14 ms·

Yamato becomes Japan's first city to 'ban' use of phones while walking

143 points by chewz 6y ago

afarviral 6y ago
Will this be effective without some form of punishment as a deterent?
- yamakadi 6y ago
  There are quite a few rules and local laws in Japan that don’t carry any punishment or, indeed, aren’t even enforced but are still followed. Making it law in this case is more of a nudge than anything else. Honestly, it’s much more scary here to be stared down by a group old people than the police.
  - iso8859-1 6y ago
    Just curious, what happens when the old people come after you? Is it because they could be yakuza?
    - yamakadi 6y ago
      It’s just extremely uncomfortable. I try to participate in the neighborhood events as well so it’s better to just fall in line (wherever the line is, not really clear either). Just a recent example, I forgot to wear a mask last week when I went to the supermarket and kept getting stares by other shoppers. That wouldn’t be an issue even a couple of months ago. I’m guilty of it now, too, though. If anyone is smoking on the road while walking or biking, I lock eyes with them and they usually stop or at least turn away.
- hardmaru 6y ago
  In Japan, it'll probably still be somewhat effective without explicitly stating a punishment.
nullandvoid 6y ago
More bans like this may well be a big driving force in the adoption and more rapid progression of AR tech
- tomxor 6y ago
  For smartphones!? I can only imagine that being more hazardous. Do you notice how we negotiate paths when we are walking? body language, with particular emphasis on the position of the head and eyes. Try this experiment: as you walk towards someone without a clear path to their left or right - walk with intent to go slightly one side with your eyes/head slightly to the other, usually your intent comes across far more ambiguous and requires more negotiation than usual... now imagine people are not looking where they are going (literally), while appearing to be looking where they are going. And I don't buy that AR magically solves concentration by keeping your field of view. At least with those zombies staring down it's clear they are distracted so you can ignore their body language.
  - Kiro 6y ago
    Smart glasses obviously.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    I'm sure I'm showing my age when I say that I really don't like walking in cities (or anywhere really) with ear buds/headphones in. It's too much isolation from the environment and I'm just not comfortable with it. I imagine that's a minority option though and many will claim that the isolation really isn't a problem with the right earpieces. But I can only speak to how I personally feel.
    - apsanz 6y ago
      Transparency mode works well on Airpods pro but I never walk around busy streets with both earbuds in. I strongly recommend only using one and listening to audio books or podcasts
      - 6y ago
new2628 6y ago
What will be more effective in the end is if walking (also: eating, sitting at a table, etc.) while immersed in a phone finally becomes uncool with young people. So far it doesn't seem to happen (unfortunately).
bartread 6y ago
In general I find people using their phones whilst walking to be a nuisance, but I'm still not particularly in favour of this. There are at least two legitimate use cases that don't cause too many problems: 1. Using your phone as an actual phone (i.e., an audio only conversation with the thing held to your ear, or with a headset). 2. Using it as a navigational aid. If I'm not too sure where I'm going I'll often use either Google or Apple Maps to set up directions before I start walking. I'll then put the phone in my pocket and just pull it out from time to time to check I'm still heading in the right direction. The real problems are caused by people reading, playing games, having video calls, or filming themselves (or others) whilst walking. They tend to dawdle, lose awareness of their surroundings and others around them, and in general behave like absolute goobers. Doing these things whilst navigating stairs or escalators is particularly aggravating - not to mention dangerous. This doesn't appear to be limited to any particular demographic or age group that I can see.
- amelius 6y ago
  > In general I find people using their phones whilst walking to be a nuisance, but I'm still not particularly in favour of this. Makes me wonder, if you bump into them and they drop their phone and break it, who is responsible? What if they were standing still and texting in the middle of the sidewalk?
  - aspenmayer 6y ago
    Until the legal system adjudicates, it is ambiguous what responsibility is borne by the two parties; also unclear are expectations or assumptions regarding accountability, foreseeability, and preventability of actions or effects. If I could not have reasonably prevented you from running into me, it isn’t my fault that I didn’t avoid it, but it may still be my fault for moving in a manner in which I can’t respond to situations outside my control. Likewise, if could have acted differently to forestall, reduce, or prevent a problem from occurring, and yet I did not act in a way which would avert known unwanted results, I am not necessarily culpable, but I may be found lacking in grounds to blame the other for also not acting differently. Good Samaritan laws[1] try to embody this implicit social expectation, but enforcement of these laws can lead to its own sort of selective moral policing.