[HN Gopher] STFU
___________________________________________________________________
STFU
Author : tanelpoder
Score : 967 points
Date : 2026-01-16 17:32 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| What's old is new again!
|
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/japanese-researchers-make-speec...
| vunderba wrote:
| Years ago, I wanted to build this exact concept into a
| smartphone so I could just toggle it on whenever I needed to
| end an interminably long phone conversation.
|
| It's basically the "Chinese food" Seinfeld gag.
| QuantumNomad_ wrote:
| > In general, human speech is jammed by giving back to the
| speakers their own utterances at a delay of a few hundred
| milliseconds
|
| That's what I seemed to remember also.
|
| I think 2 seconds like in the OP link is too long delay to work
| as actual jamming.
| m463 wrote:
| version 2.0 - why not both? one for noise-cancelling, one for
| social-cancelling.
| omoikane wrote:
| See also:
|
| https://improbable.com/2021/09/03/2012-japanese-ig-nobel-pri...
| zahlman wrote:
| Similar, but OP is about making people socially conscious of
| the noise they're producing (not through speech), while this
| "jamming" technique actually (at least theoretically)
| interferes with the cognitive process of choosing and forming
| words.
| jimmiles wrote:
| At my old job I had a phone that had IR remote capability. I'd
| turn off or mute the blaring TVs in our break rooms. Good times.
| cweagans wrote:
| There used to be a commercially-made tv-b-gone device. Not sure
| if it's made anymore, but there's a DIY kit that appears to do
| the same thing: https://www.adafruit.com/product/73
|
| I used to carry one with me everywhere (it was small enough to
| fit on a keychain). One night at a sports bar, I showed it to a
| friend. Before I could stop him, he pushed the button and every
| TV in the place went black, right in the middle of some PPV
| sports event. Anyway, he bought one on the spot.
| ErroneousBosh wrote:
| There was a guy who sold a chip for that which you fitted to
| a car keyfob. In the olden days of the late 80s, Valeo used a
| pretty insecure not-rolling-code infrared thing for central
| locking systems.
|
| Anyway you'd get a handful of old Rover, Peugeot, Renault, or
| Citroen (and a bunch of others) fobs from the scrapyard and
| fit this pre-programmed PIC microcontroller, and when you
| pressed the button it would cycle through a bunch of volume
| down, mute, and power off commands for most common brands of
| TV.
|
| However the real genius one - and it was about 20 quid - was
| this. Remember Furbies? They would chatter away to each
| other, using infrared to communicate so they'd go in sync.
| Well, this one that transmitted the "GO TO SLEEP RIGHT NOW"
| command to any Furby in the room. Relatively expensive but
| worth it.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > There used to be a commercially-made tv-b-gone device.
|
| Not sure about that one either but its functionality has been
| cloned for the Flipper Zero [1]
|
| [1] https://blog.flipper.net/infrared/
| dylan604 wrote:
| The Woz would be so proud
| markvdb wrote:
| The original TV-B-Gone [0][1] was designed by the legendary
| Mitch Altman [2].
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV-B-Gone
|
| [1] https://www.tvbgone.com/
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Altman
| achairapart wrote:
| When iPhones still had the headphone port, a friend of mine
| soldered a IR led on top of a minijack, something like this:
|
| https://www.rtfms.com/wp-content/rtfms-com/LED-pinout.png
|
| Then, with some special app, or even just playing some
| audiofiles -- I don't remember -- he'd do the same thing as
| the device above.
| mystifyingpoi wrote:
| Wow, this is clever. Yeah, the headphone out can push out a
| signal like 1 volt at low current, but this is likely
| enough for the IR LED to "light up". I really like this
| idea.
| rahimnathwani wrote:
| https://idiallo.com/blog/teaching-my-neighbor-to-keep-the-vo...
| tombert wrote:
| There's a TV-BE-GONE app for Bruce on the CardPuter and I think
| one for the Flipper Zero as wells. It will cycle through dozens
| of codes to power off the TV. It's been fun to turn off random
| TVs, though I don't do it much because I don't want to be too
| much of a douche.
| magicmicah85 wrote:
| So now there is two obnoxious people blaring sound? If you didn't
| have the courage to speak up, how are you going to have the
| courage to disrupt them and others?
| pseudosavant wrote:
| You don't have to figure out what to say back to the person. It
| is hearing their own self that makes them want to STFU.
| Apparently hearing their voice is just as annoying to them as
| it is to us?
| tshaddox wrote:
| Does it really take "courage" to speak up in cases like this?
| If anything, it's just as insulting to point out to an adult
| that playing loud audio in a crowded public place is
| inappropriate, as if they didn't know that!
| socalgal2 wrote:
| Yes, it does take courage, the person doing it is likely to
| react poorly and it could easily escalate into a physical
| altercation.
|
| for me, the worst offenders are men watching sports on public
| transportation or restaurants. I hate it, but I think
| different cultures have different norms.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| It takes a bit of experience and tact. Saying "excuse me,
| would you mind turning down your phone a bit, please" as an
| opening request would not likely be confrontational
| especially in someplace like an airport. Few people are
| going to be itchy to start a fight over something like that
| in a place full of cameras, witnesses, security people, and
| with fairly limited exits.
| michaelsshaw wrote:
| It can create an awkward situation which a lot of people are
| averse to. For example, I wouldn't speak up on other forms of
| public transport, but in airports in particular I go on a
| warpath.
| nicbou wrote:
| That person is already ignoring obvious social conventions.
| People don't want to know which other shitty behaviours they
| have in store.
| jama211 wrote:
| Think it through just a tiny bit more. It's more socially
| acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you
| directly than someone who may or may not be making an example
| of you but in a passive way. Therefore it's less likely the
| other individual will confront you back, or perhaps more
| importantly it would make them look more unreasonable for doing
| so.
|
| Social pressure is a real thing and it affects both behaviour
| and outcomes, it'd be silly to ignore that.
| tshaddox wrote:
| > It's more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone
| who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may
| not be making an example of you but in a passive way.
|
| I actually agree with this. And similarly, I'd argue that
| it's more socially acceptable to use this audio repeater than
| to "nicely" confront someone who is so brazenly violating
| social norms.
| magicmicah85 wrote:
| The people who react angrily to someone asking them to keep
| their noise down are very likely the same people who react
| angrily to someone interrupting their call or entertainment
| with loud noises, especially noises that just repeat what
| they're saying or watching. I agree social pressure is a real
| thing, but if you don't have the courage to ask them to
| kindly keep the volume down, how would you have the courage
| to do this?
| primitivesuave wrote:
| The fact that this occurred in Bombay is important context. In
| India, the culture amongst older people is to have a clear
| sense of where you fit in the hierarchy. You might be verbally
| abusive to those who you consider below you, but you will
| remain silent and deferent to those who are considered
| economically/socially superior. This manifests as a certain
| class of people who have never been called out on any of their
| obnoxious behavior, because their economic/social status has
| shielded them from criticism for their entire lives. Meanwhile
| a majority of society is perfectly accustomed to being verbally
| abused, to the point where someone like me saying "please" and
| "thank you" makes it clear that I am of the Indian diaspora.
|
| By the way, I've noticed that the younger crowd in India leans
| much more toward egalitarianism and tends to reject bizarre
| social constructs like caste. The fact that a young guy also
| thought of this solution speaks to their ingenuity as well.
| ahupp wrote:
| Hilarious. When working on a virtual reality VOIP product,
| someone added a test mode that played back your own speech with a
| delay. It was like part of your brain shut off, was a
| surprisingly strong effect.
| imzadi wrote:
| I'm old enough to remember when cell phones were primarily used
| for voice calls. Sometimes you'd hear yourself when you were
| trying to talk to someone, and it was infuriating. You'd have
| to hang up and call back, if the call was going to go on any
| length of time.
| einsteinx2 wrote:
| I've had this happen on modern video calls at work a few
| times as well, same solution too.
| kittikitti wrote:
| I think it's worse that you have to behave maliciously. They have
| a right to make sound in public places. I'm not one of those
| people who plays stuff on full volume in public places but
| sometimes I am a bit noisy. I think back to when I'm having fun
| and it often involves a bunch of noise. Society is becoming way
| too intolerant and conformist.
| michaelsshaw wrote:
| Airports aren't outside and they have a natural tendency to
| irritate people just by nature of existing. They aren't nice
| places and there's no need to make it worse by playing annoying
| TikToks
| phainopepla2 wrote:
| Doesn't the right to make sound in public places extend to the
| hypothetical users of this app?
|
| I don't think a rights-based framing is the best way to look at
| this. It's about courtesy and respect for social norms.
|
| I don't see how society is becoming too intolerant, if anything
| I think we are more tolerant of anti-social behavior than ever
| before.
| kittikitti wrote:
| The hypothetical users of the app will use it to shut down
| noise in public places.
|
| You are the one defending anti-social behavior here.
|
| If you don't like noise, don't go outside where other humans
| are. If you use psychological manipulation because you think
| people are playing videos too loud, maybe take a deep look in
| the mirror before talking about courtesy and respect.
| marssaxman wrote:
| If they have a right to play their sounds in a public place,
| then I also have the right to play the same sounds in the same
| public place at almost, but not exactly, the same time.
| kittikitti wrote:
| You should absolutely do that and play it as loud as you
| want. What if the other person doesn't want to be manipulated
| and just plays it louder?
| jlund-molfese wrote:
| Why not use headphones, so you can enjoy noise without
| bothering people who don't like noise? Some noise can be
| uncomfortable to people at an airport. Movies with gunfire or
| shouting for example.
| kittikitti wrote:
| It's absurd that people would all have to carry around and
| use headphones just because some people don't want noise in
| public. I would agree that loud gunfire isn't appropriate in
| an airport but that's not the case here and you're
| misconstruing the situation to make your case sound better.
| Ritewut wrote:
| No one is saying don't make noise. They are saying be
| considerate of those around you. It is not a radical idea.
| kittikitti wrote:
| So you would advocate for someone to do this in public
| against someone else playing a video on their phone? Do you
| think this is the most considerate option?
| compiler-guy wrote:
| https://xkcd.com/1499/
| drob518 wrote:
| And the award goes to "STFU" for best practical use of AI.
| potato-peeler wrote:
| Isn't delayed auditory feedback similar to echo?
| ndarray wrote:
| It's like a single bounce. Echo effects usually have multiple
| bounces, each quieter than the one before it.
| mkipper wrote:
| Yeah, this immediately made me think of DAF.
|
| My wife is a speech pathologist and hooked me up to a DAF
| machine for some research, and the effect was totally shocking
| to me as a layperson. I think I did worse than average, but I
| was basically unable to speak with delayed sidetone.
| neonmagenta wrote:
| Yea it can basically short circuit your thinking when trying to
| talk, BUT oddly enough it helps with stuttering with a short
| enough interval. There's in-ear attachments people can use that
| do this exact thing and it helps reduce the amount of
| stuttering and the brain getting stuck on a sound. My brother
| uses one, its crazy how it works
| ericwood wrote:
| If speaking strictly in terms of audio effects this is a delay,
| with "echo" usually implying feedback so the delayed signal is
| attenuated and fed back into the delay line, getting quieter
| each iteration and fading naturally.
| analog31 wrote:
| I'm a musician, and any delay between the sound coming direct
| from my instrument and from my headphones completely bollixes my
| ability to play.This made online jam sessions with an acoustic
| instrument impossible.
| quirino wrote:
| One of my favorite web apps for testing your microphone and
| camera has this echo feature built in, with 0s, 1s and 3s delay:
|
| https://webcammictest.com/mic/
| bityard wrote:
| Okay, but... people with loud phones/voices in public places are
| absolutely fine with it because they don't care about anybody
| else's space or opinion of them. And they very likely are not
| afraid of instigating confrontation or assault either.
| pousada wrote:
| In my experience 99% of people will turn down the volume or use
| headphones if you ask nicely.
|
| I never in my life was confronted or even assaulted, even by
| noisy teenagers or grim looking men.
|
| Not saying it's impossible but I would guess it's very
| unlikely. Ymmv
| konne88 wrote:
| He's not completely wrong though. I was assaulted (pushed and
| fell to the ground) for asking someone to turn down their
| music at a pool. And I think I've asked less than 20 people
| in my life to turn down their music.
| pixl97 wrote:
| It 100% depends where you're at and the culture of that
| place, along with your perceived threat level.
|
| People that are perceived as no threat or a 100% chance of
| being a deadly threat if ignored typically have no problems
| here. It's the grey zone where conflict shows up. Think of a
| little 60 year old grandma asking nicely the vast majority of
| people will listen. Same if you're a 6'7" slab of rock with
| tear drops tattooed on your face. Meanwhile if you're a
| minority asking a racist to turn down the volume, this
| situation is going to cause conflict almost all of the time.
| nephihaha wrote:
| 99% is way too high. More like 30 or 40%.
| tra3 wrote:
| In the style of cheap tiktoks: "There are two types of
| people...". My wife loves listening to her phone on max volume,
| but it sounds so bad compared to half decent speakers.
|
| Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want to
| listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| Also why are people using speaker phones in public places at max
| volume. The speaker in your phone is designed to deliver the
| sound directly to your ear, probably at higher fidelity.
|
| I'm loving the fact that battery technology will eventually
| eliminate weed wackers.
|
| Sorry if I sound cranky, I find loud noises challenging.
| ben_w wrote:
| I get you, I also prefer quiet.
|
| But I have a question:
|
| > I'm loving the fact that battery technology will eventually
| eliminate weed wackers.
|
| Is this a non-sequitur, or a euphemism/figure of speech/etc.
| which I have never previously encountered?
| scythe wrote:
| I think he means that electric handheld lawn equipment should
| be much quieter than gas-fired lawn equipment which is an
| infamous nuisance
| dylan604 wrote:
| Just unsolicited sharing of their own personal preferences
| with the rest of the forum readers
| zdragnar wrote:
| I think the following line puts it into more context:
|
| > I find loud noises challenging.
|
| They're basically comparing other people's speaker music to
| noise pollution. Two stroke engines can be heard from a long
| way off, and I've got box fans that are louder than my
| electric weedwhacker.
| baxtr wrote:
| I find it absurd that music in cafes and restaurants has become
| so loud that it's hard to have conversations with the people on
| your table. Sound pollution is a real thing.
| barbazoo wrote:
| I bet it's by design. If you actually make things pleasant
| you might accidentally create a third place and no one can
| profit from that!
| carlosjobim wrote:
| To be contrarian: If people are comfortable they stick
| around and keep ordering more stuff.
| mordechai9000 wrote:
| If people are uncomfortable, they can predict how often
| they can turn the table over and get another party in
| there.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| If I'm uncomfortable, I can predict how seldom I will be
| coming back.
| jiehong wrote:
| In restaurants it doesn't make sense, because you usually
| have the table for 2 hours after which the staff will
| remind you it's time to leave (in Germany).
|
| For cafe, sure!
| dylan604 wrote:
| hey, it's hard for the employees to enjoy their muzak over
| the din of all of your conversations!
| m463 wrote:
| "with this music we are a happening trendy place!"
|
| (and nobody will notice during slow times that we donn't
| actually have that many customers)
| nephihaha wrote:
| The night clubs I went to in the nineties had loud music and
| low lights so talking to anyone was a challenge.
| kelnos wrote:
| That's true of nightclubs today, and I think that's just
| expected and normal? I'd go to a club to hear music, dance,
| and drink. Sure, sometimes you might stop to try to talk a
| little bit, but that's not the primary activity.
| nephihaha wrote:
| I went to nightclubs because other people did and to meet
| women. The music was pretty much all the same with a beat
| behind it, and the drink was watered down.
|
| It's almost as if nightclubs are set up to prevent human
| interaction.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| It's because they don't want you sitting there for any longer
| than it takes to eat your meal. They deliberately have tile
| floors and hard walls to amplify the noise.
| baxtr wrote:
| I get that, but what about the next time I think about
| where to go?
| toyg wrote:
| Floors are more about cleaning, tbh.
| jiehong wrote:
| I find that sound design is famously awful in most public
| spaces!
|
| For example, train stations tend to have high ceilings, so
| announcements are loud and full of echoes and reverbs. [0]
|
| I think of sound a bit like WiFi: it's better to have tons of
| low power speakers everywhere delivering a clear and non
| aggressive sound, than a handful of screaming speakers in a
| tight space: if you're next to it it's too loud, and far away
| it's drown in reverb.
|
| My guess is that architects and everyone else either don't
| know or don't care.
|
| [0]: like the new Munich Main Station under construction,
| slide 2: https://entdecken.muenchen.de/en/station/26-4/
| barbazoo wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| Maybe they don't know of or don't have access to bone
| conducting earphones. Whatever they're listening to, that way
| they'd also still hear their environment.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Yea, with you on that one. Headphones are great at the house
| where I have a controlled environment. When I'm out and
| listening to things I'll typically only use one at a time
| because it's easy to miss very important, possibly deadly
| things.
| frankus wrote:
| They're obviously not the most affordable things around,
| but if you have an iPhone and spending ~US$250 on a pair of
| wireless earbuds won't unduly stress your budget, the
| transparency mode on AirPods Pro is great for this.
| lostlogin wrote:
| They are great. But... I tried them on a plane. It may
| have been full sound cancelling rather than transparency,
| and it works, and goes silent but it's a weird silence.
| It sort of feels heavy, or loud.
| fsckboy wrote:
| > _Maybe they don 't know of or don't have access to..._
|
| Maybe they don't know of or don't have any access to any
| sense of boundaries, as if they skipped the infant stage of
| development where they should have learned that "mom" is
| another person with her own coequal set of needs. And anybody
| with the urge to push back on this notion, please cover the
| case where it might apply to you to.
| kelnos wrote:
| If you can't listen to your music without polluting the noise
| landscape around you, then you don't get to listen to your
| music. The excuse you present is a selfish one.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Yes, you are a crank, but you are not alone. Either way, we
| should at least acknowledge the crankiness.
|
| Not everyone owns headphones. Some people might have received
| the speaker as a gift or decided on the speaker instead of
| headphones. How people spend their time outdoors is not up to
| you or I to decide. If they want to listen to music from a
| bluetooth speaker, that's what they want to do. There's a lot
| more outdoors for you to use as well so rather that stewing,
| just find more outdoors. Especially on trails. Just keep going.
| Or wait until they have kept going. I've never seen a bluetooth
| speaker that's big enough for someone to be on a trail with
| that doesn't "go away" after a minute or so.
|
| I have discussed the speaker on trails issue with friends, and
| we've noticed that the louder one's speaker is the shittier the
| music it is playing.
