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

Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 258 posts

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#241

Post by dataflow »

0xffff2 wrote: post #229
dataflow wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no punishment is too harsh, this should be considered the equivalent of lighting up a cigarette on a plane. Okay this is ridiculous. One is a fire hazard and the other is not. Do you really need the hyperbole here?

Are you aware that smoking used to be allowed on planes? We didn't stop allowing it because of a rash of airplane fires either.

Yes, I'm fully aware. And it is emphatically irrelevant. It's kind of ridiculous to suggest the original motivations for the rule somehow render the associated risks on people's safety, lives, and properties permanently ineligible for consideration.

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#242

Post by [deleted] »

BenjiWiebe wrote: post #207
dataflow wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no punishment is too harsh, this should be considered the equivalent of lighting up a cigarette on a plane. Okay this is ridiculous. One is a fire hazard and the other is not. Do you really need the hyperbole here?

The lack of cigarettes on a plane isn't due to the fire hazard.

[deleted]

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#243

Post by verdverm »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #213
verdverm wrote: post #88

An app you can use to play back their audio on a short delay that messes with the brain https://github.com/Pankajtanwarbanna/stfu

Pretty sweet. Do you have it hosted anywhere? Seems github doesn't want to let you load HTML directly (for obvious reasons lol)

Not mine, I'll keep this limitation in mind when I redo my personal site and add it in so it's easy to remember (for me at least ;)

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#244

Post by jghn »

tzs wrote: post #240
jghn wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you just hold it with your hand?

Sometimes you need both hands for something else while on the phone. Landline telephones mostly had handsets that looked like the top photo here [1]. When held with a hand they were positioned as shown in the second photo there. Because of its thickness and length you only had to tilt your head and/or raise you should a little to hold it hands free with the speaker end right at the ear and the mic end still near the…

Sure. At home. And yes, I'm old enough to have walked around with a phone tucked in my neck.

But if you're in public, and using a smartphone, headphones are always an option. There s absolutely no reason why anyone needs to use speakerphone in public if they're just one person.

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#245

Post by dguest »

3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #183
dguest wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FUN FACT: Aviation rules require that any plane carrying a parachute must have at least one for every person on board. Hopefully the reason is obvious. Now given that, do you really want to pay the extra cost of flying with 300 parachutes just so mr-full-volume-phone can have one?

That is an incredibly fun fact. Does this only apply to commercial or also a little Cessna? Presumably there is no actual enforcement on the private planes.

I made it too fun: what I said was at best an over-genarlization. The actual rules [1] apply to acrobatics and say that parachutes are required for everyone when non-crew passenger is on the plane:

    Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional [acrobatic] maneuver...
So without the passenger no one needs a parachute, with them everyone does.

It's perfectly legal for a 787 to carry a few parachutes just for the full-volume passengers.

[1]: https://faraim.org/faa/far/cfr/title-14/part-91/section-91.3...

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#246

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

pjmlp wrote: post #31

Is this really a thing?!? Blasting the others with unwanted noise. I never been in a flight, or train across Europe where passengers showed just lack of respect for the others. The only ones pumping anything loud, on trains or busses, usually get quickly pointed down by other passengers, personal or security. Ah, and then there are the rebellious kids or gangs, as the other exception, which usually don't take flights…

It never used to happen in the UK but now people do it every day on tubes and trains. I had to move seats twice last week due to these assholes blasting their stuff out.

I don't know what changed exactly. It was definitely seen as antisocial behaviour in the past. I'll just leave this clip here of Spock dealing with a noisy punk on a bus.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf5iwGZNY_Q

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#247

Post by born2web »

etrautmann wrote: post #212
dataflow wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen it everywhere except airplanes. I don't recall ever seeing it on planes. How often have you seen that? Do passengers or flight attendants do anything? How does the person respond?

Kids playing games is the truly annoying one. You feel terrible saying anything but it’s also some of the most annoying sounds.

Totally... unlike watching a movie, games keep them addicted. I have experienced situations where even toddlers played for 5 hours straight... I couldn't even muster the courage to ask them to lower their volume :-)

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#249

Post by password4321 »

sowbug wrote: post #97
andy99 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure on planes this is more ignorance than malice. It’s self absorbed people that are too selfish to consider someone else might not want to hear what they’re watching, rather than some deliberate anti society thing. Regardless, no punishment is too harsh, this should be considered the equivalent of lighting up a cigarette on a plane.

Another angle is kids who have been given a tablet as a pacifier. Their parents are often on autopilot, having checked out months or years earlier. On topic (and discussed already on HN): https://github.com/Pankajtanwarbanna/stfu

discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46649142

Re: Passengers who refuse to use headphones can now be kicked off United flights

#250

Post by RS-232 »

follie wrote: post #224
tzs wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what people think of people who use their speakerphone in public, but have the volume set low enough and themselves speak low enough that the conversation is no louder than an in person conversation would be. Still annoying? If so, is the problem usually the loudness of the speakerphone, or the loudness of the person who is there? I've noticed some people talk louder when on speakerphone than when on regu…

> Still annoying? Naturally it is extremely rude. If two people have a conversation in public both pay attention to the surroundings and feedback to change their volume tone and topics. If you put someone on speaker without introducing everyone present then they should hang up on you.

> If you put someone on speaker without introducing everyone present then they should hang up on you.

This is silly. Just tell the person you are talking to that they are on speaker.

Assuming the party on the phone has been informed and the volume is not excessive, having a conversation on speaker is equivalent to having a physical conversation in person.

Post reply on HN