Slashdot Mirror


Amusement Park Bans PDAs and Smartphones

Ant writes in with news that an amusement park in the UK is trying out a ban on smartphones and PDAs, with the intent to enable families actually to have fun together. The press release says that from May 25 to June 1, adults found using a PDA will be asked to drop it off at a "PDA Drop Off Zone" — no word on what happens if they refuse. But both the Sun and BoingBoing, which picked up their brief story, strike a more ominous note with the claim that "special wardens" will confiscate the devices. If the experiment is deemed a success the park may make the ban permanent.

75 of 474 comments (clear)

  1. I understand their point... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but stepping up and taking away someone's personal property is nothing but thuggery.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    1. Re:I understand their point... by Mike1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      stepping up and taking away someone's personal property is nothing but thuggery. Perhaps, but bear in mind they can retrieve their PDA when they leave, and one can avoid the issue altogether by leaving your PDA at home, turning it off, or just plain not using it.

      The fact is, private amusement parks can have rules, and can ask you to leave if you refuse to follow them. This is just an example of that.

      If you're so very important that you can't turn your blackberry off for a day, you have the option of not visiting Alton Towers. If you really are that important, maybe you should turn your PDA off anyway, so your employers can be prepared for if you ever die or move jobs.
      --
      "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    2. Re:I understand their point... by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...but stepping up and taking away someone's personal property is nothing but thuggery. property, privacy, rights, entitlements, money, etc... welcome to .uk. Enjoy your stay Oh, fuck off. Seriously, this is the kind of kneejerk reaction that detracts from the damages to civil liberties that are happening in the UK.

      It's a minor story about a crap gimmick Alton Towers are using to get some publicity, and it's being presented here as an "OMG!!!!! They're taking away our rights!!!!!!!!11111" story.

      Aside from the fact it's a private amusement park (not a pseudo-public space like a shopping centre), it's not even being done for the usual surveillance-state bullshit "pedos might take photos of our children" type reasons. (*)

      You don't like it? Don't go to fucking Alton Towers! I wouldn't...

      (*) Given the popularity of using pedos to justify every ludicrous measure, if this isn't the reason being given in public, then it sure as hell isn't the true reason either.
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    3. Re:I understand their point... by Blue+Stone · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They're not taking anything from anyone - it's just a little marketing gimmick accompanying a little 'family friendly' advice.

      Parents are being ASKED to relinquish/put away their PDAs etc, in order to spend 'quality' time with their children.

      The article says 'no word on what will happen if they refuse' because nothing will happen. There's no story here, no news, just an advertisement...

      ...and no need for any nerd to get their knickers in a knot. ;)

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    4. Re:I understand their point... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 2

      Did you even read that post before you replied to it? The first line ends with "...detracts from the damages to civil liberties that are happening in the UK.". The poster's whole point was that we've got enough real problems without painting an interesting (if potentially stupid) little marketing scheme as one of them and trivialising them by doing so.

    5. Re:I understand their point... by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well your pedo argument really doesn't mean much as cameras are still no problem apparently. I guess this means they have to wait till they get home to upload it to their pedo pals? I really don't get your point. *My* point was that even the usual "OMG!!! Our children must be protected from pedos" reason (which I was genuinely expecting to be the scaremongering overreaction behind Alton Towers' actions) *WASN'T* being used in this case.

      At least you got an opportunity to bring up the relation of pedophiles Only insofar as they're used as an excuse for many of the infringements on our civil liberties. (Ignoring the fact that in the majority of sexual abuse cases the perpetrator is known to the victim).

      and a persons ability to walk around with what they want. Again, I don't understand what you're getting at here.
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:I understand their point... by Petrushka · · Score: 3, Funny

      Courthouses I believe prohibit camera phones (i.e. practically all cell phones), and the only time I'd ever go there is if I can't get out of jury duty.

      For reference, I believe there are other circumstances that can in principle make presence in a courthouse obligatory.

  2. Just don't go. by urbanriot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I require my phone, not just to stay in touch with my friends and loved ones, but also to keep in touch with my business. It's fine if I'm in a theatre for a few hours (I usually put it on vibrate), but if I have to be without it for a day... screw that, I'm not going to your place.

