Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

icelandmonitor.mbl.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 296 posts

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#261

Post by tshaddox »

kelnos wrote: post #195
tshaddox wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a little funny that everyone talks about this as a “phone ban” when surely you really only need to ban like 3-4 big tech apps/domains.

Let's see... Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube... and that's just off the top of my head without thinking. There are more, many more than 3-4. And unless you block the browser (parental controls on mobile are garbage), they're going to get to those sites anyway.

Those first three are the same big tech company. But fair enough, it might be a slightly larger handful of services.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#262

Post by exe34 »

ruthmarx wrote: post #253
exe34 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only use windows as a dumb terminal to access my Linux system remotely. I'd require a significant payrise to consider using windows as a daily driver.

Not talking about using it as a daily driver, just contrasting your claim that you have never used twitter with the people who claim to have never used windows over a 20 year period of working or hobbying in IT.

I have definitely not used Windows for a hobby for 19 years. Linux (and for a short time OS X) fill my needs.

I simply have no use for twitter. if the information is important, it'll turn up on bbc.co.uk, otherwise it's not really worth the effort.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#263

Post by ruthmarx »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #254
ruthmarx wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your point is your making an unwarranted assumption about most people. It's no different from insisting someone would like a variation of something they have no interest if they would only try it . Or to put it in simpler terms, you seem to think you know better than "a lot" of people.

> unwarranted assumption about most people I said a lot. Not most. > It's no different from insisting someone would like a variation of something they have no interest if they would only try it. You shouldn't push people to do things, but as an objective true or false question, it's true a lot of the time. > Or to put it in simpler terms, you seem to think you know better than "a lot" of people. Are you implying that…

> I said a lot. Not most.

Sigh. Do you find being pedantic like this productive, honestly? Fine, though. You're making an unwarranted assumption about a lot of people. Happy?

> but as an objective true or false question, it's true a lot of the time.

No, it isn't. This is purely your preference.

> Are you implying that such a thought is obviously wrong?

In this case dealing with subjective preferences it absolutely is, and you absolutely are.

> I can list a thousand topics where enough people disagree that many of them have to be wrong.

Those topics would likely be far more objective in nature, as opposed to dealing with individual preferences as is the case here.

> I'm talking statistics, and I think there's plenty of evidence for it.

So make your argument instead of just insisting you're right. Let's see the evidence.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#264

Post by ruthmarx »

exe34 wrote: post #262
ruthmarx wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not talking about using it as a daily driver, just contrasting your claim that you have never used twitter with the people who claim to have never used windows over a 20 year period of working or hobbying in IT.

I have definitely not used Windows for a hobby for 19 years. Linux (and for a short time OS X) fill my needs. I simply have no use for twitter. if the information is important, it'll turn up on bbc.co.uk, otherwise it's not really worth the effort.

> I have definitely not used Windows for a hobby for 19 years

I never said you did. In fact, I never said anything about you using Windows at all, yet twice now you seem to have taken what I wrote as though I did.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#265

Post by Dylan16807 »

ruthmarx wrote: post #263
Dylan16807 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unwarranted assumption about most people I said a lot. Not most. > It's no different from insisting someone would like a variation of something they have no interest if they would only try it. You shouldn't push people to do things, but as an objective true or false question, it's true a lot of the time. > Or to put it in simpler terms, you seem to think you know better than "a lot" of people. Are you implying that…

> I said a lot. Not most. Sigh. Do you find being pedantic like this productive, honestly? Fine, though. You're making an unwarranted assumption about a lot of people. Happy? > but as an objective true or false question, it's true a lot of the time. No, it isn't. This is purely your preference. > Are you implying that such a thought is obviously wrong? In this case dealing with subjective preferences it absolutely is…

You seem to be objecting to the entire idea of people en masse having preferences that screw up their own enjoyment?

Cool, that's super easy to prove. Ignore dinners, go look at the science of addiction. I can link the Wikipedia page if you want, it's full of links to evidence.

Also "most" versus "a lot" isn't pedantic. There's a ton of statements that are true of 5% of people but it would be ridiculous to suggest it's a majority.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#266

Post by exe34 »

ruthmarx wrote: post #264
exe34 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have definitely not used Windows for a hobby for 19 years. Linux (and for a short time OS X) fill my needs. I simply have no use for twitter. if the information is important, it'll turn up on bbc.co.uk, otherwise it's not really worth the effort.

> I have definitely not used Windows for a hobby for 19 years I never said you did. In fact, I never said anything about you using Windows at all, yet twice now you seem to have taken what I wrote as though I did.

I did not take it as you saying that I did, both times I was trying to make the point that those people that you don't believe exist include me as one of them.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#267

Post by consteval »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #39
dopylitty wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should've been expanded into driving a long time ago. There are laws against distracted driving but I still see people weaving around like they're drunk on the roads. When I look into the car they're usually holding a phone (on speakerphone) or holding it up to their ear. People suck at driving enough as it is without driving one handed and distracted.

Isn't it already illegal in most places? (sure peolpe do it anyway, but if you're caught there are heavy fines)

They're never caught

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#268

Post by consteval »

ruthmarx wrote: post #252
Dylan16807 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's true for you isn't true for everyone. That is why I said "a lot", not everyone. Your "Nah." is not true, by your own argument . > briefly There is a reason I said "or minimal". That's minimal.

The problem with your point is your making an unwarranted assumption about most people. It's no different from insisting someone would like a variation of something they have no interest if they would only try it . Or to put it in simpler terms, you seem to think you know better than "a lot" of people.

I mean, yes: this point is true. Usually that's how things are.

It's not a matter of knowing better, it's a matter of people not considering X. If they don't think about X they wouldn't even know to change it or try something else.

Truly, you don't know something until you try it. If you never try it you just don't know. At least for most things, some things are obvious.

Also, there's arguments about phones being addictive. That changes things a lot.

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#269

Post by consteval »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #151
swiftcoder wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weddings in particular seem to have evolved "check your phone at the door" policies. Though perhaps mostly to keep folks from ruining the professional photographers shots by constantly diving into the action with cameraphones/flashes blazing...

> "check your phone at the door" policies No, no, no. A device in a (near-)stranger’s unsupervised physical possession for hours is a compromised device. No.

Okay so leave it in your locked car...

Re: The phone ban has had a big impact on school work

#270

Post by ruthmarx »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #265
ruthmarx wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I said a lot. Not most. Sigh. Do you find being pedantic like this productive, honestly? Fine, though. You're making an unwarranted assumption about a lot of people. Happy? > but as an objective true or false question, it's true a lot of the time. No, it isn't. This is purely your preference. > Are you implying that such a thought is obviously wrong? In this case dealing with subjective preferences it absolutely is…

You seem to be objecting to the entire idea of people en masse having preferences that screw up their own enjoyment? Cool, that's super easy to prove. Ignore dinners, go look at the science of addiction. I can link the Wikipedia page if you want, it's full of links to evidence. Also "most" versus "a lot" isn't pedantic. There's a ton of statements that are true of 5% of people but it would be ridiculous to suggest it…

> You seem to be objecting to the entire idea of people en masse having preferences that screw up their own enjoyment?

No, I'm objecting to the idea that you think you know what people would enjoy more than they do themselves, for any amount of people barring maybe close friends and family. It's incredibly condescending.

> Also "most" versus "a lot" isn't pedantic.

It is when you already clarified it twice and it wasn't pertinent to the main point I was making, repeated above in this very comment.

Post reply on HN