201–210 of 230 posts
Not my problem you have shit kids.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12552687 and marked it off-topic.
I read somewhere recently that smart phones have essentially become random gratification engines in the same way as slot machines. Sometimes on a slot machine you win the jackpot, because of this every pull gives you an endorphin kick, each time we pick up our phones or get a notification it might be an important/interesting thing, therefore we get a little endorphin kick that keeps us checking. Because of this I tur…
Look up "Skinner box." Basically codified the psychology behind a slot machine. A mouse hits a single lever that either releases or doesn't release food. When the lever is set to Always release food, the mouse soon gets bored and only eats when he's hungry. When the lever is set to Randomly release food, the mouse gets addicted, compulsively hitting the lever all day without concern for how fat he is getting.
After that my mind is clear. And I do not want to reach for a smartphone.
One great feature on this phone is the ultra energy saving feature. Basically turning it into a black and white display reminiscent of a Nokia 3310.
Notifications are turned down for everything.
My life is better. Walking the dog and looking at the scenery is feeling good.
I like to have my life back from the social internet blackhole.
I read somewhere recently that smart phones have essentially become random gratification engines in the same way as slot machines. Sometimes on a slot machine you win the jackpot, because of this every pull gives you an endorphin kick, each time we pick up our phones or get a notification it might be an important/interesting thing, therefore we get a little endorphin kick that keeps us checking. Because of this I tur…
For some reason, I misread what you said as: "smart people have essentially become random gratification engines in the same way as slot machines." Somehow, that seems strangely appropriate. If you're making interesting posts on social networks like Facebook (or HN, for that matter), you're providing that instant gratification you're talking about. Similar things could be said about those building social networks and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel for you but please, please don't let email be the channel that has a hold on you. Pick another one to be a slave to. Is it work or personal? If it's work is it urgent? I ask these questions because you could set some rules on email. I check my personal email once per day. My masters are facebook and text.
Personal. Work email is there for the calendar sync (very useful), but I feel little compulsion to check it. For a while I completely removed email from my phone, but that was a pain when I legitimately needed, for example, an RMA number while standing in the post office. You're right, rules plus zero notifications would probably work well. Or, perhaps enable notifications and set it to check only once a day.
One thing I found helpful here to is reducing the amount of incoming e-mail. I used to receive several dozen messages a day. Over the course of a week I unsubscribed from every newsletter and e-mail notification service that I didn't used or strongly cared about; this reduced the daily private mail influx to about 10 messages a day. It's easier not to check for new e-mail if there's nothing to check for :).
It took a few days to get used to this routine, but I don't really feel a compulsion to check e-mail anymore. Since I also limited my social media use at the same time (disabling as much notifications as possible), I pretty much don't use Facebook anymore. It came naturally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personal. Work email is there for the calendar sync (very useful), but I feel little compulsion to check it. For a while I completely removed email from my phone, but that was a pain when I legitimately needed, for example, an RMA number while standing in the post office. You're right, rules plus zero notifications would probably work well. Or, perhaps enable notifications and set it to check only once a day.
You're actually lucky that email's your poison. It's the most aync mode out there, especially if people adjust to not receiving an immediate response. I have friends that have trained me not to expect an immediate response to texts so I know it's possible to use text more async for everything that's not urgent. If not responding immediately is your default, it's not a break from your normal behavior to delay. I'd lik…
The way I see it, people will communicate with you the way you allow; if you let everyone expect that you're always available, you'll be spammed with trivialities all the time. Many people don't have the manners (for lack of better word) and self-awareness to understand their issue is trivial and not worth breaking someone's focus by forcing synchronous communication on them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're actually lucky that email's your poison. It's the most aync mode out there, especially if people adjust to not receiving an immediate response. I have friends that have trained me not to expect an immediate response to texts so I know it's possible to use text more async for everything that's not urgent. If not responding immediately is your default, it's not a break from your normal behavior to delay. I'd lik…
My son, like all 4 year olds I think, are fully human, in tune with the moment, developing ego but still open. I picked my son up from school and we were playing, then I reached for my phone, noticing the shift in his facial expression from happy to subtle concern and disappointment. He knows that device creates distance in real life. Then we discussed some topic that I decided could be better handled by Youtube. As…
Many people seem to polarize on their issues; either they're falling for the "digital crack", or they treat this as unnatural and will get angry if you so much as look at your phone when in their presence.