    1. Re:Just don't go. by mindstormpt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmmm... That's exactly the point. If you go to an amusement park with your family, they won't be thrilled if you can't spend more than a few hours without taking a call.

    2. Re:Just don't go. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      None of their damned business, first of all. That's between him and his family.

      And second, being callable doesn't mean you'll necessarily take a call. My phone is always on, and always on me, short of airplane travel -- but I'm only rarely called.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    3. Re:Just don't go. by iviagnus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And it is indeed your right not to go. But I might suggest that if you need to be tethered to your device when you go to an amusement park with your family, friends, or alone, that you need to seriously consider whether your current career choice is more valuable to you than your own vacation or time off. Many people want too much in life, and suffer working too many hours to compensate. If owning the toys you really can live without is more important than quality time with your family, then you shouldn't have one. If you want a family, work enough to pay for a home, the vehicles you absolutely need to get you to work and the market, plus something for a movie or to eat out once a week, plus a nestegg, and be happy. If getting that boat (plus a truck large enough to haul it) or a couple four-wheelers and a truck and trailer is going to mean working weekends at the expense of your family time, then you really shouldn't have them. There is no reason a husband and wife shouldn't be able to support the necessities with just two $20,000 incomes. You can work at a convenience store in Maine, which has a lower per-capita income than most states, and bring that home. Also, while on vibrate, do you answer your phone while in the theater, or do you exit and take/return the call in the lobby? You probably leave the theater. But many people open their phones right there and start holding a conversation. This is very rude, and the reason that banning is happening, and will get more confining as rudeness increases. Frankly, I'll be glad when some of these areas have localized interference set up so that no signal gets through . . . period.

  3. Not just PDAs by muellerr1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This reminds me of a restaurant in Colorado Springs that prided itself on cutting your tie in half if you stupidly showed up with one on. Casual diners only!

  4. texting on the PDA? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why yes...I'm talking to my kid who is waiting in line at another ride. You have a problem with that?

    Kiss my ass.

  5. Smart... by TJ_Phazerhacki · · Score: 4, Insightful
    So the policy allows kids phones for safety purposes.

    Who are they going to call? The parents without the cell phones?

    --
    Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
    1. Re:Smart... by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you really think it's a good idea to bother emergency services with countless "I lost my mommy" calls?

  6. Heading the wrong way! by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would hate to see attendance figures as they plummet - how many teenagers would want to go to a place where they have to give up the cell phone?

    Instead they should be going the other way, and see how they can integrate mobile devices into the "fun" they are offering. Disney does this today in a limited way in an attraction at the Magic Kingdom in Disney World, called the "Laugh Factry" or something like that. It's an animated live stand-up comic show, where while you are waiting to get in you can text jokes you like to them and they use some of them in the routine.

    That's pretty limited, but you could imagine parks texting you when a show or parade you signed up for was about to start, or having some mobile app that could somehow integrate into a ride or receive SMS messages with pictures of you on a ride.

    Anyway, there are lots of better things they could be doing that trying to strip away technology from people who will be very reluctant to do so.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  7. Forced fun? by Tango42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not sure forced fun is going to work. It's a worthy cause, but I don't think this is the way to do it...

  8. Oh Please... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but stepping up and taking away someone's personal property is nothing but thuggery.
    No it's not. They have a policy at a private amusement. I f you don't like it, you can "recreate" elsewhere.
    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Oh Please... by BorgDrone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They have a policy at a private amusement. So ? A policy at whatever place cannot override the law. If I have a policy that says I'm allowed to kill you on my private property, I'm still going away for murder if I do.
    2. Re:Oh Please... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Perhaps I should have expanded. Having a policy is fine. I have accidentally run afoul of a no cell phones policy at a country club. However, the difference is that I was asked to not use the phone rather than having someone take it away from me.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    3. Re:Oh Please... by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As long as they have a huge sign posted out front BEFORE I PAY that's just fine with me. I would just take my money elsewhere.

