Slashdot Mirror
Mobile Phone Abuse and AbUsers
Doctor Hu writes "The Economist has a story ("Think Before You Talk") describing a new range of mobile phone prototypes designed by Ideo to discourage antisocial usage - devices ringing in concert halls, loud proclamations that the caller is on his way home, etc. The first of the series uses electric shocks to condition the user to talk at a non-intrusive level; the others are similarly ingenious. Not intended to be commercially produced, just to provoke discussion (and provide publicity for Ideo, presumably). Nice comment at the end from one of the designers that for devices like mobile phones, "user-centric" design needs to take the needs of people nearby the user into account as well."
The First Amendment isn't there to give you the right to be obnoxious, it's there to ensure you have the right to express your views without fear of government censure. If your intepretation were correct, noise ordnances would be unconstitutional.
People forget the lesson of the man who died on the cross to preserve the American way of life.
Oh, silly me. I thought you were serious until I read this part. Still, there are people who do think the First Amendment gives them a legal right to be annoying bastards, so I'll post this reply anyway, even though IHBT.
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
... setting up licensed cell-phone free zones (such as concert halls etc) where phones cannot ring. The zones could have a small very low-power transmitter/scrambler that would inform/interrupt the cell phone so that it just wouldn't ring in those areas.
Agreed this is a start, but the problem isn't holding onto something, try going down the road holding the phone up to your ear. For the most part, people only have/need one hand on the wheel anyway.
The dangerous part is the lack of concentration. Handsfree adapters don't help this, if anything, make it worse, people have a subconscious tendency to look at the source of the audio when speaking...
I can understand the frustration when folks talk in a movie theater during the show, or in an art gallery. At those times it should be right to express frustration and tell them to STFU (if they are or are not using a cell phone it doesn't matter).
But a grocery line? A bus? A train? What the hell is wrong with using a cell phone there?
I mean really - I never saw a parent staple their annoying brats mouth shut to stop it from yammering about how it wants that candy bar by the cash register - I don't see people duct taping their mouths on a train instead of conversing.
If a cell phone user keeps it quiet, what the hell is the problem?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
> If someone is bothering you with their
> cell phone chatter in a place such as a
> movie theater...
How about just tell the person they're bothering you? What's wrong with us here in the US that we can't confront anyone anymore? Everyone has to just pretend that everyone is nice all the time, then of course talk about these people behind their backs.
Just say something! You're not being rude; you're alerting this person to the fact that they are out of place in what they're doing. We'll all be better off.
Yeah, I hate passive agressiveness.
--- witty signature
Why not ask first, call the usher second? They're clearly breaking the rules of the theater ("No Talking" is displayed rather prominently on the screen before each and every movie I've ever seen.)
Instead of taking the law into your own hands, vigilante-asshole style, just get the fuckers kicked out. It's a much more satisfying feeling, and the chance you'll get your ass kicked severely is much lower. Also, you'll be acting much less like a 12-year-old.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
It is the user! Zapping the annoying Cell phone user in the theater wont stop them from A) letting their annoying screaming child run amok during the movie B) chatting at normal volume with the person next to them C) loudly snoring D)
being generally obnoxious with their squeaky straw or nearly empty soda.
We went to my son's 4th grade chorus recital last night. The family perched behind us A) let their 3? 4? year old child spend the entire half hour screaming to his (presumed) relative on stage, they carried on a conversation that came out louder on my camcorder than the singing, and when the kids did "hard knock life" with the snapping part, they got into a rampant (and loud) discussion of how to snap, and proceeded to practice throughout the rest of the show.
Yes, I politely asked them to quiet down. No it didnt do any good.
Its not the phone, its the jerk using it, and those same jerks have ALWAYS A) worn hats to theaters, B)jammed their knees into your seat (partially the theaters fault for building seats for 5' 100 lb people) and C) insisted on sitting dead center in a row of people and getting up three times during the movie.
I would much prefer the devices be in the SEATS and controlled by a consensus of people in the theater.
Maeryk
Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
"Seriously, there should be laws saying that all cellphones can operate in vibrate-mode only if in any public place."
Seriously? SERIOUSLY? You think we need *more* laws for stupid crap like this? What is your justification? Because it annoys you? That's a justification for a new law? A noise made in public? What's next laws against talking in public? After all that might just annoying someone else - so they should be forced to write notes to each other, or work out a serious of winks and body groping or something.
WTF, I can't belive that there are truly people that stupid in this world. It truly boggles the mind. I can only hope that you're a troll...please tell me your just a troll...
For the most part, I'd say the accidents that were "caused" by cell-phone users were not "caused" by cell phone users. It may have been a corollary, but not a causality. They were caused by morons. Just because you are using a cell-phone doesn't make you a danger. Its the moron that's a danger. Doesn't matter if he has a cell phone, cuz these are the same people I see on my way to work who:
Put make-up on while driving, looking into rear-view mirror whole time, instead of where they are going.
Shave while driving.
Floss while driving, steering with knees.
Has kid sitting in lap, steering the car for them, while driving.
Holding a drink in one hand, Big Mac in the other, and steering the car with their knees.
Reading the newspaper while driving.
Reading a Book while driving.
Head turned around, scolding their kids in the back while driving.
Drops cigarette in their lap, and are franticly searching for it, while driving....
etc, etc, etc...
PS: Who the hell looks at their cell phone while they are talking? I don't know about you, but I can't see my ears....
These technological solutions are blunt instruments; they prevent some valid (legal and/or moral) use, and they don't prevent some invalid use. Regardless of the morality of applying such blanket solutions, they simply don't solve the problem, even though they may help to mask the symptoms in some cases.
The problem of inappropriate mobile phone use is little different from that of people speaking to each other loudly, playing digital watch tunes, or any other disruptive activity. As many others here have said, the problem isn't the phone; it's the user who allows the phone to sound and/or takes a call at such a time. It's entirely possible to set most phones so that the ring tone starts silently and slowly increases in volume; combined with a vibrating alert, I usually answer my phone (or reject the call) before anyone else was aware it was ringing. If only most other users applied similar consideration, I doubt options like this would be considered for a moment.
The bottom line is that you can't force people to be considerate/moral/caring, neither with technology nor with the law. People must want to behave like that.
Here endeth the lesson.
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.