[2][3] Many of these same social undercurrents also seem relevant to the new focus on social justice and cancel culture. It seems that those being judged often feel that they are judged too harshly, and bristle at being judged at all. I hope we can find ways to stop pointing fingers and start linking and building. It’s far easier and quicker to tear down than to build, and its impact is just as fleeting, thus the need for more finger pointing. Outrage is a renewable resource, but we as moral agents are only capable of feeling so much before we become desensitized to it in some way. I worry that one day people won’t be able to care about bad things happening in the world, because they don’t relate to a shared society at all. I hope for a future society[4] where social and civic participation at the individual level is collaborative and welcomed, and where all perspectives are judged on their merits outside an echo chamber. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue [3] https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/addressing-cops-confusion-over-the-public-duty-doctrine-SDnVxWnDhgenqAXO/ https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/a... [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20170221125058/http://lareviewofbooks.org/article/a-genre-in-crisis-on-paul-di-filippos-wikiworld https://web.archive.org/web/20170221125058/http://lareviewof...
okasaki 6y ago
What a weird idea. What if you're using it for navigation? What if I want to pause the audiobook I'm listening to? I have to stop and remove myself from the flow of traffic? (not even possible sometimes)
- microcolonel 6y ago
  I think probably minimal use like that would not be an issue, and there is no penalty at the moment. It'd be nice if they would link to the actual draft ordinance, so I could read it. Added: Yeah, seems like you would have no problem. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23731864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23731864
matthewcanty 6y ago
I get that people dawdle but simply that 6% of people use their phones whilst walking isn’t a problem. It’s an observation. What are they hoping to change and by how much?
- jdavis703 6y ago
  I’ve never been to Yamato, but pedestrian congestion is a problem on some crowded sidewalks in the US. If 6% of users are blocking the sidewalk, it can create slow downs for 94% of everyone else who are trying to get somewhere.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
afarrell 6y ago
In London, they used to have a prohibition against absent-mindedly using your phone while walking enforced by privateer motorcyclists who would confiscate your phone.
- BillinghamJ 6y ago
  Sadly that tradition is alive and well. Angel is a particular hot spot for it
  - afarrell 6y ago
    I still remember getting my phone swiped on the sidewalk across from my favorite restaurant on Chapel Market. (There are many words I've adopted since moving here. "Pavement" is not one of them.")
    - ghaff 6y ago
      Anecdotally, for some reason, random swiping and lifting of electronics, laptops, etc. seems more prevalent in Europe than in the US. Whenever I've heard of a colleague's laptop of whatever being lifted at dinner, it's always Barcelona, Amsterdam, Brussels, etc. rather than San Francisco or New York City. I'm sure it happens in those places too but it seems less common.
      - fiblye 6y ago
        I’ve lived in some really crappy places in the US, but the only place I’ve often seen and experienced people committing obvious crimes in broad daylight was Europe. It was pretty weird having someone struggle to unzip my backpack while walking down the street. I bound the zippers with a lock and they couldn’t get in, but I guess they didn’t notice because they really fought to get it open. Seeing obvious pickpockets and scammers operating 10 feet away from police officers while being directly observed was what really blew my mind though. I hear loads of people say they’re disappointed with Europe and the crime is overwhelming these days, but man, they’re not kidding. It’s insane what’s tolerated so openly there. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t had valuables stolen randomly while in Western Europe for short periods.
lumberingjack 6y ago
Am I the only one that doesn't have a problem walking and chewing bubble gum?
- dvtrn 6y ago
  On a planet with 7 billion people? Probably not.
microcolonel 6y ago
Seems like it was only in force for a day, and carried no penalties. Also seems like it was aimed at people who are looking at their smartphones primarily (i.e. playing Pokémon GO). I don't think they were looking to cure the menace of 歩きスマホ in the stroke of a pen, but rather wanted awareness of the issues of being engaged primarily with your phone rather than your environment. https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASN71728GN71ULOB004.html#:~:text=神奈川県大和市で,確保が課題となる。 https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASN71728GN71ULOB004.html#:~:t... The language chosen for defining 歩きスマホ (“walking smartphone”) uses the word https://jisho.org/word/注視 https://jisho.org/word/注視 in its definition, not sure if this is just formal language, or there is some important distinction between 注視 and 見て here. Nonetheless, here is the draft: http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/content/000159510.pdf http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/content/000159510.pdf And if you happen to live in Yamato, and want to track this, here is one of the official pages for tracking the ordinance. http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/d-seibi/arukisumahopb.html http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/d-seibi/arukisumahopb.html
- malikolivier 6y ago