| tristor wrote:
| > Not everyone owns headphones. Some people might have
| received the speaker as a gift or decided on the speaker
| instead of headphones. How people spend their time outdoors
| is not up to you or I to decide. If they want to listen to
| music from a bluetooth speaker, that's what they want to do.
| There's a lot more outdoors for you to use as well so rather
| that stewing, just find more outdoors. Especially on trails.
| Just keep going. Or wait until they have kept going. I've
| never seen a bluetooth speaker that's big enough for someone
| to be on a trail with that doesn't "go away" after a minute
| or so.
|
| I am very open to the argument of "you do you", which is
| pretty much my philosophy also. But I do think there are
| /some/ limits to this, because some behaviors are inherently
| anti-social. My philosophy is more than "you do you" should
| apply to policy and regulation, meaning that we should not
| criminalize or directly punish anti-social behaviors that
| don't cause direct and immediate harm. But that definitely
| does not mean that we should not shame people for acting in
| completely inappropriate ways, or directly inform them that
| their behavior is unwelcome, or otherwise seek to ensure that
| we act to exist in spaces devoid of anti-social behavior.
|
| I've had this same exact scenario happen, and I simply spoke
| to the person and told them to lower the volume, use
| headphones, or stop altogether because they were scaring away
| the wildlife that I was there to see and photograph. They
| apologized, lowered the volume, and we both went back to
| doing our own thing. Most people are reasonable, and act in
| anti-social ways due to lack of awareness not malice. We are
| both sharing the trail, and we are both there to experience
| nature, and that very well might include many different
| modalities (including accompanying music), but if someone is
| acting in a way that completely prevents me from enjoying
| nature I definitely have the right to say something, to
| complain about it, and to complain about it after the fact,
| and "you do you" is not a valid argument in response to that.
| olyjohn wrote:
| It's simple. You do you, but don't bother other people.
| That's all there is to it.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I've been on both ends of this. One of the local parks
| allowed for permits to use amplified sound which we took
| advantage of about once a month weather permitting. Lots of
| complaints to the point I often interacted with police. We
| showed them the permit, we'd show dB readings from a meter,
| the police would leave, we'd keep going. It's a public
| place being used in a way allowed by those that be. There's
| no bluetooth speaker today that can compare to our use of
| amplified sound.
|
| We all have rights to be in public parks/trails/etc. Cities
| have ordinances about nuisance things like loud anything.
| If you're on a trail and someone comes along with a speaker
| you don't like, just let them pass. They aren't hurting
| anyone/thing, you're just annoyed. If you've plopped down
| in the park or at the beach when someone else comes along,
| you can talk to them about, but they again have rights to
| do it.
|
| You are free to talk to your local representatives to
| change ordinances if that's how you feel. Good luck with
| that if that's what you so choose.
| tristor wrote:
| A public park and a trail have very different meanings in
| my mind. When I say that I have encountered this on a
| trail, I'm specifically referring to trails in places
| which are designated wilderness areas, which are not
| subject to any ordinance. The US has a lot of national
| parks, national wilderness, and BLM land that is
| completely open to the public. That's a wonderful thing,
| but it also does not make sense to call for a park ranger
| to get involved in what is fundamentally a discontent at
| someone else's anti-social behavior, when I can simply
| have a conversation with them.
|
| Behavior, and the response to behavior, exist on a
| spectrum. The fact you responded to me pointing out that
| "you do you" has philosophical limits, but that those
| limits should not involve criminalizing behavior, by
| suggesting I should campaign to enact an ordinance seems
| extremely obtuse. There is no need to change the law to
| criminalize making noise in a natural area, but similarly
| it's perfectly appropriate to tell someone to stop doing
| it.
| BeetleB wrote:
| > The US has a lot of national parks, national
| wilderness, and BLM land that is completely open to the
| public.
|
| Many concerts, shooting ranges, and other loud activities
| occur in two of the three categories you mention above.
| All a lot louder than multiple hikers with Bluetooth
| speakers.
|
| I won't even get into ATVs.
|
| (Not disagreeing with your intent - merely pointing out
| to other readers of the various socially acceptable uses
| in these lands).
| dwaltrip wrote:
| Local parks are quite different from hiking trails.
| kelnos wrote:
| I think you're confusing the issue here. You were in a
| public place that explicitly allowed loud music with a
| permit. You obtained that permit, and you did what you
| were explicitly allowed to do. Great; you did the right
| thing.
|
| But on hiking trails (and in many parks), there isn't
| that sort of thing. While some will prohibit loud noise,
| many don't say _anything_ about loud noise. In those
| cases, in the absence of guidance, we should do the thing
| that is courteous and considerate of others: _not_ play
| loud music.
| dpark wrote:
| > Most people are reasonable, and act in anti-social ways
| due to lack of awareness not malice.
|
| Sometimes. I'm pretty sure that very often it's because
| they simply do not care that they are being
| rude/inconsiderate/whatever. But even the willfully rude
| will likely lower the volume if you ask them nicely because
| not caring about being rude is not the same as wanting
| confrontation.
| pkulak wrote:
| > How people spend their time outdoors is not up to you or I
| to decide.
|
| Oh no, it absolutely is. Societies have laws, and even just
| social norms, that don't stop applying "outdoors". Unless
| you're in the ocean, I suppose.
|
| Pack out what you pack in. Stay on the trail. No
| loudspeakers. Very simple.
| groby_b wrote:
| 100%
|
| I'd argue that unspoken rules apply even more strongly in
| actual outdoors setting, because a good number of those
| norms actually have serious consequences when violated.
| Anybody seriously hiking or offroading gets to save a non-
| zero number of behinds of people who ignored those rules,
| every single year.
|
| And they also know they _need_ to rely on those rules,
| because they might get them out of trouble too. The
| outdoors is not always friendly.
|
| The "No speakers" thing is just the "let's try not be an
| ass to the same person who might need to pull me out of a
| ravine next" part of the rules.
| devin wrote:
| I can assure you some of them also very much apply in the
| ocean.
| BeetleB wrote:
| Of the three you mention, only one is the law in every
| public land place I've hiked.[1]
|
| Staying on the trail is mostly a suggestion for your safety
| (and to preserve the area) - definitely not a law.
|
| Ditto for loudspeakers. People often go into nature and
| throw concerts.
|
| [1] OK - trails in state parks and perhaps some national
| parks likely have more rules. But trails in general public
| lands (BLM, forest, etc)? Not many.
| dpark wrote:
| This is willful misreading. They specifically also said
| "social norms".
|
| This "it's not technically illegal so it's not a problem"
| sentiment is unhealthy for civil societies. I for one
| would like basic social norms to be respected without
| law-enforcement being involved.
| BeetleB wrote:
| I was pointing out the pointlessness of invoking "laws"
| in this scenario. I'm not the one that brought it into
| the conversation.
|
| As for social norms, one only has to read the comments to
| understand that there clearly isn't consensus on this
| point. People go to nature for many reasons - not all
| related to enjoying the sounds of nature. What dylan604
| is pointing out is to be mindful of that.
| dpkirchner wrote:
| There are a lot of people who are loud about not wanting
| to follow social norms (which is expected when we're
| talking about people rudely being loud, I guess). It
| seems to be a point of pride. I don't get it but I've
| definitely seen it.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _People go to nature for many reasons - not all related
| to enjoying the sounds of nature._
|
| The issue that you seem to be (willfully?) ignoring is
| that in a shared space, there are actions that you can
| take that force others to "enjoy" the space in a way
| that's different than they'd like.
|
| Someone wants to enjoy the space with music. Ok, they
| play music, so they're enjoying the space in the way they
| want. Great for them.
|
| Someone else wants to enjoy the space more quietly, able
| to hear the sounds of nature around them. But the person
| above has decided for them that they are not permitted to
| enjoy the space that way.
|
| This is the difference between "freedom to" and "freedom
| from". Unfortunately when you have the "freedom to" do
| whatever you want, you infringe on the "freedom from" of
| others. It's a balance, and I'm sad to see that it seems
| people are swinging that balance toward "freedom to" at
| the expense of others. When I was growing up, we used to
| call this "common courtesy", which seems to be much less
| common these days.
| etc-hosts wrote:
| Often when I encounter a person loudly listening to music or
| videos on their phone in a cafe, it's because they are
| completely unaware of how loud they are or they obviously
| have some challenging psychological issues ( I live in SF ).
|
| I have a lot of wired headphones I got off of Temu, I just
| give them a pair.
| rahimnathwani wrote:
| What % of the time does it work?
|
| Any adverse experiences (e.g. punch in the face)?
| mythical_39 wrote:
| > How people spend their time outdoors is not up to you or I
| to decide. If they want to listen to music from a bluetooth
| speaker, that's what they want to do.
|
| What if it interferes with my desire to NOT listen to their
| music on their bluetooth speaker?
| LunaSea wrote:
| > There's a lot more outdoors for you to use as well so
| rather that stewing
|
| There are also many deep caves in which you can listen to
| music on speakers. Why aren't you going to these caves?
|
| The societal contract is that your freedom stops where your
| neighbours freedom starts. This also applies to the noise you
| produce.
| DoneWithAllThat wrote:
| This is probably the most perfect illustration of toxic
| empathy I have ever read.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| _How people spend their time outdoors is not up to you or I
| to decide._
|
| If they're blasting music in a normally quiet place, _they_
| are deciding for _me_. You 're literally giving priority to
| whoever chooses to be less considerate of others.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _How people spend their time outdoors is not up to you or I
| to decide._
|
| Hiking trails and parks are public spaces, and we absolutely
| do get to decide how people spend their time there. I've seen
| parks and trails where the sign at the entrance/trailhead
| says no amplified music (among other restrictions). Selfish
| people of course ignore these signs and damage the experience
| for everyone around them.
| vondur wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker.
|
| Boy, that one really gets to me when I'm on the trail. Both
| hikers and mountain bikers are guilty of that. Also, the people
| with their AirPods in oblivious to anything going on around
| them...
| sneak wrote:
| So, people playing music around them is bad, and people
| playing music just to themselves is also bad?
| decimalenough wrote:
| Yes, but they're different kinds of bad. People playing
| music publicly are being obnoxious to everyone else, while
| people playing music privately are putting themselves at
| risk. (Not so much when hiking, but IMHO wearing headphones
| while cycling in traffic is suicidal.)
| eddyg wrote:
| At least AirPods have an _excellent_ transparency mode
| mrexroad wrote:
| You touched a nerve for me -- folks hiking with Bluetooth
| speakers. My god that grinds my gears. I can see an argument
| for playing music (at reasonable volume) while relaxing at a
| camp site, but on the trail it's as aggravating as a dirt bike
| or snowmobile ripping along near by.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I've heard many people say the cannot stand they way earbuds
| feel. Just like many people said they could not breath
| wearing a mask.
| olyjohn wrote:
| There are a lot of different types of headphones.
| spookie wrote:
| Just get the shower style ones.
| mythical_39 wrote:
| I can sympathize with this, but
|
| 1) earbuds are not the only headphone style
|
| 2) listening to speakers is not a necessity.
|
| So fine if you don't want to use earbuds, but not
| necessarily fine to annoy those around you with music/talk
| shows or whatever sounds you want to introduce to the
| enviroment.
| pc86 wrote:
| 3) "I don't like this" / "I don't wanna" is not really an
| acceptable reason to be an antisocial ass.
| johnisgood wrote:
| Being in nature, all alone is not social though, is it?
| Why are people so frustrated? What am I missing?
|
| FWIW, it is dangerous to wear headphones in the city and
| listen to music, but you can always wear only one side.
| It is not comfortable, but that is how you remain safe
| without being an ass.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Transparency modes, bone conduction, lower volume.
| hexfish wrote:
| Bone conduction is amazing!
| toast0 wrote:
| > Being in nature, all alone is not social though, is it?
| Why are people so frustrated? What am I missing?
|
| Let's say I'm out in the woods, being non social. And
| someone comes up the path, playing music loudly. Now I'm
| being annoyed by people again, which is what I was trying
| to avoid by being out in the woods. And they're usually
| on a motorized vehicle, even though motorized vehicles
| are prohibited on the path.
|
| I'm not trying to tell people how to live their lives. If
| they want to apprechiate nature in silence, cool. If they
| want to listen to music, cool ... but it'd be nice if
| they used headphones and it would be acceptable if they
| had a speaker at reasonable volume, but when I can hear
| them before I can see them, it's really not cool.
|
| If they want to walk with a friend and chat, that's ok
| too.
| fwipsy wrote:
| I can't stand the way earbuds feel. That's why I wear over-
| the-ear headphones or bone-conducting headphones. There are
| so many options for personal audio. Even if you're truly
| allergic to all of them, that doesn't give you the right to
| inflict your noise on others.
|
| Imagine if everyone decided they were entitled to play
| their music on speakers. The result would be a cacophony
| where nobody can hear their own music and life is worse for
| everyone. People who play music in public spaces are
| claiming a common resource for their own exclusive use.
|
| Sincerely - someone who's lived with 7 other people in a
| 3-bedroom house.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Nobody is forced to listen/watch stuff anyway. If you
| don't have the mean to do it quietly, you can just
| abstain yourself from doing it.
| horsawlarway wrote:
| I'm one of those people - I find any "in-ear"
| headphone/earbud to be outrageously uncomfortable.
|
| Great news - there are a TON of alternatives! You're still
| an asshat if you play loud music without regard for your
| surroundings.
|
| My personal pick? Get a bone conduction headset (ex: Shokz
| or cheaper alternative). Comfortable, lightweight,
| waterproof, you can still hear your surroundings.
| Twisol wrote:
| I have a Shokz brand two-piece headset (the OpenFit 2+ i
| think?) that just wraps around the outside of the ear,
| with the actual speaker part held just outside the ear
| canal. I can't do in-ear buds either, but these just work
| for me. Doesn't even feel like anything's there.
|
| I did try their bone-conduction headphones, but the
| quality was slightly worse and they didn't feel as
| nonexistent to wear.
| rpdillon wrote:
| Same problem with anything in-ear. I have two pairs of
| Shokz that I use for work (OpenComm) and play (OpenRun).
| I thought they would be a gimmick, but 3 years later, I
| love them and use them daily.
|
| Fun hack: when I travel I prefer my over-ear noise
| cancelling Ankers, but they're bulky. So, for traveling
| light, I use Shockz and then silicone ear plugs to block
| out external sound on e.g. the airplane. Creates a little
| bit of a "swimming pool" effect acoustically, but works
| well and is tiny to carry.
| aquariusDue wrote:
| I've been using a Shokz pair of headphones off and on for
| around 5 years and while they're great indoors I wouldn't
| really recommend them outside. Due to the city noise
| you'll probably tend to crank the volume pretty high
| (without realizing) and give yourself hearing damage over
| time.
| lacoolj wrote:
| Why would earbuds be the defacto standard here? Get
| headphones. They're great, I promise. I'll even send a link
| https://www.bestbuy.com/product/sennheiser-
| momemtum-4-wirele...
| hamdingers wrote:
| Even fewer people want to wear earmuffs while hiking.
| recursive wrote:
| There are so many styles and those people can choose one
| consistent with their muff preferences.
| barbecue_sauce wrote:
| I recommend Koss Porta Pros with Yaxi pads.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Maybe go without headphones and pay attention to your
| surroundings instead. I have zero patience for such excuses
| from people who choose to impose their preferences on other
| people.
| mrexroad wrote:
| > Maybe go without headphones and pay attention to your
| surroundings instead.
|
| This. Even when you are seemingly quiet on a trail, 90%
| of wildlife are hiding from you. It's amazing what
| happens when you stop and sit in complete silence for
| 5-10 minutes -- a whole hidden world comes alive around
| you. 10/10, highly recommend.
|
| > I have zero patience for such excuses from people who
| choose to impose their preferences on other people.
|
| This as well. Somewhere along the way, civics teachings
| in America's school left folks w/ the impression that the
| spirit of our liberty is, "It's a free country, I can do
| what I want!", rather of, "I have the liberty to pursue
| happiness, up until it infringes on the liberty for
| others to do so."
| prmoustache wrote:
| This is domething I realized riding my MTB by night in
| the forests in the mountains. Thanks to the reflection of
| all those eyes staring at your headlight you realize the
| sheer amount of wildlife there is hidden a few meters
| from you.
| cons0le wrote:
| To play devils advocate, telling other people to turn off
| thier music is also "imposing preferences on other
| people".
|
| I do agree with what they're saying though.
| lostlogin wrote:
| If they aren't a dick they can have their music, through
| headphones.
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| I found some good bone-conduction headphones... very comfy,
| only $35, Shokz-style. Full-day battery.
| goopypoop wrote:
| me too but I had to grow sideburns to cope with the wind
| Tanoc wrote:
| I can confirm the earbuds thing. Not the mask thing. Modern
| jelly ended "earbuds" just feel awful. They irritate my
| sense of momentum, never stay in, and it constantly feels
| like I have altitude pressure buildup in my ear canal when
| I wear them. The old hard plastic first generation iPod
| style in-ear earphones however I have had no problem with.
| Gravity keeps those in place and so there isn't that
| constant pressure of expansion in your ears. Those or over-
| ear headphones are what should be recommended to people,
| and if neither of those options work then they're just
| using it as an excuse.
| kelnos wrote:
| Tough shit. "I don't like how earbuds feel" does not mean
| you should feel free to add noise pollution to everyone
| else's day.
|
| Regardless, earbuds are only one type of headphone. I'm
| sure someone with an earbud sensitivity can find another
| type that works well. And if not, again: tough shit; no
| music for you.
| mlfreeman wrote:
| In potentially-dangerous-animal country (e.g. grizzly bears,
| mountain lions, etc), it could be a safety mechanism...I was
| told repeatedly you need to make some kind of distinctive
| noise regularly so they won't get startled by you rounding a
| bend.
| chasd00 wrote:
| those people, i've encountered them too, don't give a shit
| about anything let alone being safe around wildlife. If
| prey distress calls could be confused with music they'd be
| blaring that just as well.
| throw-the-towel wrote:
| These people probably don't do it for this reason, but
| you're correct, at least when it comes to bears.
| m463 wrote:
| lol.
|
| that's like harley riders with unmuffled motors "for
| safety".
|
| On the other hand, I remember being in japan and watching
| some construction vehicles in tokyo. They were surprisingly
| quiet. After a while I realized what it was - in the united
| states all construction vehicles have these annoying "beep-
| beep-beep" sounds while they're working (for safety).
|
| I wonder if one day they can play those only when someone
| walks nearby or play in some technologically quieter way.
| ArnoVW wrote:
| In France I see (and hear) more and more use of a special
| type of warning device, "le cri de lynx" that reduces
| sonic pollution by building sites.
