[HN Gopher] Phone-free bars and restaurants on the rise across t...
___________________________________________________________________
Phone-free bars and restaurants on the rise across the U.S.
Author : Brajeshwar
Score : 128 points
Date : 2026-04-05 15:04 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.axios.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.axios.com)
| SilverElfin wrote:
| Great. It would be nice to normalize that as a feature. A cafe
| near me sort of has this by simply not offering WiFi and having a
| sign about it, and it works - there are people having
| conversations with their kids and with friends and with strangers
| there, while all other cafes seem to be mostly people on their
| phones and iPads (especially kids) and laptops. Also we need a
| total ban on meta glasses and other similar surveillance devices.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| The former (traditional personal devices) and the latter
| (wearable surveillance platforms) are not even remotely the
| same thing.
| le-mark wrote:
| I don't see kids glued to devices in public as much as I used
| to. Now its around 50/50. I feel like there's a growing social
| stigma about it now. And rightfully so imo.
| quchen wrote:
| There are a couple of communities that have almost no phone
| presence. Certain kinds of music festivals are an example, and
| it's really quite nice not having to worry about being filmed.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| What are you doing that has you worried about strangers filming
| you? I'd be pretty offended and creeped out if a total stranger
| was following me around filming for no apparent reason but that
| isn't something that happens presumably because I'm not
| particularly interesting.
|
| I opened this comment section because I was perplexed by the
| premise of the title and after scrolling a bit I remain
| entirely unable to comprehend the underlying motivations.
| tayo42 wrote:
| Self conscious about dressing, signing badly, dancing. It's
| fun in the moment but I wouldn't want it recorded or show up
| in a promo video or something.
| anonymousiam wrote:
| There's a breakfast spot that I visit sometimes, with a sign on
| the wall that reads; "We do not have 'WiFi' -- Talk to each other
| -- Pretend it's 1995"
| Teever wrote:
| I totally support the phone-free bar and restaurant experience
| and encouraging people to socialize verbally instead of online
| but the thing is that I like to eat breakfast alone.
|
| It's a meditative process to me. There's nothing better than
| sitting in a greasy spoon looking out at a rainy day eating
| bacon and hashbrowns while sipping coffee and reading the
| newspaper. Just watching the world and gthe people go by while
| flipping and folding the pages of a large newspaper. That's
| bliss.
|
| Now that newspapers aren't really a thing anymore I like to
| read the news on my phone, or a paper about a topic that
| interests me.
|
| It's good to promote socializing as long as it doesn't come at
| the expensive at reflective processes.
| senko wrote:
| > _It 's a meditative process to me. [...] I like to read the
| news on my phone._
|
| I don't think reading news, especially on the phone, is
| meditative.
|
| With paper you might pause & reflect while turning a page,
| with phone even that is lost.
|
| > _Just watching the world and the people go by while_
|
| Why not do that without looking at the phone?
| Teever wrote:
| I knew someone was going to pull on that little thread.
|
| So let's use a dictionary definition: meditative -- of,
| involving, or absorbed in meditation or considered thought.
|
| In that context I have for decades now enjoyed sipping
| coffee, reading the news, and watching peope go by, smiling
| at the waitress, and considering how it all fits together.
| The cream in my cup, the man crossing the street, the price
| of tea in China -- it's all connected. Sometimes do this
| without a phone or a newspaper or a book. Sometimes I
| don't.
|
| This is just how I like to spend my Sunday breakfast.
| Alone. Not talking to people. Watching them and the world.
| senko wrote:
| Beautifully said, thank you.
|
| I'm glad I pulled on that thread :)
| Teever wrote:
| Thank you for the kind words.
|
| I agree that a phone provides a suboptimal experience for
| this kind of thing.
|
| I loved seeing the pile of newspapers that have already
| been rifled through by previous patrons who have finished
| their morning meal. Picking the exact paper or sections
| that I want, perhaps grabbing a finished section from an
| old man who has already sat down and made it half way
| through his morning breakfest ritual.