  > not sure if this is just formal language, or there is some important distinction between 注視 and 見て here. Actually 注視 is as well the word that is used in the law that forbids people from watching the infotainment screen of a car while driving. 注視 means that you are looking at something, while exclusively concentrating your mind on this specific thing, not being aware of your surroundings. Source: Non-native Japanese speaker here, having lived in Japan for quite some time, and who took his driving license in Japan. 注視 definition in a Japanese dictionary: https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%B3%A8%E8%A6%96/ https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%B3%A8%E8%A6%96/
ravenstine 6y ago
Eventually more people will be moving out of cities after enough of them enforce one too many rules to appease some people. Obviously, not everyone will, but it rules like this seem counter to what the global system wants, which is to cram people into cities.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  This is Japan, not the US. People in Japan don't balk at every regulation and are generally pretty accepting of putting rules in place in public spaces if it improves quality of public life, which is true for people in most cities on the globe to be honest.
jrockway 6y ago
My dream is that one day, everyone will see the imaginary lines down the sidewalk that I do. Keep to the right, just like you're driving, and even someone texting while walking won't run into. Sadly, these lines are imaginary and while people tend to keep right, don't take it very seriously. A deeper issue is how much of the space between buildings is dedicated to private vehicles. When the sidewalk is 6 feet wide and you're required to social distance by 6 feet past sidewalk cafes and garbage waiting to be picked up, there is no room for pedestrians -- texting or otherwise. Perhaps we should turn the two 8-foot free parking lanes into pedestrian lanes. Then you'd never even notice people walking while texting. Or running 2-abroad. Or kids playing with balls. It will never happen, though. We need our cars, and more importantly, we need to park them near our high-density housing ;)
- catalogia 6y ago
  I believe in Japan, people walk on the left side.
  - bamboozled 6y ago
    Many people in Japan don't drive so they don't really think about "sides" like people who come from car cultures do.
    - FemmeAndroid 6y ago
      Interesting! That’s a bit surprising to me. In Japan they have the yellow tiles with bumps near the center of most city sidewalks that I always assumed was a kind of lane system. If it’s not to create lanes, what are those tiles for?
      - laurieg 6y ago
        They are tactile paving for blind and partially sighted people. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactile_paving https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactile_paving
      - 6y ago
ekianjo 6y ago
It will be as effective as JR recommending people not to use phones next to elderly seats. Entirely ignored.
hootbootscoot 6y ago
Good. I'm tired of phone zombies walking literally INTO me. There at least needs to be some clearly defined etiquette. "keep right" only works in right-hand drive countries, nor is it consistently applied (shopping center escalators, etc.) except for Germany, lol
anderspitman 6y ago
I finally figured out what bugs me so much about people walking while looking at their phone. Without phones, when people approach each other in a hallway or on the street, there's a lot of nonvocal communication happening. You don't even have to make eye contact to decide how everyone is going to maneuver around each other. Everyone is generally looking at a point far ahead and walking in a straight line towards it. Now enter smartphones. This entire communication is simply gone. People on phones only see about a couple meters in front of them. They constantly shift the direction they are walking. It's impossible to predict where they will go. If you're walking towards them, this creates a small spike of anxiety in your lizard brain because it's trying to communicate with them and the lines are down.
- isoskeles 6y ago
  For me, it creates excitement at the thought that I can inconspicuously shoulder check some inconsiderate jerk.
devchris10 6y ago
I think the problem will be lessened slightly as wearables get better.
grawprog 6y ago
I find the best thing to do when someone's walking towards you, texting, totally oblivious to your coming towards them, is to play chicken with them. Just keep walking, see how close you can get to them before they notice you. It gets pretty close sometimes, almost had a couple collisions, but so far everyone's looked up in the knick of time, gotten embarrassed and quickly veered away. Gets that adrenaline flowing though.
- bamboozled 6y ago
  A bit passive aggressive ?
- saagarjha 6y ago
  So it looks like they’re not so unaware of their surroundings after all?
  - willcipriano 6y ago
    The human mind is incredible, the sound of a car in the distance getting slightly muffled by the body now directly in front of you might cue the subconscious mind that something in the scene has changed triggering you to look up. My guess is all the talk of a sixth sense is just tiny cues from the other senses all getting subconsciously analyzed together.
JoshTko 6y ago
Japan needs to focus on real problems such as banning smoking everywhere instead of use of phones.
- osdiab 6y ago
  Tokyo already passed and is enforcing an ordinance that banks smoking in all restaurants, cafes and bars. It’s great! There are some straggler restaurants not complying with it though, having just been in place since April.
- kalleboo 6y ago
  They are https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/01/national/japan-ban-indoor-smoking/#.XwFkLS0_C0A https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/01/national/japan-...
Markoff 6y ago
how does ban without penalty even work? isn't it called recommendation in English?
acd 6y ago