    4. Re:Oh Please... by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A local store has a sign they hang up that you can only see as you're leaving, which says "we reserve the right to inspect bags". Security guards ask nicely, but I walk past them with a sneer. How do I get away with it? They _don't_ have that right to begin with, so they can't reserve it.
      A manager at the store blocked my path once, immediately after I purchased something, and asked to see my bag.. the bag the check-out clerk just gave me. I told him to get out of my way or I'm calling the police. He first looked like he'd be happy to have the police there until a little spark went off in his little reptilian brain and he got out of my way.

      If I hang up a sign in my house saying "I reserve the right to cavity search" or "I reserve the right to confiscate your property", it doesn't mean I suddenly am exempt from laws against assault or theft perpetrated against people I asked onto my property.

    5. Re:Oh Please... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ahh.. policy.. The bureaucratic form of "I was only following orders"
      What's the difference? This is not a government establishemtn, it's a PRIVATE business. Move on, troll...
      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    6. Re:Oh Please... by howlingfrog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So ? A policy at whatever place cannot override the law. If I have a policy that says I'm allowed to kill you on my private property, I'm still going away for murder if I do.

      That's only vaguely true, and not even vaguely relevant. The owners of private property have every right, legally and ethically, to require visitors to that property to agree to (practically) any terms they want. The visitors are free to leave if they find the terms unacceptable. I can't imagine any US or UK court upholding terms that allow illegal behavior, but for anything short of that, what do you think "private property" means?

      And in this case, there's nothing remotely illegal about the terms being set. The amusement park operators are simply not allowing certain devices on their property, and offering a (free?) storage service for those disallowed devices. Visitors can leave their smartphones at home, or in the car, or in the park-provided storage. If you don't like those choices, don't go to that park.

      The real issues are:

      1. Would you personally visit an amusement park with this policy?
      2. Is this policy a sound business decision?
      My answers are no to both, as I assume yours are, but this is ABSOLUTELY NOT a legal/civil liberties issue.
      --
      The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
    7. Re:Oh Please... by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My answers are no to both, as I assume yours are, but this is ABSOLUTELY NOT a legal/civil liberties issue.

      I agree that anyone bothered by this should just take their business elsewhere. I also agree that this isn't a legal issue. But I disagree about it being a civil liberties issue. This is yet another little bit of presumptuous oversight that people will eventually acclimate to. It's not some huge step in Big Brother control, but it is yet another situation where people will get used to surrendering things because the authority figure said so. No single raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood.

      --
      We are all just people.
    8. Re:Oh Please... by shilly · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh well if it says it on boingboing, it must be true. Just take a minute to engage your brain and think to yourself whether it's even remotely likely that an amusement park is actually going to set up a policy to steal people's PDAs. Aside from being illegal, it's hardly going to pull in the punters, is it? Obviously, the policy will be to ask adults with PDAs to take them to the drop-off zones. Strikes me as a fairly innocuous policy, and if people don't like it, it'll be reflected in the attendance figures no doubt, and then they'll drop the policy or risk losing out to rivals.

    9. Re:Oh Please... by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, he doesn't have the right to stop you. But, at the point that he stepped out of the way, he would have been fully within his rights to inform you that you were not permitted to shop there in the future, and that attempts to reenter the store would be treated as trespass.

    10. Re:Oh Please... by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I invite you into my home and tell you to leave your cell phone at home, but you choose to bring it anyway, are you telling me I have the right to confiscate it from you and keep it? It's one thing if the park forces you to leave and refunds the price of your tickets, it's an entirely different form of thievery to steal your personal property.

    11. Re:Oh Please... by Korin43 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The difference is that they are not stealing your phone, they're saying "You can't come into my house with your phone, but you can leave it in the front closet if you want."

    12. Re:Oh Please... by frdmfghtr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you are seen using a Palm, iPaq or other personal digital assistant or smartphone, the special wardens will take it away from you."
      My question is: what if you are using it to communicate with other members of your party in the park? Suppose you have a copy of the park map on it?

      Smartphones/PDAs are not just used for business, after all.
      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    13. Re:Oh Please... by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps I should have expanded. Having a policy is fine. I have accidentally run afoul of a no cell phones policy at a country club. However, the difference is that I was asked to not use the phone rather than having someone take it away from me.

