4 ms·

> they ruin social interactions in public situations (think "talking to people in the grocery line" I DONT WANT TO TALK to people in grocery line, especially w

by deely3 3y ago

> they ruin social interactions in public situations (think "talking to people in the grocery line" I DONT WANT TO TALK to people in grocery line, especially when I don't have a phone. I perfectly ok to just stand quietly. > they're utterly toxic for teenagers sometimes, and still we have to be sure that its a phone and not society.

dorkwood 3y ago
> I DONT WANT TO TALK to people in grocery line, especially when I don't have a phone. I perfectly ok to just stand quietly. I do! My day is almost always made better by a random encounter with a stranger. I wish I was confident enough to start those interactions myself, but I always inevitably think back to messages such as yours, and my anxiety gets the better of me.
- CalRobert 3y ago
  I'd love to have phone / no phone sections ( or chat / no chat ) in places like subways, airports, etc. I love taking to random people but don't want to bother then if they don't want to talk. Having kids helps inasmuch as my eldest will talk to every kid she sees and that usually means at least a hello to the parent.
  - dorkwood 3y ago
    When visiting London I noticed they have something called a "happy to chat bench", which you're supposed to sit on if you don't mind someone trying to strike up a conversation with you. I'm not a resident, so I'm not sure how useful they are in practice, but I found the concept interesting.
  - maccard 3y ago
    Have those ever existed though, really? I used to take a long bus or train most weekends, before smartphones were everywhere, and the vast majority of people were using earphones or reading - not talking to strangers.
    - CalRobert 3y ago
      It depends on where you are. I found that older people in Ireland (not ancient, just didn't grow up with phones) were often very happy to chat on the bus. Now I'm in the Netherlands and most of my chance interactions lately come from talking to other parents while my kids play in the street or playground. Funny enough I was at a playground a few weeks ago and my kids envied another kid's sled, they talked and the other kid was happy to share, and I talked to the dad who had also moved here from Ireland and even had similar interests (Green party member, etc.). Sure, usually it's a pleasant hello and then not much, but sometimes you meet people you get on with really well. I don't think that would have happened if I had just been sitting on the bench looking at my phone while my kids played.
      - maccard 3y ago
        That weekly bus/train was in Ireland, funnily enough. > most of my chance interactions lately come from talking to other parents while my kids play in the street or playground. I think there's a signal here that's the difference. If I'm on a bus, I probably don't want to talk to anyone. Similarly, if I'm in a grocery store, I don't want to talk to someone in the baking aisle, I just want sugar. But if I'm out with my kid/dog, I know that's an inherently more sociable situation that may end in an interaction. > Sure, usually it's a pleasant hello and then not much, but sometimes you meet people you get on with really well. I've a dog and live in Edinburgh, I've found that the people I get on with are people I see repeatedly. Neither of us made the effort the first time, but after 2 weeks of seeing each other every morning at 8:30 in the rain and the dogs saying hello to each other, you can end up talking. I immediately have more in common with this person than going to the same destination as them, for example!
    - ale42 3y ago
