4 ms·

any visitor to our house has to put their phone into a key box next to the entrence which is shielded. it is both annoying and confusing for them the first time

any visitor to our house has to put their phone into a key box next to the entrence which is shielded. it is both annoying and confusing for them the first time they visit. but I guess for them it is also a bit exciting ("what kind of a looney place did we agree to come to") ... but it makes for great conversation ... the purpose for us is less security/privacy but a way to teach my environment about these problems. It also makes for interesting conversations around screen addiction, anxiety and spending time in the moment. We still use wireless/laptop ofc and when we are among ourselves we have a rule that the phone goes in the box from 18:00 - 06:00. but for visitors there is no cell-phone in my house (this is perfect for us because we can pretty much rule out microphones/cameras being used). I understand this might sound very strange for most people here, and it is strange. But how would you feel if say in the 80ies and 90ies you invite somebody for dinner and they show up with a big camera/flash around their neck and a microphone and tape recorder. bienvenue chez moi! also my partner does use a mobile phone for work, or on the go. I don't own one.

MathCodeLove 7y ago
This behaviour is not only unhealthy, it's also unnecessary. What precisely do you hope to gain from this? Do you truly think that you're really depriving any observing agents of knowledge that they desperately hoped to gain? I could understand protocall like this for mental health reasons, or for the desire to be "free" from technology for a time, but you can't justify this behaviour purely with privacy concerns. They already have more than enough information on you from the remainder of the time that you spend with your device(s).
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  Parent stated ‘the purpose for us is less security/privacy but a way to teach my environment about these problems.’ Seems more like daily Sabbath.
- DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
  > This behaviour is not only unhealthy you misunderstood. privacy is the conversation opener but discussions around mental health are the goal. when you say it is unhealthy are you implying "devices on the dinner table are healthy?" or putting toddlers on a screen/ipad is healthy? or showing your kids that it's ok to be only half present when interacting with them is healthy? sorry I utterly missed your point.
- SamPatt 7y ago
  Why unhealthy? Having rules for guests which make you more comfortable in your own home makes sense to me.
- mlang23 7y ago
  Sure they can justify that behaviour. It is their house after all, and they set the rules. Period.
IshKebab 7y ago
Ha that is really mad. Going to save this comment as an example of how atypical HN readers are!
- Fnoord 7y ago
  You put off your coat and shoes when you enter my house, but not your spycraft? Not that I follow the same rule, but when I think about it, I find it entirely reasonably. It is the rest of us who, including myself, who are mad.
  - IshKebab 7y ago
    Most people consider the likelihood of things actually happening. It is not likely that MI6 are listening to my phone or any of my friend's phones, and even if they were the worst that happens is they hear my boring conversations. So for 99.999% of people the benefit is essentially zero, and the cost is moderately high (having to put your phone in a box all the time). Consider other things that have a similar cost/benefit ratio that are more obviously mad: * I could install a 3 metre high wall with razor wire around my house in case the police try to attack me for some reason. * I could walk everywhere wearing a bicycle helmet in case I fall over. * I could never use stairs. Only use lifts - they're much safer! Hopefully it's obvious why those are mad.
    - Fnoord 7y ago
      It isn't the local secret service we should be wary of (they can already easily get access anyway); it is commercial companies who profit of data, and hostile secret services.
    - titzer 7y ago
      I hope you never witness a government official breaking the law and start thinking about blowing the whistle.
amoshi 7y ago
Sounds incredibly inconvenient. What if your guest is expecting/gets a phone call that day? Or they want to show you some holiday pictures? What about smart watches? I'm really conflicted, as your approach is privacy focused but I just can't imagine following it in real life. Perhaps I'm part of the problem...
titzer 7y ago
I think you should go one step further and after they reluctantly agree to put it in "the box", it proceeds to smash it with a hydraulic press clearly visible through a pane of glass on the front. Of course, you don't actually smash their phone, but a dummy you substitute with sleight of hand. Oh, but the look on their faces!
rini17 7y ago
Wonder what is your opinion about hearing aids. Many modern ones broadcast everything via radio because of stereo processing. It's strictly proprietary and impossible to get any further information from the manufacturer. If you ask their wearer to put them away before entering, then you can't have conversation with him/her.

MathCodeLove 7y ago

This behaviour is not only unhealthy, it's also unnecessary. What precisely do you hope to gain from this? Do you truly think that you're really depriving any observing agents of knowledge that they desperately hoped to gain? I could understand protocall like this for mental health reasons, or for the desire to be "free" from technology for a time, but you can't justify this behaviour purely with privacy concerns. They already have more than enough information on you from the remainder of the time that you spend with your device(s).

dillonmckay 7y ago
Parent stated ‘the purpose for us is less security/privacy but a way to teach my environment about these problems.’ Seems more like daily Sabbath.
DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
> This behaviour is not only unhealthy you misunderstood. privacy is the conversation opener but discussions around mental health are the goal. when you say it is unhealthy are you implying "devices on the dinner table are healthy?" or putting toddlers on a screen/ipad is healthy? or showing your kids that it's ok to be only half present when interacting with them is healthy? sorry I utterly missed your point.
SamPatt 7y ago
Why unhealthy? Having rules for guests which make you more comfortable in your own home makes sense to me.
mlang23 7y ago
Sure they can justify that behaviour. It is their house after all, and they set the rules. Period.

IshKebab 7y ago

Ha that is really mad. Going to save this comment as an example of how atypical HN readers are!

Fnoord 7y ago
You put off your coat and shoes when you enter my house, but not your spycraft? Not that I follow the same rule, but when I think about it, I find it entirely reasonably. It is the rest of us who, including myself, who are mad.
- IshKebab 7y ago
  Most people consider the likelihood of things actually happening. It is not likely that MI6 are listening to my phone or any of my friend's phones, and even if they were the worst that happens is they hear my boring conversations. So for 99.999% of people the benefit is essentially zero, and the cost is moderately high (having to put your phone in a box all the time). Consider other things that have a similar cost/benefit ratio that are more obviously mad: * I could install a 3 metre high wall with razor wire around my house in case the police try to attack me for some reason. * I could walk everywhere wearing a bicycle helmet in case I fall over. * I could never use stairs. Only use lifts - they're much safer! Hopefully it's obvious why those are mad.
  - Fnoord 7y ago
    It isn't the local secret service we should be wary of (they can already easily get access anyway); it is commercial companies who profit of data, and hostile secret services.
  - titzer 7y ago
    I hope you never witness a government official breaking the law and start thinking about blowing the whistle.

amoshi 7y ago

Sounds incredibly inconvenient. What if your guest is expecting/gets a phone call that day? Or they want to show you some holiday pictures? What about smart watches? I'm really conflicted, as your approach is privacy focused but I just can't imagine following it in real life. Perhaps I'm part of the problem...

titzer 7y ago

I think you should go one step further and after they reluctantly agree to put it in "the box", it proceeds to smash it with a hydraulic press clearly visible through a pane of glass on the front. Of course, you don't actually smash their phone, but a dummy you substitute with sleight of hand. Oh, but the look on their faces!

rini17 7y ago

Wonder what is your opinion about hearing aids. Many modern ones broadcast everything via radio because of stereo processing. It's strictly proprietary and impossible to get any further information from the manufacturer. If you ask their wearer to put them away before entering, then you can't have conversation with him/her.