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BljL3XO0fyg&pp=0gcJCTIBo7Vq
| N5t...
| lostlogin wrote:
| Sadly I don't speak French and Searching for whatever
| this is isn't working.
|
| If it's noise cancelling it sounds amazing.
|
| Can you further expand?
| tom_ wrote:
| It's the noise you hear at about the one minute mark when
| the digger is reversing:
| https://youtu.be/BljL3XO0fyg?t=59
|
| Actual cri du lynx:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtsdVQWGibQ
| lostlogin wrote:
| Oh this is horrible.
|
| We don't want people run over by reversing vehicles, but
| also, if I had to listen to that every day, I'd leap in
| front of them.
| slobotron wrote:
| IMO, in person it's much nicer on the ears than the old
| single-tone beep that they used to have. It's less
| jarring and easier to locate where the noise is coming
| from, ye olde beep seemed to come from everywhere at
| once.
| VageGast wrote:
| It does remind me of a video from Tom Scott about the use
| of white noise for reversing trucks. It has multiple
| benefits over the old beeping sound, including being
| easily able to hear the direction the sound is coming
| from. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa28lIGuxq8
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| > while they're working (for safety).
|
| Should only be while they're backing up. It signals to
| anyone around that the vehicle is in reverse. At least
| the ones I'm familiar with.
| toast0 wrote:
| > some technologically quieter way.
|
| I'm not going to watch the video linked in sibling
| comments right now, but "pulsing loud static" is a pretty
| common alternative to beeping around me; especially in
| the big citie. Kind of a big shush shush noise: sometimes
| it sounds a little like hydraulics working which is fine
| because if you hear those, something big is happening and
| you should pay attention.
|
| Anyway, the real nice thing is it's loud and attention
| catching near the source, but it seems to disipate faster
| than beeps, so you don't really hear it when it's not
| relevant.
| yujzgzc wrote:
| This is my reason for blasting music from my bicycle. Feels
| less rude than clicking a bell at the pedestrians and
| somewhat more effective at attracting attention.
| nephihaha wrote:
| We don't have bears or mountain lions where I live but
| mountain bikers still do this.
| cwillu wrote:
| It's great for announcing that an asshole is approaching.
| shermantanktop wrote:
| "Heeeeere I come!!!" Boom psst boom psst waka waka
| lostlogin wrote:
| Better still, a nice free hub. If you don't pedal, it's
| noisy, if you back pedal it sounds urgent.
|
| As an upside, your better get good at hill climbing as
| freewheeling or backpedaling up hill takes some practice.
| what wrote:
| How about don't ride on the sidewalk or any pedestrian
| path.
| Dilettante_ wrote:
| There are shared pedestrian/cyclist paths in some places.
| VorpalWay wrote:
| Mixed bike/pedestrian paths and sidewalks are extremely
| common here in Sweden at least. Some are split into two
| halves, but mixed is more common.
| yujzgzc wrote:
| Right, I don't! it's the other way around where I live.
| Lots of pedestrians distractingly lolling about in the
| bike lane, maybe with a dog and a loose toddler too. So,
| music.
| VorpalWay wrote:
| That is definitely the wrong thing to do. It isn't rude
| to use the bell, and as a pedestrian I appreciate a
| single ring (obviously, don't ring like a madman either).
| Playing music loudly in a public space is way more rude
| than using your bicycle bell.
| yujzgzc wrote:
| Too many close calls with inattentive pedestrians in my
| area. I ring, no move, or worse, they get startled, and
| turn around _into_ the middle of the bike lane. If I have
| to choose between coming off as rude and keeping my brain
| enclosed, I know what to do.
| KolmogorovComp wrote:
| It's amazing how HN readers are immune to second degree
| and fell flat into the trap.
| mrexroad wrote:
| Huh? I've never met anyone in the backcountry that played
| music to keep predators away. Even when forced to hike at
| dusk, the primary risk is quietly stumbling on a predator
| out stalking, or worse, a predator's offspring. At most you
| clap every so often, maybe talk/sing to yourself, or dangle
| some stuff from your pack at higher risk times. Animals
| will do the hard work of avoiding you When you're nearby,
| but its quite unnecessary to notify everything with in a
| 1km radius of your presence.
| calmbonsai wrote:
| That's what "bear bells" are for...in bear country.
|
| Mountain lions are avoidant at all times unless it's a
| mother with cubs and even then they'll let you know _well_
| in advance.
|
| Otherwise, just normal conversation, your smell with even a
| light breeze, and the vibrations on-trail will alert _all_
| animals to your presence.
|
| In other words, the "trail music" theory is bullshit. They
| just want to listen to their music.
| chickensong wrote:
| Bear bells have been shown to not be effective.
| calmbonsai wrote:
| Cite?
|
| In some parks, there use is required by-law.
|
| Given that they've been in continuous use for centuries I
| question the conclusion that they're not effective, but
| I'm open to altering my opinion backed-up with data.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| > Mountain lions are avoidant at all times
|
| Actually sometimes they stalk people but I guess that's
| neither here nor there because bear bells aren't going to
| help in that situation.
| calmbonsai wrote:
| I've heard of "being followed" by a mountain lion out of
| curiosity or, perhaps, scavenging when ill, but never a
| full-day stalk.
|
| There was a recent death in our "backyard" though
| https://vt.co/news/us/details-emerge-solo-hiker-killed-
| by-mo... that was, clearly, the result of a planned
| attack by a teenage male so, perhaps, their behavior is
| changing.
|
| Still, it's so rare, we don't have enough modern data.
| robotburrito wrote:
| I think it's cultural to do this or something.
| boogieknite wrote:
| definitely not cultural
|
| now, imagine showing up to a hike and the person youre
| meeting whips one of these out and proceeds to blast rap
| music. its happened to me and it feels like Seinfeld but
| 2020s
| skirmish wrote:
| Be prepared to counter with Norwegian black metal!
| fuzzer371 wrote:
| It is absolutely a cultural thing.
| boogieknite wrote:
| this guy is a white cop and our mothers are sisters
|
| so is this white guy culture, cop culture or what
| culture?
|
| in my experience its nearly always college bros with
| fanny pack speakers. college bro who will grow up to be a
| white cop culture maybe
| cons0le wrote:
| Yeah, you're really not going to find many people
| blasting gustav mahler in the forest for example. It's
| always pop music.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| I'm with you. IMO sound pollution is no different than 2nd hand
| smoke. IMO It should not be anyone's right to impose upon
| others, especially when there are lower externality options.
| Wear headphones.
|
| "Not everyone owns headphones" is such a dumb response because
| 1. This entertainment is purely optional (not needed for
| survival) and 2. There are $4 headphones on amazon making me
| believe in cheaper/poorer markets you could get them for about
| 1/2 that.
| sneak wrote:
| Secondhand smoke is toxic and physically damages your body
| and enters your bloodstream.
|
| Someone playing music is annoying and does not physically
| harm you in any way.
|
| These are not remotely the same thing. There is a clear
| bright line between them.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| It stresses me out and distracts me from what I'm doing.
| You have no right to do that and I will ruin your day if
| you try.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| As long as I'm within the restrictions of any ordinance
| regarding noise level/place/time of day, I have no
| obligation to be silent in public places.
|
| You don't have a right to freedom from annoyances, within
| reason.
| mancerayder wrote:
| That's why the person wrote the app in the link of this
| thread. So that when you annoy us, we'll echo it back in
| your face at full volume. And you have no right to
| complain since you just approved not being free from us
| doing this to you.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Unwanted noise affect stress level which has an impact in
| health.
|
| It is not just harmless annoyance and not everyone is equal
| in that regard.
| evilduck wrote:
| C'mon now.
|
| "<insert literally anything you feel like> affect stress
| level which has an impact in health [so do what I want]"
|
| What _can't_ you use that argument for?
| frm88 wrote:
| _Someone playing music is annoying and does not physically
| harm you in any way._
|
| Tell that to someone wearing hearing aids or implants. I'm
| fairly sure, they feel differently.
| socalgal2 wrote:
| Go to SF. people carrying 24inch speakers on their back
| blaring music walking down market street
|
| Or the DJ school at 20th and Mission playing music outdoors
| every Friday
| ecshafer wrote:
| > I'm loving the fact that battery technology will eventually
| eliminate weed wackers.
|
| I've moved to all electric lawn equipment. Snow blower, lawn
| mower, weed wacker, leaf blower. They all work great, are
| quieter, and I don't have to deal with carburetors and oil ever
| again.
| zdragnar wrote:
| I only moved halfway. I had some electronic failure in one of
| my more expensive battery powered purchases, and the thing
| was just dead. There's no servicing it for any reasonable
| cost. For more important things, I'd rather have a two stroke
| engine I can work on myself. For everything else, battery
| operated is the way to go.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| My battery-powered lawnmower died once.
|
| After I took the handle apart and undid some connections, I
| diagnosed it as a bad switch.
|
| I fixed it by making a small hole in the switch body with a
| hand-held drill bit, shaking some water out of it, spraying
| in some Corrosion-X, and exercising it while watching its
| performance improve on my meter.
|
| In terms of cost: It took about 40 minutes to get from
| "WTF?" to "Fixed!", along with maybe 3 cents of the magic
| spray stuff and some tools I already owned.
| officeplant wrote:
| Side benefit: Our electric push mower has enough LED lights
| on it for some reason that I can mow after sunset. I've mowed
| the grass at 9pm without disturbing anyone and its magic.
| yesfitz wrote:
| It's not unreasonable to expect certain behavior in a shared
| space.
|
| I'm really not sure where some of the other people replying to
| your comment are coming from. Forcing every human and animal
| you come across to listen to what you're listening to is
| selfish. Full stop. And not doing it costs $0, which preempts
| any question of resources.
| dd8601fn wrote:
| Sometimes I would really rather not have the outside world
| isolated or noise cancelled while I'm listening to music...
| so I sorta get it?
|
| But also, for all the reasons described, I just use
| transparency modes if I want that. That way nobody else has
| to hear my poor taste in music.
| franga2000 wrote:
| There are so many types of headphones that don't isolate
| much, including the cheapest crappy on-ears from the
| walkman era, there's really no excuse.
|
| And on the few occasions where I've had no other option, it
| made so much more sense to set my phone to low volume and
| bring it close to my ear instead of holding it iut and
| maxing the volume.
|
| And if I need to talk as well, many people don't know this,
| but there's a second smaller speaker on the opposite end of
| the phone, approximately one mouth-ear distance away from
| the microphone.
| BeetleB wrote:
| Wearing headphones while hiking is uncomfortable, and wearing
| earbuds for any length of time is always uncomfortable - hiking
| or not. They also fall out.
|
| As others have said - not really a big deal. Either get ahead
| of them and maintain a significant distance, or stay behind and
| do so.
| gensym wrote:
| It is a big deal. It means for a lot of people there's
| nowhere they can go to actually enjoy the sound of nature.
| The strategy of getting ahead or staying behind doesn't work
| when there are switchbacks or crowded trails. The strategy
| that does work is to get fit enough to go deep into the
| backcountry because the troglodytes that bring speakers to
| hikes lack the discipline to ever get that far.
| BeetleB wrote:
| > The strategy of getting ahead or staying behind doesn't
| work when there are switchbacks or crowded trails.
|
| If a trail is crowded, you won't hear much of the sound of
| nature, whether someone is playing music or now.
|
| It all depends on where you live, and what access you have.
| Nature is not far from me, so I have several options within
| an hour's drive.
| latexr wrote:
| https://shokz.com
|
| There you go. Quite comfortable, don't have to stick them
| inside your ears, and still allows you to perceive the sounds
| around you.
|
| In the spirit of fairness, I'll also share the cons from my
| experience: First is battery life isn't as good as
| headphones. That's somewhat obvious as they're much smaller,
| but they will still last you the whole day so not really an
| issue for hiking. Second one is that because they don't block
| outside sounds, they're not appropriate for
| audiobooks/podcasts while walking in the city. Again, not an
| issue for hiking.
| BeetleB wrote:
| Whether they realize it or not, most of the population
| can't afford this. Cheap Bluetooth speakers are, well,
| cheap!
| latexr wrote:
| Then buy a cheaper brand. I just did a no-effort search
| on Amazon and found some under $30.
|
| Additionally, "I can't afford the alternative" is not a
| valid excuse to be an asshole to those around you.
| BeetleB wrote:
| What constitutes being an asshole is very much the point
| of contention in this thread. Your comment is borderline
| tautological.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > Cheap Bluetooth speakers are, well, cheap!
|
| And so are cheap headphones.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| No. This is YOUR problem. If you want to play your own music
| on a speaker, you're making your problem everyone else's
| problem. Grow up.
| BeetleB wrote:
| You are being needlessly triggered, to the point that
| you're not parsing the thread well.
|
| 1. I didn't say I do this. It's not my problem.
|
| 2. You're exaggerating by saying "everyone else's problem".
| As is clear from the thread, only certain people view it as
| a problem.
|
| I also don't like people taking selfies on trails. But I
| know how not to have my contentment be affected by minor
| problems.
|
| Learn to share the trail and live with others different
| from you.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| No. Your first sentence is framed from the point of view
| of your own experience. Regardless, I will not tolerate
| sound pollution like this. It's one thing in the city,
| where noise is chronic and endemic. Bringing that into a
| natural setting is simply inconsiderate of others, and it
| is the inconsiderate person who must change their
| behavior, not the people who are being imposed upon.
| devin wrote:
| I am with you on speakers on a nature hike, but I think the
| line blurs a bit in a city context. As long as it's not
| extremely loud, I find it slightly more difficult to hate on
| the person playing some music and moderate volume while trucks
| and loud motorcycles go by. If we had less of a car culture, I
| might feel differently about it, but there's so much noise
| already that in that context I kind of shrug my shoulders at
| it.
| lacoolj wrote:
| I don't think this is really the idea behind this post
|
| It's about enclosed spaces (airport) or open, quiet ones
| (hiking)
| prmoustache wrote:
| TLDR it feels better to announce yourself with some (non
| aggressive) music than triggering a bell.
|
| I wouldn't use that when hiking but it is true that I
| sometimes use a bluetooth speaker when riding my bicycle in
| the city.
|
| I don't put it at full volume but a lot of pedestrians and
| their dog seem to be attracted by dedicated bicycle lanes
| when they are built on the same level as the sidewalk. It is
| a good way to warn people of my presence without using a
| bell. Using a bell sometimes sounds a bit rude because people
| associate it to the use of the car horn which has become a
| proxy for insults instead of the warning device it used to
| be.
|
| [1] I used to think pedestrians were doing it to annoy
| cyclists on purpose but judging by their often suprised
| reaction. I think it is just an unconscious behavior. Apart
| from bicycle lanes which aren't well marked, it is probably
| because the bicycle lanes are usually a smoother surface and
| thus more agreeable to the feet than the sidewalk thus people
| tend to walk on them natually.
| kelnos wrote:
| In a city context it's still obnoxious. In my experience
| these people are playing their music _loudly_. Like you can
| hear it from 2-3 blocks away, even with vehicle noise.
|
| And the vehicle noise is expected and "necessary", in that
| it's a street, and of course there will be noisy cars and
| motorcycles on it. The noise is also easier to treat as a
| background buzz and tune out. Loud music is not any of those
| things.
|
| Cities are a delicate balance when it comes to noise: if you
| live in a city, you have to acknowledge that you're living in
| a densely-populated place with lots of other people around,
| and make your peace with the fact that there will be noise.
| But at the same time, each individual should also do their
| best to avoid polluting the air with unnecessary noise. And
| blasting music from a giant bluetooth speaker in a backpack
| is 100% unnecessary, rude, and selfish.
| lbrito wrote:
| >Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| I'm baffled by this too, but I think some people get accustomed
| to just having a soundtrack around them at all times, like
| they're living in a Hollywood movie. It gets to the point where
| they actually sleep with something always on (in the old days
| that would be a TV, not sure today. Probably a podcast)
| martinpw wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| Washington Department of Natural Resources recommended
| bluetooth speaker playlists for hiking:
|
| https://unofficialnetworks.com/2022/08/20/washington-roasts-...