      I did long train journeys weekly between 25 and 15 years ago, approximately. I've chatted with a lot of people, and had quite some interesting discussions. Of course people were reading, and/or wearing headphones (mostly younger people), but not all of them. And many were open to conversation even though. Sometimes you read a book to pass the time, but you can be as well interested to a random exchange with a stranger. I was also reading in the train and often wearing headphones, but that didn't prevent conversations from happening. I think that people were less taking book-or-headphones as a signal that you don't want to be disturbed. The experience could also be relatively different depending on what the train population is (e.g. whether the train is filled with tired commuting people or with people coming back from a week-end break). I'm not taking the train as much recently, but people are clearly more isolated into their smartphones now. And have to say, sometimes discussions still do happen.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  I used to value a random encounter with a stranger. Now, the median person is likely to be 1. Disturbed, 2. Obsessed with politics, 3. Belligerent for no reason, 4. Ready to whip out their phone camera looking for “content” or 5. Generally offended/Scared of the idea of talking to a random stranger. The last 3 or so years have turned America into a giant mental asylum and it’s starting to be not worth it to talk to a rando.
  - maccard 3y ago
    I live in an area where people will talk to you as you're walking by. In my experience, no, the median person is not Disturbed, obsessed with politics, belligerent or filming. I do agree that the last point is true - but see OP's message. I don't want to talk to you in the grocery store. If I'm standing there with Earbuds in, and you make Smalltalk with me, don't be surprised if I totally blank you or seen confused.
  - bandie91 3y ago
    maybe it's a genuine human-to-human interaction which helps healing these...
    - AstralStorm 3y ago
      Small talk isn't one of these, however. "Third spaces" (guided meeting place that's relatively loose and not work or home) are sorely missing because running one is not very profitable. By the way, pubs aren't one of those really, as they're too unstructured.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        "Third spaces" don't have to be (and preferably aren't) commercial spaces where monetization is expected. > pubs aren't one of those really, as they're too unstructured. I'm not sure what you mean by "third spaces", then.
- GoblinSlayer 3y ago
  I once encountered a psychopath like that, lol.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
  Strange, my interaction with strangers is always either robbers or beggars or Mormons, I'd rather keep clear.
okr 3y ago
It is just a theory, but i think, apps were often written by people, who want to avoid conversations with strangers, who can exert some kind of power, who say no arbitrarily, because they can. At some point it took off and it became business as usual and since then its rolling. But i suspect there is much more and many people are not like that. It should be richer and not so monotone.
lm28469 3y ago
> we have to be sure that its a phone and not society. Are we really at that level of discussion ? Smartphones, and the web, clearly have a magnifying effect on many topics which are detrimental in a lot of cases Human nature didn't magically change in 2007 when god emperor Steve Jobs shat out the first smartphone
- deely3 3y ago
  Yes, we always at this level of discussion. Smartphone is a tool, not a sentinent thing that commands you what to do. Its always the simplest way to forbid something, but I think we have to be more caution with easy ways.
  - lm28469 3y ago
    A nuclear bomb is just a tool, fentanyl is just a tool, an AR15 is just a tool, and guess what ? all these things are heavily regulated "it's just a tool" is level 0 of argumentation. What is the tool used for ? What are the people in control of said tool getting from it ? Who's benefiting for it ? Who's getting abused by it ? &c. We can collectively make decision about things, we've done it on thousands of different subject for thousands of years, history didn't stop in 2007
    - deely3 3y ago
      Now you suddenly shifting your arguments into 'its not regulated enough'. And now you yourself using level 0 argument that we implemented regulations in the past. Look, if you just want to win this discussion then please imagine that I agree with you, that my comment is "oh, Im so wrong and you so right" and go fight in comments with someone else.

