN Gopher] A French village that voted to ban scrolling in public
___________________________________________________________________
A French village that voted to ban scrolling in public
Author : giuliomagnifico
Score : 91 points
Date : 2024-02-10 16:06 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| andy99 wrote:
| Banning doesn't make sense. I'd be ok with a campaign to try and
| make it socially unacceptable, like smoking.
| _fat_santa wrote:
| Eh even then, if I'm sitting on a park bench smoking and you
| sit next to me, there's a certain measurable harm that you get
| because I'm smoking. But if I'm just scrolling HN on my phone?
| You can sit there and not be bothered at all.
| berkes wrote:
| If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our lives
| would improve.
|
| Human contact, even with strangers, has a profound impact on
| health, mental state and quality of life. This has been
| researched and proven over and over. We are simply wired to
| function in social groups. Our current state of individualism
| is rather exceptional, and a cause for many issues with
| (mental) health.
|
| So, yes, you scrolling HN has an effect on my health, because
| the reverse is unfortunately true too: loneliness (and
| isolation etc) have a negative effect on humans
| vigilans wrote:
| "If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our
| lives would improve."
|
| You haven't talked to me :D
| polishdude20 wrote:
| Yeah, it takes two people to talk and if I'm on my phone
| and someone starts talking to me, I'm more than willing
| to put it down and talk.
| JadeNB wrote:
| > If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our
| lives would improve.
|
| I'm wholly in sympathy with the idea that public life would
| be better if we spent less of it on our phone, but counting
| every good deed left undone as a harm done is a very
| dangerous road to go down.
| giantrobot wrote:
| > If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our
| lives would improve.
|
| Citation needed. The cohort that wants to talk to random
| strangers in my experience 1) significantly overvalue their
| opinions 2) seem unbothered by any behavior or body
| language saying "please leave me alone" and 3) are not
| nearly as interesting as they think.
|
| Just because I'm outdoors doesn't mean I signed up to be
| bothered by randos.
| krisoft wrote:
| > If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our
| lives would improve.
|
| It might be just my big city upbringing but the random
| people chatting me up in public almost always want
| something from me I would rather not give them. Most of
| them want my literal money. Either by scamming me or by
| just begging. Those who don't usually want to tell me about
| their faith and try to get me converted.
|
| Not saying it is all interactions. Have a few positive ones
| too, but the wast majority is not.
|
| The reason I am very skeptical about talking with strangers
| is evidence based and has nothing to do with phones. In
| fact it predates smartphones by decades.
|
| The idea that baning phone usage is going to make people
| less lonely is in itself preposterous. If you see me on my
| phone in public most likely i'm talking with one of my
| friends. If you are feeling so lonely that you want to
| force me to interact with you instead of them, then maybe
| you are the one who has a problem? Like join a club, invite
| people over for some board games or volunteer.
| LouisSayers wrote:
| I believe this is most likely a big city mindset (for
| good reason).
|
| After living in London a few years and returning back
| home, I realised how defensive and wary I'd become of
| stranger interaction.
|
| In London people might be trying to pickpocket you or
| sell you something, but in smaller towns I've found most
| of the time people are genuinely being friendly or asking
| for directions etc
| renewiltord wrote:
| I've almost always lived in big cities myself and had
| many pleasant conversations. But I'm pretty good at
| profiling.
| lloeki wrote:
| It might come as shocking, but it used to be the case
| that one could _meet new people_ in the street, because
| the probability of positive human contact dwarfed the
| scammers or beggars you describe.
|
| Couples that met on a bus commute was a trope with a
| basis in reality; nowadays everyone's isolated,
| headphones on, eyes glued on a phone. The first reaction
| to human contact in public spaces is one of distrust and
| defence.
|
| > The idea that baning phone usage is going to make
| people less lonely is in itself preposterous.
|
| It's not magic; it's a signal, a public statement.
| krisoft wrote:
| > It might come as shocking, but it used to be the case
| that one could meet new people in the street, because the
| probability of positive human contact dwarfed the
| scammers or beggars you describe.
|
| That sounds good. I was in my early twenties when
| smartphones went from a curiosity you heard about on the
| TV to a reality in many hands. Scammers and beggars
| masively outweighted positive random contacts even
| before. Phones and headphones did not cause this where I
| have grown up.
| berkes wrote:
| One of the most famous experiments that prove exactly
| this were done in the NY subways. (In the eighties) on
| mobile, so don't have a link to the paper at hand.
| fzeroracer wrote:
| I grew up in a small suburban area where a lot of my
| learned behaviors came from being a mall rat. Since that
| was the major place I socialized (in the arcades), you
| quickly learned how to try and signal you're not willing
| to talk or engage with people. Mainly because malls had a
| ton of smaller stalls staffed with sales people who would
| immediately try to pull you aside if you even gave them a
| side glance and try to sell you a phone plan or other
| things.
| rascul wrote:
| > If, instead of scrolling HN, you talked to me, both our
| lives would improve.