|
| thumbing through the pages, holding the paper up to fold
| it over, putting it down on the table and pressing that
| edge of the with your thumb to make a sharp edge and then
| sipping your coffee.
|
| There really is nothing like it.
| heeton wrote:
| > I totally support the phone-free bar and restaurant
| experience
|
| If you then expect an exemption because _your phone use is
| different_ then I challenge that you don't actually support
| the experience.
|
| If you want to read news in a phone-free environment: bring a
| newspaper, a kindle, etc.
| bawolff wrote:
| What experience are you expecting in a phone-free breakfast
| joint if you are there by yourself? Interupting other
| patrons meals to randomly talk to them? That sounds kind of
| like hell.
| myself248 wrote:
| Boredom and being alone with your thoughts is not, as
| popularly believed, fatal.
| bawolff wrote:
| Of course not, but its also not an exclusive experience
| you can only get at resturants.
|
| And quite frankly noisey busy resturants are a subpar
| place to have that sort of experience. Most people who
| want to do that sort of thing go to a park or somewhere
| quiet with nature.
| gosub100 wrote:
| You could enforce this by making a farday cage out of the
| building. I looked into this for an irrational (5G is government
| poison) family member. I wasn't going to debate how RF works,
| just buy some points by helping her indulge her fantasy. But
| actual RF blocking copper mesh material is very expensive. I
| wonder if this could be done via wallpaper and printing using a
| conductive ink printed on the same pattern?
| madaxe_again wrote:
| Just run a jammer - much easier and just as illegal - although
| if you use a busted microwave from the 80s it gives you good
| plausible deniability.
| wikibob wrote:
| Faraday cages are passive and not illegal. Jamming is.
| gruez wrote:
| >although if you use a busted microwave from the 80s it gives
| you good plausible deniability.
|
| Not every radio runs off 2.4G, the frequency that microwaves
| would affect. Even for wifi there's 5ghz and 6ghz bands. For
| cellphones there are far more:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR_frequency_bands
| gosub100 wrote:
| "just"
| cyanydeez wrote:
| SImilar, except their belief is part of a illness that's some
| kind of dementia. It went further into all kinds of radiations,
| including things that are meaningless, like the 911 frequency.
|
| It degraded slowly over a decade. It's "stabilized" but just a
| bunch of word salad.
| gosub100 wrote:
| I'm so frustrated with her. she believes any health
| conditions are either a result of RF emanation or "the jab.
| Her brain is completely unaccountable for illnesses incurred
| by those before RF or vaccines. It's infuriating, but telling
| her she's wrong won't help. It reminds me of the advice to
| never tell a paranoid schizophrenic they are delusional. It
| just makes you part of their opposition.
| gruez wrote:
| >I wonder if this could be done via wallpaper and printing
| using a conductive ink printed on the same pattern?
|
| AFAIK they have to be grounded so it'll be a massive pain to
| install, even if you can get it printed.
| kibwen wrote:
| Last I checked there was no consensus on whether or not a
| Faraday cage needed to be grounded to function properly,
| which seemed surprising.
| avidiax wrote:
| Well, what does it mean to be "grounded". There isn't
| something special about the voltage potential of Earth.
|
| If a Faraday cage blocks interstellar signals only if one
| part of it is stuck in a ball of mud and rock... well, I
| have some questions.
|
| There is the possibility of the ground being a return path
| to the transmitter, but if that were effective, radio
| infrastructure would interfere world-wide, and you could
| transmit through the earth's core. And even that argument
| would suggest that the Faraday cage should be floating, not
| grounded.
| iamnothere wrote:
| A large cage probably doesn't need to be grounded to
| prevent a relatively weak signal from escaping, as
| attenuation would be high due to the amount of material
| involved. Smaller cages may radiate the signal after some
| attenuation.