Principle 1 is fortunately widely recognized. Laws and social pressure seem to be doing a good job enforcing this principle even on people who for some reason don't recognize it on their own. Anecdote - the other day we had a cow-orker admit to using phone without a headset/loudspeaker while driving, and man, I've never seen so much social pressure I saw there. Instant and strong (but polite) disapproval of our entire room.
Principle 2 - the way I see it, it's not really about focus. I can talk with people while playing 2048 on my phone all day long. It's about signalling and manners. Most of the time, if you pull up your smartphone to do something unrelated while talking with people, you'll be signalling you don't think they (or what they're saying) are important. Even if you can focus on them but you have some kind of ADHD like I seem to have. It's not about your focus, it's about their perception.
That's why I don't have a problem seeing (usually young) people talking while each doing something on their own phone. They all know that smartphone use doesn't preclude paying attention. But it works only with people who share this belief, so when in doubt - keep the phone in your pocket.
Principle 3 - couldn't agree more :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've done the same. Facebook was closed last year, Reddit this year, Twitter never really used, but deleted the app. I've added comment blockers in all of my browsers to get rid of all of the negativity on websites, especially YouTube. I don't use any other social apps besides the occasional Instagram for business purposes. My phone goes into Do Not Disturb about an hour before bed, and I place it face down on the ni…
How do people survive without Facebook? How do I keep up with what everyone's up to? Sure, there's a lot of mindless posting on there but for me the good outweighs the bad.
When I deleted my Facebook, I lost friends. But if my friendship with someone relies on my having a Facebook then, well, fuck them. I text people or call. I also don't need to know what everyone is up to, either. They can tell me when we talk or hang out.
Coincidentally, the friends I lost where the type of people who are on their phones the entire time we hung out, so I don't consider it much of a loss.
I consider Facebook -- for me -- wasted time, though, and I didn't enjoy it. If you do like it and you're comfortable with the platform (because, tbh, I'm one of those tin-hat security nuts, too, and Facebook skeeves me out on principle), then keep it. Or, if you're curious, disable it for a week and see what happens. There's no one-size-fits-all solution for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look up "Skinner box." Basically codified the psychology behind a slot machine. A mouse hits a single lever that either releases or doesn't release food. When the lever is set to Always release food, the mouse soon gets bored and only eats when he's hungry. When the lever is set to Randomly release food, the mouse gets addicted, compulsively hitting the lever all day without concern for how fat he is getting.
Sources for that? "Skinner box" is a generic term for a much broader class of experiments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is not calling on all restaurants to do this. He just thinks it would be good if there existed some restaurants that did. Just like there are some restaurants that don't serve alcohol, note. Or restaurants that don't serve meat.
Non-alcoholic restaurants? Maybe that's a nice idea, but I don't think that actually solves anything. The main problem with alcohol (at least in my culture) is that it's not given that you can go and drink non-alcoholic stuff in a social gathering without others making it a huge problem. In that situation, who would go into the non-alco restaurant? Especially would you like to ask your friends "let's go to the non-al…
> would you like to ask your friends "let's go to the non-alco place instead of the usual one"
Sure. Vegetarians and vegans do this sort of thing reasonably often.
I should note that actual friends would tend to respect this sort of request. If I had a friend who struggled with alcohol addiction I would certainly respect a request to go to a no-alcohol place. In fact, I would default to that in that situation. It's just basic politeness from my point of view, and yes, I realize that the concept of "politeness" differs from society to society too.
> Yeah, I've never heard much about non-alco restaurants.
They're everywhere, in some countries. Simple example: McDonalds in the US. Again, this varies from country to country; in many countries in Europe McDonalds does serve alcohol. This does come back to the societal attitudes thing.
I agree that this is rarer for upscale restaurants, but from a quick search http://www.latimes.com/food/jonathan-gold/la-fo-gold-dongpo-... is an example (whether temporarily or not is not clear).
Certainly there are lots of medium-scale restaurants in the US that do not sell alcohol but may allow you to bring your own, and then you, as the group going, get to make the call on whether to have alcohol. Of course t305158 he parallels between alcohol and phones are not exact; most people don't carry alcohol with them everywhere they go. ;)
But in general what I think you're missing is that having explicit options that buck the societal trend goes a long way towards normalizing bucking the societal trend.
> The existence of gimmicky restaurants isn't answer to these kinds of problems
It's not _the_ answer, but it's part of _an_ answer.