|
| Talking to random strangers in public is generally very
| awkward and unpleasant for me and I don't see how
| subjecting myself to that would improve my life in the
| general case.
| berkes wrote:
| Me too. But science tells it's the reverse. Obv.
| statistics, so it doesn't apply to your personal
| situation.
|
| Yet, I, introvert++ have had the best moments when
| travelling, talked to random strangers or exchanged
| beers, music and stories when stuck in transport. This
| still comes out as net positive for me in all the decades
| of having awkward conversations, unwanted attention or
| just social interaction. I won't give up those hundred of
| situations that made me uncomfortable for the few that
| truly changed my life.
| fzeroracer wrote:
| The last thing my introverted-ass wants to experience is
| someone assuming that they're making my life better by
| randomly chatting with me on the street.
|
| I spend all day at work talking with people, being in
| meetings and having said human contact. Outside of work I
| prefer to control that contact, hence why I walk around in
| public with big obvious headphones on.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| As an introvert the last thing I want is random people
| deciding that me trying to enjoy some peace on a park bench
| is license to try to "improve" my life by talking to me.
| Almost every stranger who has thought they were "improving"
| my life by talking to me, has either had no impact, or
| actively made it worse.
|
| Plus, it's such a culturally dependent thing, Americans are
| known for always engaging in little bits of random
| conversation and pleasantries with total strangers, but
| other cultures can see it as either cheap and shallow or
| weird and creepy, and of course if someone sees it as
| either of those, it isn't going to help their loneliness.
| coldtea wrote:
| I'd take second hand smoke over an unsociable society of
| human-zombies scrolling around in public.
| throwanem wrote:
| After twenty years smoking and close to a decade quit I
| still can't smell it but want to light up one of my own.
| (I'd say 'bum one', but even so evanescent an unplanned
| interaction seems to take people the wrong way, these
| days...)
|
| I'd still call it the same way you would, if anyone gave me
| the chance. Wouldn't even have to think it over.
| standardUser wrote:
| Where do you live that you feel like you are surrounded by
| scrolling zombies?
| coldtea wrote:
| In Western Europe, but does it matter? Most modern cities
| would qualify...
| standardUser wrote:
| I live in Manhattan and I would not describe the scene
| here as 'zombies on phones'. If there is noticeable anti-
| social trend here it would be headphones, not scrolling.
| ur-whale wrote:
| > You can sit there and not be bothered at all.
|
| Radiations man, radiations!
| throw98989 wrote:
| > there's a certain measurable harm that you get because I'm
| smoking
|
| Do you really believe that? Do you actually believe you get a
| "measurable harm" due to a few minutes of so-called "second
| hand smoke"? Does ANYONE actually believe that?
|
| I'm not sure how people just buy into small memes and make no
| use of common sense, whatsoever.
| sandgiant wrote:
| Sounds like it's more of a campaign than an actual ban.
|
| > It is not enforceable by police - officers could not stop or
| fine people scrolling in the street because there is no
| national law against smartphones - but the mayor describes it
| as an incitement to stop scrolling and guidance for limiting
| phone use.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| It sounds silly on its face but these things can have
| impacts. Say that a store bans the use of phones. Is this
| ordinance a defense against a discrimination suite brought by
| someone kicked out while using a translation or vision app?
| The store would say that it was simply acting in support of a
| local ordinance.
| dannyw wrote:
| Obviously there's discretion at play. No shopkeeper is
| going to kick out a mum who's taking a call from her son
| who's in trouble.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Haha you think smoking is socially unacceptable in France? By
| some measures it is more popular than ever.
| mijamo wrote:
| I suppose "by some measure" means "by none whatsoever"?
| Tobacco sales are at lowest point for 50 years, and even
| occasional usage is close to 50y low.
|
| I remember when you couldn't go anywhere without smelling
| cold tobacco, even in trains and buses, not even talking
| about might clubs and restaurants... Now even outside many
| smokers are considerate and will avoid smoking in your
| direction, especially when you have kids, which was
| definitely not the case 20 years ago!
| jeffbee wrote:
| But among youth the prevalence of smoking is increasing
| again, even if they buy less tobacco.
|
| ETA: I guess you are objecting to my "worse than ever"
| characterization, and you are probably right, but it's
| shocking to drop into France where youth smoking is visibly
| more common than it was 15-25 years ago, mother-daughter
| smoking is a thing, young adult smoking might be only
| 40-50% but that's hard to differentiate from 100% and it's
| 10x higher than some other western nations so it seems
| crazy.
| dylan604 wrote:
| But smoking is banned in certain places punishable by fines.
| So, why not publicly scrolling while walking down the street?
| You can't drive while distracted (ignoring the fact every
| dumbass does it), so why not make distracted walking
| punishable?
| seszett wrote:
| There's no particular reason not to do it, it's just that
| it's not in the power of a mayor, at least in France.
| arlort wrote:
| There is a law against smoking in certain places, a village
| can't put in place an equivalent law against this
| fhdkweig wrote:
| When a pedestrian bumps into another, it isn't expensive
| property damage and potential death.