      Yeah, but you didn't have your six year old with you with his noisy hand-held game.

      Country clubs are wise, they stop the problem right at the source. They don't just have a policy against devices, they have a policy against kids. They either prevent you from taking the kids in with you, or they have you check your kids at the door (so they are placed in their own waiting holding area). At an amusement park, apparently it's too much to ask that they confiscate your kids as well, and that you only get to retrieve them when you've had your fun at the end of the day.

    14. Re:Oh Please... by dotancohen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My question is: what if you are using it to communicate with other members of your party in the park? Suppose you have a copy of the park map on it?

      Smartphones/PDAs are not just used for business, after all. The iPhone has a media player and a camera. What if you are making a home video of your family enjoying the amusement park?
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    15. Re:Oh Please... by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ahh.. policy.. The bureaucratic form of "I was only following orders" I agree - Nazi germany was the first thing I thought of when I heard about people not being allowed to use their PDAs. I will give you a better analogy. The local US embassy confiscates cellphones. Apparently there is a sign at the door that you can leave the phone at a drop-off point across the street for the equivalent of $3 US. My wife who went to the embassy to pick up some papers had to leave her place in line (after over an hour in line outside the building) and hide her phone in the bushes because she didn't have the cash on her.
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    16. Re:Oh Please... by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think we're making too much of it. It's no different ethically or legally from movie theaters that ban outside food.

    17. Re:Oh Please... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Re they going to guarantee that the PDA or the data stored upon it won't get stolen? Because with identity theft so rampant and the amount of personal data that can be on someones cell or PDA it seems to me that this is a lawsuit waiting to happen. But that is my 02c,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    18. Re:Oh Please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh dear, you have more issues than I first thought.

      1. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a troll. It's egocentricity of the highest order to convince oneself that a differing opinion cannot even be taken seriously.

      2. No-one's deciding what's best for you or your daughter - neither I nor the theme park. It shows an irresponsible lack of depth to take feedback from one private individual, or a policy on some private ground, as a general commandment.

      3. Freedom requires property - if you don't think so, watch me walking into your house, finding a comfortable seat, taking out my 'phone, and using it to call whomever I please. I have a better idea - when I'm on your property, you can set me boundaries; and when you're on mine, same applies.

      4. Back to the point - millennia of teenage daughters not feeling the need to have a permanent line to their parents: it's not necessary. Something about the last 12 years has changed that, causing your daughter to feel the need (as you allege it - I've heard so many parents say "but my child wants it this way..." and the child relate otherwise) to have a permanent line to you. She has lost the notion that she is able to be independent, for some reason, and that's a loss of freedom - psychologically programmed, perhaps, but that's how most freedoms are eroded.

      4.

    19. Re:Oh Please... by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about leaving the stupid thing in your car if you are so worried about it? Its not like you don't know up front its going to happen and what their rules are.

      You DONT have a right to have you phone on their property. So quit acting like you do.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    20. Re:Oh Please... by mpeskett · · Score: 4, Funny

      Damn those movie theatres! Infringing on our right to a giant bucket of fried chicken while we watch a movie!

      It's virtually censorship... they're preventing my free expression of chicken-eating. I demand chickeny freedom!

    21. Re:Oh Please... by quanticle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't have the right to confiscate the property, but you also have the right to not allow with people with cell phones onto your private property. The "drop off" point that this amusement park is providing is nothing more than a convenience. You're free to leave your phone in your car or at home if you choose.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    22. Re:Oh Please... by KutuluWare · · Score: 4, Informative

      What. The. Fuck. "There is now law that says you must be allowed..." What the hell is that? Since when were activites implicitly blacklisted and then only allowed once added to a whitelist? Since the beginning of human history, or thereabourts. You may have heard of this concept, it's called "private property", and you aren't even allowed to enter my private property until I give you permission to do so.

      You seem to be very vocally confused about exactly what's going on here, so perhaps a bulleted list will be of some assistance:

      * This is the United Kingdom, not the US, so the Constitution means fuck-all to anyone involved.