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Hopefully the rest of the world will eventually follow the
| Netherlands attempts to limit noise in cities by design
|
| [1]:https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8?t=202
| m463 wrote:
| I was in downtown seattle recently and these homeless people
| play music on giant bluetooth speakers.
|
| It was kind of surreal - sketchy looking person playing high-
| pitched voice female vocals (imagine k-pop).
| autoexec wrote:
| Every person is just a few missed meals and showers away from
| being a "sketchy looking person" even k-pop lovers. The
| majority of Americans are precariously close to ending up
| homeless.
| bradleyy wrote:
| I used to work in Pioneer Square, and there was a guy with a
| "portable" (think desktop PC in a milk crate, bungie corded
| to a foldable dolly) gaming pc playing on the regular.
| Granted this is back a bit.
|
| Seattleites are a resourceful lot.
| sefk wrote:
| I also sound cranky a lot lately when complaining about loud or
| unwelcome sounds in public spaces. So this project (and your
| comment) resonates with me.
|
| Also yes, hiking with a bluetooth speaker is particularly
| galling. you're in nature! For that reason I've been
| considering buying (or building) a portable bluetooth jammer. I
| wouldn't do all the time, no reason to punish someone using
| wireless earphones respectfully. It'd need to have a trigger
| for JIT intervention.
| dpc050505 wrote:
| I've found myself wishing I had a bluetooth speaker crossing
| meadows in bear country. It gets old singing Yellow submarine's
| chorus for the 35th time. Bears will hide if they hear you, if
| you surprise them and they get scared you might have a bad
| time.
| Pxtl wrote:
| I've a smallish lawn so I've just been using wired yard tools
| my whole life. Have to be careful to mind the extension cord
| but it's dead simple and zero-maintenance. My lawnmower is just
| about old enough to run for President. Just make sure you get
| the right cable gauge for your mower, since you're dealing with
| long-enough runs that resistance loss in the cable is
| substantial and Home Depot just wants to sell you 100 foot 16
| gauge thing that probably shouldn't be anywhere near a proper
| lawnmower.
| runjake wrote:
| _> what 's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!_
|
| Finally, it's my time to shine. OK, so I do this. Granted, I
| hike spots where I rarely run into other people. I listen to
| music out in nature because:
|
| - I enjoy it and it creates a mood.
|
| - I don't wear headphones because I want to be comfortable but
| I also want to hear the environment (for safety and enjoyment
| reasons).
|
| - It also lets bears and cougar know I am around.
|
| Finally, nature isn't new to me. I've spent significant amounts
| of time in the remote woods alone -- even living in the woods
| for some time. Not that it's boring by any stretch, but it's
| also not a novel experience to me.
|
| But yeah, it'd be rude to be doing it where other people are
| trying to enjoy nature.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _But yeah, it 'd be rude to be doing it where other people
| are trying to enjoy nature._
|
| Right, so you are a hiking music-player, but also a person
| who is sensitive to the experiences of others and not a
| douche. I think this thread is about the douchey people who
| do this in much more crowded spaces than you're used to.
| Maybe they have the same justifications as you have when
| you're alone, but they just don't hold water for me when
| there are other people around.
| Wurdan wrote:
| I've recently started trying open ear phones for other
| reasons and I've found the current state of the art pretty
| good in terms of sound quality. I use Nothing's open ears,
| but I'm sure there are many others that are equally good.
| They won't act as cougar alerters, but if you want to listen
| to both music and the environment where others are around,
| the tech is ready
| dystopiandevel wrote:
| I can appreciate the reasons you have for wanting it. The
| only problem is when it affects my hiking experience. It
| annoys the crap out of me to hear it coming loudly from down
| the path when I just want to listen to nature.
|
| Like the other commenter posted, you can use open earbuds,
| which I use as well for the same reasons.
|
| As far as wild cats go, they are already pretty good at
| knowing you are there already without a speaker. Where I live
| there are many mountain lions and bobcats but I have never
| seen one close up, same in the California Sierra. In terms of
| bears, if they aren't black bears then yeah although it
| depends on where you are hiking. If it's in the backcountry,
| please pause it when I come by.
| jszymborski wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| I've not done this, and I don't think I would ever do this, but
| I can sympathize with having the idea that they don't want to
| be so isolated from nature so as to have headphones blocking
| out the sounds of the world around them dampened, but also feel
| like it would be super sweet if they could listen to Bowie
| right now.
|
| It's also been shown that having music reduces the feeling of
| loneliness, having similar effects to having had a conversation
| recently, so if a person is hiking along perhaps it offers them
| companionship?
|
| _If_ I ever did this (I wouldn't) I'd probably have it down to
| a whisper such that you would hardly be able to make it out
| unless you were right beside me.
| prmoustache wrote:
| When you are hiking there is actually a ton of noise/songs to
| listen to. Especially birds.
| mancerayder wrote:
| What are you doing out in nature if you need to be around
| music and feel lonely? Stay in the city, leave the country to
| people who want to actually get a break from the city for
| their mental health.
|
| In my case, listening to other people's music damages my
| mental health. If I encounter someone on a trail with music
| (this has not happened here in the northeast to me yet)
| they'll encounter a string of direct to-face insults from me.
| jszymborski wrote:
| Lol please don't gate keep "nature". As if the only people
| who play music on a hike are from or belong in cities.
|
| The nice thing about the great outdoors is that there is
| plenty of space for you and me, even if I were to play
| music you can audibly detect from a meter away.
|
| Look, I hope you find some other ways than insulting people
| to express your displeasure in the future. That'll damage
| both the mental health of the person your speaking to and
| your own!
|
| Take care out there!
| shrx wrote:
| If I'm hiking or cycling alone through the woods with high bear
| populations, I will often play some music to alert them to
| prevent an unpleasant encounter.
| ipv6ipv4 wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| I used to hold this same opinion. Unfortunately, times have
| changed and now everyone is constantly in their phones,
| isolated in their own universes, typically with earbuds or
| headphones. At least the obnoxious speaker dude is present; in
| a shared physical reality with the world around him. A lesser
| evil.
| MrGinkgo wrote:
| This is why god invented bone conducting headphones
| ipv6ipv4 wrote:
| That's still not a shared experience.
| Izikiel43 wrote:
| > Also what's up with the people hiking (by themselves) with a
| bluetooth speaker. You're by yourself, in nature. If you want
| to listen to music wear headphones!!
|
| Wife is concerned about bears
| pvtmert wrote:
| there are many sibling/child comments here touching the
| bluetooth speaker topic.
|
| obviously there are numerous people blasting those in public
| places in waay too high volume.
|
| _sometimes_ when I ride bicycle in non-car road (cycle /hiking
| paths around luxembourg) i put not-too-loud music playing on
| phone speaker (about 70% volume) both for _vibes_ and also for
| safety. -- as there are people walking which may be obstructed
| by the bushes or other oncoming cyclists.
|
| for the vibes part, i am really hoping smart-glasses or similar
| equipment to be more common, as i got echo frames last year, i
| am quite happy about the _vibe_ it adds when i play
| _background_ music (just to myself) in different occasions.
| (even though quality is not great)
|
| many people mentioned headphones & earbuds, but i do not see
| them as the solution for nature/hiking related situations;
|
| - (partial) blocking of external sounds, even if there is no
| noise cancellation, it dims outside sounds like bike bells,
| engine sounds, other people yelling at you because you are in
| danger, ie. may cause accidents
|
| - comfort & compatibility issues with other equipment. like
| hearing aid (maybe that's the reason some people blasting away
| such high volumes? -- maybe never hearing loss haven't
| diagnosed properly!). if you have a helmet, over-head
| headphones usually dont work, stuck with ear-buds. fit and
| comfort of these are quite difficult. even if you use over-head
| ones, cushions usually go bad quite fast due to mild sweating
| or contact with external air & humidity.
|
| i really hope price of bluetooth-speaker or bone-speaker
| glasses will go down significantly in the future. this way, you
| don't obstruct external sounds, not add heavy or squishy things
| to your ear while adding your theme song on a moment.
|
| ---
|
| obviously i mention these as a _reasonable_ human being, who
| keeps their phone in silent 7 /24, and all videos muted all the
| time (i also mute my laptop, as i hate hearing other people's
| zoom/chime calls constantly ringing throughout the day!)
| kelnos wrote:
| The way I look at it when it comes to the comfort bits: if
| you aren't comfortable using headphones to listen to your
| music in a public place (for fit or safety or whatever
| reasons), then you don't get to listen to your music. It's
| just basic common courtesy. I find it mind-blowing that there
| are so many comments in this subthread supporting this sort
| of behavior.
|
| I guarantee you that your 70% volume music while cycling is
| audible to people much farther from you than you think, and
| that many of those people are probably annoyed by it.
| Tade0 wrote:
| I spent a good part of the summer weekends in the mountains
| which are an hour's drive from my place.
|
| Every minute someone in the distance would be flooring whatever
| loud vehicle they were driving/riding - mostly motorcycles, but
| I've heard a few cars.
|
| Their enjoyment is everything, screw everyone else.
| alturp wrote:
| Audio jacks have to come back.
| connorgurney wrote:
| I might be in a minority saying this - and particularly so here
| on HN - but I struggle to understand why you'd be willing to use
| a tool like this, as OP did, but not to politely ask someone to
| keep it down?
| brk wrote:
| Have you tried asking many people to "keep it down"? Generally
| that doesn't end with them politely keeping it down.
| connorgurney wrote:
| As with anything in life, it depends on how you ask.
| pixl97 wrote:
| You mean
|
| "As with anything in life it depends on a huge number of
| variables such as location, number of allies the other
| person has, the threat potential you represent, the number
| of allies you have, your standing on the social ladder, if
| you're in a position of power, your ability to understand
| social clues, the exact method how you ask, yada yada"
| ArnoVW wrote:
| No. It delends on how you ask.
|
| Did you walk over? Did you say hi? Did you lower yourself
| to be around their height? Give them a second or two to
| get used to you? Tell them first that their noise is loud
| ? Ask them in a respectable tone if they would lower it,
| just a bit? Did you give the impression that you were
| asking, not demanding?
|
| Of course I won't ask a drunk or aggressive looking
| person. But there is a wrong way to ask, and a better
| one.
| jraph wrote:
| I'm all for asking nicely in general but it doesn't work
| well with entitled people who don't give a shit about the
| people around them.
|
| The chances, regardless how nice you try to ask, that the
| person who elected to broadcast their tiktoks or calls to
| the whole wagon at full volume goes "oh, sorry, I'm so
| embarrassed, I'll turn this off", are very low.
|
| Last time I tried to ask "can you use headphones?", the
| guy answered "I don't have headphones" and put the volume
| even louder.
|
| A person who cared even a tiny bit would not have started
| to begin with. Asking is almost futile. These people
| simply seem to be used to get away with inflicting
| themselves to people around without consequences. The
| worse part is that if you do nothing, you participate in
| this.
|
| What can you do.
|
| I think it can only work if it becomes very socially
| unbearable, or if they got fined for this. Or, indeed, if
| it brought them nuisance. In that regard, this HN post's
| solution is interesting (not sure it's good though).
| pvtmert wrote:
| i agree with this one, in this particular order, how
| things be in large cities & crowded areas:
|
| - loud person does not care in the first place, that's
| why they do the loud act
|
| - usually they are more than 1 person, outnumbering me
|
| - although some places have public disturbance prohibited
| laws, unless there is a law enforcement/security around,
| chances of me being ending up in a hospital is higher
| than chances of stumbling on a decent person
|
| - it is easier to act or play stupid
|
| ---
|
| on a similar note, last time when i asked someone to
| lower their volume while having headphones on me, they
| demanded my headphones because they claimed they were too
| poor to buy one. -- i am talking about 20$ type-c earbuds
| vs 16" macbook size marshall speaker. -- as a result, i
| did not give my headphones and they continued to play
| music.
| dartharva wrote:
| > Did you walk over? Did you say hi? Did you lower
| yourself to be around their height? Give them a second or
| two to get used to you?
|
| I personally detest the kind of people who behave like
| this. It all just exudes deliberate fakeness; if anyone
| were to try this on me I'll only be irritated more than
| anything else.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _Of course I won 't ask a drunk or aggressive looking
| person._
|
| I've learned in my time in cities that it can be very
| hard to judge who is likely to be aggressive and who
| isn't.
| jasondigitized wrote:
| No it doesn't. That's equivalent to saying you can get
| most woman to date you depending on how you ask.
| pixl97 wrote:
| I'm not really sure where you're from or what sheltered
| life you've lived but this does not jive with reality
| what so ever.
|
| Seems like you're from western Europe, and maybe people
| are nicer there, but once you get to a place with strong
| racism, classism, wealth disparity, you suddenly find
| that being civil has little weight.
| renewiltord wrote:
| I left my Mac on top of my car in San Francisco once and
| the next day when I came back it was still there. The thing
| with catastrophic events that occur at 1% is that even if
| everyone were to risk it ten times (that's a huge amount
| for this I think) 9 out of every 10 people would say "nah,
| nothing happens, I've done it ten times without anything
| happening" but then 1 out of 10 would die.
|
| So then the question becomes how well you've sampled that
| catastrophic risk before you say what the real risk is. As
| an example, I've been mask off and partying since as soon
| as that became legal. Haven't gotten sick from COVID yet.
| Shows, house parties, sharing drinks with people who later
| had it. Tested often because I was this high risk. Zero
| positives.
|
| I could say "actually, if you just do the things that I did
| you'll be fine". After all, I've been fine. Nothing
| happened. I just didn't get sick. I've got the winning
| formula.
| netcoyote wrote:
| > I left my Mac on top of my car in San Francisco once
| and the next day when I came back it was still there.
|
| Not the latest model, huh? That's certainly a passive-
| aggressive way to suggest you upgrade...
| kelnos wrote:
| I was mask _on_ and at a bar literally on the day they
| lifted the capacity restrictions, and came down with
| COVID days later. I was the lucky 1 in 10!
| tonymet wrote:
| in my experience, the more polite you are, the more likely
| you are to get punched in the face
|
| If you are in a venue where politely asking someone to keep
| it down, results in them actually responding, you generally
| don't need to ask. You are among conscientious people to
| begin with.
|
| For the most part, about 99% of the time, the whole point
| of drawing attention is waiting for someone to politely ask
| them to turn it down. And it isn't so they can respond in
| kind.
| RationPhantoms wrote:
| While I agree and I'm not the OP you're replying to this
| feels like the burden of societal correction needs to be on
| the wronged and not on the person committing it?
|
| It's tolerating the intolerant (their intolerance to
| understanding social order). They need to be bludgeoned
| back (metaphorically).
| on_the_train wrote:
| No. People who are loud do that because they want to be
| loud. They want to hurt people. And they get off to
| weaklings being polite. The law is too slow and too
| forgiving for these destructive forces. We need to bring
| violence back in a big way.
| bpev wrote:
| I've seen a fistfight on the muni that started from this.
| charles_f wrote:
| In my experience, if you ask it politely and nicely, it
| works. I can't recall a time when it didn't.
| user- wrote:
| I mean, he took a picture of the guy posted it on his twitter
| calling him a 'fat uncle'. I don't think he cares about being
| polite.
| lbrito wrote:
| Is "fat uncle" a slang I don't know about?
| komadori wrote:
| In some Asian cultures, "uncle" can be used to refer to any
| man older than yourself.
| knollimar wrote:
| Is uncle just old unmarried guy?
| sergiomattei wrote:
| Real courageous from that guy calling someone a "fat uncle"
| on a Twitter thread. Could've applied that same energy IRL
| and told him to tone it down.
| throwaway150 wrote:
| You have to understand though that this is X (rip twitter) we
| are talking about and from the verified account, the 14k
| follower count, it is evident that this person either is or
| is trying to be a tech "influencer". Posting controversial
| rage-baits is pretty much the pattern every influencer
| follows today to stir up discussion, increase their
| visibility, and get more followers.
|
| > I don't think he cares about being polite.
|
| If you're polite, debate civilly, say reasonable things and
| act like a normal person, you are a nobody on X. Nobody will
| see your tweet. Nobody will engage with it. You might as well
| have not said anything.
| varjag wrote:
| It's a way to avoid direct confrontation via passive
| aggression.
| olyjohn wrote:
| Yeah except being passive aggressive actually tends to
| escalate the situation. Because sometimes people will just
| respond to a polite question, but now you've just been the
| same asshole to them, so there is a higher chance that
| they're just going to get offended.
| varjag wrote:
| The whole PA phenomenology originates from the military,
| where hierarchy prevents direct confrontation. So
| subordinates lash out in ways that are harder to counter. I
| feel like it's a similar dynamic here.
| kelnos wrote:
| Absolutely, but the key word in the GP's use of "avoid
| direct confrontation" is _direct_. Being passive-aggressive
| is indirect, and even if it 's more likely to cause an
| escalation, to many people it feels safer, even if it
| really isn't.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| Because social anxiety, typically. "What if the person tells me
| to fuck off? What if they make a scene of it?" Especially if
| six years ago you are the person who was in your teenage years,
| chances are your social skills are not what they could be if
| you didn't spend a year in lockdowns.
|
| Conversely, if you are the kind of person able to come up to a
| stranger and ask them (politely and respectfully!) to change
| what they are doing, you likely the person with the social
| skill to do other things well too.
| connorgurney wrote:
| I follow that, and it's something I've struggled with in the
| past, but doesn't this sort of solution make them more likely
| to tell you to fuck off or to make a scene, rather than less?
| groby_b wrote:
| What are they going to make a scene about? You playing
| audio loudly in a public space? They kind of ran out of
| legs to stand on a while ago.
| simonbw wrote:
| It seems harder to justify telling someone to fuck off for
| doing literally the exact same thing you're currently
| doing.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| Imagine you are sitting in public watching TikTok videos
| and someone sitting two seats down from you just turns on
| this app. Are you more likely to say "hey sorry mate I
| didn't realize it was bothering you." or are you more
| likely to turn it up louder and/or tell them to fuck off?
|
| Now imagine the same situation but the person comes up to
| you and says "excuse me but would you mind turning your
| volume down a bit or using headphones? The sound from your
| phone is really bugging me and I would really appreciate
| it." Which situation is more likely to piss you off?
|
| And sure you might respond poorly to both but I see no
| universe in which you respond positively to the first while
| I think there is a good chance you respond well to the
| second.
|
| On the other hand if the person approaches you and says
| "hey buddy turn that shit down".. but the kind of person to
| use this 2 second delay thing in my experience would never
| have the confidence to do something like that so not even
| worth considering.
| Aurornis wrote:
| > Because social anxiety, typically. "What if the person
| tells me to fuck off? What if they make a scene of it?"
|
| As opposed to building a tool to actively annoy them without
| politely asking them a question? This doesn't follow.
|
| I doubt the tool was actually used.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| That's my point. This tool is pointless because while it is
| designed to avoid confrontation it nearly guarantees it. A
| waste of bits, as it were.
| fortran77 wrote:
| It's not social anxiety. It's fear of being shot.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| What a great society
| maximilianroos wrote:
| What did you think "building social skills" meant? vibe coded
| apps?
|
| Gotta start somewhere!
| IgorPartola wrote:
| Just wait until Claude doesn't want to be friends anymore
| and Alexa isn't returning your calls. Siri will always talk
| to you but you don't want to talk to her :)
| ecshafer wrote:
| I have seen fights break out in the subway over people being
| loud. People playing loud music in public often seem to be the
| types to be looking for trouble, they want someone to tell them
| to turn it down, so they can say no and escalate. In a lot of
| cities this is a big risk.
| tptacek wrote:
| This app is even more hostile.
| ecshafer wrote:
| The app is more hostile, I agree. Its a bad idea, and a
| good way to get beaten up.
| boarsofcanada wrote:
| To this point, there have been at least a few stories of
| elderly people being beaten on San Francisco public transit
| for politely asking people to turn their music down.
| tkel wrote:
| OK, I read about someone being murdered by their spouse.
| That doesn't mean it is going to happen to me. The media
| reports on sensational stories. That doesn't make them
| normal.