| playingalong wrote:
| There are countries this is banned.
| cscurmudgeon wrote:
| What's next? Can't walk while drunk? Someone has to carry you
| on their shoulders?
|
| Banning thinking and daydreaming while walking?
|
| License for walking, lanes for walking and turn signals on
| your shoulders?
|
| For your safety.
| dylan604 wrote:
| i second the motion.
|
| i'd now like to move to the next item on the agenda and
| propose banning of smart phones followed by all social
| media.
| cscurmudgeon wrote:
| Lets ban the internet itself. And then ban
| reading/writing too.
| standardUser wrote:
| People on their phones rarely get in my way. I live in a big
| city and walk everywhere and it really isn't a problem. I
| wonder if people in smaller cities/towns are less adept at
| walking and using their phone, because people seem to get
| very upset about it. I only get upset when people stop in the
| middle of the sidewalk, which sometimes involves a phone and
| sometimes not.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Lets ban walking while talking too then, that is also
| distracted walking, and as any fast walker can attest to,
| people walking slowly while absorbed in conversation and
| hogging the entire width of the sidewalk are only second to
| people weaving through pedestrians on bicycles in causing
| trouble.
| thih9 wrote:
| > I'd be ok with a campaign to try and make it socially
| unacceptable, like smoking.
|
| Why though? I'm fine with shunning smokers - these directly
| affect the others in a negative way.
|
| Scrolling seems harmless to others; no reason for me to make it
| socially unacceptable.
| amadeuspagel wrote:
| Smoking is also banned in many places.
| davidw wrote:
| "Hear ye, hear ye ..."
|
| "Hello, sir, do you have a license for that scroll?"
|
| "No, I am but a crier here to announce..."
|
| "The rule is no unlicensed scrolling. We're going to have to take
| that scroll into custody"
| ysofunny wrote:
| right now it's only the scrolls
|
| but I bet they're coming for the parchments later then the
| papers and finally the books!
|
| when does it end!!??
| mondobe wrote:
| Soon they won't even let us use our smartphones!
| croisillon wrote:
| it could lead to dancing!
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| This definitely screws over all the town olden times
| philosophers too.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| And the grey beard wizards who love to pour over them.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| I'll believe it when I see a French court actually enforce this
| ordinance. It seems too vague and rights-limiting to be more than
| a publicity stunt.
|
| I also chuckle at a French government trying to encourage people
| to spend more time in public. Throughout history French
| governments have famously tried to keep people from taking to the
| streets. Most every revolt began with a conversation in a pub or
| coffee shop.
| bowsamic wrote:
| Read the article, they say in it that they won't actually try
| to enforce it
| JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B wrote:
| Because they can't and because this "ban" is ridiculous.
| bowsamic wrote:
| Right but it doesn't seem like their intent was to do so
| ZoomerCretin wrote:
| Being friendless has a higher negative impact on lifespan than
| smoking. It's not a big stretch to link phone use to the huge
| increase in depression, anxiety, and poor social skills. And just
| like smoking, phone use in public isn't limited to the person
| using it. You can't exactly have a conversation with someone who
| is on their phone. I find myself pulling my phone out whenever my
| companions also do so.
|
| If this seems a bit heavy-handed, it's because damaging and
| addictive habits require collective action to stop. No one walks
| down the street in San Francisco and tries to convince heroin
| addicts to stop for other peoples' good. No one tries to tell
| drunks and alcoholics to stop overdoing it.
|
| They are definitely early, and possibly the first place to do
| this, but they will surely not be the last. Our youth have been
| ruined by cheap, omnipresent, and never ending social media
| content. This is a step in the right direction to make public
| spaces social again.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Strangers out on the street are largely out doing something or
| going somewhere and are unlikely to want to strike up a
| conversation.
|
| People who are friendless ought to get a job, volunteer, get a
| hobby, join a group, go to a social space instead of expecting
| strangers to entertain them.
| throwanem wrote:
| Yeah, God forfend people should act human to one another,
| right?
| michaelmrose wrote:
| You aren't entitled to other people's time. You should try
| to earn it by doing something together with people that
| both enjoy. I volunteer at a cat shelter for instance. Feed
| some cats, play with the kittens then shoot the shit with
| the other volunteers.
| throwanem wrote:
| I never understand where it comes from, this idea that an
| unplanned social interaction in public necessarily
| constitutes one person choosing to waste the time of
| others, or that no one ever has any choice but to let an
| unwelcome interaction persist indefinitely. It gives the
| impression of a somewhat socially impoverished style of
| life, but I assume that's no more accurate a perspective
| than anyone else's.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| I think this opinion differs both geographically and
| generationally. Uban/young/northern people are less apt
| to want to socialize with strangers. Neither preference
| is inherently wrong I tend to think the strangers you are
| discussing know better than you what is or isn't a waste
| of their own time.