      * Even if this were the United States, you'd still be horribly wrong. With very very few exceptions, nothing in the Constitution has any jurisdiction over private organizations. I direct you to the first words of the First Amendment as an example: Congress shall enact no law...

      * Finally, the Constitution doesn't even remotely say what you claim it says. The confusion you seem to be having is over the Tenth Amendment. It says that any "power" (power to make laws) not expressly given to the Federal Government, is automatically given to the states. It says absolutely nothing about whatever laws the states may or may not have that aren't written in the Constitution.

      That's just for starters, so perhaps you should take a political science course or two before your next ill-informed /. rant.
    23. Re:Oh Please... by Petrushka · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've got this the wrong way round. It would indeed be a civil liberties matter if the law prohibited people from exercising control over what comes onto their property and what does not. If you're for civil liberties, you should be on the amusement park's side here. Control over who and what comes onto your private property is a pretty important set of rights.

    24. Re:Oh Please... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      If I invite you into my home and tell you to leave your cell phone at home, but you choose to bring it anyway, are you telling me I have the right to confiscate it from you and keep it?
      You can leave it at the door - your strawman will keep it for you till you leave.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  9. Isn't it the other way around? by pacroon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't it usually more the problem with having kinds leave their gameboys and nintendo ds's in the cars, rather than adults spending time on their smartphones?

    --
    It's all fun & games until someone loses the game.
  10. Stupid. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I understand the sentiment, but if a parent is such a jackass to not be able to ignore their phone for a single day to go have fun with their kid, there is no way the park is going to be able to "force" them to b a good parent by stealing their phone.

    I've tried telling the office to only call me for emergencies when I'm on vacation. That didn't work. Now they know that I'll check my messages at night, and if they haven't fixed the problem, I'll remote in and fix it when I get a minute.

    Vacation means vacation. The fact that they're not willing to hire someone else who can take some of the load off of me, doesn't mean that I'm going to give up my vacation time (says the puppy, posting from work on Sunday on a holiday weekend).

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  11. /.'ers don't have to worry by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Remember - to be affected by this policy, you'd a) have to be in a relationship; and b) have to venture outside. So breathe easy!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  12. Re:Not Going to Work.......I Think by xaxa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They aren't going to "enforce" it. It's just a way to remind dad that maybe, just maybe, he should be spending time with the kids rather than being glued to his PDA.

  13. This is what we can all PR gimmick by Angostura · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Alton Towers gets free publicity in the papers, a debate ensues, no-one actually gets their PDAs removed. Nothing to see here, move along please.

  14. Good for them! by ragincajun1337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think this is a great idea!

    A corresponding story:
    I think I am the only one in my family who actually hates sitting down for dinner because either 1. no one ever sits down for dinner at the same time, or more importantly and more relevant 2. everyone turns to watch whatever is on the TV at the moment, even if their back is to the TV they'll take a bite and turn around to watch while continuing to chew their food. (And before anyone tries to cry foul and point out the obvious, yes, I have mentioned my extreme distaste for their actions more than once, but they don't listen)

    I am usually the aloof and solitude type, but I would love to sit down to dinner and have a full conversation with my whole family and be interested in what is happening with everyone else's lives and have others be even slightly interested in what I'm doing (since I'm off at college except for about three or four weeks out of the year). That never happens though. They'd all rather be watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire or Dancing With The Stars or Desperate Housewives (yes I'm a guy living in a house with too many women).

    You wonder why families seem to be so much more dysfunctional and broken nowadays? Well it's no illusion. Families are more discontent and broken nowadays because society is falling to the pits and worrying more about possessions, money, and kissing their bosses' ass than worrying about their families, loved ones, and the things that truly matter the most in life.

    This also goes along with those people who take "vacations" yet take their smartphones with them and never really disconnect from the office and their work while they're supposed to be relaxing and enjoying time off from work. I never want my cell phone to do anything other than make phone calls. Like this phone: http://dvice.com/archives/2008/04/claritylife_pho.php Hell, I'd be happier without a cell phone.