|
| Edit: reading some more about it, cages that are close to
| the radiating element may experience capacitive coupling,
| and this is what can cause an ungrounded cage to serve as
| an antenna. A larger cage, with the radiating element
| farther away from the cage, is less likely to experience
| this. In either case grounding should reduce this risk.
| frollogaston wrote:
| Just a typical metal mesh building material can do it. My
| friend has a house with an accidental Faraday cage like that.
| 0 bars unless you're near a window, 90% packet loss if you're
| near a window but not sticking the phone outside. Wifi only
| works if you're LOS to the access point.
| silisili wrote:
| You really don't need a full on faraday cage. Signals in the
| phone frequency range are pretty poor at penetration,
| especially brick or concrete. I once lived in a house with lath
| and plaster walls, and I had to leave the office door open to
| even get wifi in there.
|
| Perhaps some well placed metallic material on or near the
| windows would suffice?
| nahkoots wrote:
| Linus Tech Tips made a Faraday cage out of an employee's house
| using graphite-based EMF-blocking paint. MMS messages with
| images couldn't be sent from within the house, although text
| messages and phone calls went through. They didn't do anything
| to treat the windows, though, so maybe if you combine the paint
| with some sort of fine wire mesh over the windows you'd get a
| more comprehensive blocking effect.
|
| At $200/gallon, the cost of the paint would also be a major
| consideration.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5BOFsiDpYQ
| dredmorbius wrote:
| For those near the SF Bay Area, the De Young Museum in Golden
| Gate Park, with its copper-cladded exterior, is an excellent
| instance of this.
|
| I suspect that the effect was unintentional, but (at least
| until internal WiFi access was provided) the consequences were
| delightful.
|
| Any metallic grid should attenuate signals effectively. Old-
| school lathe-and-plaster construction (which often incorporates
| a wire mesh) is well-known WiFi / cellular poison:
|
| <https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-to-get-a-wifi-
| signal-...>
| wolvoleo wrote:
| Hmm I love phone free nightclubs (or rather camera free, they
| tape off the cameras). Like techno clubs.
|
| Not so much of a fan of this in bars and restaurants, sometimes
| you need to stay in touch with friends who are still arriving
| etc. Or often they change their mind "this place is cool, why
| don't you come to us instead of us coming to you?". But ok plenty
| of places to choose from.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| > sometimes you need to stay in touch with friends who are
| still arriving etc.
|
| Do we need to? We are way too communicative now days. Back
| before everyone had cell phones, you said on Monday to friends
| and/or co-workers, "Let's get drinks on Friday at 7pm at
| BarClub" - Everyone put it in their diary, and on Friday at
| 6:55-7:30, people showed up where they were supposed to.
|
| We now have this anxiety around not being in constant contact
| with people, when just a couple decades ago, we wouldn't talk
| to a person for days/weeks at a time, but still manage to get
| together without (m)any issues.
| wussboy wrote:
| Humans used to get on ships and sail away, perhaps never to
| be heard from again. We can absolutely survive several
| minutes of confusion around eating arrangements. "Text me
| when you get there." Let's all just calm down and live with a
| little uncertainty
| wolvoleo wrote:
| Go for it but don't force it on me.
| borski wrote:
| There will always be other places that don't care.
|
| But I think it's okay to appreciate the world around you
| and spend time being present while waiting for someone.
| We used to do this all the time. People watching is fun.
| wolvoleo wrote:
| Yeah there'll be others sure.
|
| There's another aspect: these days most people don't like
| being told what to do. When it infringes on other
| people's lives like making photos I understand but
| anything else nope.
|
| I couldn't imagine working in an army either. I'd never
| let them get away with barking at me.
| borski wrote:
| People have never liked being told what to do. Even in
| the military, it's rare that anyone _likes_ being told
| what to do. The point is that you do it anyway, because
| you are disciplined and believe in the chain of command,
| provided you aren 't being asked to do something illegal.