|
| For practical purposes most folks just aren't apt to have
| anything useful to contribute in 3 minutes. I'm 43 and I
| don't think I have EVER got anything useful out of such
| an interaction. It's just pure social petting like
| monkey's picking bugs off one another and I don't get
| anything out of it nor feel obligated to do it when
| walking around. I don't feel socially impoverished
| because I have actual social interactions in contexts
| which I feel are useful or beneficial.
|
| My theory is the people that have more need of such
| social petting are aggrieved at changing social
| standards. It's just not my problem.
| throwanem wrote:
| "Like monkeys picking bugs off one another" is a hell of
| a thing for a hominin to say. I take your point about
| geography and generational change, and I don't think
| you're wrong, but I'm also not at all convinced this is a
| healthy habit for a species remarkably social even among
| primates.
| lloeki wrote:
| If I go to a cat shelter it's to help cats and interact
| with cats, how dare you steal that time from me with your
| simiesque jibberjabber!
|
| There's nothing specific to any context+ that would let
| presuppose that anyone's up for socialisation. The only
| thing in common is that two people have volunteered to
| feed cats. It is just as much a commonality as me
| noticing someone in a bus or park reading a book and
| saying "hey I've been meaning to read that one, WDYT of
| it so far?".
|
| The only way to know, is... to address the person,
| thereby taking a risk at either robbing them of a bit of
| time, or - $deity forbid - meeting someone nice, if for a
| fleeting moment. They are of course at liberty to turn
| the attempt down, a perfectly valid response that should
| be treated with utmost respect.
|
| + well, except things like parties or blind dates.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| It puts you in the same space at a time when your
| attention isn't fully engaged by other matters nor the
| task at hand with the same person for hours every week.
|
| Furthermore at least some conversation is apt to be
| started for functional reasons.
|
| This creates the space, opportunity, and time for
| meaningful conversation and interaction. Contrast this to
| standing in line for food together for 2 minutes with
| someone you aren't apt to ever meet again.
| standardUser wrote:
| "Our youth have been ruined..."
|
| I don't get where this hyperbole comes from. Wasn't every
| generation "ruined" by this, that or the other thing? We need
| to maintain some perspective. The youth are the more relevant
| ones here, not us.
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| I would note that friendship has never been defined by the
| casual and vapid interactions at the grocery store. My longest
| lasting friendships have been ones I formed on irc 30 years ago
| and still go on, despite only rarely speaking face to face.
|
| People who don't understand something that didn't exist when
| they grew up assume it must not be possible. People assume that
| games crush creativity, that social interaction online is not
| _actually_ social interaction. These same biases based on "the
| way we did it" show up in the RTO debate and other areas of
| society that are being changed with a new mode of interactions.
|
| Human beings are remarkably adaptable, and I don't think for
| one second that online interactions are _necessarily_ worse. I
| do think we are going through a transient period where as a
| society we adjust, and transient periods are rough. But as we
| learn to exist with these new modes of living we, as a social
| whole, will simply adapt how we interact and live, create new
| social rules about how to best exist with these new tools.
|
| As we did with language, written words, books, newspapers,
| telegraphs, radio, telephones, television, etc. Every one of
| these was greeted with fear and disdain, and social disruption
| as we settled through a period of transformation. This one is
| no different.
|
| Hand wringing and bans and teeth gnashing will happen, won't
| help, and won't alter the course of a single thing. Better,
| IMO, to lean into learning how to live with these advances in a
| healthy way and teach your children that. Banning them from
| learning the complexities of a new social medium until they're
| old enough to get into serious trouble will only hurt your
| kids.
| NotYourLawyer wrote:
| > The village has also approved a charter for families on
| children's use of screens: no screens of any kind in the morning,
| no screens in bedrooms, no screens before bed or during meals.
|
| Yikes. Who actually wants the government regulating something
| like this?
| pharrington wrote:
| The villagers want it, and they have gotten it _precisely at
| the scale of the village they live in_.
|
| edit: moved the bulk of my comment upthread
| Narishma wrote:
| These are recommendations, not regulation.
| wand3r wrote:
| This is an interesting idea: Voting on the norms of society even
| if not strictly enforceable. I would love a referendum on tipping
| in my American state.
|
| The proposed solution that at least 54% of this village have
| recognized is that the internet has really eroded societal bonds.
| The optimization of everything, coupled with the easy on-demand
| connection provided by phones is a big problem for society. It's
| like eating cake all the time, its easy and feels good in the
| moment but it will likely have negative societal impacts.
|
| I'll speak for America, but I am sure it isn't unique here. The
| optimization of everything to short term profit & loss coupled
| with phones has made society pretty unpleasant.
|
| - Grocery stores have removed handles from bags and most tellers.
|
| - Extremely uniform big box stores are primarily all that are
| left
|
| - Shopping is fully online
|
| - Workers have been reduced as much as possible to automata in
| low status jobs.
|
| - Due to the quality and quantity of data, of all goods are
| priced to the absolute max society can bear and wages are
| suppressed to the extent possible as well.