    I am disgusted with society today, but major props to these people for trying to do something right by the world and society.

  15. Re:Sniff, sniff.. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, I can think of a few people who would actually enforce a policy that stupid, but...

    First question: Are they confiscating all cell phones, or only smartphones?

    If it's only smartphones, it's a liveable policy -- provided you can buy everyone a non-smartphone. It's still moronic that they're trying to enforce fun -- it's not like it spoils anyone else's fun if you want to spoil your trip by playing Solitaire on your smartphone the whole time.

    If it's all phones, well, you've just eliminated a useful tool for finding lost kids, or for preventing kids from getting lost. It's all well and good to say "We'll meet here at 5:30," but it's nice to be able to call if they don't make it.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  16. You're all missing the point by xaxa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The word "ban" isn't really what they're doing.

    "Amusement Park Provides Secure Drop-Off Point for PDAs and Smartphones" would be more like it. To advertise this service they have a kid dressed as a policeman "banning" people from using PDAs and pointing them towards the drop-off point.

  17. Just so you know... by neokushan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My friends and I go to Alton Towers all the time (We have season tickets), the staff there are generally very helpful and friendly, so I doubt they're going to change that policy just to make families feel a bit better, there's a good chance it's more of a tongue-in-cheek sort of thing to help Dad relax on his day off rather than to cause real distress.

    I highly doubt they're going to kick up a fuss or cause an argument for the sake of it, they'll more than likely go to the kids and be all "hey kids, tell daddy to put the phone away! I'll even take it off his hands and put it in a safe place, how about that?!". As cheesy as it sounds, it might ACTUALLY work.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  18. Heh. If we're talking about sad... by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heh... I still remember first weekend in the previous town I've lived in. So it was a beautiful day of may, with sunshine, flowers and all. And I had to go through a park. Well, maybe not "have", but it was a bit of a detour to go via the other side. Anyway, so the birds were chirping, the sun was high, the breeze was warm, and you could see couples of teenagers everywhere.

    But the couple that stuck to my mind were a boy and a girl having a picnic on a blanket on the grass. Well, when I say 'picnic', it was more like the girl was sitting there idle watching other couples go by, while the boy was typing furiously on his laptop.

    Not sure if it would have been better with a policy to take his laptop, though. I had a feeling it would have been akin to taking the oxygen tank away from a scuba diver ;)

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Heh. If we're talking about sad... by kullnd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Funny you should combine the two, as last month I was at the lake doing some scuba diving when the call came in that work needed some emergency router configuration changes... Got my laptop, put in the cell card, and did the work I needed to do at the lake between dives... Sure am glad that I was able to use the available technology vs. having to leave the park, drive to work, and do what I needed to do, which would have ruined the remainder of my fun for the day...

      --
      +++ATH0 NO CARRIER
  19. Ban watches, phones, mp3 players... by gelfling · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ban everything everywhere. Ban it. You WILL have fun goddamnit.

  20. What you should have done: by Wooky_linuxer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Walked straight to them, and with authority, proclaimed yourself as Park Police. Whatever that means. Then, after explaining the Park policy of not allowing work with a laptop in its premises, explain ed the penalty: - I am sorry, sir, but I will be forced to confiscate. - No way, this is my private property and I am doing important work here. - I mean the girl.

    --
    Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
  21. Re:The smartphone dilemma by BVis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't. I think you're missing the point of the ban.

    IMHO this ban is protection from asshole bosses who think they own you 24/7/365. When you go to one of these places you can say "I took my kids to such and such, they don't allow cell phones inside."

    Clearly this doesn't work for anyone who has a job that requires 24/7 availability (for example, you need to be notified if your data center catches fire.) However, if your job is one where your availability ISN'T needed 24/7, but your asshole boss THINKS it is, then this works.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  22. They allow phone calls by aembleton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think they will allow phone calls, just not the tapping away that you see when people are checking up on their emails from the office. And on another note, this preview feature takes a long time.

  23. Good Daycycle Citizen! by IonOtter · · Score: 3, Funny

    Good Daycycle, Citizen, and welcome to Alton Towers, where fun is mandatory! Please bear in mind that failure to have fun is considered Treason, and is punishable by painful death reserved for Commie Mutant Traitors and those Citizens who failed to have fun.