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| You tend to know your spouse, you don't know the mental
| state of people on the train. Especially people who have
| already demonstrated they don't care about social norms
| or preserving tranquility in public spaces.
| tombert wrote:
| I remember one guy had a whole DJ setup on the subway once.
| Like he had a table, a laptop, several large speakers, a
| microphone, monitor headphones, the works. He would have been
| right at home DJing a kids birthday party.
|
| The music he was playing was ridiculously bad. Obviously
| subjective but this was such terrible low effort stuff that I
| am not sure it would even make it to SoundCloud. Think "your
| stoner friend's demo tape you try to listen to but can't get
| more than three minutes in"
|
| We were in a long tunnel and he turned the volume up, which I
| don't think anyone wanted. I yell over the speaker and say he
| should that shit off. He said people here want it, to which I
| say "no they actually don't. See how everyone here has
| headphones on? If your music was any good you wouldn't have
| to force people to listen to it as hostages. If you want to
| actually test this then go to Washington Square Park, not the
| fucking train".
|
| He called me an asshole, turned the music even louder, and
| kept it going until I left the train. I don't think he agreed
| with my reasoning.
| itodd wrote:
| i would hope you're not the minority. i'm in your camp.
| Aurornis wrote:
| This feels like a case of imaginary revenge. I doubt the tool
| was actually used. Creating this tool was part of a revenge
| fantasy.
|
| If someone has too much social anxiety or is too afraid to
| politely ask the other person to turn it down, using an
| actively annoying option like this isn't going to help. This is
| more likely to induce a confrontation.
| nozzlegear wrote:
| My wife and I were sitting in the coffee shop/dining area of
| our grocery store not long ago, eating breakfast before we
| bought our groceries. There's a gentleman who's usually there
| on the same weekend days that we are, and he watches videos on
| his phone _very_ loudly. It was clearly annoying everyone
| around, but this being Minnesota, nobody was going to bother
| him about it (instead they just do little glances over their
| shoulder or the "OPE" eyes at each other lol).
|
| Finally, one older woman gets up and walks over to him. My wife
| and I are like "Oh shit, she's gonna let him have it, here it
| comes." She taps him on the shoulder and says "Excuse me, can
| you turn that down? It's very loud." And you know what he did?
| He said "Oh, sorry," and turned it down.
|
| She said thanks and went back to her seat, simple as that.
| tkel wrote:
| Thanks for sharing your story about how simple normal
| requests lead to simple normal social outcomes.
|
| The isolation and atomization of modern individualized living
| has led people to be so controlled by their anti-social
| anxieties, fear, and loathing of other people, that they and
| OP won't even try.
| gsinclair wrote:
| That's good, and I also have spoken to people in public about
| their noise several times, but...
|
| That dude shouldn't be turning it down; he should be turning
| it off.
|
| My go-to line is: "Excuse me, do you have any earphones?"
| jspash wrote:
| You've never met my neighbours! No seriously. Some people are
| just jerks.
| lacoolj wrote:
| lol this is a very good point
|
| if you have the balls to do this next to someone, they will
| immediately recognize what you're doing right after they stop
| (if they stop).
|
| that's gonna be 100x more awkward than asking them politely
| would have been.
| latexr wrote:
| Agreed. Especially since something like this seems much more
| likely to get the other person to turn on you. It's passive
| aggressive.
| cvoss wrote:
| It's a great example of (effective, apparently) passive
| aggression, and, I would guess, is motivated by all the same
| reasons as any other kind of passive aggression. E.g., fear of
| open confrontation, or a desire to create a situation that is
| just as or more undesirable for them so that the other person
| actively chooses the thing you want, of their own free will.
| raffael_de wrote:
| It is very difficult to stay polite while getting very angry.
| Politeness is usually reserved for respectful people. If
| somebody acts in a way that is perceived as intentionally
| disrespectful (whether that's actually the case or not), there
| is a severe psychological dissonance to overcome. Also
| physiologically people will get nervous, voice shaking, facial
| tension and twitching, heart racing, mind getting foggy when
| severely agitated which makes trying to act polite even more
| difficult. It's easier and seemingly more sensible to just skip
| straight to snapping or ... bottling the rage up to eventually
| release it against somebody sufficiently harmless - humans are
| monkeys after all (which isn't even necessarily bad, we should
| just strive for civilizing the chimp and strengthening the
| bonobo within us.)
| satvikpendem wrote:
| > _didn 't have the courage to speak up._
| rdtsc wrote:
| Think of it as catering to the fantasy of a geek's revenge.
|
| The keyword is fantasy.
|
| > so i built a tiny app that plays back the same audio it
| hears, delayed by ~2 seconds. asked claude, it spat out a
| working version in one prompt. surprisingly WORKS.
|
| Note, they never said they actually played it and then person
| realized they were being disrespectful and stopped. That whole
| scenario is supposed to happen in a hypothetic fantasy world,
| and every reader here is supposed to take in the same way for
| themselves.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| But still, I think the solution is brilliant and I can't wait
| to try it.
|
| If you ask someone to turn it down, it can immediately come
| off as confrontational, even if you're being polite. With
| this solution, though, it's kind of hilarious because in one
| sense it's _more_ confrontational, but the original music
| blaster would have to ask _you_ to turn it down - but it 's
| just _their_ music.
|
| I'm a pretty nonconfrontational person, but the one time I
| lost it was when this late middle aged woman kept chatting
| away on her cell phone in the quiet car of the LIRR despite
| other people previously telling her that she was in the quiet
| car (I believe my exact words were "Hey princess, what part
| of 'no cellphones' do you not understand" - there is a giant
| sign at the front of the car that says no cellphone use). But
| I don't think I'd ever do this in a public situation where
| the rules weren't so clearly spelled out.
| moron4hire wrote:
| It's also incredibly passive aggressive and passive
| aggression is one of the most reliable ways to trigger
| defiance in someone.
|
| At least it is for me. Especially when it's my moth... you
| know what? Never mind. If I keep going I'll spiral out.
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| Because then you don't end up with an idea for a coding
| project.
| pseudosavant wrote:
| My experience has been that people are usually (>50% of the
| time) offended and non-compliant, no matter how politely you
| ask. Who am I to ask them to be quieter? They only stop if
| something annoying is happening for them, like this app, or
| audibly responding to their call/video.
| sergiomattei wrote:
| Seriously, this is as easy as tapping the dude next door and
| telling him to tone that volume down.
|
| Negative social skills on that Twitter thread
| cheema33 wrote:
| I was at a Bills game in Buffalo last year. 5 rows ahead of me
| was big tall dude, who stood up and would not sit down. This
| was blocking the view of everybody behind him. People grumbled,
| but nobody said or did anything for about 20 minutes. I was
| quite peeved. Then an old lady right behind him gently tapped
| him on his shoulder and reminded him that he was blocking the
| view of several people behind him. The dude shrugged his
| shoulder and said, "not my problem, you can stand up too if you
| want". I am a mega-nerd, but I lost my cool right there and
| then and started screaming at the guy. My girlfriend, who
| didn't want to see me get beat up, pulled me away from the
| scene.
|
| Many people are just massive assholes. Asking nicely does not
| work. Particularly big drunk dudes at an American football
| game. That was my first and last visit to a football stadium.
| valleyer wrote:
| That really sucks, but don't deprive yourself of something
| you think you might enjoy because of that one jackass.
| Chances are that next time you won't experience something
| like that.
|
| Also, basically every pro and semi-pro sports stadium
| nowadays has cell-phone-contactable security that you can
| summon to handle situations like these. The threat of being
| kicked out of his $250 seats is way more of a threat than
| that of being confronted by a "mega-nerd".
|
| I wouldn't make a habit of contacting security over every
| little annoyance, but if they're obnoxiously blocking an old
| lady, that's the time to use it.
|
| P.S.: your karma is currently 1337, sweet
| bigDinosaur wrote:
| Seek sympathetic allies and then contact relevant
| authorities is probably the best general piece of advice on
| dealing with any kind of conflict.
| charles_f wrote:
| Exactly! Every time I asked someone respectfully to lower their
| noise, it worked. Most times they apologized, I think sometimes
| people don't realize they're annoying others. It might be
| intimidating the first couple of times, but it's so much better
| to feel assertive and _not_ be annoyed anymore.
|
| Last time this happened was in a bar, there was a pianist
| playing, and a group sat right next to the piano and started
| being very noisy. I went and asked them to lower their voices.
| They apologized, and shut up entirely. Later, someone came to
| thank me for that.
|
| On the other hand, I would never dare using that tool, it feels
| a bit childish and would make me feel like such an ass!
| baby wrote:
| This. People are scared of human interactions more and more.
| It's all about being passive agressive or avoiding the good ol'
| conformism through connection.
|
| On the other hand if you can force people to behave through
| machine processes it's much more effective than human processes
| subjectsigma wrote:
| There's two options:
|
| 1. This is a lighthearted joke that someone made after having a
| bad experience with others being noisy in public. (Most likely
| scenario.)
|
| 2. The author is going to actually use this tool in public, in
| which case they are either a power-tripping asshole who gets
| off on "outsmarting" people, or a limp-wristed coward without
| basic social skills.
| ivanjermakov wrote:
| > me being me, didn't have the courage to speak up
|
| I hardly imagine a situation where speaking up is less
| "couraging" than using such tool to mock annoying person.
| bsimpson wrote:
| I think the word you're looking for is courageous.
| ddtaylor wrote:
| I imagine they keep their headphones on or play it off as the
| device doing it on it's own. The "work" of having to solve the
| problem hasn't gone away, but it has been translated from
| social into lying by omission and performative contradiction.
|
| EDIT: By performative contradiction I mean doing the thing the
| person is doing to demonstrate the contradiction.
| dartharva wrote:
| Speaking up would have a higher failure rate. Speaking up
| overtly stimulates the annoying person's defensiveness and
| propensity to challenge back. Subtle manipulation always works
| better.
| rw_panic0_0 wrote:
| solving problems with tech that are solvable with speaking to ppl
| is crazy social anxiety spares no one
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| I saw a video a few years ago with people speaking into
| microphones connected to a digital delay attached to headphones
| they wore. With something like a 200 - 300ms delay most people
| could only speak a few words before becoming unable to speak
| intelligibly.
|
| Something like that, with a directional microphone and one of
| those eerie directional speaker rigs I find in retail stores
| could be tons of fun for those irritating people who insist on
| using speaker phone in public.
| arlattimore wrote:
| > made with spite
| ikamm wrote:
| Prompted with spite
| thadt wrote:
| In the 80's we had a way to deal with that kind of thing [1].
| Just gotta practice to get the technique right.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1GyHQiuneU
| ta2112 wrote:
| Exactly! Also, that random ride across the bridge towards Marin
| is taking forever
| fusslo wrote:
| I had this exact scene in my mind and I am glad I am not alone,
| friend
| lazarus01 wrote:
| Very funny!
|
| I believe the concept of public decency is entirely cultural and
| has less to do with courage.
|
| Where I live, if someone is being loud in public, you usually
| keep to yourself. So long as they are not being overtly offensive
| or profane.
|
| In other countries, like the Netherlands for example, people will
| have no problem telling you to be quiet or verbalize any
| violation of cultural norms. I believe it's like that in Germany
| and Scanda as well, from what I hear.
| arjie wrote:
| There was an exhibit at the Exploratorium demonstrating a similar
| effect. You speak into a device and it plays your voice back to
| you delayed. If you're also listening for the other person this
| makes it impossible to speak. You can easily ignore it by just
| not paying attention to the audio back but it's surprising how,
| if you have to listen, this delay ruins everything. Someone
| saying a different thing, on the other hand, is easy to listen to
| while speaking.
| bevelwork wrote:
| That reminds of seeing Mike Rowe do something like this that just
| broke my brain of doing exactly that for extended periods of time
| for voice over work.
|
| https://youtu.be/J4LhdU3a1KM?t=111
| test1072 wrote:
| https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/Pankajtanw...
|
| It's working. Op might consider adding to readme
| sodafountan wrote:
| I wonder if the future of AI is that we all just create our own
| programs out of thin air like this. Like if I need something, I
| just describe it to AI, and within seconds, it's generated and
| ready to use.
|
| Operating systems become redundant; you open any digital device,
| and it's just a portal into the most advanced LLM on the planet.
|
| Obviously just spitballing here.
|
| I wonder how far AI will advance.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Operating systems, no. You still have to access what is going
| to be standardized hardware and make the analog bits behave
| digitally at low power.
|
| Applications, yea, 100%.
| sodafountan wrote:
| I found it interesting that the OP defaulted to using an AI
| agent for his voice recording software rather than doing a
| Google search. Perhaps a sign of things to come? I would've
| chosen Google, but maybe I'll be falling behind in the
| future.
|
| Aside from getting an LLM up and running on a device, what's
| stopping AI from creating an operating system? I admittedly
| don't know much about operating system development, but
| aren't most operating systems written primarily in C?
|
| I guess what I meant by that is it would be interesting if
| the AI prompt itself were the OS, and all software would be
| generated via prompting the agent. No downloads, just a "What
| do you need?" prompt with the AI generating everything on the
| fly.
|
| Perhaps becoming so fast that you wouldn't even notice it
| thinking. Just: "I need to edit a document that was sent to
| my email" The AI would then retrieve the email, download the
| document and generate its own text editor to display the
| document in. All within a few milliseconds.
|
| Call it AIOS
| pixl97 wrote:
| >AI from creating an operating system?
|
| Nothing really... Creating a working operating system and
| understanding all the hardware bugs it could run into is a
| different story.
|
| Simply put when you look at the combined energy expenditure
| to create something like Windows or Linux and the numbers
| would likely stagger a person, like hundreds of gigawatts,
| hell probably terrawatts. This entropy expenditure is
| reduced by us sharing the code. This is the same reason we
| don't have that many top end AI models. The amount of
| energy you need to spend for one is massive.
|
| Intelligence doesn't mean you should do everything
| yourself. Sharing and stealing are solutions used in the
| animal kingdom as alternate solutions to the limited fuel
| problem.
| sodafountan wrote:
| Hardware bugs can be documented for an LLM to learn from;
| it's really just a chicken-and-egg problem. There are
| plenty of open-source, working operating systems for LLMs
| to learn from as well.
|
| And yes, I understand code re-use and distribution are
| valuable, and that's a good point. Having an LLM generate
| everything on the fly is definitely energy-intensive, but
| that hasn't stopped the world from building massive data
| centers to support it, regardless.
|
| I guess the theory of my past few posts would be similar
| to rolling updates, so using the text editor as an
| example, you'd prompt the AI agent in the hypothetical OS
| to open a document, and it would generate a word
| processor on the fly, referencing the dozens of open
| source repos for word processors and pushing its own
| contributions back out into the world for reference by
| other LLMs - computationally expensive, yes. It would
| then learn from your behaviors, utilizing the program,
| and the next time you'd prompt the OS for a word-
| processor-like feature (I'm imagining an MS-DOS-like
| prompt), it would iterate on that existing idea or
| program - less computationally expensive because ideally
| the bulk of the work is already learned. Perhaps adding
| new features or key-bindings as it sees fit. I understand
| that hard-disk space is cheap, and you'd probably want
| some space to store personal files, but the OS could
| theoretically load your program directly into RAM once
| it's compiled from AI-generated source code. Removing the
| need to save programs themselves to disk.
|
| Since LLMs are globally distributed, they're learning
| from all human interactions and are actively developing
| cutting-edge word processors tailored specifically to the
| end-users' needs. More of a VIM-style user? The LLM can
| pick up on that, prefer something more like MS Word? The
| LLM is learning that too. AIOS slowly becomes geared
| directly to you, the end-user.
|
| That really has nothing to do with intelligence; you're
| just teaching a computer how to compute, which is what AI
| is all about.
|
| Just some ideas on what the future might hold.
| lbrito wrote:
| People blasting awful music any time of the day or night,
| anywhere (neighbours, beachgoers, public park, transit) is enough
| of a problem in my country (Brazil) that arduino/Raspberry
| Pi/ESP32-based bluetooth jammers are somewhat common.
|
| I would never try to use it though, as you can very realistically
| get killed in retaliation.
| mystifyingpoi wrote:
| How could you get in trouble (aside of this probably being
| illegal, at least I know it is in my country)? How would people
| know that you are jamming the signal, and not someone else?
| lbrito wrote:
| Non-asshole-seeming people tend to be, unbeknownst to
| themselves, conspicuous in these scenarios
| dekhn wrote:
| Here's one I don't know how to solve: at work some folks take
| meetings in the bathroom. They're on their phone, they walk to a
| stall, do their... business while doing their business, all the
| while talking and listening, while toilets flush in the
| background.
|
| I understand cultural differences but taking business meetings in
| the bathroom seems inappropriate under effectively all
| circumstances.
| sublinear wrote:
| Report it to HR
| pelagicAustral wrote:
| Under what punishable figure, pissing while working?
| sublinear wrote:
| HR is not merely about punitive measures.
|
| This would be escalated to upper management to find out why
| people are under so much time pressure that they need to
| take calls in the bathroom, and at the very least doing so
| would be made some kind of violation of new policy.
|
| These are the kinds of reports the organization needs as
| ammunition in order to fix what sound like bigger problems
| with the organization and work culture. There's very little
| chance this hasn't been noticed and isn't a symptom of
| something more going on.
| closewith wrote:
| > This would be escalated to upper management to find out
| why people are under so much time pressure that they need
| to take calls in the bathroom, and at the very least
| doing so would be made some kind of violation of new
| policy.
|
| Or why there are people so idle that they can defecate
| without working.
|
| Remember, HR protects the company, and complaints about
| heavy hitters because they work on porcelain aren't going
| to reflect well on the complainant.
| sublinear wrote:
| Yes, that old chestnut. It's such insanely toxic advice
| too.
|
| You're correct that HR is there to protect the company.
| The original post did not specify "heavy hitters", nor
| did I ever say to make an accusatory report. HR doesn't
| have to specifically know who is taking their calls this
| way.
|
| I'm sorry if you or others have had such bad experiences
| with the most basic of HR interactions, though if I
| assume you're taking your own advice I doubt you've ever
| tried.
|
| There's the tactful way to do this, and then there's
| whining to HR. I would be very careful taking advice from
| whiners because they're the ones who keep propagating
| this bad faith myth about HR.
|
| All I'm saying to do is notify them about ongoing
| behavior with an emphasis on how it probably makes the
| company look bad and that it's done by many. They don't
| care who is doing it and it's not personal. I'd honestly
| be very surprised if this behavior doesn't already fall
| under some existing policy.
| closewith wrote:
| > I'm sorry if you or others have had such bad
| experiences with the most basic of HR interactions,
| though if I assume you're taking your own advice I doubt
| you've ever tried
|
| I use HR to protect my company from people like you.
| sublinear wrote:
| And there it is.
|
| It's exactly as I suspected. The only people spreading
| the toxic advice about HR are the ones who benefit most
| from making the workplace suck for everyone else.
|
| I can only hope you just think HR is there to insulate
| you this way and haven't had to test it, because it
| simply isn't. You really don't want to be on the losing
| end of a wrongful termination suit. It's only because
| people rarely bother that you may not have come across
| one of those. Then it then escalates to worse when all of
| HR spills their guts about the pressure they were under
| to protect higher ups.
|
| There is no loyalty after all. It's just a job to
| everyone else.
| closewith wrote:
| HR insulates me and the rest of the heavy hitters from
| people like you. It's a Godsend, obviously.
|
| Surveilling co-workers in the bathroom is more than
| sufficient grounds for dismissal - gross misconduct.
| sublinear wrote:
| It's obviously not surveillance, and if it's as common as
| OP made it seem everyone already knows.
|
| HR isn't that dumb and doesn't need to find another
| squealer.
| chasd00 wrote:
| If the Supreme Court can do it then why not Jan in backend
| dev?
