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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
(I am exaggerating, and in the sense of pleasure there are obviously submissive people, etc., but you get my point, I think)
True and I'm one of them in fact. But it's different, I'm submissive only when I want to, to whom I choose to, within limits that I set. There's a lot of safety net. Whereas people who are forced to work in the military don't have any choice.
I think being so antiauthoritarian is what makes that interesting for me. Though I'm never authoritative myself, I could never manage people either.
But I understand your point, thanks!
The issue of being in the military is precisely that you don't have that control, and choices are made for you. The benefit of this is learning discipline, hard work, resilience, and eventually getting to a point of being in control (whether of yourself or of others).
There are hundreds of ways this can go wrong, but it is all designed for one thing: swift action when necessary. Allowing people choice definitively makes things slower, and speed is of the essence in war. Strategy is too, of course, but decisive action matters.
And those who have no choice are nothing if not decisive when told what to do. :)
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.
But socially this has gotten inverted.
I have several very long relationships with people (>30 years) who are overwhelmed by this. Living their lives immersed in constantly buzzing irrelevant social noise.
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.
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.
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.
It comes up. Frequently.
And have you tried working a stressful job where emergencies come up all the time so you need to work till 8 pm instead of 5:30 pm, and have to cancel plans last-minute a quarter of the time? Or you have kids where all sorts of unknowns happen all the time?
For many people, it happens. Frequently.
Maybe you can be less judgmental and realize different people lead different lives, rather than think you know enough to start judging other people's friends. Talk about arrogance.
One time someone said "day after tomorrow" instead of giving a date, that was a mistake.
Yeah gonna be downvoted, but whatever.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
I'm glad I pulled on that thread :)
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.
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.
I see single people use their phone while they wait for their date/friends to arrive. Or while their date uses the restroom.
I see groups of friends where one person is temporarily texting because the babysitter reached out, or a friend is asking where they are, etc.
Going to restaurants and bars is expensive. People aren't going out to use their phones.
People go out by themselves all the time (I'm single, WFH and live by myself, if I didn't go out by myself I would literally leave the house only once or twice a week).
You will get "No bars". (and also maybe no customers and a safety code violation?)
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® Ultra NT® 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.
The only way around this is to build somewhere that happens to have no cell reception.
In the first case, a third party came up with the idea, and you are subjecting yourselves to their idea. In the second case, it's your idea, and your friends are subjecting themselves to your idea. Really if you are proposing, there's always a bit of "your idea" there, but the "blame" can be shared with someone else who's not in the group.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you really want to read a book in peace, try a library.
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.
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.
It's not my intention to be rude but based on your responses on this topic I'm guessing you're fairly oblivious to the relevant social cues. There's nothing wrong with that per se but adopting an attitude of "not my problem" is probably just going to aggravate the people around you.
You seem to have a strange definition of what's a social situation. Maybe I want to be around people without talking to them; if I wanted to strike up conversation with strangers, I'd sit at a bar.
You're obviously conscious of the fact that you may be doing something that people don't want, which makes it all the more confusing to me that you're upset about people possibly preferring their phones to books: if you're going to interrupt them either way and potentially invade their space, why do you care how they're signalling? (For the record, I don't think people inherently are signalling, but you seem to--it's the inconsistency in your own stated approach that's confusing me.)
Sure, I might be doing something you don't want, but that's also true of asking a girl out (and I mean in real life, not on snapchat). She might say yes, she might say no. Either way, you I never get anywhere unless I ask.
Here are some places I think its perfectly acceptable to talk to strangers:
- A class (barring when the professor is speaking).
- On a bus or at the bus stop.
- A coffee shop
- Airplane ride
- DMV
- Waiting for a table at a restaurant
Maybe you disagree. I can't read minds.
As for what makes phones particularly bad, its because they discourage social interaction. Why talk to people when you have endless stream of dopamine in your pocket? In economic speak, phones dramatically raise the opportunity cost of actual social interactions. So everyone just stares at their phones, and this negatively affects even those who choose to opt-out of technology because we are deprived of human engagement because we are unable to compete with those little dopamine machines.
Oh, and unlike with books, everyone has a phone at all times, and when things get boring (even a little), then the phones come out and you're left talking with yourself.
Perhaps these people just don't like you.
If you find a social interaction is entirely one sided, usually that is a sign you should take a moment to self reflect on what is going on.
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.
I do when I’m going somewhere that doesn’t allow phones. How is this complicated or hard to understand?
I mean, sure that is true, but that logic would also apply to a resturant that spits in your food.
At $200/gallon, the cost of the paint would also be a major consideration.
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-...>
Perhaps some well placed metallic material on or near the windows would suffice?
AFAIK they have to be grounded so it'll be a massive pain to install, even if you can get it printed.
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.
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.
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
It degraded slowly over a decade. It's "stabilized" but just a bunch of word salad.
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