3 ms·

You do realize even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right? Minutes? 3 seconds?

You do realize even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right? Minutes? 3 seconds? Whatever. No one has a right to other people's time. I can't help but feel that anything else is a sense of entitlement over other peoples time. That's not to say someone should blare their horn after 3 seconds, but definitively a tap or two... and if that doesn't work, then get progressively louder.

Dylan16807 7y ago
Nobody can drive perfectly with .01 second precision at all times. It's not entitlement to aim for "good driver" without being a neurotic mess about every time you slow down or don't take the first gap. And I think the logical conclusion of having absolutely no right to anyone else's time is to not take up space on the road at all. And when I say "about zero" I mean that it can in fact be exactly zero.
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  You are right. That is why there is an expectation of you paying attention. Including during a red light. That means not using your phone. I can assure you, if you are using your phone at a red light, it takes more than 0.01 seconds to notice the change in light, put the phone down, look at the street in front of you to make sure there isn't anything new since the last time you looked and go. In fact, if it took you the 0.01 seconds you say, it would literally be impossible for someone to honk you in time before you take off. The amount of time quoted is mind mindbogglingly small. I don't get honked at. When I'm at a red light, I'm paying attention. If I need to use my phone, I pull over. Therefore, when a light changes I generally move along as quick as possible. If for some reason something falls in my car, I'm having a conversation with someone next to me or I get distracted (happens once or twice a year) and someone honks, I defer to them, since I know I'm in the wrong by not being on the ball. I defer because I have no entitlement over the time of the person behind me. I'm not making up excuses saying how little time it is. I understand it's wrong of me to impose on them unnecessarily. Using your phone while driving is not necessary. It's all very logical. Basically: My pleasure < Their Right to not have people impose on their time. I always find it strange when an issue isn't addressed but instead denied by making it seem small (generally with gross underestimations). I remember a coworker once got fired for stealing a box of pens. When caught he claimed "I didn't steal, it was just a box of pens! It's basically worth nothing." - I think the boss actually fired him for giving that argument instead of owning the issue. * Exceptions could be made for checking the traffic in GPS or some other activity that aids driving (knowing you need to change lanes with advance notice is important). Checking messages emails isn't one such activity, though I've seen a lot of friends and colleges do it much to my chagrin.
  - Dylan16807 7y ago
    > I always find it strange when an issue isn't addressed but instead denied by making it seem small That's not what I was doing at all. I was calling your standard impossibly high, using an intentionally minuscule number to show that every driver violates the idea that "any amount of time[...]isn't cool" And obviously if you waste so much time you get honked at you've done something wrong. So far I've avoided being honked at for that reason. But there are ways to use a phone that don't waste time! If you keep the cross light in view and put the phone down when it turns yellow, that's plenty of time to focus on the road situation.
    - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
      > I was calling your standard impossibly high Except... you are arguing against a cartoon of what I said. You even intentionally edited it out to make it seem like I am being unreasonable. I'll post your quote with the missing part included: "amount of time needlessly" Needlessly. An important part of what I said. If you aren't wasting peoples time needlessly, you are within my standard. Therefore, my standard isn't unrealist. Let's be clear about the chain of events: mikepurvis complains about cell phone use during red lights. tasty_freeze posts saying: why is this an issue rconti tries to take a middle ground by saying 'he does the phone checking at a red light to, but he is highly consious of other people and he notices that many who check it during a red light aren't as concious and implores other people to be so. He explains the chain effect of how a few seconds of your delay can cause several minutes of delay to other people. Dylan16807, you, post how this knock on effect would only happen if there were 'more than a hundred people stopped directly behind' (as if that is impossible) Furthermore you state: "And that's assuming the entire pack of cars doesn't just catch back up to the one in front of you, where you had to wait anyway, dropping the actual time loss back to about zero" Which sounds a hell of a lot like denial through minimizing. So I post saying: "even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?" It seems like a statement you seem to agree to but haven't stated as much. Instead, you edited my words to try and prove the point that I have 'unrealistic expectations'. To me, it sounds like you feel like arguing. Though I might be missing your point, so feel free to clarify what that point is and how it is relevant to the chain of communication as originally posted and recaped on this post.