Could we please do it in Sweden too. Sweden are too distracted in traffic for their own good, its like mobile phone zombies sometime, people staring at a piece of glass. This includes myself sometime. Also cell phones should be banned in traffic because it causes distractions. Attention in traffic is very important.
- jesseb 6y ago
  In my province in Canada there are hefty fines[1] for distracted driving, and yet I still constantly see people texting and driving. It's very frustrating, and as somebody who walks/transits whenever possible terrifying at times. I don't know how to get through to people. [1] https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/road-safety-rules-and-consequences/distractions https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-an...
  - kiliantics 6y ago
    At least where I live, in NYC, all city officials and representatives have the perk of free parking anywhere -- to the extent that they don't even get fined for parking say in a bus stop or next to a fire hydrant or even on the sidewalk or bike lane. With these people in charge of choosing and enforcing the rules of the road, we will never see safety or consideration for non-drivers. I see cops pull over cyclists for harmless stuff all the time, but see drivers pull outrageously reckless stunts on busy roads with no consequence. I think if people who are in charge of our safety don't know what it's like to navigate as a vulnerable pedestrian/cyclist/etc. on the road, and just see us as obstacles that are slowing them down, I don't think we will see change. (And this includes the average driver, who I believe should have to log some hundred miles or so of cycling before being given a licence to drive near cyclists.) The mayor of Paris cycles to work and has pedestrianised huge parts of the city and built massive numbers of cycle lanes. This is probably not why she was elected but it is probably something we should more seriously consider when appointing people who will have power over our public spaces.
- zrobotics 6y ago
  I had to have a very strong discussion with an employee yesterday, as I almost ran him over with a forklift. He was walking back from break, head buried in his phone. I don't care if he spends his break time on his phone, and truth be told I don't even care if he sends the occasional text while working. However, I definitely have a problem with walking around a hazardous warehouse environment and not looking as what you are doing. For context, I was reversing with a fairly precarious load and saw him walking toward my path. The backup alarm was going, and I even honked twice to get his attention. I finally had to yell loudly to get him to look up and stop. Thankfully I was paying attention (as I also expect all of our equipment operators to do), but I also expect anyone wandering through active working areas to also be paying attention to their surroundings. These requirements aren't because I want to be a jerk or make employees miserable, it is because I don't want anyone getting hurt. The warehouse I manage isn't a huge facility with 30 forklifts running around, but there is enough activity that I do expect people to be looking around for hazards, and that is a part of the employee handbook and training.
saagarjha 6y ago
I really don’t understand how you can walk around on your phone with zero situational awareness. Surely if you did it enough you’d have enough practice to develop it? When I was young I used to walk around reading books; I can’t see a phone being significantly harder than that to look past…
joecool1029 6y ago
We did this sort of ban in the 80's but with the Walkman: https://patch.com/new-jersey/woodbridge/walkmans-banned-woodbridge-yes-law-still-books https://patch.com/new-jersey/woodbridge/walkmans-banned-wood...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Grue3 6y ago
If you're proposing a law, and a study says that 12% of people would violate this law, it's a major indication that this is a bad law.
- fzeroracer 6y ago
  Is it? Studies seem to indicate that around that many people admitted to or have drove drunk in America for example. Does that mean drinking and driving laws are bad?
  - Grue3 6y ago
    Drunk driving had to be banned because it's just too dangerous. It had to be eradicated at all costs even despite many people violating this law. On the other hand there's no indication that texting while walking is more dangerous than walking while drunk. Walking is a low-risk activity which doesn't require a license and people routinely do it while being under an influence.
    - fzeroracer 6y ago
      I mean sure, but that wasn't your original argument. Your original argument was that if it affects 12% of people, then it's a bad law. We've now demonstrated that reducing things down like that doesn't work. There's an argument to be made that texting while walking can be dangerous because if you're sharing a small space with cyclists or others then you're potentially leaving yourself open to colliding with them. And ultimately the cost to fix this problem is low and unobtrusive (ie just step aside).
      - Talanes 6y ago
        Their original argument was it's a MAJOR INDICATION of a bad law. Which is to say that if you're law is going to be broken by double-digit percentages of the population, there needs to be a solid argument as to WHY. A real counter-example would need to be a law that is widely broken, has no demonstrable benefit, and is still somehow a good law. Which is tautologically impossible, criminalizing people for no benefit is inherently bad lawmaking.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
habanany 6y ago
I like the idea, i hope braking news does not read Yamato’s governor was caught talking on the phone while walking