|
| If you _don 't_ trust your chain of command, then there
| are issues. But militaries are decidedly not democracies,
| because the military often requires swift action, and
| democracies move slowly by design.
| wolvoleo wrote:
| I am absolutely not disciplined and don't believe in a
| chain of command though. And I never will.
|
| There's talk of bringing military service back in my
| country but I would honestly prefer fighting my own
| country than the enemy.
|
| I hope more people are going to be like that when they
| implement it.
| borski wrote:
| That's fine, I wasn't trying to convince you. :) I was
| just clarifying that there isn't a human alive who
| _actually_ likes being told what to do. There is usually
| a reason they do it anyway, but it is rarely because they
| like it.
|
| (I am exaggerating, and in the sense of pleasure there
| are obviously submissive people, etc., but you get my
| point, I think)
| frollogaston wrote:
| Should be forced
| wolvoleo wrote:
| It is what it is. It's how things work now. Anyway I have
| great respect for places that tape off cameras because it
| makes others feel safe. Because they know they won't be
| photographed without consent.
|
| But being on your mobile somewhere is more of a "you do you"
| thing for me. I'm not always on my phone, when I go out I
| don't go near it normally but getting a quick message is no
| problem IMO. For example when plans change. When others are
| on phones around me I don't find that very annoying, there's
| much more annoying behaviour.
|
| Personally I hate planning and love chaos so I really like
| this thing where I see someone online at 2am and they're like
| "hey why don't you come out to this club". Which happens
| fairly often.
| downut wrote:
| In 1989 I wrote and posted a paper letter to a college friend
| of ours in Northern England, asking, hey, around [June date I
| forget] we will be in London, want to meetup? A while later I
| get a reply letter saying sure, how about we meet at
| Piccadilly Circus on this date at this time. I posted an
| affirmative reply and there was no further communication. We
| were in Arizona at the time.
|
| On the agreed-to date and time we were there, and so was she.
|
| If we were talk about paper maps, it would blow people's
| minds. If we were to get further in the weeds and describe
| how we traveled around communist Czechoslovakia w/o a map,
| only a phrasebook entitled "Travelers Czech", well...
|
| Ah I forgot! We, without being specific about the date, knew
| that other college friends of ours, originally from
| Czechoslovakia, had told us they were going to be in their
| home town of Olomouc. We got the barest help in Prague with
| my wife's bad German on how to get there by train. Arrived,
| got a room, and called them up. For the next week they showed
| us around the country and visited family and friends.
|
| Other than lousy waiters in Prague we had a terrific
| adventure. Different times.
|
| But you sure had to able to demonstrate you had integrity in
| your agreements and were open to changes of plans.
| pimlottc wrote:
| What's amusing is that I've tried to do this nowadays,
| where I make plans with someone a few weeks in advance and
| then just show up. Only to have them not be there, and when
| I ask what happened, they said, "oh, I didn't think we were
| still doing that, you hadn't said anything about it in a
| while"
| wolvoleo wrote:
| It depends. My friends with kids have everything planned
| out months in advance. If they're to come out to
| something they have to have it all scheduled between judo
| classes and school birthday parties blah blah
|
| The rest of us just wing it. Which I really prefer. I
| hate having plans. Especially in case I might not feel
| like it on the night in question.
| smelendez wrote:
| It's kind of funny that business etiquette has moved much
| more to scheduled meetings even for short discussions,
| and social life has moved in the opposite direction.
| ghaff wrote:
| At higher levels, I think impromptu calls/messages of a
| time-sensitive nature are probably more common. But, in
| general, phone calls out of the blue are less accepted
| than they were 10-20 years ago outside of a very close
| circle. And in business there would probably be a
| preceding message to the effect of "can we chat?"
| megous wrote:
| Czechia has a very dense public transport network and if
| you want to walk a very nice network of marked tourist
| tracks. Not that different form 1989, except for marking an
| explicit cycling network since then.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Yes, we need to.