by deely3 3y ago

dorkwood 3y ago

> I DONT WANT TO TALK to people in grocery line, especially when I don't have a phone. I perfectly ok to just stand quietly. I do! My day is almost always made better by a random encounter with a stranger. I wish I was confident enough to start those interactions myself, but I always inevitably think back to messages such as yours, and my anxiety gets the better of me.

CalRobert 3y ago
I'd love to have phone / no phone sections ( or chat / no chat ) in places like subways, airports, etc. I love taking to random people but don't want to bother then if they don't want to talk. Having kids helps inasmuch as my eldest will talk to every kid she sees and that usually means at least a hello to the parent.
- dorkwood 3y ago
  When visiting London I noticed they have something called a "happy to chat bench", which you're supposed to sit on if you don't mind someone trying to strike up a conversation with you. I'm not a resident, so I'm not sure how useful they are in practice, but I found the concept interesting.
- maccard 3y ago
  Have those ever existed though, really? I used to take a long bus or train most weekends, before smartphones were everywhere, and the vast majority of people were using earphones or reading - not talking to strangers.
  - CalRobert 3y ago
    It depends on where you are. I found that older people in Ireland (not ancient, just didn't grow up with phones) were often very happy to chat on the bus. Now I'm in the Netherlands and most of my chance interactions lately come from talking to other parents while my kids play in the street or playground. Funny enough I was at a playground a few weeks ago and my kids envied another kid's sled, they talked and the other kid was happy to share, and I talked to the dad who had also moved here from Ireland and even had similar interests (Green party member, etc.). Sure, usually it's a pleasant hello and then not much, but sometimes you meet people you get on with really well. I don't think that would have happened if I had just been sitting on the bench looking at my phone while my kids played.
    - maccard 3y ago
      That weekly bus/train was in Ireland, funnily enough. > most of my chance interactions lately come from talking to other parents while my kids play in the street or playground. I think there's a signal here that's the difference. If I'm on a bus, I probably don't want to talk to anyone. Similarly, if I'm in a grocery store, I don't want to talk to someone in the baking aisle, I just want sugar. But if I'm out with my kid/dog, I know that's an inherently more sociable situation that may end in an interaction. > Sure, usually it's a pleasant hello and then not much, but sometimes you meet people you get on with really well. I've a dog and live in Edinburgh, I've found that the people I get on with are people I see repeatedly. Neither of us made the effort the first time, but after 2 weeks of seeing each other every morning at 8:30 in the rain and the dogs saying hello to each other, you can end up talking. I immediately have more in common with this person than going to the same destination as them, for example!
  - ale42 3y ago
    I did long train journeys weekly between 25 and 15 years ago, approximately. I've chatted with a lot of people, and had quite some interesting discussions. Of course people were reading, and/or wearing headphones (mostly younger people), but not all of them. And many were open to conversation even though. Sometimes you read a book to pass the time, but you can be as well interested to a random exchange with a stranger. I was also reading in the train and often wearing headphones, but that didn't prevent conversations from happening. I think that people were less taking book-or-headphones as a signal that you don't want to be disturbed. The experience could also be relatively different depending on what the train population is (e.g. whether the train is filled with tired commuting people or with people coming back from a week-end break). I'm not taking the train as much recently, but people are clearly more isolated into their smartphones now. And have to say, sometimes discussions still do happen.
ryandrake 3y ago
I used to value a random encounter with a stranger. Now, the median person is likely to be 1. Disturbed, 2. Obsessed with politics, 3. Belligerent for no reason, 4. Ready to whip out their phone camera looking for “content” or 5. Generally offended/Scared of the idea of talking to a random stranger. The last 3 or so years have turned America into a giant mental asylum and it’s starting to be not worth it to talk to a rando.
- maccard 3y ago
  I live in an area where people will talk to you as you're walking by. In my experience, no, the median person is not Disturbed, obsessed with politics, belligerent or filming. I do agree that the last point is true - but see OP's message. I don't want to talk to you in the grocery store. If I'm standing there with Earbuds in, and you make Smalltalk with me, don't be surprised if I totally blank you or seen confused.
- bandie91 3y ago
  maybe it's a genuine human-to-human interaction which helps healing these...
  - AstralStorm 3y ago
    Small talk isn't one of these, however. "Third spaces" (guided meeting place that's relatively loose and not work or home) are sorely missing because running one is not very profitable. By the way, pubs aren't one of those really, as they're too unstructured.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      "Third spaces" don't have to be (and preferably aren't) commercial spaces where monetization is expected. > pubs aren't one of those really, as they're too unstructured. I'm not sure what you mean by "third spaces", then.
GoblinSlayer 3y ago
I once encountered a psychopath like that, lol.
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
Strange, my interaction with strangers is always either robbers or beggars or Mormons, I'd rather keep clear.

okr 3y ago

It is just a theory, but i think, apps were often written by people, who want to avoid conversations with strangers, who can exert some kind of power, who say no arbitrarily, because they can. At some point it took off and it became business as usual and since then its rolling. But i suspect there is much more and many people are not like that. It should be richer and not so monotone.

lm28469 3y ago

> we have to be sure that its a phone and not society. Are we really at that level of discussion ? Smartphones, and the web, clearly have a magnifying effect on many topics which are detrimental in a lot of cases Human nature didn't magically change in 2007 when god emperor Steve Jobs shat out the first smartphone

deely3 3y ago
Yes, we always at this level of discussion. Smartphone is a tool, not a sentinent thing that commands you what to do. Its always the simplest way to forbid something, but I think we have to be more caution with easy ways.
- lm28469 3y ago
  A nuclear bomb is just a tool, fentanyl is just a tool, an AR15 is just a tool, and guess what ? all these things are heavily regulated "it's just a tool" is level 0 of argumentation. What is the tool used for ? What are the people in control of said tool getting from it ? Who's benefiting for it ? Who's getting abused by it ? &c. We can collectively make decision about things, we've done it on thousands of different subject for thousands of years, history didn't stop in 2007
  - deely3 3y ago
    Now you suddenly shifting your arguments into 'its not regulated enough'. And now you yourself using level 0 argument that we implemented regulations in the past. Look, if you just want to win this discussion then please imagine that I agree with you, that my comment is "oh, Im so wrong and you so right" and go fight in comments with someone else.