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/06/politics/toilet-flush-
| supreme...
| keeganpoppen wrote:
| this is, and forgive me the lowering of quality discourse here,
| what ripping one's loudest farts and triple flushing is for. if
| they are so important that they can live through the
| embarrassment that i would assume 99.9% of people would feel in
| that situation, then good on 'em.
| Henchman21 wrote:
| Being unable to feel embarrassment is not a "good on 'em"
| situation. The inability to feel shame is a serious
| impairment of one's faculties. It is literal brain damage.
| HendrikHensen wrote:
| Go to the stall next door, play pooping and farting noises on
| your phone, very loudly.
| dekhn wrote:
| I really don't need a phone to do that. That's what I'm in
| there for already.
| RomanPushkin wrote:
| Have you thought it could be because of the pressure they're
| getting at work? Today you're forced to work when you're sick,
| to do your business while doing your business...
|
| I agree that flushing toilets could have been muted, but isn't
| it a Zoom/Google-Meets issue when they're supposed to remove
| the noise?
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| Crushing it! And flushing it.
| jlarocco wrote:
| A previous CTO at my company would do this and it always
| weirded me out. Standing at the urinal, and suddenly hear him
| talking to a customer over in the stall. Very strange and
| uncomfortable.
|
| I won't lie, though, I secretly enjoyed timing flushes to match
| when he was talking.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > timing flushes
|
| Or porcelain-shattering dumps. Such a liberating experience
| by itself in a public bathroom, doing it to someone on the
| phone would give me a memory that would bring a smile to my
| lips for many years.
| mc32 wrote:
| Agree that this is very annoying and I can't imagine taking
| calls much less having discussions while on the toilet.
| logicx24 wrote:
| Robert Caro, in the LBJ series, wrote about how LBJ would use
| the discomfort of being the bathroom as a negotiating technique
| and a show of dominance. He would drag senators into the
| bathroom and force them to listen to him talk as he used the
| urinal, or force his staffers to take dictation as he took a
| shit.
| darth_avocado wrote:
| I have seen more than one CEOs of big companies do this. The
| number VPs is probably a lot more.
| lostlogin wrote:
| The TV show Veep is great. She behaves like this sort of
| arsehole, with utterly crass behaviour, and coming from a
| female makes it more striking.
|
| Amazing show.
| scns wrote:
| Thanks for the tip, looks interesting
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| Apparently he urinated on the shoes of a secret service agent
| just as a flex.
| tyleo wrote:
| Crazily enough, I've also heard he pulled his Johnson out in
| meetings.
| lostlogin wrote:
| There is a joke here somewhere.
| treetalker wrote:
| Toobin would like a word.
| no-dr-onboard wrote:
| Toobin had many words. Most of them were onomatopoeias.
| waffletower wrote:
| I'd like to say that is where the slang originates, but
| perhaps it just gave him extra license.
| teaearlgraycold wrote:
| And called it Jumbo
| newsoftheday wrote:
| Also, LBJ allegedly unzipped his fly and exposed himself to
| reporters demanding to know why the U.S. was in Vietnam,
| declaring, "This is why!".
| knowitnone3 wrote:
| his limp biscuit is why the US was in Vietnam? Was Vietnam
| hording the viagra? The US sure has a history of
| psychopathic presidents.
| moorederodeo wrote:
| It seems he was well-endowed
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/50ej3a/ho
| w_d...
| nailer wrote:
| "limp biscuit" is an activity, not a euphemism for a
| penis.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soggy_biscuit
| anal_reactor wrote:
| Try this on me. It won't work.
| strangattractor wrote:
| We now know why he served only one term:)
| kgwxd wrote:
| These days, stunts like that might get you a third term.
| furyofantares wrote:
| Well, one and a half.
| normie3000 wrote:
| Why? It sounds like he was a number two term president.
| strangattractor wrote:
| It was somewhat of a joke;) He completed Kennedy's term
| and and was only only elected once. He refused to run for
| a 3rd. Given the immense ego's of these guys one might
| assume it was because he was unlikely to win. Peeing on
| people is unlikely to win you a lot of friends.
| abalashov wrote:
| I understand the overwhelming opposition to this, and I
| wouldn't do it myself. However, I lead a life of very few
| meetings (I'd actually appreciate more--this stance puts me in
| a very small company, to be sure), so it's easy for me to say
| that one should be more judicious with one's timing.
|
| I can emphathise with someone stuck in meetings all day in a
| predominantly listening role, that they consider perfunctory or
| mostly pointless, or maybe in a very active role that has them
| stressfully bouncing from meeting to meeting.
|
| I can easily envision how this would lead to a kind of
| nihilistic resignation and a determination to just do normal
| life stuff with a headset on one's head.
| gouggoug wrote:
| There's a difference between passively listening to a meeting
| and actively participating, while being in the bathroom.
|
| I would never do either. But one is less weird than the
| other.
| array_key_first wrote:
| And if you're going to be playing audio in the bathroom,
| any audio, wear some god damn headphones. I don't want to
| listen to your standup or your tiktok.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Exactly. If you're just listening on a headset and are
| muted, then it's way less obnoxious.
| krick wrote:
| As a matter of fact, I do NOT understand the overwhelming
| opposition to this. What's your deal if a guy is good at
| multitasking and people on the other end of the wire don't
| mind it? It isn't like he is desecrating a temple, or
| intruding into your home and using _your_ toilet, or jerking
| off in the public... Wait, actually I 'd say even the latter
| shouldn't be your business, unless he stains something. Why
| cannot people mind their own business?
| kstrauser wrote:
| I do not wish to hear anyone else's bathroom noises. Yes,
| we all use the bathroom. No, I still don't want to hear
| anyone else doing it.
| krick wrote:
| Even that I'd call somewhat petty, but it is more
| defensible if it's insulting to you when you hear toilet
| noises from your phone, and you are totally in your right
| to tell it straight to the person who is calling you,
| that it's hard to hear him behind all farts and flushes.
| That's ok. People here seem to be complaining that
| _somebody else_ is talking to _somebody else_ on a phone
| while being in the public (office) toilet. I mean, I
| kinda understand if it distracts them from their business
| due to some psychological difficulties they may have, but
| that 's the public toilet design fault when you cannot
| feel isolated enough, not the guy's talking.
| socalgal2 wrote:
| Talk about a spoiled 1st world problem
| array_key_first wrote:
| At the end of the day it's very easy and free to not shit
| while on a conference call. I think 99% of people would
| prefer a shit-free conference call, so, maybe we're all
| spoiled.
| kstrauser wrote:
| What a weird take. If I'm also in the bathroom, I can
| tune out all the other noises around me because
| everyone's in there to do the same thing. If I were on
| the phone with someone, paying close attention to what
| they're saying, and then I'm treated to a thunderstorm of
| bowl challenges, I'm going to be annoyed.
|
| Humans pee, fart, and burp. That's perfectly normal. And
| yet, it's considered basic politeness not to do those
| things in a freaking business meeting if you can help it.
| ChipopLeMoral wrote:
| I take noise cancelling headphones to the bathroom at
| work, especially after lunch.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Me either, which is why I find it so satisfying to shake
| the stall with explosive bowel movements when necessary.
| I'm very private by nature so it makes me giddy to cut
| loose. Only when necessary of course.
| dekhn wrote:
| Taking a meeting in the bathroom _is_ desecrating the
| temple.
| filoleg wrote:
| Is this a sarcastic take?
|
| Asking because I was pretty much on-board with the comment
| and took it as being fully serious, up until the point of
| "jerking off in public shouldn't be anybody else's
| business, unless they stain something" being mentioned.
|
| Now, I am not so sure. Either the entire comment was
| sarcastic or I am missing something major. But putting
| jerking off in public and talking on the phone in a public
| bathroom into the same bucket of activities (in terms of
| appropriateness) feels crazy to me.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Not to mention, it's a crime which may get you on a
| register. And I don't have a problem with it being
| classified as a crime.
|
| This is like some 4chan post.
| krick wrote:
| They are not in the same bucket, and I'm being
| intentionally provocative, if this confession makes
| things easier for you, but I really don't think you
| should mind that much if somebody is jerking off in
| public unless it harms you in some way (in broad sense,
| e.g. being intentionally annoying, loud and doing it
| right into your face). The point is that you should do
| whatever you want unless it harms others, and shouldn't
| mind other people doing whatever they want unless it
| actually harms you. I would say a guy watching tiktok
| without a headset right next to you in the airport harms
| you waaay more than a guy jerking off in the same airport
| standing 10 m away from you or anyone else. I mean, it's
| disconcerning, because you'd rightfully assume he must be
| crazy, but the activity itself really shouldn't bother
| you.
|
| And surely anyone mentioned is a hundred times less
| harmful than a guy smoking on the street. _That_ should
| be illegal. Yet people for some reason act as if it 's
| ok, and it is broadly legal in most places (unlike
| jerking off in public).
| freedomben wrote:
| Are you talking about jerking off in a stall, or on a
| park bench with your dick out? Or some third option in
| the middle somewhere?
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I assumed they meant jerking off in a stall. Something I
| don't want to know about but definitely happens.
| autoexec wrote:
| > It isn't like he is desecrating a temple, or intruding
| into your home and using your toilet, or jerking off in the
| public...
|
| Just like jerking off, defecation should be done in
| private. Meetings are not private. Very few people want to
| see/hear/smell you do that and that includes over zoom or
| phone conference. Most people really do want to mind their
| own business, and that means having no part in you doing
| those very private things.
|
| If someone is in a meeting on their phone while in a
| bathroom stall it's also very rude to everyone else in the
| bathroom trying to do their own business as privately as
| they possibly can under the circumstances.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| I have no wish to listen to other people's bodily functions
| when I'm working, or conversely to listen to them working
| while I'm answering a call of nature. The correct response
| to these behavior is to either hang up on them or tell them
| to shut the fuck up, respectively. It's not OK to impose
| yourself on others like this.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| It's either a weird power flex, or someone who lacks agency
| at the point that they let themselves be bullied and not
| taking a break to take a dump.
|
| It's the breaking of a norm that makes me be question your
| judgment, either way.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Was this supposed to be on an alt account?
| pc86 wrote:
| Thank you for helping me clarify something. Your last
| example, jerking off in public, is not only a crime (as it
| should be) but is clearly antisocial behavior. That helped
| me realize that's what all the other shit is too, no pun
| intended. Using the restroom while you're talking to other
| people on the phone, or generally just doing anything that
| forces other people to listen to you use the restroom, is
| antisocial behavior and shouldn't be tolerated by anyone
| civilized.
|
| "Minding your own business" when it comes to antisocial
| behavior is enabling when the correct response in shaming
| and ostracizing. It's not going to work with LBJ but it
| will probably work with Kevin from accounting.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _What 's your deal if a guy is good at multitasking and
| people on the other end of the wire don't mind it?_
|
| I strongly suspect these sorts of people don't ask the
| people on the other end of the line for their consent.
|
| (TBH, I would probably give that consent if asked, though
| I'd never take a meeting from the toilet myself.)
| matwood wrote:
| > However, I lead a life of very few meetings
|
| An old business partner had meetings which felt like 24/7. He
| had zero issue taking a phone call in the bathroom. I doubt
| anyone on the other end ever knew.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| But my 1 pair of Bluetooth headphones are dead and who
| could possibly sleep at night if their phone was 1mm
| thicker for a headphone jack???
| matwood wrote:
| He was a speakerphone or hold it to his ear person lol.
| Only used headphones if he was listening to music.
| mmmlinux wrote:
| Just join in the conversation. People hate that for some
| reason.
| mystifyingpoi wrote:
| I regularly engage in meetings when taking a dump, but only
| when I'm working from home, and of course flushing only on
| mute. I don't have a problem with that, the other side has no
| idea where I am anyway.
| closewith wrote:
| Everyone knows you're in a toilet due to the acoustics, but
| no-one is going to bring it up out of courtesy. Everyone also
| thinks less of you for it.
| RussianCow wrote:
| I highly doubt it. Most people are in rooms with bad
| acoustics to begin with.
| closewith wrote:
| I'm not sure if you're serious, but everyone knows.
| 7bit wrote:
| No one knows.
| NamlchakKhandro wrote:
| We know now
| riversflow wrote:
| Yeah this whole thread is absolutely filled with prudes as
| far as I'm concerned. Everybody poops, get over it.
| NamlchakKhandro wrote:
| I think you're mistaken sir.
|
| I myself, me... Am descendant from a long line of arms that
| ascend from misty lakes depensing royalty on the form of
| moist scimitars.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Why don't you just excuse yourself for a few minutes like any
| normal human being would?
| NoSalt wrote:
| This ... is disgusting and appalling.
| m463 wrote:
| > I understand cultural differences
|
| These are not cultural differences. This behavior is across-
| all-cultures lack of decency.
|
| I would say the answer is education, but like the law doesn't
| even prevent all speeding, maybe the answer is speed bumps
| (this app?)
| throw310822 wrote:
| Let me guess: Ireland?
| Pxtl wrote:
| In 1-on-1 it would be awkward to call it out but in a group
| meeting where I wouldn't be singling a person out it'd be
| pretty easy to just ask "could whoever's in the bathroom please
| mute?" without any kind of confrontation.
| shevy-java wrote:
| > but taking business meetings in the bathroom seems
| inappropriate under effectively all circumstances.
|
| Now, now ... if she is pretty ...
| 7bit wrote:
| Once you took a meeting while taking a shit, you will see
| things differently. It just makes problems look insignificant,
| when you're pumping one out while you listen to someone explain
| how the issue is company critical.
|
| Of course, disable your camera and mute your mic while dropping
| or flushing.
|
| And how to deal with it becomes vastly different when you've
| done it. It's just human. Just ignore it.
| joecool1029 wrote:
| > Here's one I don't know how to solve: at work some folks take
| meetings in the bathroom.
|
| Not legal but there's a technical solution that's worked in the
| past: pocket cell jammer. Range isn't very far but it'll work
| to boot callers a stall away or a booth away at a diner, etc.
| Only need to run it a few seconds to drop a call.
|
| Do want to stress these do see enforcement now (in the US at
| least) but a low power pocket one used occasionally is unlikely
| to attract attention. It will be noticed if it's higher power
| or runs in a regular location. Fines are severe and risk
| jailtime but hey it's your life.
| matthewfcarlson wrote:
| I wonder if there's a jammer out there that also sends WiFi
| deauth packets
| joecool1029 wrote:
| Plenty, this is something off the shelf consumer hardware
| can be modified to do.
|
| However it's not super effective anymore as 802.11w
| (protected management frames) is a thing and mandatory for
| WPA3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11w-2009
| amelius wrote:
| Question: if two people are caught having SDR units that
| could cause the jamming, how do they know who is guilty?
| linohh wrote:
| Both. It's not who caused the jam. Operating these things
| isn't legal to begin with.
| joecool1029 wrote:
| Actually, just being in possession of such a device in
| the US isn't legal. Whole FCC page on it with citations:
| https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement
|
| This is probably an area where SDR's with send capability
| could in theory be prosecuted as a jamming device.
| Whether it's been interpreted that way or enforced ever
| is unknown to me. A purpose built device advertised as a
| jammer would absolutely be a problem.
|
| Oh also, the 1934 communications act is supposed to
| prohibit US/state governments from using such devices as
| well, but they've ignored the law. Some companies in the
| 2000's challenged it for use in their buildings and afaik
| lost the cases. My experience dates from that same time
| range when they were sort of accepted as de jure illegal
| but there wasn't de facto enforcement.... also networks
| use more bands now so a jammer covering more frequency
| ranges would be needed. back then they could do 3 ranges
| (850mhz-ish, 1900mhz-ish, 2100mhz-ish), now there would
| be way more like 3.7ghz down to 600mhz. Ignoring mmwave,
| that's not going to be in your bathroom.
| amelius wrote:
| > Actually, just being in possession of such a device in
| the US isn't legal.
|
| Wait, SDR devices are not legal in the US? That doesn't
| sound plausible.
|
| My "computerized legal advisor" says:
|
| > There's no rule from the Federal Communications
| Commission (FCC) that forbids individuals or hobbyists
| from buying, importing, or owning SDR hardware in the
| United States. You can legally purchase and have them.
|
| > Radios that transmit need FCC equipment authorization
| (such as certification or Supplier's Declaration of
| Conformity) before they can be marketed in the U.S. if
| they are capable of operating in ways that could cause
| interference. That's primarily a manufacturer obligation,
| not something that restricts private ownership.
|
| > Owning a device is fine, but you must not transmit
| illegally. Sending signals on unauthorized frequencies or
| at unauthorized power levels can lead to fines, equipment
| seizure, and other penalties.
| kstrauser wrote:
| As with so many other things, intent matters.
|
| Owning lockpicks? Fine!
|
| Owning lockpicks when you're caught burgling a house?
| You're extra screwed.
|
| Owning an SDR? Fine!
|
| Owning an SDR and getting caught using it to illegally
| disrupt communications? You're extra screwed.
|
| Yes, you can absolutely own an SDR, and transmit with it
| on legal frequencies. If you're busted using it to break
| the law, then it's strong evidence that you went out of
| your way to deliberately, premeditatedly break it, and
| that makes for a bad day.
| kelnos wrote:
| The person upthread said, unqualified:
|
| > _Actually, just being in possession of such a device in
| the US isn 't legal._
|
| Their view was that it isn't legal to own, regardless of
| context or intent. That's what GP was arguing against.
| kstrauser wrote:
| Yeah. I was reassuring the parent of my post that they're
| right, it's legal to own an SDR. You can still get in
| extra trouble for breaking the law with it, but it's
| perfect fine to have and use one otherwise.
| amelius wrote:
| Sure, but my original question was what happens if two
| people are caught with an SDR unit, and authorities can't
| prove who (of the two people) used their unit to do the
| jamming.
| kstrauser wrote:
| Not a lawyer. My guess: if they're together, they'd both
| be charged, as if they robbed a store as a team. If
| they're not, neither would be charged, as each would have
| a brilliant defense.
| joecool1029 wrote:
| Nobody clicks the link and reads... they just use the
| slop generators, now I'm stuck having to do tard
| wrangling:
|
| > Sections 510 - allows for seizure of unlawful equipment
| (47 U.S.C. SS 510).