|
| - Connection with society is primarily done through a screen and
| id ephemeral
|
| I could go on. The point is that in concert, this has seriously
| changed our society even if any single change alone would be
| positive.
|
| Phones are simply a symptom of a society that is lonely and
| disconnected and a biological psychology that makes adaptation to
| this change hard/impossible. It's not neccesarily negative, but
| we will see how this shapes society when gen-z and gen alpha are
| in their 40s.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| Interestingly the article mentioned that some young people
| raised an objection that they had "nothing else to do" without
| their phones.
|
| In response the mayor promised new investment into sports,
| recreation, libraries and book sharing... In other words,
| there's more going on here than just the "phone ban", but a
| broader attempt to reconnect and rehumanise the village life.
|
| My concern is that even with the social and financial will to
| restore a more convivial lifestyle, those young people won't be
| able to engage. Having been raised by screens they are already
| so psychologically altered (damaged?) as to be lost.
|
| The assumption that life can "go back" may be misguided, and
| that makes this an experiment worth watching.
| rapind wrote:
| I'm pretty sure (like 99%) that you can unlearn social media
| and phone bad habits if forced to with minimal fuss. Just go
| on a month long camping retreat (sans screens) and you'll see
| how quickly we adapt.
| qingcharles wrote:
| Go to jail. I read over 800 books that way. Still installed
| TikTok the day I got out, though.
| glitchcrab wrote:
| How long were you in for to read that many books?
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| I used to read 500 books in a single summer as a
| teenager. I don't know how much free time you have in
| prison, but I can totally see doing 800 books in just a
| year or two.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Your perspective is as always refreshing and unique.
| Thank you :) I hope to do my reading outside of jail and
| I still haven't installed TikTok and never will but I
| think my kids would be happy to agree with your position
| (probably minus the jail bit too).
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > if forced to
|
| That's definitely problematic and not where anyone wants
| this to go, right?
| rapind wrote:
| No. I was referring to forcing yourself if you wanted to
| run the experiment.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > forcing yourself
|
| Ah yes that's quite a different matter.
|
| My thoughts are that sure, when you are living and
| working alone, as happens to many of us at times, it _is_
| possible to successfully apply "force". Like making
| objects of temptation unavailable, maybe using a time-
| locked safe or taking a week away at tech-detox bootcamp.
|
| IIRC Johann Hari in "Stolen Focus" seemed to think this
| only ever created a temporary relief, a bit like dieting
| and then gaining rebound weight.
|
| What I wrote about in Digital Vegan was based on my
| interaction with heroin addicts, and is all about the
| friction that comes from peer pressure and groups that
| reinforce (mutually enforce) behaviours. Friends are a
| bigger problem than self-will in the arena of addiction.
| External force, even in peer relations, tends to have the
| opposite effects.
| anvil-on-my-toe wrote:
| Penalize tech companies for damaging children and put the
| money towards rehabilitation.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _"...had "nothing else to do" without their phones."_
|
| Now what would they have done before the advent of the
| smartphone? Turn the clock back and have them do that.
| forgotusername6 wrote:
| My generation drank, smoked, took drugs, hung around in
| large intimidating groups... I'm not exactly sure being
| hooked on smart phones is worse.
| alsetmusic wrote:
| We did the same, but only because a medium-sized city in
| a Midwest state offered nothing for young people to do.
| We could go bowling or go to the movies.
|
| Last week I met friends at a board game cafe / bar (I
| live on the west coast now) and there were tons of
| college students enjoying coffees and beers and pizza.
| There was still alcohol, but it wasn't the point of the
| evening. When I was their age, we got loaded to forget /
| escape our boredom.
|
| What I'm saying is that there's a positive outcome that
| can be reached through community investment.
| bluefirebrand wrote:
| > there were tons of college students enjoying coffees
| and beers and pizza.
|
| So what are High School students supposed to do? They
| often don't have the money to go spend to hang out
| someplace, and even if they did, can they actually get
| there? Maybe with an hour of transit time each way or
| with a friend's parent who can drive them.
|
| The complaint of "I don't have anything to do without my
| phone" is probably coming from a younger group than
| College Students in general.
| jacobolus wrote:
| When I was in high school we would go to the public park,
| which was free.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Sorry for you, but I think we could show that many (most)
| kids were not doing those things.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| given the epidemic of sexlessness and general delay of
| adulthood among young people I don't understand the
| demonization. Smoking, drinking and getting into some
| trouble have been important rituals for a long time for a
| reason.
|
| Now we've traded it in for solipsistic, depressed, pill
| hooked anti-social teens because of an obsession with
| health at the cost of everything else. The pandemic of
| course did its part to accelerate that trend. Hitchens
| anticipated it a generation ago.
|
| Your body will recover from some stupidities in your
| teens and young adulthood, having your mind glued to your
| phone instead of having a real life for your formative
| years, not so sure.
| bluefirebrand wrote:
| Spent time in shopping malls?
|
| Or at an arcade? Or a rec center? Or at church?
|
| Or some other thing outside of their house that doesn't
| exist anymore in any real way?
|
| The death of the third space outside of school/work and
| home has been awful for society tbh.
| SkiFire13 wrote:
| > In response the mayor *promised* new investment
|
| I mean, we all know how this is gonna end.
| lemming wrote:
| Here's an article discussing a recent law change here in NZ
| banning phones from schools. The upshot seems to be that more
| normal human relationships come back pretty quickly, although
| this is still very recent so it's hard to tell definitively.
|
| https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/508614/school-phone-
| ban-...