|
| If I'm meeting someone for drinks and then an emergency
| happens, I kind of want to know rather than waiting around
| for 45 minutes and then giving up.
| allturtles wrote:
| You described a want, not a need. How often does this
| actually come up? If your friends are frequently having
| "emergencies" that prevent them from meeting you, they may
| not be good friends.
| j1elo wrote:
| We don't need to be communicative at all times. But don't
| romanticize it either; we did what you say _because we had
| to, whether we wanted or not_. Not having any chance of
| correcting course or being more flexible is not a cool thing
| of the past, it 's a limitation of how things were. That you
| find confort on it, is a different thing than it being better
| or worse... it just was.
| frollogaston wrote:
| You already get this experience if one guy in the group has
| an Android
| markus_zhang wrote:
| It's just to create a brand to attract targeted customers. If
| you really hate phones in restaurants you are going to stick to
| them. Not an issue for me TBH, it's their free choice. It's
| kinda difficult to compete in food quality and such, but rather
| easy to just create a brand. You see this kind of things in
| politics a lot.
|
| Yeah gonna be downvoted, but whatever.
| 627467 wrote:
| I bet if you study the rate of "mind changing" over time since
| phones got smarter we'll see it correlates. As does
| ability/willingness to commit to anything or anyone.
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| Yes! Phones should be treated like smoking.
| wussboy wrote:
| I like this idea. You can use your phone but you have to go
| outside to do it.
| KellyCriterion wrote:
| ++1
| tayo42 wrote:
| Smoking and non smoking sections, separated by a small plastic
| window?
| raincole wrote:
| To increase table turnover rate for the restaurant.
| frollogaston wrote:
| There are cafes that disallow laptops for this reason
| markus_zhang wrote:
| Well if they don't want businesses from phone-carrying people
| that's perfectly fine with me.
|
| Restaurants are too expensive anyway. A random breakfast in a
| random diner now costs around 60 CAD (include tax and tip) for
| two persons nowadays in my city. It is difficult to justify
| eating out unless I'm financially free.
| hdbebdhdh wrote:
| I don't get it. If you don't want to use a phone, simply don't
| use a phone O_o
| Dig1t wrote:
| If you all agree to not have phones, then the group social
| dynamic changes. You can't lean on your phone as a crutch when
| there's a lull in the conversation, you can't look up facts on
| the internet. So you're forced to think a little harder about
| things, to discuss a little more, be less distracted. It's fun
| for group outings.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| What group social dynamic? This is a restaurant or bar as a
| whole, not a personal friend group. If you prefer a certain
| dynamic then talk it over with the people you spend time
| with. Maybe they'll agree, maybe they won't, but either way
| that's entirely separate from the policy of a dining
| establishment.
| Dig1t wrote:
| An example: I went to a phone-free drink lounge with a
| group of people. Before the event I texted the group saying
| "this place takes your phone at the door" and everyone said
| they were cool with that and that it sounded fun.
|
| We all knew going in that this is what we were signing up
| for.
|
| It's like going to a club with a specific dress code. You
| go there for the atmosphere and the unique experience. And
| yeah everyone agreeing to not have a phone in their pocket
| does change how people in a group interact with each other.
| 28304283409234 wrote:
| If I had a bar I'd ban phones and call it The No Bars Bar. Alt:
| The Bar Without Bars
| petcat wrote:
| No need to ban phones, just coat the walls in magnetic paint
| and install faraday cages on the windows.
|
| You will get "No bars". (and also maybe no customers and a
| safety code violation?)
| drum55 wrote:
| Intentionally interfering with 911 would probably be a poor
| decision.
| petcat wrote:
| Oh yeah definitely. Also your own POS system probably wont
| even work unless it's hard-wired.
| fragmede wrote:
| Have staff/employee wifi for the PoS to use.
| petcat wrote:
| Wifi wont work at all (or at least be very packet-droppy)
| in this configuration
| myself248 wrote:
| Hi, I have worked in numerous shielded environments,
| built one, and am in the process of building a second.