    Thank you for your cooperation, Citizen, and remember to have fun!

    Your Friend,

    The Computer

    --
    [End Of Line]
  24. Re:This is a great idea! by nbannerman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Whoa, hang on a minute.

    A few things to think about;

    1. England != UK. Confusing the two is bad form; our Scots and Welsh brethren will surely kick up a stink at that. 2. Alton Towers are free to trial this. The fact they are trialling it first is a good way to go about things. 3. We use the Pound (Sterling) as our currency - you'll prise it from my euro-sceptic-dead-hands.

    Considering the pasting that Labour are getting in the papers and at the polling booths, I'd say us 'British Subjects' are still quite capable of fighting back, in the more general sense of the political climate here at the moment.

  25. Re:Intrafamily phoning by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They did, but it was a lot harder and entailed walking around searching or going to a courtesy booth and having an announcement made over a PA.

    On a recent trip to Disneyland with relatives, cellphones were used a couple times to check in and coordinate. Very handy if you ask me.

    Personally, any park that says I can't have my phone won't get my business.

  26. this will backfire by moxley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Assuming they are even doing this for the reason they claim, I understand what they're doing, but I think it's completely retarded and will probably backfire - and here's why:

    The type of person who is going to be using their smartphone/PDA at an amusement park generally isn't going to be doing so because they think it's more fun than hanging out with their family or going on rides, they're going to be doing it in most cases because they have to be able to have those communication options to even be able to get away. If the person's family doesn't have a problem with it, then why should the park?

    What about people who want to have their smartphone AS A PHONE?

    This is just so stupid and I think that it will cost them business. For any person who would find this appealing, there are going to more than twice as many who will hate it.

  27. Re:Sniff, sniff.. by shilly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Christ, wouldja take a minute to think even briefly before typing. What are you on about, saying, "it's not like it spoils anyone else's fun if you want to spoil your trip by playing Solitaire on your smartphone the whole time"? This policy is not aimed at 19-year-old geeks who've turned up by themselves, it's aimed at parents. And yes it really will spoil your 10-year-old's day if you're playing Solitaire instead of joining them on the rides.

  28. What a GREAT IDEA! by RaigetheFury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I read about 100 comments in this post and I have to admit most were about "I wouldn't go there then" or "They are taking away our rights".

    Correct me if I'm wrong since I'm in the US... but where in the UK law does it say "Right to bear cell phone"... it doesn't you twits.

    This is a terrific idea made by a PRIVATE entity on THEIR property. I cannot tell you how often I hear loud obnoxious people on cell phones distracting from MY fun. How the families they are with are like "Come on dad" or "Honey can't you do that later" and they reply "Just one sec" while being blissfully ignorant of the line behind them.

    I WOULD go to this theme park simply because it removes the ADD enhancing objects in our lives and lets us focus on conversation with each other and paying attention to ones surroundings.

  29. Let's carry a laptop instead! by wikinerd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I like to carry a laptop or subnotebook in my hands while I walk and work with it, and that's what I did last time I went to a zoo park: Writing code while lemurs and rabbits were jumping all around me (but you have to take care as lemurs sometimes have the tendency to jump on your head!). I had fun playing with the lemurs AND more fun writing code. The last thing I want is a PDA police telling me how to have fun, and if they came to me I'd tell them it's not a PDA :)

  30. Re:Intrafamily phoning by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Funny

    Gee, I wonder how separated people found each other before cell phones... You are aware that the Neanderthals went extinct for this very reason, right?
    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  31. Re:Sniff, sniff.. by houghi · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it's all phones, well, you've just eliminated a useful tool for finding lost kids, or for preventing kids from getting lost.
    Indeed the children, won't anybody think of the children.
    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  32. Waiting Time Killers by hiruhl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My experience with PDAs at amusement parks is that they make the amusement park more fun.

    Waiting in line for rides/attractions is a pain in the ass. Yes, I suppose you get to chat with whomever you're with, but geez...It's nice to pull out a PDA with SlingPlayer on it and watch some TV, or surf the web, or whatever.