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| Amazing. Adaptation at work. Hard to believe how well that
| went. Bookmarked for further research, thanks. Maybe that
| explains a deep fear latent in the tech industry. That in
| reality someone could say "Enough. No more smartphones!",
| and a whole generation could just turn around and say
| "Okay. No worries. What's next?"
| creer wrote:
| > In other words, there's more going on here than just the
| "phone ban", but a broader attempt to reconnect and
| rehumanise the village life.
|
| No there isn't: "In response the mayor promised". Namely, the
| mayor and their gang achieved THEIR objective first and blah
| blah the rest.
| blackshaw wrote:
| You forgot "restaurants that no longer provide printed menus
| and expect you to view the menu on your phone instead".
|
| Dear fucking God I will go to my grave complaining about how
| much I hate this trend.
| russellbeattie wrote:
| Either it will negatively affect the bottom line and stop, or
| diners will get used to it and it'll continue.
|
| Or it'll actually boost profits from people having the menu
| on their phone for dine-out ordering, allow the restaurant to
| update pricing more easily matching their costs, and of
| course the savings from not having to print physical menus.
|
| Time will tell. I'd bet on the latter.
| callalex wrote:
| It's not like the restraints we're ever cleaning the menus
| everyone touches before...I like having control over my own
| hand hygiene just before eating.
| np- wrote:
| As a counterpoint, most people use their phones daily while
| sitting on the toilet and very rarely sanitize it. You may
| be diligent in keeping it sanitary but the past 50 people
| who kept their phones on the table while reading the menu
| probably didn't (and the wet rag the bus person wipes the
| table down with probably doesn't do much either).
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| I do not believe that most people use their phones on the
| toilet at all, much less daily. It would be incredibly
| stupid to risk dropping your phone in the toilet just so
| you have something to look at for the <1 min it takes to
| do your business.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| He's referring to when taking a dump. Of course urinating
| is too quick to involve using a phone.
| seabass-labrax wrote:
| Cutlery is your saviour :)
| j1elo wrote:
| I just play dumb and ask for a physical menu, claiming that
| my phone broke this morning. Adapt the experiment for the
| number of people. With 2, the other one might say "and I'm
| out of battery". 3 could be "mine I forgot at home". And 4+
| people are already too many to reasonably expect customers to
| share a single phone between them all.
|
| It's all just a social experiment which hopefully ends up
| trickling up and making owners aware how stupid it is to
| expect everyone to bring a phone in their pockets in order to
| being able to order food.
|
| Some times it's not even a lie: as part of mentally cleaning
| up from an intense addiction to social media, I've forced
| myself into offline mode and purposely leave the phone at
| home from time to time.
| PhasmaFelis wrote:
| You can skip the theatrics and just say "I'd like a menu,
| please."
| blackshaw wrote:
| I always do, but increasingly I'm finding places don't
| even have one to give me.
| qingcharles wrote:
| I love how if you pay for your whole grocery order on Amazon
| with food stamps (because you are below the poverty line)
| Amazon still recommends you pay a minimum $10 tip from a debit
| card on your order.
| virtue3 wrote:
| Nothing is more American than taking government money and
| then not paying your workers enough on top of it requiring
| your customers to determine if your workers receive a fair
| wage or not.
|
| It's like how CA taxes you on your unemployment insurance
| income.
| killingtime74 wrote:
| Australia taxes your unemployment insurance income.
| Many/most welfare payments in fact.
| sfRattan wrote:
| > The proposed solution that at least 54% of this village have
| recognized is that the internet has really eroded societal
| bonds.
|
| _Just under 11% of the village support the measure strongly
| enough to vote for it_. Not 54%. Only 20% of the local
| electorate voted at all.
|
| On that basis, it's probably a good thing the measure is
| unenforceable.
| downut wrote:
| I think that as long as a) the effects of the measure were
| well communicated and b) there were no significant
| impediments to actually voting, then the percent that vote is
| immaterial and the result of the vote should stand for
| everyone.
|
| After all this is the way the US conducts its elections. Many
| elections have very low turnout, yet the results are binding.
| sfRattan wrote:
| People have their own reasons for silence, even when a
| referendum is nonbinding. Interpreting that silence as
| consent or approval is the moral equivalent of a bulldozer.
| powersnail wrote:
| I think there's a difference between the result being
| binding, and that the vote stands for everyone.
|
| Abstaining leads to your opinion not being represented,
| which is to be expected. It doesn't follow that therefore
| other people's vote hence represent you.