143 points by chewz 6y ago

afarviral 6y ago

Will this be effective without some form of punishment as a deterent?

yamakadi 6y ago
There are quite a few rules and local laws in Japan that don’t carry any punishment or, indeed, aren’t even enforced but are still followed. Making it law in this case is more of a nudge than anything else. Honestly, it’s much more scary here to be stared down by a group old people than the police.
- iso8859-1 6y ago
  Just curious, what happens when the old people come after you? Is it because they could be yakuza?
  - yamakadi 6y ago
    It’s just extremely uncomfortable. I try to participate in the neighborhood events as well so it’s better to just fall in line (wherever the line is, not really clear either). Just a recent example, I forgot to wear a mask last week when I went to the supermarket and kept getting stares by other shoppers. That wouldn’t be an issue even a couple of months ago. I’m guilty of it now, too, though. If anyone is smoking on the road while walking or biking, I lock eyes with them and they usually stop or at least turn away.
hardmaru 6y ago
In Japan, it'll probably still be somewhat effective without explicitly stating a punishment.

nullandvoid 6y ago

More bans like this may well be a big driving force in the adoption and more rapid progression of AR tech

tomxor 6y ago
For smartphones!? I can only imagine that being more hazardous. Do you notice how we negotiate paths when we are walking? body language, with particular emphasis on the position of the head and eyes. Try this experiment: as you walk towards someone without a clear path to their left or right - walk with intent to go slightly one side with your eyes/head slightly to the other, usually your intent comes across far more ambiguous and requires more negotiation than usual... now imagine people are not looking where they are going (literally), while appearing to be looking where they are going. And I don't buy that AR magically solves concentration by keeping your field of view. At least with those zombies staring down it's clear they are distracted so you can ignore their body language.
- Kiro 6y ago
  Smart glasses obviously.
- ghaff 6y ago
  I'm sure I'm showing my age when I say that I really don't like walking in cities (or anywhere really) with ear buds/headphones in. It's too much isolation from the environment and I'm just not comfortable with it. I imagine that's a minority option though and many will claim that the isolation really isn't a problem with the right earpieces. But I can only speak to how I personally feel.
  - apsanz 6y ago
    Transparency mode works well on Airpods pro but I never walk around busy streets with both earbuds in. I strongly recommend only using one and listening to audio books or podcasts
    - 6y ago

new2628 6y ago

What will be more effective in the end is if walking (also: eating, sitting at a table, etc.) while immersed in a phone finally becomes uncool with young people. So far it doesn't seem to happen (unfortunately).

bartread 6y ago

In general I find people using their phones whilst walking to be a nuisance, but I'm still not particularly in favour of this. There are at least two legitimate use cases that don't cause too many problems: 1. Using your phone as an actual phone (i.e., an audio only conversation with the thing held to your ear, or with a headset). 2. Using it as a navigational aid. If I'm not too sure where I'm going I'll often use either Google or Apple Maps to set up directions before I start walking. I'll then put the phone in my pocket and just pull it out from time to time to check I'm still heading in the right direction. The real problems are caused by people reading, playing games, having video calls, or filming themselves (or others) whilst walking. They tend to dawdle, lose awareness of their surroundings and others around them, and in general behave like absolute goobers. Doing these things whilst navigating stairs or escalators is particularly aggravating - not to mention dangerous. This doesn't appear to be limited to any particular demographic or age group that I can see.

amelius 6y ago
> In general I find people using their phones whilst walking to be a nuisance, but I'm still not particularly in favour of this. Makes me wonder, if you bump into them and they drop their phone and break it, who is responsible? What if they were standing still and texting in the middle of the sidewalk?
- aspenmayer 6y ago
  Until the legal system adjudicates, it is ambiguous what responsibility is borne by the two parties; also unclear are expectations or assumptions regarding accountability, foreseeability, and preventability of actions or effects. If I could not have reasonably prevented you from running into me, it isn’t my fault that I didn’t avoid it, but it may still be my fault for moving in a manner in which I can’t respond to situations outside my control. Likewise, if could have acted differently to forestall, reduce, or prevent a problem from occurring, and yet I did not act in a way which would avert known unwanted results, I am not necessarily culpable, but I may be found lacking in grounds to blame the other for also not acting differently. Good Samaritan laws[1] try to embody this implicit social expectation, but enforcement of these laws can lead to its own sort of selective moral policing.[2][3] Many of these same social undercurrents also seem relevant to the new focus on social justice and cancel culture. It seems that those being judged often feel that they are judged too harshly, and bristle at being judged at all. I hope we can find ways to stop pointing fingers and start linking and building. It’s far easier and quicker to tear down than to build, and its impact is just as fleeting, thus the need for more finger pointing. Outrage is a renewable resource, but we as moral agents are only capable of feeling so much before we become desensitized to it in some way. I worry that one day people won’t be able to care about bad things happening in the world, because they don’t relate to a shared society at all. I hope for a future society[4] where social and civic participation at the individual level is collaborative and welcomed, and where all perspectives are judged on their merits outside an echo chamber. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue [3] https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/addressing-cops-confusion-over-the-public-duty-doctrine-SDnVxWnDhgenqAXO/ https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/a... [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20170221125058/http://lareviewofbooks.org/article/a-genre-in-crisis-on-paul-di-filippos-wikiworld https://web.archive.org/web/20170221125058/http://lareviewof...