|
| https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/510
|
| > (a) Violation with willful and knowing intent Any
| electronic, electromagnetic, radio frequency, or similar
| device, or component thereof, used, sent, carried,
| manufactured, assembled, possessed, offered for sale,
| sold, or advertised with willful and knowing intent to
| violate section 301 or 302a of this title, or rules
| prescribed by the Commission under such sections, may be
| seized and forfeited to the United States.
|
| Guess what? You don't have to be a fucking lawyer to know
| how to read.
| not_a_bot_4sho wrote:
| Tangentially, I did this once years ago.
|
| I had consumed a large amount of spicy food the day prior, and
| it pulled the fire alarm right in the middle of a phone screen.
| I foolishly thought I could silently and secretly handle both
| tasks at once.
|
| These were the days before background noise filters. The poor
| candidate obviously heard unpleasant things but neither of us
| acknowledged it directly.
|
| He accepted the job though. But this still bothers me decades
| later. Never again!
| linohh wrote:
| Oh, I had that in my old office building, everyone but me was
| buying and selling fruit and they were dealing while shitting
| in the communal bathrooms. Really weird when you just want to
| defecate and suddenly someone yells into their phone YES I'LL
| BUY EVERYTHING.
| alsetmusic wrote:
| My previous employer was a twenty-something person shop and the
| owner would do this while speaking with clients. Granted, it
| was a single-person bathroom, but it still drove me mad.
| There's no way people couldn't hear what was happening while he
| spoke and flushed the toilet. Maybe that's part of why we
| weren't getting new clients.
| morkalork wrote:
| I worked in a building that shared the floor with a small law
| office, the number of lawyers that would cruise on in to take a
| piss while chatting away on their Bluetooth earphones was too
| high. They would be talking about their client's cases too, no
| respect for privacy at all.
| tsoukase wrote:
| During toilet and all other breaks between my patients' visits
| I always call back the numbers had reached me. During the flush
| moment I increase my voice volume. I don't know how it's heard
| on the other side. There is no other way I return home on time.
| sublinear wrote:
| Is fighting antisocial behavior with more antisocial behavior
| really necessary?
|
| There is no singular solution that fits all situations. This
| entire discussion is pointless.
| Craighead wrote:
| You need it to be 200ms not 2 seconds
|
| Delayed Auditory Feedback (DAF) is the term you need to look
| into. Playing back what someone says to you back at them with a
| 200ms delay is literally a brain Denial of Service.
| ericwood wrote:
| Very similar in theory to Bob Widlar's legendary "hassler"
| circuit
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Widlar#Personality
| jonathanstrange wrote:
| My personal take is that having phone conversations at normal
| speaker volume is fine because people also talk amongst each
| other in public and there is no substantial difference, but
| watching videos or even listening to music on loud speaker is not
| okay because it's a public nuisance.
|
| However, it seems that the cultural norms differ a lot, I've
| heard of people who disapprove of almost everything and don't
| have much sympathy for them. Politeness goes both ways, and in my
| opinion using that app is impolite, too.
| bonesss wrote:
| There is a substantial difference between people talking
| amongst themselves and one person on a phone.
|
| Humans are social animals, we tune out conversations easily.
| Half conversations are just one interrupting, attention-
| grabbing ... jarring start ... ... after ... ... ... ...
| another. It's a series of unpredictable spontaneous one-sided
| outbursts, behaviours that otherwise belong to disturbed
| individuals.
|
| Listening to people in the phone is inherently more annoying,
| backed by decent research IIRC.
| nephihaha wrote:
| Phone speakers are tinny and sharp and I find them a lot more
| annoying.
| PeterStuer wrote:
| On the one hand I love this. Otoh. Will the people who this is
| supposed to target actually care?
|
| To be fair, the callousnes of the people blastimg any audio in
| public is just beyond me.
| idsafsdij wrote:
| this whole app is just theatrical programming. a vibe coded repo
| built so this guy could share a made-up anecdote about when he
| was passive-aggressive at the airport. By the author's own
| admission, even the name "STFU" was ripped from someone else's
| app that does the exact same thing
|
| We don't even get to see it in action! It's just the code, a
| gesture at what's possible if one could be bothered to pull the
| repo and run it themselves. "person asks LLM for an app that does
| audio recording and playback with a delay". fascinating, thank
| you
|
| P.S. the so called "discussion" thread linked in the repo is
| wild. "Garbage will be there everywhere... Have zero hope in the
| political system regardless of party in power" what does this
| have to do with anything man, i'm just trying to look at cool dev
| articles
| overfeed wrote:
| I wonder what fraction of people complaining about inconsiderate
| behavior in this thread, permanently use high beams when driving.
| athenot wrote:
| This is a fun app.
|
| One way I deal with people talking on speakerphone, is inviting
| myself into their conversation and making comments as if I were
| an active participant. That usually earns me a weird look, and
| then they go off speaker so I can't hear what's been said.
| Success.
|
| Similar with folks watching reels on speaker, I fake a laugh or
| make comments about the content. It's awkward enough that they
| usually stop because they want a moment alone, not an interactive
| session with a stranger. Which ironically is the same thing I
| want too.
| xattt wrote:
| How do you deal with the small possibility that the offending
| person is unhinged (since they've already chosen to throw out
| societal mores out the window) and could physically hurt you?
| Spooky23 wrote:
| It's a two-way street.
|
| I used to have to deal with unhinged people on the regular
| and one of the techniques that keep the peace and stay safe
| is to present an edge that gives the vibe that you may be
| more unhinged.
|
| My dad used to run housing projects, and my uncle was an
| assistant principal at one of the most violent schools in New
| York City. They were like Jedi masters of presence. They had
| stories that were absolutely insane.
| echelon_musk wrote:
| > _They had stories that were absolutely insane._
|
| Don't leave us hanging.
| johnisgood wrote:
| Yes, please give us some!
| Spooky23 wrote:
| lol, Sure! Here's one that was one of the crazier ones
| that I remember from my dad. There were a bunch of people
| complaining about smells coming from an apartment. The
| dude was a little out there and some sort of religious
| practitioner.
|
| The workers were afraid of the guy, but he hadn't really
| done anything except be weird and creepy. So he ended up
| going up with a few folks to check it out. The dude was
| capturing (many) wild animals and boiling their blood. So
| much so that it was condensating on the ceiling.
|
| The dude opened the door and came at them with a bloody
| machete. He was babbling something about his mother, and
| I guess as it was told dad just softly said something
| along the lines of "Your mom sent us and she is not happy
| with what is happening here, and I think you know that."
| I guess the guy stopped in his tracks, dropped the
| machete and started bawling.
|
| He was a special guy and made a point to treat people
| fairly and with respect. They'd kick out drug dealers and
| people who'd terrorize neighbors with dogs and such. The
| local street dealers beat up some guy who tried to steal
| his car because being diligent in the buildings was
| keeping their families safe. He'd take me down as a kid
| in the summer to hang out and help out with kids
| programs. It was profoundly meaningful to me as I got to
| understand that we are all really the same.
| railsgirls112 wrote:
| I love this, thank you for sharing. I imagine that
| position gives you an exposure to humanity that many
| can't handle with that kind of grace and constitution. We
| surely need more people like him.
| getdoneist wrote:
| It is pure game theory. An aggressive person expects no bad
| outcomes from his passive victim. If they get a signal that
| their own outcome may be not that good, even marginally,
| this very often changes their behaviour.
|
| That's why the advice to act submissively presented as
| "avoiding confrontation" is often the wrong advice.
|
| You are not seeking confrontation, but you should signal
| that you are ready for confrontation. Stops aggressive
| behaviour very often.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| Unfortunately this quite reasonable observation has been
| mangled by pop culture and memes into "be aggressive
| yourself".
|
| It also fails to account for there being different sorts
| of aggressive people.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| That's a good point. There's alot of weird stuff out
| there about this, especially with regard to weapons.
| There's a balance between being aggressive and not a
| victim. If you tip too much on the "aggressive" side, you
| become a threat.
|
| If you work with dogs it's very obvious with them as they
| are so empathic and attuned to humans. If you are afraid,
| they will try to take over. If you present as in control,
| they accept your control. If you are a threat, they
| respond as they see it. It happens between other animals
| too -- we're all seen reels of family pets chasing off
| bears or tiny chihuahuas chasing off German Shepards.
| People aren't dogs, but I think the comparison has some
| merit.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Anectodal evidence, but 3 out of 4 bullies left me alone
| after I punched them back just a single time. The 4th got
| backup for the next time he jumped me, so it _can_
| backfire.
| latexr wrote:
| > The 4th got backup for the next time he jumped me, so
| it can backfire.
|
| But was there a next time after that, or did they stop
| after getting their revenge once? If they did stop, and
| assuming you didn't receive any permanent damage, you
| still won the interaction long term.
| butler14 wrote:
| How did you manage to acquire /four/ bullies?
| aidenn0 wrote:
| 1. This was over the course of almost 20 years; one in
| elementary school, two in junior-high, one in high school
|
| 2. I'm an insufferable know-it-all.
| subscribed wrote:
| You deserve a muffin for the way you delivered it
| slumberlust wrote:
| Speak softly and carry a big stick.
| niemandhier wrote:
| This is dangerous advice.
|
| You need to read the situation very carefully:
|
| Antisocial behavior is often an attempt to gain status in
| the subjects in-group. Breaking rules in a way conveys
| power.
|
| Violence against members of the out-group is an even more
| effective way to display dominance and hence gain status.
|
| Unless you play a repeated game with the other person
| there is little to gain for you by initiating conflict.
|
| Even if you assume you have something to gain, always
| consider the other person might have little to lose and (
| my opinion) never display aggression you are not willing
| to back up.
|
| Sources: 1. Rory Miller: "Meditations on Violence"
|
| 2. Life experiences, that match 1's observations
| getdoneist wrote:
| The advice is not about initiating a conflict. It is
| about not to appear an easy victim in order not to
| provoke aggression.
|
| But life is always about fight-or-flight, so flight
| should remain an option, very often the best one.
|
| By not signalling readiness to fight back, you increase
| probability of aggression by removing all costs to the
| potential perpetrator from their calculation.
| charcircuit wrote:
| It's illegal for them to hurt you.
| bravetraveler wrote:
| > _It 's illegal for them to hurt you._
|
| A well-known inhibitor for the unhinged.
|
| I wish I had the social awareness to troll _[the right]_
| people _[well]_ in the moment like this. I 've misjudged
| the dangerous ones enough, find that has blocked my words.
| charcircuit wrote:
| It's the being in prison for years which truly inhibits
| them.
| bravetraveler wrote:
| For the benefit of the _next_ victim, maybe. The unhinged
| are _famously_ forward-thinking. Hopefully you report
| their crime _after the fact_ and it 's met with a
| favorable result.
|
| All to say: _" May the odds..."_, etc.
| evilduck wrote:
| Is that why our prisons sit empty?
| iammrpayments wrote:
| Just lift weights, or say it's just a prank I guess
| reassess_blind wrote:
| Personally, it's not worth living in fear of that small
| chance. If you're alone and they're visibly on drugs or
| something then yeah, better to just move. Otherwise we just
| let people get away with bad behavior.
| taneq wrote:
| Diet, exercise, and physical training, probably?
| NoSalt wrote:
| This is a good way to shanked on the D.C. Metro.
| jcbe wrote:
| Kind of a funny day to post this (WMATA just released data
| showing crime rates at a 25-year low)
| nailer wrote:
| I have do idea about DC but I don't trust crime rate stats
| - a lot might be unreported.
|
| In NYC last year someone burnt someone else to death while
| they sat, relaxed and watched, and in a seperate incident a
| person died died and someone else had sex with them
| afterwards.
|
| It could that be crime is lower or it could be that insane
| brutality has become normalized.
| stavros wrote:
| But do you have reason to believe that crime is reported
| less often now than in the past?
| lostlogin wrote:
| Crimes stats famously get massaged. However murders are
| hard to downgrade.
| bigiain wrote:
| <Renee Good's family joined the chat>
| lostlogin wrote:
| Sounds like time to send in the National Guard.
| testing22321 wrote:
| 25 year low is still an order of magnitude higher than a
| developed country.
| cool-RR wrote:
| It's my fantasy to do this. Congrats on having the courage.
| hyperbolablabla wrote:
| My friend does this and I feel the same way. I could never
| bring myself to do this, I cant even smile at people
| pseudosavant wrote:
| I've recently become a convert to this kind of thinking. The
| person invited the public to join in when they decided to have
| a public speakerphone call. If they don't want my responses or
| laughter, they get annoyed and stop the behavior I was finding
| annoying in the first place.
|
| I don't even have to act like I'm bothered by it, or that I
| find their behavior offensive. They change their behavior
| because they are bothered by mine.
| onethought wrote:
| How is that different than two people talking in person? Do
| you interrupt them as well?
| itishappy wrote:
| Yup. Online too! I have no qualms about adding my two cents
| to any loud public conversations.
| mezyt wrote:
| A half conversation is a lot more disruptive because your
| brain try to fill in the gap of information.
| cortesoft wrote:
| This comment chain is talking about people using
| speakerphone, though, meaning they hear both sides of the
| conversation
| jomohke wrote:
| In theory yes, but in practice they usually have the
| speaker up far higher than they are speaking themselves
| so we do only hear one side clearly.
|
| I think the high distractability is a trifecta of volume,
| non-naturallness of the sound (compression etc: feeling
| out of place in the space) and this point.
| stavros wrote:
| Do you think having your conversation on speakerphone in
| public is the same as talking to someone?
| sdenton4 wrote:
| People talking to each other in person tend to modulate
| their voices to match the context. People talking on
| speakerphone tend to crank the volume and shout.
| stavros wrote:
| Plus devices are tinny and grate. Watching a video on the
| phone of someone speaking is much more annoying than
| someone speaking in person, even at the same volume.
| onethought wrote:
| I think this is the only meaningful point being made in
| this thread.
|
| The sound from a phone speaker is annoying, more so, than
| a typical in person talking. To me the solution lies
| somewhere in fixing that to make it sound more natural.
|
| Everyone else claiming that some how having "loud"
| conversation is rude, feels like they've fallen into some
| anti-social hole... we are literally the only animal to
| have developed complex spoken language... it's part of
| our humanity.
| xp84 wrote:
| No, the loudness is a whole separate dimension. 99% of
| the time, there's no need to be loud in public. Not when
| you're talking on the phone (the microphones on a phone
| work great!), not when you're having a conversation with
| one or two other people close to you. Not when talking to
| Siri (etc). You can talk quietly in a place that isn't
| very loud, and in a place like an airport you can talk
| just loud enough to be clearly heard -- there's no need
| to shout or to project your voice.
|
| There are exceptions to this -- of course nobody expects
| you to worry about your volume at a concert between sets,
| at a sporting event, etc. But people who speak very
| loudly everywhere are annoying to everyone around them.
| shermantanktop wrote:
| It's all context. Some cultures are loud, some are quiet;
| some people are loud, some are quiet; some places are
| supposed to be loud, and so on.
|
| The people being quiet in an normally-loud place create
| no problems. The people being loud in a normally-quiet
| place are causing problems for others by violating the
| quiet.
|
| Loud people also tend to be oblivious to this and then
| get defensive when it's pointed out. Not always - I've
| known some naturally-loud people who had figured out that
| being shushed meant they were in the wrong.
| lxgr wrote:
| For speakerphone-appropriate situations (e.g. being alone
| or with people that all want to participate in a call),
| yes, that would be great.
|
| For everything else, the solution is to STFU. People
| blasting reels or having rambling non-essential phone
| calls in public transport is detrimental to everybody's
| stress level and by extension mental and physical health.
| I'd love to see it banned and the ban actually enforced.
|
| Shout out to the GGT 101 bus driver that made the
| annoying passenger on some endless legal/business call
| actually shut up with a polite but firm "Sir, this is a
| bus, not a call center". Best trip across the Golden Gate
| Bridge I've ever had.