|
| For the vote mentioned in the article, which is non-
| binding, non-enforceable, and ridiculous in its scope, I'd
| guess that most abstainers' real opinion on the matter, is
| that it's a waste of their time to participate.
| fasterik wrote:
| Most of this is just "things were better when I was young".
| It's nostalgia for a past that might have had some advantages
| for some people, but was also worse in a lot of ways.
|
| 40 years ago if you lived in a small town and had nerdy or
| niche interests, you were mocked, bullied, and socially
| isolated from your peers. Now you can find thousands of other
| people who share your exact passions and interests and connect
| with them through the internet.
|
| The status quo is always defended by people who are well
| adapted to it. But the status quo doesn't work for everyone.
| The internet age is making life a lot better for a lot of
| people who were previously marginalized.
|
| I'm sure that when Gen Z gets old, they'll be nostalgic for the
| good old days of TikTok and Instagram. They won't understand
| whatever new VR metaverse their children live in, just like
| Boomers and Gen Xers don't understand the current situation.
| It's a story as old as time, but the world will move on and
| continue improving.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| This is also what comes to mind with all of the "just go out
| and socialize like the good old days" suggestions. Being an
| introvert I'd still rather just stay indoors and enjoy my
| niche hobbies, if anything I'd be less social due to not
| being able to meet people with similar sets of interests to
| share spur of the moment thoughts with.
|
| Hell, the way I got into tech (in the very early smartphone
| days) in the first place was because my friend group - which
| isn't easily changed when you're not an adult - was not very
| accepting of my hobbies.
|
| There's also the mention of asking for directions instead of
| using map apps, have we already forgotten how frustrating an
| experience it used to be, trying to find a place, getting
| vague and often wrong directions, circling around the same
| place until finally getting the right directions?
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| The word "ban" is doing a lot of work here. As I read (and
| commented) earlier it's merely an informal decision by the
| village mayor that smombies are to be discouraged.
|
| The headmaster of a school who says no to phones probably has
| more clout.
|
| What amused me in that article was the kid who said he needed GPS
| to find his way around... in a village of 2000 people.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| From my perspective the ban has to be a plus. At least the
| mesmerized wouldn't be blindly walking across roads whilst glued
| to their screens and frightening the hell out of motorists who
| are trying to avoid them.
| forinti wrote:
| I'm reminded of Robin William's French Siri impression: "You're
| in France, look around you. Walk down the block, you idiot".
| mtVessel wrote:
| Is this how we use the term "scrolling" now? I mean, I get "doom
| scrolling", but now just bare "scrolling" connotes addictive
| attachment to social media on a mobile device?
|
| <sigh>
|
| Okay, fine.
| fingerlocks wrote:
| The "next" button on HN is way ahead of its time!
| julienreszka wrote:
| It's a non-event only 200 people voted and no real sanctions.
| anonu wrote:
| Fifteen years ago I pulled out my point and shoot camera while on
| tourism in a random city in Turkey. I wanted to take a picture of
| a beautiful flower bush outside a shop. The shop keeper rushed
| out and scolded me not to take pictures and proceeded to tell me
| to appreciate the beauty with my eyes.
|
| The moment stuck with me. Of course he was right. But he was
| fighting a cultural tsunami.
| renewiltord wrote:
| From the beginning of adulthood to about mid-20s I was a "live
| in the moment" kind of guy. Then I started taking photographs.
| The latter is a way better way for me to live life. Now,
| sometimes as I walk to my desk the photo display switches to a
| moment that brings me joy and memories. It's really wonderful.
| Big fan of photographs.
|
| And there's so much of Turkey I wouldn't remember without the
| photos. Good times good times.
| Kye wrote:
| Same.
|
| I went to three days of a convention in 2016[0]. By the end,
| the whole thing was so vivid in my mind I could walk around
| it in my head and remember every little detail. Eight years
| later, blurs of shapes and colors and sounds are all I have
| without the photos I took and the words I wrote. Taking notes
| helps, but a photo captures all those details I don't think
| to note in the moment.
|
| [0] https://kyefox.com/2022/07/11/my-first-furry-convention/
| standardUser wrote:
| He was not right. He was an asshole.
| pharrington wrote:
| This is the very definition of small government. Anything less is
| no government, and the only people who, after seriously thinking
| about it, seriously want no government, are organized criminals,
| extreme sociopaths, and extreme survivalists who are already
| living in isolation.
| seabass-labrax wrote:
| I was tickled by this statement:
|
| "Those who might check their phone's map when lost are instead
| being encouraged to ask for directions."
|
| Having Interrailed across northern Europe and travelled within a
| variety of cities without an internet-connected phone, I am now
| confident in declaring that the average local is _terrible_ at
| giving directions! Attempt to ask how to get to the nearest metro
| station or bus stop, for instance, and each of the friendly
| residents you ask will direct you in an entirely different
| direction. Of course, you 'll also get your fair share of
| unsolicited travel advice: in Brussels, I believe I have now
| heard more instructions for effective fare-dodging than I have
| actual directions!