    Perhaps they should allow PDAs when in line, but not on benches...But that seems too arbitrary. I really just think that there are enough legitimate uses for PDAs to enhance the experience at an amusement park (which is meant for amusement, right? not boredom, standing in line?) to warrant a ban on such devices.

  33. Re:Sniff, sniff.. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This policy is not aimed at 19-year-old geeks who've turned up by themselves, it's aimed at parents. And yes it really will spoil your 10-year-old's day if you're playing Solitaire instead of joining them on the rides. And if you're that kind of parent, this policy isn't going to make you a better parent. It's probably going to result in you not going to the park at all.
    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  34. Re:Sniff, sniff.. by Tassach · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And yes it really will spoil your 10-year-old's day if you're playing Solitaire instead of joining them on the rides. Not at much as me spewing my guts all over her and the rest of the family. I have an inner ear condition which make me very prone to motion sickness. I simply cannot ride many amusement park rides without becoming violently ill. Waiting at the ride exit playing solitaire while my wife takes our 5 and 10 year olds on the rides is a preferable alternative to projectile vomiting.
    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  35. Don't forget, it's The Sun by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Informative

    For those outside the UK, it's probably worth pointing out that The Sun is a fanatically right-wing paper written for a reading age of approximately 9 years. Most prominent in The Sun are the "Page Three Stunna" (a different picture of a topless woman every day), a large sports section, and a large comics section. Fairly typical Sun headlines are "Do Fellas Prefer Flirtier Females?", "Driven to suicide by websites", and "Immigrant got me pregnant at 14". These are *real* headlines from The Sun, I'm not making this up. Ok, they're not quite at the level of batshit crazyness of some USian tabloids (National Enquirer, I'm looking at you here), but they have printed their fair share of "I got pregnant by a space mushroom"-type stuff.

  36. What? But I'm a Doctor, on call...! by misterhypno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Special wardens will confiscate such devices" as a possible outcome.

    How will those who are doctors, law enforcement officials and such who are on call or other emergency personnel be able to remain in touch with their call-in stations then and who are required to carry such devices (and may even be issued them as part of their standard equipment)?

    And isn't that called "theft?" Or, at least violation of personal property under UK law?

    While I appreciate the idea of not having to be interrupted at every turn by some idiot either playing a video game or answering a mindless "WHASSUP?!" call in the middle of a show, there should be some better way to do this.

    And what happens when someone loses their claim ticket or, worse, the park loses their smart device? The cost to the park will be far in excess of the "social savings" this ban might give them.

    From this side of the pond, it's just another sign that every petty administrator, everywhere, wants to control a little slice of the lives that come into their sphere of influence.

    They are going to have a LOT of very angry people to contend with when they try this because, more and more, smart devices are becoming the norm, rather than the exception. What a wonderful way to turn the happiest place on earth into a focus for seething animosity!

    Well done, park officious officials!

  37. Criminal damage by Alain+Williams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter if they think that you are stupid or not, cutting your tie in half is criminal damage ... I am surprised that someone has not called the cops out on them.

  38. Does "paying customer" mean nothing anymore by kylehase · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They paid their entrance fee so they can do whatever they want as long as it does not disrupt the experience for other parties (or break the law of course) and I don't see how using a PDA would disrupt others. It may create a less engaged experience for one's own family but that's a private matter.

    If the PDA addict's wife says to put it away that's another story.

    --
    You want fun, go home and buy a monkey!
  39. Re:The smartphone dilemma by caluml · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IMHO this ban is protection from asshole bosses who think they own you 24/7/365. This seems to be less common in the UK (where this park is).
    My boss has only once in 7 years rung me up out of hours, and he told me that he was very sorry, as it could be taken as harassment.
  40. The Law of Unintended Consequences by WallyHartshorn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not uncommon for a boss to be unable to grant a request for time off if the employee will be unreachable. It's also not uncommon for the EMPLOYEE to be unwilling to take time off if they will be unreachable.

    Given such a situation, this attempt to encourage family togetherness could just result in LESS family togetherness.