|
| Wifi works perfectly fine inside a shielded enclosure, if
| both the AP and the client are inside the shield. It
| should not work _across_ the shield, if the AP is inside
| and the client is outside, or vice versa. (If that
| worked, it wouldn 't be a very good shield.)
|
| It is entirely plausible, practical, and not even all
| that hard, to build precisely the environment described
| up-thread. "Magnetic" paint is not necessary, it just has
| to be conductive. Ecofoil(r) Ultra NT(r) is my favorite
| shielding material, it's good as a radiant energy barrier
| (say, to keep your hot roof from radiating heat down at
| your attic) and as a radiant signal shield. Which makes
| sense, when you consider that RF is just RF is just RF.
| Filtered power passthroughs aren't particularly hard
| (Start with the Delta 20DBAG5 and add some ferrite
| beads), and if you really want to be snazzy with your
| data passthrough, use fiber. There are all sorts of
| cheap-and-cheerful ethernet switches with SFP slots now.
|
| The door seals are the tricky part. Commercial shielded
| enclosures go all-out with complicated lever-actuated
| doors that wouldn't feel out-of-place on a bank vault,
| but I've found that simply sanding the paint off a
| commercial steel door and covering the bare steel with
| copper tape, then engaging it with beryllium-copper
| spring finger-stock around the doorjamb, is sufficient
| for about 60-80dB of isolation, which is plenty in many
| environments.
| petcat wrote:
| Good to know! I only knew about the magnetic paint
| because a company I worked for a long time ago wanted to
| put up big mural-like pictures throughout the office
| space and decided to mount them on magnets and cover the
| walls in magnetic paint so they would stick. But then
| some of our conference rooms couldn't get good wifi even
| though the AP was right next door... We only figured out
| later (after putting hard-wired APs in every room LOL)
| that it was because of the magnetic paint.
| giantrobot wrote:
| Inside of the cage it'll be fine. It just won't do great
| traversing the boundary. As long as there's a WAP/antenna
| inside the cage everything inside the cage will get a
| signal.
| iamnothere wrote:
| Passive interference like this isn't illegal, although you
| might have a lawsuit if a customer gets injured and it
| takes a few extra seconds for someone to step outside and
| dial 911 (people will sue over anything). It's active
| jamming that violates FCC regulations.
| jmyeet wrote:
| Jamming cell signals is illegal. There are good reasons for
| this such as people who are on call or people who need to
| call 911.
|
| The only way around this is to build somewhere that happens
| to have no cell reception.
| iamnothere wrote:
| Passively blocking signals through absorptive materials is
| not jamming and is not illegal.
| bawolff wrote:
| Phone free resturants if you're eating alone sounds kind of
| miserable. Sometimes i want to read something while i wait for my
| food to come out.
| Aboutplants wrote:
| Good news! If your alone there are other options!
| bawolff wrote:
| Can you be specific what you mean by that. Are you just
| saying if you are alone you should go to other resturants?
|
| I mean, sure that is true, but that logic would also apply to
| a resturant that spits in your food.
| troymc wrote:
| Maybe bring a (printed) book, brochure, flyer, or treatise on
| the nocturnal behaviours of silkworms?
| bawolff wrote:
| Do you commonly carry those around with you? I'm not
| mistaking a resturant for a library, i just want to kill time
| until my food comes out.
|
| Is there a reason why someone sitting by themselves reading a
| book on the e-reader app on their phone is more offensive
| than someone sitting by themselves reading a dead tree book?
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| It's not hard to bring a book with you. People did it
| before phones.
|
| And I don't know what you're doing when you're transfixed
| by your phone and I'm not going to peer over your screen to
| find out.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| You dodged the question. You don't know what he's using
| his phone for. Fair enough. Is there a reason that
| privately looking at the screen is offensive while
| privately looking at a book is not?