|
| As a result of the typical denizen's questionable geography
| knowledge, I've now made sure I have a good offline map before
| embarking on any journey. If I know approximately which railway
| or bus lines I'll need to use, I'll download timetables for them
| as well. Of course, I could print out a dozen maps in advance -
| there's nothing inherently electronic about a map - but spurning
| maps entirely and asking for directions just won't cut the
| mustard!
| telesilla wrote:
| I was at a very nice hotel recently in the countryside where
| car sharing apps don't work and the trains in that country are
| notorious for not arriving. I needed to get a train to a near
| town, a very very well known place and it was at least a
| 3-connection trip. The young person at the desk said, oh I
| don't take public transport (I guess they cycle everywhere and
| never leaves the area without their Mum?), and proceeded to
| start looking at Google Maps. Horrified, I said please find me
| someone here who knows how the transport works in the area.
| They didn't understand what I was asking so I walked away and
| figured it out myself (got a taxi to the nearest station with
| the busiest lines). I'm still surprised given how I can imagine
| how anyone lives in that area without taking a bus or train to
| get further afield.
| irrational wrote:
| Maybe they had never been afield? I was once having dinner at
| a small restaurant in a village in northern Iceland. The
| server had impeccable English with an American accent. I got
| to talking to him and learned that he had never in his life
| (he was probably in his mid 20s) left his village. He had
| never even travelled to the nearest town/city.
| Kye wrote:
| My memory is just incompatible with direction-giving. In one
| ear, out the other. I _need_ a map to navigate an unknown
| place.
|
| This is also my issue with the "put your camera away, live in
| the moment!" crowd. Well it's have my camera out or have no
| photo anchors to bring memories out of whatever fog they fall
| in to.
| powersnail wrote:
| I still remember the first day at university. My plane was
| delayed, and I missed the first day orientation. The bus
| dropped us off somewhere in the campus. With no map, no guide,
| hungry and thirsty, I spent the next 2 hours looking for the
| dining hall by asking for directions, to no eventual avail.
| Luckily, in the end, two good-hearted seniors took me to pizza
| and walked me to my dorm.
|
| When I got the map the next day, I realized that all the roads
| are curves and circles, and intersecting at strange angles, and
| the buildings aren't situated as blocks. It's almost impossible
| to follow instructions like "walk straight for two blocks and
| then turn right", especially at night.
|
| As far as navigation goes, I'll take GPS over asking for
| directions any day.
| jltsiren wrote:
| I think asking for directions is often conceptually wrong.
| Everyday knowledge tends to be implicit rather than explicit.
| People living in organically grown cities may think in terms of
| adjacencies, not directions. If you want to go from point A to
| point F, one route goes through B, C, D, and E. Except that
| points B, C, D, and E may not have names, or the name is
| irrelevant in everyday life. It may even be difficult to
| describe what those places look like.
| kragen wrote:
| i think there are laws like this in north korea too
|
| i wonder if there used to be laws against reading books in public
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| Before smart phones came along I walked around reading a book. I
| carried one in my pocket at all times, and any moment I wasn't
| forced to speak to someone I whipped it out and read. With the
| palm pilot I started reading project Gutenberg books on a device.
| With the iPhone I switched to kindle books.
|
| Antisocial does as antisocial does, and no right wing ban on it
| will prevent me from scrolling, whether it be on vellum, wood
| pulp, or oled.
| ur-whale wrote:
| If there's one thing the French are particularly gifted at, it's
| sticking the government's nose deep, deep where it strictly does
| not belong.
|
| Even more amazing: when that happens, no one seems to notice that
| a huge line has been crossed, because by now, they've been
| shafted that way so many times, it's just fairly normal.
|
| So sad.
| subroutine wrote:
| It would be funny to see a bunch of people huddled up in a
| designated phone-ers area outside a bar in January to satisfy
| their instagram addiction.
| binarymax wrote:
| Pretty much this exact scene was predicted by Ronnie Chang as a
| comedy bit.
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BN6aUgMtAos
| henriquez wrote:
| > young people say there's little else to do
|
| They could ... read a book?
| onion2k wrote:
| It's considered rude to interrupt someone who's reading.
| Reading takes you out of a social situation. When someone is on
| their phone they're still present enough to talk to. They're
| very different activities.
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| What? It's no more rude to interrupt someone reading than it
| is to interrupt someone messing around on their phone.
| amadeuspagel wrote:
| Maybe banning headphones in public would be enough to encourage a
| sense of presence while still allowing people to look up
| directions.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Note that this is not enforceable.
|
| So it's not going to work, because they would not need it if
| people could gone without phone, and people who can't won't stio
| just because a bunch of other people will tell them it's better.
|
| Social pressure doesn't work with addicts. Espacially if said
| addict are to a tool that also makes some tasks 10 times faster.
| amelius wrote:
| I'm betting this village will have the highest adoption rate of
| Apple Vision Pro helmets.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-10 23:01 UTC)