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| I think I've had that driver (or we were on the same
| bus!) because I remember this happening on that bus when
| I took it as well.
|
| To the larger point about loud conversations -- any
| conversations above what is appropriate to the situation,
| even in person conversations, are annoying. Ever go to a
| restaurant and you're able to hear the loud table across
| the room because they're yelling while everyone else is
| speaking at a normal volume? Highly annoying. "Who
| ordered the mojito? Monique ordered the mojito!" I'm just
| trying to enjoy a cocktail and talk with my partner, not
| listen to your cacophony.
|
| Doubly annoying if you have a speech processing disorder
| of any kind. I already have a hard time understanding
| people on one side of my head, I don't need to also be
| picking up someone's loud voices interrupting my attempts
| to listen.
| strken wrote:
| No, loud conversation on a train during commuter hours
| really is rude where I live.
|
| Most patrons have a conversation at a normal volume where
| the words are clear to their conversation partner but not
| to people sitting further away.
|
| Speaking loudly enough to be understood from a
| significant distance is rude because it prevents other
| people from having their own conversations, and it forces
| people who are not having a conversation to listen to
| you. Speaking at an appropriate volume is not anti-
| social, it is _pro_ -social: other people can't be social
| themselves if you're too loud.
|
| The unwritten rules loosen up at night, during events, or
| at other times when there's a boisterous crowd.
| sowbug wrote:
| And the person on the other end of the line often doesn't
| realize how uncivil the situation is. They might know
| they're on speakerphone, but they actually can't see that
| they're interrupting the trains of thought of dozens of
| people around them. This means the content of the
| conversation is more likely to be inappropriate for
| public consumption, making it even more distracting for
| the forced participants.
|
| The person holding the speakerphone is to blame, of
| course, but they often seem to go into a state of
| pathological flow where they're almost as oblivious as
| their conversation partner.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| It's similar to the distinction between a driver having a
| conversation with a passenger in a vehicle vs. the same
| driver having a phone call, _even in a hands-free /
| speakerphone mode_.
|
| The passenger will be _far_ more aware of context and
| circumstances, including traffic or other hazards, and
| will generally adapt to those surroundings. The remote
| party simply has no access to those cues.
|
| (And yes, some passengers may be oblivious, for various
| reasons, including but not limited to children. I'm
| discussing the _general_ case.)
| lxgr wrote:
| If their voices sounded shrill/unnaturally amplified/too
| loud, definitely. Listening to an annoying conversation on
| speakerphone is 10x more annoying than when it's face-to-
| face.
| indrora wrote:
| A friend of mine works AV at shows that have rotating DJs and
| one of the things she has on her mixer board is "The Suck
| Button."
|
| It causes a mic at the other end of the room to get cut into
| the DJ's live feed monitor with a semitone shift down and some
| reverb. This causes all sorts of inner-ear chaos and usually
| clears a DJ off the stage when they're over time within a few
| minutes at most -- usually under 30 seconds. One time they were
| trying to figure out why it wasn't working and discovered that
| the DJ had muted their monitor feed, which explained why they
| were not only peaking the meters but over time: They hadn't
| heard the FOUR warnings from the back of house that it was time
| to wrap up.
| inlined wrote:
| There was a coffee shop ages ago in SF that would every few
| hours play a cacophony (e.g. multiple songs at once). I
| assume it was to drive away people camping on their laptops
| to rotate tables. Understand but super annoying to people
| like me who had a timer to but food or drink no less than
| hourly to be a good citizen
| acomjean wrote:
| We had a friend who would play Metal when the ice cream
| store he worked at was closed but the customers were
| lingering too long. It generally worked, as he was immune.
| reincarnate0x14 wrote:
| I introduced my local restaurant owner to Mongolian
| Techno and the late night bar flies and some of the
| kitchen staff have never forgiven me. He won't admit if
| he plays it for himself, or because of them :)
| fragmede wrote:
| eg https://youtu.be/9uMtnH7cABg for the curious.
| vrighter wrote:
| this is awesome!
| reincarnate0x14 wrote:
| It's 3am and we're arguing some insipid minutae over
| technically illegal tequila shots while one drunk girl is
| breaking it down on the tiny dance floor :)
| WalterBright wrote:
| I play disco music to keep the kids off my lawn.
| bigiain wrote:
| A live music venue near me plays this when it's time for
| people to GTFO:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Tiz6INF7I
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| I was at a coffee shop once that was playing metal while
| my writing group was meeting there and I just thought
| they had excellent taste (it was not near closing time)
| nerdsniper wrote:
| We did this where I bartended as well. Generally 15-20
| minutes after serving the last drink of the night.
|
| The goal wasn't to offend or clear out 100% of the
| customers - just make a large enough portion decide that
| outside might be more comfortable/conducive than inside.
| The 20 or so customers who were fine with the cacophony
| were easy enough to wrangle manually, and also generally
| either people we knew well .
| kstenerud wrote:
| In Japan it's pretty much an institution that shops play
| an instrumental version of Hotaru no Hikari (which is
| basically Auld Lang Syne with different lyrics) when
| they're closing.
|
| Most Japanese know it as "the closing song"
| ralferoo wrote:
| It's maybe best not to give too much context to this,
| except just to warn you to turn down the volume and not
| watch if you might suffer from epilepsy.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJT8vfraCmk
|
| When this was first presented, I was watching this in a
| large dark hall with this on the projector and the sound
| level set to extremely loud. Like a fool, I sat through
| this to the end wondering whether it was going to ever end
| rather than recognising it as a glorious troll.
| CTDOCodebases wrote:
| That's extremely annoying. I have a Bluetooth speaker that
| I was intending to repurpose into a device to combat
| inconsiderate smart phone usage. I connected it to my
| laptop and started playing multiple streams of Punjabi MC -
| Beware of the Boys. It was torturous.
|
| My other idea was to get the line from dumb and dumber "Do
| you want to hear the most annoying sound in the world..."
| And just loop the sound continuously.
|
| I might just try this project though and see how it goes.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| That reminds me of the "speech jammer", which won an Ignobel
| Prize last decade. It's an acoustic gun that combines a
| directional microphone and speaker array with a delay,
| tripping up the speaker.
|
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shut-up-speech-jammer-
| among-201...
| anotherevan wrote:
| Sidled up next to the guy and said loudly, "Mr Smith? Mr Smith?
| The mistress is ready for you now!"
| latexr wrote:
| Fun solution! But what do you do if the person is listening to
| loud music? There's nothing to comment there.
| pjs_ wrote:
| I love this... have been thinking about exactly this technology
| for years but combined with phased array directional loudspeaker
| and shotgun mic. Deploy during major political speech, instantly
| shut down brain of speaker, would appear to be an internal
| malfunction
| SuboptimalEng wrote:
| Indian-American here. Thank you for this!
|
| I have hearing sensitivity and have repeatedly asked my parents
| to lower the volume on TVs, whatsapp videos, insta reels 100s of
| times. They always lower it for 5 minutes before raising it back.
| Likely because they are losing their hearing, but unable to admit
| that.
|
| I tend to be very mindful of others (maybe because I grew up in
| America), but my parents are not even mindful of my requests.
| Maybe it's a cultural thing? I expect those who have grown-up (or
| spent their whole lives) in India would do the same.
|
| Definitely need to test this out app out when I go home.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| On the flip side, people with hearing sensitivity are the most
| god awful people to deal with. It's like the entire world has
| to quiet down for them when they could just as easily put in
| ear plugs instead.
| anotherevan wrote:
| Hyperacusis is a real thing. One of my kidults has it, and
| yes, they use active noise cancelling ear plugs or over the
| ear headphones and sometimes the world is still too loud.
| ikamm wrote:
| The idea that 12 lines of vibe coded JavaScript prompted because
| someone was too scared to talk to someone disturbing him (but not
| enough to take a creep shot and blast him on Twitter) could make
| it to the top post of this website is quite sad.
| mmmlinux wrote:
| Too much engagement arguing if you should be able to hike and
| listen to music.
| Sabinus wrote:
| I'm pretty amused this is what the post has deveolved into.
| If this was a Trump thread it would have been [Flagged] by
| now.
| fernandotakai wrote:
| i've seen people get beat up because they asked an anti-social
| c-words to turn the volume down.
|
| some people just cannot be reasoned and the amount of people
| like this is growing HARD.
| ikamm wrote:
| I don't know what makes you think passively aggressively
| playing the sound back at a person like that would illicit
| any better a response.
| tombert wrote:
| I've never really understood that. I've never been beat up
| over it but people have gotten extremely defensive over it.
|
| Is it some kind of minor evangelism on their end? Like they
| think the music is so wonderful that obviously everyone
| should be listening to it?
| dyauspitr wrote:
| And twitter was just a static page you could post 140 character
| messages to.
| dartharva wrote:
| Did you forget what site you were on? This is Hacker News.
| publicdebates wrote:
| > app that plays back the same audio it hears, delayed by ~2
| seconds.
|
| > idk i'm not a neuroscientist. all i know is it makes people
| shut up and that's good enough for me.
|
| Is it happening for the right reasons?
|
| What is going through the minds of those people in that moment,
| when they hear an audio recording of what just happened played
| back to them?
|
| Are they thinking they're being recorded? Are they nervous? Do
| they feel threatened? Might they act out on this in an unexpected
| and perhaps escalating way?
|
| These are why I would not use this app.
| kogus wrote:
| I love the ingredients for this project: made
| with spite and web audio api. do whatever you want with it.
| anymouse123456 wrote:
| It is true that this app is more hostile than asking someone to
| keep it down, but people should beware of either approach, as
| it's not unusual for the same assholes who are comfortable
| blasting their audio in public spaces to also be comfortable
| getting into a fist fight.
|
| I have personally been threatened on multiple occasions because I
| asked someone to turn down (or turn off) their volume while
| watching videos on their phone in public.
|
| In one instance, I was in a doctor's office waiting room and a
| rather large, otherwise normal-looking man (likely in his late
| fifties) was watching videos at full volume while 4-5 of us were
| sitting quietly. We were all annoyed by him and exchanging looks,
| so I politely asked him to mute the video or watch it outside and
| he stood up and started threatening to fight me in a doctor's
| office waiting room!
|
| In my anecdotal experience in various tier 2 USA cities (i.e.,
| not NY, SF, LA, etc), Gen-Xers and Boomers seem to be the worst
| offenders and also surprisingly, the most belligerent when
| confronted.
|
| If you're going to try either approach (this app, or asking),
| please do not be surprised if you find yourself in a rapidly
| escalating confrontation that may quickly result in physical
| violence.
|
| Sometimes, this calculus is more than worth it, sometimes it's
| not, but just don't think it can't happen.
| phlo wrote:
| My go-to for situations like these: Assume that the offender
| _clearly_ didn't mean to behave incorrectly, and help them
| overcome the mistake.
|
| Person in a public space listening to reels at full volume? Get
| their attention, then loudly point out that their headphones got
| disconnected and everybody can hear the audio.
|
| People leaving a train or bus and leaving behind trash? Loudly
| let them know that they forgot their water bottle or paper bag.
| If it's a single item, this works doubly well if you helpfully
| hand them the item, too.
| omgJustTest wrote:
| ``` README.md
|
| straight up honest - originally called this "make-it-stop" but
| then saw @TimDarcet also built similar and named it STFU. wayyyyy
| better name. so stole it. sorry not sorry.
|
| ```
|
| Probably the reason that the code "worked" from a single prompt.
| Could potentially have downloaded the github repo first...
| m463 wrote:
| adding levels of indirection/abstraction is a common
| engineering move, especially in software engineering.
| einsteinx2 wrote:
| > Probably the reason that the code "worked" from a single
| prompt
|
| I took a look at the repo, and the whole thing is 12 lines of
| JS and some basic HTML and CSS. I'm not surprised at all it
| worked the first time from a single prompt. No need to copy
| someone else's project for something so simple.
| omgJustTest wrote:
| Good that you did.
|
| At least the author clearly delinated that it is indeed
| sloppiest of slop.
| silexia wrote:
| I absolutely hate the people who walk around or bike around or
| skate and carry a big speaker and force everyone else to listen
| to their garbage music.
| nephihaha wrote:
| Always garbage music. I heard one of them playing Bryan Adams'
| "Summer of '69" (or whatever it's called), so not all new
| garbage either.
| maximilianroos wrote:
| I'm all for building apps to solve problems, but I would really
| encourage folks to ask people politely to do what you want them
| to do, rather than having an app do it for you.
|
| You can just ask people for things! And you will become a better
| person for it.
| delfinom wrote:
| Video of person being beaten to death after asking the attacker
| to stop smoking in a bus:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/1qdqztb/whe...
| anigbrowl wrote:
| He was not beaten to death, liar. He shouldn't have been
| punched, but there is no need to just make stuff up.
| fernandotakai wrote:
| sure. he wasn't beaten to death.
|
| but:
|
| 1. do you really wanna get into a fight because of this?
| because dude, i have a family to take care, so i would
| rather just not say anything.
|
| 2. you can easily die from a single punch
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Nobody is suggesting he deserved to be punched or that
| there are some unreasonable violent people around. Yeah,
| he could have died. But saying he actually did is a lie
| deployed to get attention, I can't stand that.
| tintor wrote:
| What is impressive in the video is two guys stepping in to
| help.
| dartharva wrote:
| Asking people publicly tends to challenge their ego and bring
| up defensiveness. It would fail a lot more than subtle
| manipulation like this, and instead bring additional
| confrontation.
| ahmetomer wrote:
| It seems that most of the people who suffer from loud voices in
| public spaces tend not to confront those scoundrels, and instead
| eat it up and wonder endlessly how they can be so mindless and
| rude to others. I am sometimes like that as well, but I would
| rather "fix" it myself because I just don't know of any practical
| ways to bring about a proper public commute etiquette. That's not
| my job.
|
| Today I went to Munich on public transportation -- with a mix of
| transfers on trams and regional trains. I think I read about 50
| pages, all the while traveling. It may sound like an ad, but it's
| not; I really appreciate my Sony XM4 -- would not have been
| possible to focus on reading without it -- which I've been using
| for years now. I put it on with ANC, and play a non-distracting
| focus music. This helps quite a lot!
| nephihaha wrote:
| Oh, some of us _do_ confront them.
|
| You're lucky to be able to read on public transport. I barely
| can anymore because of these people.
| wagwang wrote:
| This is why going to the gym matters
| m463 wrote:
| Do people talk on speakerphone in the gym too? so
| desensitization? :)
| shevy-java wrote:
| I have to admit: I found the two seconds delay quite entertaing
| there.
| clueless wrote:
| The fact that we can't just spin up a Claude code on our iPhones
| and have it program and run the end result right there in iOS
| should be chargeable offense by apple (and Android). Looking
| forward to the day that this capability exists.
| einsteinx2 wrote:
| Since this is a web app, you kind of can do it today using web
| tools, but I know what you mean.
| doktor2un wrote:
| Doesn't work on my phone
| zahlman wrote:
| I love that you're honest about having one-shot something with
| Claude and that you describe the experience in your own words
| without asking Claude to hype up the result for you.
|
| It's also a simple, genius idea. Congrats.
|
| [Edit: I guess this wasn't submitted by the author/prompter.
| Still, you get the point.]
| friedtofu wrote:
| Hey HN! Check out this vibe-coded shell script that Claude Opus
| one-shot that does the same thing(Pretty CrAzY!!!).
|
| This is a fish shell function but you can probably get claude
| code to convert it to bash or zsh function STFU
| #alsa records incoming audio from the default input device for 2
| seconds arecord --duration 2 echo.wav
| #alsa plays back the echo.wav of the recorded audio file
| aplay echo.wav #Ctrl+C when the target looks
| your way!!! end STFU
|
| Guess I should create a git repo for this now and add an MIT
| license like OP, amirite?
|
| (Yes this is post is entirely sarcasm, except that I do use fish
| as my default shell.)
| jlebar wrote:
| I carry cheap earbuds I got off aliexpress in my backpack and
| offer them to people who are listening to music or tiktok without
| headphones.
|
| I have a nonzero accept rate!
|
| But you really have to be in the right frame of mind. If you
| approach someone in anger, they'll pick up on it and mirror you.
|
| The best line I've found so far is, "I know Apple stopped giving
| out earbuds with their phones; would you like some?"
| malfist wrote:
| I appreciate your empathy for the fellow human. Even if it's
| "undeserved" it still makes things better for everyone
| involved.
| lifetimerubyist wrote:
| We are at the stage where we can engage in AI warfare with
| bespoke AI generated weapons.
|
| Nice.
| mrinterweb wrote:
| This is so passive aggressive. I kinda love it and hate it if
| that makes sense.
| hamburglar wrote:
| I wonder how well this would work on a street preacher if
| connected to a megaphone.
| blks wrote:
| Dislike for ai profile picture
| indigodaddy wrote:
| Initially thought this was cloning and doing TTS, but then I
| looked at the html file. I'm dumb lol
| hereme888 wrote:
| Sorely needed app. Amazing how inconsiderate and shameless many
| people are these days: airport, bus, train, even the gym sauna
| just blasting random tiktok feeds.
| disqard wrote:
| Reminds me of SpeechJammer:
|
| https://sites.google.com/site/qurihara/top-english/speechjam...
|
| (which won the Ig Nobel prize in 2012)
| burnerRhodov2 wrote:
| Im from LA... the type of people who play music or talk on
| speaker are not the kinda people you'd want to do this too.. This
| sounds like a perfect way to get stabbed.
|
| Fun light hearted github, that will passively agressively get
| someone killed.
| xpe wrote:
| I've read several dozen comments, but I haven't come across the
| following stated quite this way:
|
| One option is to politely ask someone if they have headphones
| and/or to turn it down.
|
| Cont'd from ^: you can often lubricate the situation by giving
| some "reason" that lets the other person save face. You can be
| genuine or creative or both. (You might say you just really had a
| rough day and would appreciate quiet.)
|
| As a point of comparison, think about how many drivers forget to
| turn on their headlights even after the sun goes down. Some
| fraction of people screw up in spite of their self-interest.
|
| If you are genuinely afraid of speaking to someone, listen to
| your gut. Just try to check this against reality... if this
| happens at 1000X the rate of crime in the area, you might be
| miscalibrated.
|
| You might consider talking to Mr Blaring McLoud without
| mentioning your annoyance at first. This might help get you one
| step closer to asking nicely later.
|
| Some people are genuinely unaware, so erring on the side of
| kindness is a smart step one. Even when asking nicely without
| snark or impugning someone's pride, you might still face rude
| behavior. I like the phrase "don't mistake kindness for
| weakness." You can walk away and figure out what you want to do
| next, knowing that you gave the other person a chance.
| CapsAdmin wrote:
| I moved from a very quiet culture to a very noisy one.
|
| Here people watch tik tok on full blast, people let their kids
| run amok in concrete cafes, constantly honk at each other, blast
| karaoke for all neighbors to hear, etc.
|
| These people have some ability to sift through noise. For example
| being able to talk to someone on the phone with a loudspeaker in
| a loud environment while both seem to understand each other well.
|
| But for some reason, the majority of people don't care, and so in
| some weird way, the concept of sound pollution don't exist.
|
| When sound pollution don't exist as a concept, there is nothing
| to get annoyed about.
| stephenhandley wrote:
| /)_-)
|
| https://www.amazon.com/s?k=headphones
| milleramp wrote:
| I wish there was an app for the other annoyances of the 'Bombay'
| airport. Like the get your ass in line app, or I don't need you
| to carry my luggage 5ft and demand a tip app.
| evo_9 wrote:
| My 3 and 5 year old love this, very entertaining for small
| children.
|
| And I'll most definitely use this for its intended use, great way
| to solve that problem. Nice job
| pseingatl wrote:
| Is this an iOS app? Android?
| falkensmaize wrote:
| This sounds like an "I want to get my ass kicked" application.
| logicziller wrote:
| So, a tool that ends up annoying more people than the first
| person.
| jamesholden wrote:
| This is a weird comment but, I read this before bed. In my dream,
| I was on a subway or at an airport or some travel place and I did
| this and the dude in my dream got mad and chased me. :D
|
| Even subconsciously, I seem to love this app.
| throwaway758439 wrote:
| Not surprising, dude is from India, and in his mind solution to
| (noise) pollution is more noise pollution, guess why their
| country is the way it is, **hole.
| NSPG911 wrote:
| Thanks throwaway account.
|
| But have you fully read it? By replaying what was playing, it
| forces the original noise to stop and in return, the repeated
| noise.
| m151 wrote:
| Next, we need an app like this for smoking in public.
| the_wolo wrote:
| I like it but what this program needs is some DSP: an overdrive,
| reverb, delay, flanger, chorus and what not :D
| mancerayder wrote:
| Unfortunately this is the most dangerous when it is most needed -
| on the New York City subway, especially when the train has a cell
| signal, when jackasses listen to reels of IG and TikTok and
| scroll at high volume.
|
| It's an incredibly rude world we live in - this behavior two
| decades ago would have led to a fight. Now everyone is scared to
| tell anyone anything, since punching or stabbing are risks. Also,
| I believe the new generation is hyper tolerant of such things
| compared to us olds.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-17 23:01 UTC)