okasaki 6y ago

What a weird idea. What if you're using it for navigation? What if I want to pause the audiobook I'm listening to? I have to stop and remove myself from the flow of traffic? (not even possible sometimes)

microcolonel 6y ago
I think probably minimal use like that would not be an issue, and there is no penalty at the moment. It'd be nice if they would link to the actual draft ordinance, so I could read it. Added: Yeah, seems like you would have no problem. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23731864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23731864

matthewcanty 6y ago

I get that people dawdle but simply that 6% of people use their phones whilst walking isn’t a problem. It’s an observation. What are they hoping to change and by how much?

jdavis703 6y ago
I’ve never been to Yamato, but pedestrian congestion is a problem on some crowded sidewalks in the US. If 6% of users are blocking the sidewalk, it can create slow downs for 94% of everyone else who are trying to get somewhere.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

afarrell 6y ago

In London, they used to have a prohibition against absent-mindedly using your phone while walking enforced by privateer motorcyclists who would confiscate your phone.

BillinghamJ 6y ago
Sadly that tradition is alive and well. Angel is a particular hot spot for it
- afarrell 6y ago
  I still remember getting my phone swiped on the sidewalk across from my favorite restaurant on Chapel Market. (There are many words I've adopted since moving here. "Pavement" is not one of them.")
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Anecdotally, for some reason, random swiping and lifting of electronics, laptops, etc. seems more prevalent in Europe than in the US. Whenever I've heard of a colleague's laptop of whatever being lifted at dinner, it's always Barcelona, Amsterdam, Brussels, etc. rather than San Francisco or New York City. I'm sure it happens in those places too but it seems less common.
    - fiblye 6y ago
      I’ve lived in some really crappy places in the US, but the only place I’ve often seen and experienced people committing obvious crimes in broad daylight was Europe. It was pretty weird having someone struggle to unzip my backpack while walking down the street. I bound the zippers with a lock and they couldn’t get in, but I guess they didn’t notice because they really fought to get it open. Seeing obvious pickpockets and scammers operating 10 feet away from police officers while being directly observed was what really blew my mind though. I hear loads of people say they’re disappointed with Europe and the crime is overwhelming these days, but man, they’re not kidding. It’s insane what’s tolerated so openly there. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t had valuables stolen randomly while in Western Europe for short periods.

lumberingjack 6y ago

Am I the only one that doesn't have a problem walking and chewing bubble gum?

dvtrn 6y ago
On a planet with 7 billion people? Probably not.

microcolonel 6y ago

Seems like it was only in force for a day, and carried no penalties. Also seems like it was aimed at people who are looking at their smartphones primarily (i.e. playing Pokémon GO). I don't think they were looking to cure the menace of 歩きスマホ in the stroke of a pen, but rather wanted awareness of the issues of being engaged primarily with your phone rather than your environment. https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASN71728GN71ULOB004.html#:~:text=神奈川県大和市で,確保が課題となる。 https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASN71728GN71ULOB004.html#:~:t... The language chosen for defining 歩きスマホ (“walking smartphone”) uses the word https://jisho.org/word/注視 https://jisho.org/word/注視 in its definition, not sure if this is just formal language, or there is some important distinction between 注視 and 見て here. Nonetheless, here is the draft: http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/content/000159510.pdf http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/content/000159510.pdf And if you happen to live in Yamato, and want to track this, here is one of the official pages for tracking the ordinance. http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/d-seibi/arukisumahopb.html http://www.city.yamato.lg.jp/web/d-seibi/arukisumahopb.html

malikolivier 6y ago
> not sure if this is just formal language, or there is some important distinction between 注視 and 見て here. Actually 注視 is as well the word that is used in the law that forbids people from watching the infotainment screen of a car while driving. 注視 means that you are looking at something, while exclusively concentrating your mind on this specific thing, not being aware of your surroundings. Source: Non-native Japanese speaker here, having lived in Japan for quite some time, and who took his driving license in Japan. 注視 definition in a Japanese dictionary: https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%B3%A8%E8%A6%96/ https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%B3%A8%E8%A6%96/

ravenstine 6y ago

Eventually more people will be moving out of cities after enough of them enforce one too many rules to appease some people. Obviously, not everyone will, but it rules like this seem counter to what the global system wants, which is to cram people into cities.