Dylan16807 7y ago

Nobody can drive perfectly with .01 second precision at all times. It's not entitlement to aim for "good driver" without being a neurotic mess about every time you slow down or don't take the first gap. And I think the logical conclusion of having absolutely no right to anyone else's time is to not take up space on the road at all. And when I say "about zero" I mean that it can in fact be exactly zero.

4ntonius8lock 7y ago
You are right. That is why there is an expectation of you paying attention. Including during a red light. That means not using your phone. I can assure you, if you are using your phone at a red light, it takes more than 0.01 seconds to notice the change in light, put the phone down, look at the street in front of you to make sure there isn't anything new since the last time you looked and go. In fact, if it took you the 0.01 seconds you say, it would literally be impossible for someone to honk you in time before you take off. The amount of time quoted is mind mindbogglingly small. I don't get honked at. When I'm at a red light, I'm paying attention. If I need to use my phone, I pull over. Therefore, when a light changes I generally move along as quick as possible. If for some reason something falls in my car, I'm having a conversation with someone next to me or I get distracted (happens once or twice a year) and someone honks, I defer to them, since I know I'm in the wrong by not being on the ball. I defer because I have no entitlement over the time of the person behind me. I'm not making up excuses saying how little time it is. I understand it's wrong of me to impose on them unnecessarily. Using your phone while driving is not necessary. It's all very logical. Basically: My pleasure < Their Right to not have people impose on their time. I always find it strange when an issue isn't addressed but instead denied by making it seem small (generally with gross underestimations). I remember a coworker once got fired for stealing a box of pens. When caught he claimed "I didn't steal, it was just a box of pens! It's basically worth nothing." - I think the boss actually fired him for giving that argument instead of owning the issue. * Exceptions could be made for checking the traffic in GPS or some other activity that aids driving (knowing you need to change lanes with advance notice is important). Checking messages emails isn't one such activity, though I've seen a lot of friends and colleges do it much to my chagrin.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  > I always find it strange when an issue isn't addressed but instead denied by making it seem small That's not what I was doing at all. I was calling your standard impossibly high, using an intentionally minuscule number to show that every driver violates the idea that "any amount of time[...]isn't cool" And obviously if you waste so much time you get honked at you've done something wrong. So far I've avoided being honked at for that reason. But there are ways to use a phone that don't waste time! If you keep the cross light in view and put the phone down when it turns yellow, that's plenty of time to focus on the road situation.
  - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
    > I was calling your standard impossibly high Except... you are arguing against a cartoon of what I said. You even intentionally edited it out to make it seem like I am being unreasonable. I'll post your quote with the missing part included: "amount of time needlessly" Needlessly. An important part of what I said. If you aren't wasting peoples time needlessly, you are within my standard. Therefore, my standard isn't unrealist. Let's be clear about the chain of events: mikepurvis complains about cell phone use during red lights. tasty_freeze posts saying: why is this an issue rconti tries to take a middle ground by saying 'he does the phone checking at a red light to, but he is highly consious of other people and he notices that many who check it during a red light aren't as concious and implores other people to be so. He explains the chain effect of how a few seconds of your delay can cause several minutes of delay to other people. Dylan16807, you, post how this knock on effect would only happen if there were 'more than a hundred people stopped directly behind' (as if that is impossible) Furthermore you state: "And that's assuming the entire pack of cars doesn't just catch back up to the one in front of you, where you had to wait anyway, dropping the actual time loss back to about zero" Which sounds a hell of a lot like denial through minimizing. So I post saying: "even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?" It seems like a statement you seem to agree to but haven't stated as much. Instead, you edited my words to try and prove the point that I have 'unrealistic expectations'. To me, it sounds like you feel like arguing. Though I might be missing your point, so feel free to clarify what that point is and how it is relevant to the chain of communication as originally posted and recaped on this post.