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| It's a more social activity in a world that is
| increasingly isolated. A book is a nice conversation
| starter. I'm not going to come up to you and ask about
| what's on your little screen. Even if you're just reading
| an e-book the phone contributes to the perceived
| loneliness of those around you.
|
| If you really want to read a book in peace, try a
| library.
| tenacious_tuna wrote:
| > Even if you're just reading an e-book the phone
| contributes to the perceived loneliness of those around
| you.
|
| This is a wild projection of your own experience onto
| someone else's actions.
|
| > If you really want to read a book in peace, try a
| library.
|
| I've quite enjoyed the times I've taken a book to a
| restaurant and read over a meal. I do not appreciate you,
| or people like you, dictating how I ought to act in
| public in a way that doesn't affect anyone else in the
| slightest.
|
| I don't want to start conversations when I'm alone at a
| table with my book. The fact that you find it somehow
| less social for me to be on my phone instead of reading a
| book when I am minding my own business at my own table
| seems like a tremendous failure in your own boundaries
| and expectations of other people.
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| >This is a wild projection of your own experience onto
| someone else's actions.
|
| I asked a friend who doesn't use a smartphone about how
| it feels walking into a room full of people with phones
| and he told me the same thing. I have a smartphone but I
| don't take it out reflexively. I don't even consider
| myself a very social person or an extrovert, yet it
| always has to be ME to start a conversation in a room
| full of people because they would rather stare at a
| screen that say a hello.
|
| I'm going to talk to you whether you like it not. If you
| don't want to talk to people, then maybe don't put
| yourself in a social setting? Imagine entering a coffee
| shop and finding it dead silent. I would just go home and
| make some food. If you have a problem with me talking to
| you, go ahead tell me how much you don't appreciate it or
| whatever, I don't care.
| bawolff wrote:
| Maybe this is a cultural difference, but i would
| generally consider it incredibly rude for a random person
| to interupt someone trying to enjoy their meal. A
| resturant isn't a singles mixer.
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| Depends on the layout. If its a large, sit-down
| restaurant with wide gaps between the tables, then yes it
| would be weird for me to go up to you and say "Hi,
| Stranger!". But at a coffee shop you might be sitting
| right next to me. We might even be sitting at the same
| table waiting for our food. Am I not allowed to talk to
| the person sitting right next to me? I ordered some food
| the other day and realized there were no free tables, so
| I asked a stranger if I could sit at his table and had a
| conversation with him and his buddy.
| vile_wretch wrote:
| I don't think you're going to have many good
| conversations if you go around interrupting people trying
| to read in peace, regardless of where you do it. What a
| bizarre sentiment.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| > A book is a nice conversation starter.
|
| Do you make a habit of interrupting people who are
| reading? If so I can just about guarantee that you're
| "that guy" to the people you're doing that to.
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| Depends. In a library? No. In a social setting? That's
| fair game.
| bawolff wrote:
| > And I don't know what you're doing when you're
| transfixed by your phone and I'm not going to peer over
| your screen to find out.
|
| Nor should you, talk about injecting yourself into
| something that is none of your business.
| Acrobatic_Road wrote:
| Oh, it's everyone's business. Phones are eroding the
| social fabric.
| bluebarbet wrote:
| >someone sitting by themselves reading a book on the
| e-reader app
|
| I was this person. Eventually I gave it up because I didn't
| want to be mistaken for just another screen-addled zombie
| with no impulse control miserably scrolling Whatsapp and
| Instagram.
|
| Perhaps I have too much self-awareness but I'd argue most
| people have too little.
| fc417fc802 wrote:
| > ... I didn't want to be mistaken for ...
|
| Who cares? They're strangers. If they want to make faulty
| assumptions and feel an unjustified smug sense of self
| superiority that's none of my business.
|
| At this point I read ~all books on my phone as a simple
| matter of practicality. I'd prefer my phone had an epaper
| screen and grayscale page centric apps (instead of
| scrolling) but that's just not how things are.