Barrin92 6y ago
This is Japan, not the US. People in Japan don't balk at every regulation and are generally pretty accepting of putting rules in place in public spaces if it improves quality of public life, which is true for people in most cities on the globe to be honest.

jrockway 6y ago

My dream is that one day, everyone will see the imaginary lines down the sidewalk that I do. Keep to the right, just like you're driving, and even someone texting while walking won't run into. Sadly, these lines are imaginary and while people tend to keep right, don't take it very seriously. A deeper issue is how much of the space between buildings is dedicated to private vehicles. When the sidewalk is 6 feet wide and you're required to social distance by 6 feet past sidewalk cafes and garbage waiting to be picked up, there is no room for pedestrians -- texting or otherwise. Perhaps we should turn the two 8-foot free parking lanes into pedestrian lanes. Then you'd never even notice people walking while texting. Or running 2-abroad. Or kids playing with balls. It will never happen, though. We need our cars, and more importantly, we need to park them near our high-density housing ;)

catalogia 6y ago
I believe in Japan, people walk on the left side.
- bamboozled 6y ago
  Many people in Japan don't drive so they don't really think about "sides" like people who come from car cultures do.
  - FemmeAndroid 6y ago
    Interesting! That’s a bit surprising to me. In Japan they have the yellow tiles with bumps near the center of most city sidewalks that I always assumed was a kind of lane system. If it’s not to create lanes, what are those tiles for?
    - laurieg 6y ago
      They are tactile paving for blind and partially sighted people. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactile_paving https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactile_paving
    - 6y ago

ekianjo 6y ago

It will be as effective as JR recommending people not to use phones next to elderly seats. Entirely ignored.

hootbootscoot 6y ago

Good. I'm tired of phone zombies walking literally INTO me. There at least needs to be some clearly defined etiquette. "keep right" only works in right-hand drive countries, nor is it consistently applied (shopping center escalators, etc.) except for Germany, lol

anderspitman 6y ago

I finally figured out what bugs me so much about people walking while looking at their phone. Without phones, when people approach each other in a hallway or on the street, there's a lot of nonvocal communication happening. You don't even have to make eye contact to decide how everyone is going to maneuver around each other. Everyone is generally looking at a point far ahead and walking in a straight line towards it. Now enter smartphones. This entire communication is simply gone. People on phones only see about a couple meters in front of them. They constantly shift the direction they are walking. It's impossible to predict where they will go. If you're walking towards them, this creates a small spike of anxiety in your lizard brain because it's trying to communicate with them and the lines are down.

isoskeles 6y ago
For me, it creates excitement at the thought that I can inconspicuously shoulder check some inconsiderate jerk.

devchris10 6y ago

I think the problem will be lessened slightly as wearables get better.

grawprog 6y ago

I find the best thing to do when someone's walking towards you, texting, totally oblivious to your coming towards them, is to play chicken with them. Just keep walking, see how close you can get to them before they notice you. It gets pretty close sometimes, almost had a couple collisions, but so far everyone's looked up in the knick of time, gotten embarrassed and quickly veered away. Gets that adrenaline flowing though.

bamboozled 6y ago
A bit passive aggressive ?
saagarjha 6y ago
So it looks like they’re not so unaware of their surroundings after all?
- willcipriano 6y ago
  The human mind is incredible, the sound of a car in the distance getting slightly muffled by the body now directly in front of you might cue the subconscious mind that something in the scene has changed triggering you to look up. My guess is all the talk of a sixth sense is just tiny cues from the other senses all getting subconsciously analyzed together.

JoshTko 6y ago

Japan needs to focus on real problems such as banning smoking everywhere instead of use of phones.

osdiab 6y ago
Tokyo already passed and is enforcing an ordinance that banks smoking in all restaurants, cafes and bars. It’s great! There are some straggler restaurants not complying with it though, having just been in place since April.
kalleboo 6y ago
They are https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/01/national/japan-ban-indoor-smoking/#.XwFkLS0_C0A https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/01/national/japan-...