| bluebarbet wrote:
| >on my phone as a simple matter of practicality
|
| Yes, I came to the same conclusion. IIRC I read Great
| Expectations on the thing!
|
| In my case scrollability was a _bonus_. Horses for
| courses.
| bawolff wrote:
| > Eventually I gave it up because I didn't want to be
| mistaken for just another screen-addled zombie with no
| impulse control miserably scrolling Whatsapp and
| Instagram.
|
| So you gave it up not because you are worried about being
| a "phone addicted zombie" but because you are worried
| about being precieved and judged as such?
|
| Some would say changing your behaviour due to social
| insecurity is just another form of being a zombie.
| bluebarbet wrote:
| Not sure it would make me a "zombie" exactly but I agree
| it's an oddly incoherent position to judge the behavior
| of others while also being concerned about their gaze.
| Much introspection has not yet pierced this mystery.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Or just do what we did before, sit and think. What they call
| "mindfulness" now and even meditation is what we used to call
| just being alive.
| crazygringo wrote:
| When I think of places where phones _aren 't_ a problem, I think
| of bars and restaurants.
|
| So why on earth would you even need to make them phone-free...?
|
| People are socializing plenty. I've never walked into a bar or
| restaurant that's full of people where they're all on their
| phones. It doesn't even make sense.
| Upvoter33 wrote:
| Really? I see this all the time. Maybe I'm going to all the
| wrong places. I see "couples" on their phones, I see groups of
| friends on their phones, etc., etc. Maybe different parts of
| the country / world?
| mikkupikku wrote:
| I don't see the problem; when you're out drinking with
| buddies, sometimes you're talking and sometimes staring at
| the sportsball TV in contemplative silence. Or a phone
| instead of the TV, it serves the same role. It doesn't have
| to be talk all the time. Somebody who's not talking now might
| have been talking a minute ago, and will be again in a few
| minutes.
| frollogaston wrote:
| Some bars have nearly every customer on a phone. Not an issue
| in restaurants though.
| gentleman11 wrote:
| How do you prevent people from having phones while inside?
|
| Do you just get in trouble for whipping it out? Or do you have to
| drop it off with a phone valet at the entrance? If so, how do you
| prevent theft or mixups? Are all the staff comfortable
| confronting people who have taken their devices out, risking
| their tips and personal comfort levels? What if somebody gets
| cranky after being asked because they didn't know and it's
| halfway through dinner?
|
| It's a tricky policy to enforce smoothly
| frollogaston wrote:
| They don't take your phone. People just follow the rule.
| pajamasam wrote:
| The article mentions some of the places use Yondr phone
| pouches.
| yalogin wrote:
| Phone/device free venues have to become a thing. Social media has
| taken a strong hold of people but the ai chat bots are upping the
| game even more. If anything phone free areas will become an
| incentive to visit these establishments for me
| Dig1t wrote:
| I am so surprised at the negativity about this idea in this
| thread. It's a novelty, and it's pretty fun, if you don't like
| the idea you can just go to the 99% of other bars or restaurants
| that do allow phones.
|
| I personally like going to these types of places. When you go
| with a group of people it does change the social dynamic, not
| being able to ask ChatGPT the answer to a question you don't know
| off the top of your head, or scroll through your messages as a
| crutch when there's a lull in the conversation. Everyone is more
| fully engaged.
|
| It's just a fun novelty, an experience you can't get elsewhere.
| lemax wrote:
| The worst has been the post-covid assignment of seating and QR
| code driven ordering in bars. So few opportunities to mingle. I
| miss standing in bars, talking to bartenders, chatting with
| random patrons. This has recovered much better in large cities
| but I find that restaurants and bars in US suburban environments
| are deeply impersonal now. It's no wonder singles are stuck
| meeting partners on apps with so little unstructured social
| opportunities left. Not to mention no one is going to bars
| anymore anyway.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-04-05 23:02 UTC)