Markoff 6y ago

how does ban without penalty even work? isn't it called recommendation in English?

acd 6y ago

Could we please do it in Sweden too. Sweden are too distracted in traffic for their own good, its like mobile phone zombies sometime, people staring at a piece of glass. This includes myself sometime. Also cell phones should be banned in traffic because it causes distractions. Attention in traffic is very important.

jesseb 6y ago
In my province in Canada there are hefty fines[1] for distracted driving, and yet I still constantly see people texting and driving. It's very frustrating, and as somebody who walks/transits whenever possible terrifying at times. I don't know how to get through to people. [1] https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/road-safety-rules-and-consequences/distractions https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-an...
- kiliantics 6y ago
  At least where I live, in NYC, all city officials and representatives have the perk of free parking anywhere -- to the extent that they don't even get fined for parking say in a bus stop or next to a fire hydrant or even on the sidewalk or bike lane. With these people in charge of choosing and enforcing the rules of the road, we will never see safety or consideration for non-drivers. I see cops pull over cyclists for harmless stuff all the time, but see drivers pull outrageously reckless stunts on busy roads with no consequence. I think if people who are in charge of our safety don't know what it's like to navigate as a vulnerable pedestrian/cyclist/etc. on the road, and just see us as obstacles that are slowing them down, I don't think we will see change. (And this includes the average driver, who I believe should have to log some hundred miles or so of cycling before being given a licence to drive near cyclists.) The mayor of Paris cycles to work and has pedestrianised huge parts of the city and built massive numbers of cycle lanes. This is probably not why she was elected but it is probably something we should more seriously consider when appointing people who will have power over our public spaces.
zrobotics 6y ago
I had to have a very strong discussion with an employee yesterday, as I almost ran him over with a forklift. He was walking back from break, head buried in his phone. I don't care if he spends his break time on his phone, and truth be told I don't even care if he sends the occasional text while working. However, I definitely have a problem with walking around a hazardous warehouse environment and not looking as what you are doing. For context, I was reversing with a fairly precarious load and saw him walking toward my path. The backup alarm was going, and I even honked twice to get his attention. I finally had to yell loudly to get him to look up and stop. Thankfully I was paying attention (as I also expect all of our equipment operators to do), but I also expect anyone wandering through active working areas to also be paying attention to their surroundings. These requirements aren't because I want to be a jerk or make employees miserable, it is because I don't want anyone getting hurt. The warehouse I manage isn't a huge facility with 30 forklifts running around, but there is enough activity that I do expect people to be looking around for hazards, and that is a part of the employee handbook and training.

saagarjha 6y ago

I really don’t understand how you can walk around on your phone with zero situational awareness. Surely if you did it enough you’d have enough practice to develop it? When I was young I used to walk around reading books; I can’t see a phone being significantly harder than that to look past…

joecool1029 6y ago

We did this sort of ban in the 80's but with the Walkman: https://patch.com/new-jersey/woodbridge/walkmans-banned-woodbridge-yes-law-still-books https://patch.com/new-jersey/woodbridge/walkmans-banned-wood...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Grue3 6y ago

If you're proposing a law, and a study says that 12% of people would violate this law, it's a major indication that this is a bad law.

fzeroracer 6y ago
Is it? Studies seem to indicate that around that many people admitted to or have drove drunk in America for example. Does that mean drinking and driving laws are bad?
- Grue3 6y ago
  Drunk driving had to be banned because it's just too dangerous. It had to be eradicated at all costs even despite many people violating this law. On the other hand there's no indication that texting while walking is more dangerous than walking while drunk. Walking is a low-risk activity which doesn't require a license and people routinely do it while being under an influence.
  - fzeroracer 6y ago
    I mean sure, but that wasn't your original argument. Your original argument was that if it affects 12% of people, then it's a bad law. We've now demonstrated that reducing things down like that doesn't work. There's an argument to be made that texting while walking can be dangerous because if you're sharing a small space with cyclists or others then you're potentially leaving yourself open to colliding with them. And ultimately the cost to fix this problem is low and unobtrusive (ie just step aside).
    - Talanes 6y ago
      Their original argument was it's a MAJOR INDICATION of a bad law. Which is to say that if you're law is going to be broken by double-digit percentages of the population, there needs to be a solid argument as to WHY. A real counter-example would need to be a law that is widely broken, has no demonstrable benefit, and is still somehow a good law. Which is tautologically impossible, criminalizing people for no benefit is inherently bad lawmaking.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

habanany 6y ago

I like the idea, i hope braking news does not read Yamato’s governor was caught talking on the phone while walking