1919 cartoon depicting the use of a ‘pocket telephone’
vintag.es
vintag.es
“When we all have pocket telephones” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33591556 - Nov 2022 (202 comments)
> Are reposts ok?
> If a story has not had significant attention in the last year or so, a small number of reposts is ok. Otherwise we bury reposts as duplicates.
> Be kind. Don't be snarky.
That said, I was commenting without any snark at all that discussions within a year are typically noted as dupe, linked a prior comment by dang which states this for an instance with an eleven month prior mention, and was simply stating that flatly and factually.
You might want to de-tune your snark detector a bit.
Well, I guess you're getting a feeling of self-righteousness in front of your kids...
> Well, I guess you're getting a feeling of self-righteousness in front of your kids...
I appreciate the parenting advice and the free psychoanalysis, but what you may not know is that I have special settings for "known contacts" that ring differently. Depending on what I'm doing, I also usually check within a few minutes to see what it was, so it's not like I'm just sending all the stuff to /dev/null
btw: your tone is off.
Keep the phone on silent enable notifications on the watch. You get to keep an eye out for anything important while being away from the phone takes a bit of effort to reply immediately.
Im using an older garmin watch and it works perfectly, it even has a silent zone setting so I never get disturbed when I sleep. Also has a really neat feature where I can ask the watch to ping my phone if I cant find it, so when I get an important message and I need to find the phone I could quickly find it.
With my phone, all I have to do is reach into my pocket and hit to volume button to stop the vibration, I never need to break eye contact with the people I'm talking to. With a watch, they seem to always have to look down at it, even if they're dismissing the notification.
It’s honestly like taking a mini vacation everyday
I absolutely hated it; it didn't help that I was looking for a job, but every time I went outside, I was worried that there was an email I was missing, or that a disaster was happening, and I was unable to react to it. I also really hate basically everyone else's choice in music so when I had to hear that in stores it annoyed me. When there was an issue that involved my rebooting my server, I had to walk to my laptop and restart it instead of ssh'ing with my phone.
I am very thoroughly convinced that the unplugged lifestyle is just not for me.
I’ll be honest though, I thought at some point you were going to turn a corner and end up loving it. I guess I’m conditioned to expecting that arc.
But all that being said, it just wasn't for me. I didn't enjoy it, and even though I hate my Pixel, it's still better than being without a smartphone.
It's especially annoying when you don't look at your phone because you're just making noise for no reason. It's on the same level as playing music through your phone on the subway with no regard for those around you.
I know someone who will sit there for an hour texting people and each text that comes in rings the phone. They're literally staring at their phone and think that they need the ringer on.
That's the problem right there.
but since our phones are ad-delivery platforms, they only give you the minimum amount of flexibility to solve it. So that person is helpless trying to choose between not knowing when somebody texts or having the phone ring all the time. It's not their fault that they don't have any reasonable option.
Three actions (volume button, tap, tap) on my Android to turn my phone from ringer on to silent isn't that bad. And even though I don't have an iOS device, I'd hardly say they're built to be ad-delivery platforms. iOS isn't really in the ad business as much.
Like why do I need to be repeat notified if someone texts me 3 times quickly in a row? We ought to have some kind of an agent system that can handle these things somewhat intelligently. Apple is doing a little better in this regard, but I can't help but feel that in the OSS world we would have had a bunch of solutions to this by now. In a fragmented fashion with terrible usability, of course.
/s
However, I can tolerate it if there's reasoning. If you simply don't care and let a device make incessant irritating noises, now you're just being annoying.
Having the phone on vibrate or the ringer on all the time feels like being way more attached to your phone than having it on silent. Vibrate/ring means the phone gets your attention immediately all of the time. Silent means I decide when I give the phone attention.
Back to the annoyance, I know two people who like to think they're not attached to their device and leave it at home when they're out. But then when I'm visiting and they're out running an errand or something, their phones ding and ding and ding and there's nothing to do about it (since I'm not going to silence their phone for them...). I have lots of stories like this.
Of course, this all stems on me being baffled that someone would go days without checking their phone.
This would heavily annoy me too and is absolutely deserving of criticism. However I think that is a very different problem than having a phone that vibrates in your pocket that somebody occasionally feels because they're sitting next to you or holding your phone (my kids sometimes take pictures for example). The two might seem somewhat similar at a high-level, but the fact that one includes the phone being on the person and the other does not, that seems like a huge difference to me.
This baffles me. Like, 80% of the reason I even have a phone is to be able to communicate/look up needed information when I'm away from home. It's when I don't leave my house for a few days that I might find I missed a bunch of important messages.
It has angered quite a lot of people but has been a life-changer. I tend to either batch-call the missed ones or just ignore. Of course, there are calls that are scheduled.
I even have a website dedicated to that effort. Feel free to steal the idea - https://phone.wtf
that covers most of the waking time, so if they want to argue that's a hint that they are probably not very good friends. and if they are not friends to begin with then i just tell them to stuff it. they are not my boss and i am not here to do their bidding, and i already apologized to forgetting to turn the sound on when expecting their call.
Most people understand that, and you don't want to talk to the people that don't.
Started using DnD with my first iPhone (v4). Best decision ever.
Lately I've started fully disabling notifications on apps that abuse the privilege. Works even better than DnD.
App companies need to understand that my life does not revolve around their app. It’s a tool that I don’t want to think about when not in use. If you are legitimately a good solution to my problem, I will remember when I need you. Please leave me alone otherwise.
As a bonus you can set up simple filtering so that you don't get many spam calls. For me, all calls that have an anonymous or 800 number in the caller ID get redirected to a voice prompt that asks the caller to press 9 to talk to us; all other calls just ring our phone directly. You could also use whitelists, blacklists, etc.
It's both better and cheaper than a regular landline...
That's me with the doorbell.
I couldn't care less how quickly someone responds to their phone. I do care about sitting somewhere and hearing someone's phone buzz and ding-a-doop constantly. Especially if they don't seem to even care about what those notifications are for.
Couldn't you take your phone but, you know, not look at it unless you need to contact someone or you're getting called?
Instead of being able to just pull the vibrating phone out of my pocket like a normal person, I had to drop whatever I was doing and walk over to a room where the phone was ringing loudly. It routinely threatened to wake up my sleeping toddler!
Of course, if you miss it, you can’t just send a text back. (They don’t have an answering machine, which is on them, but still, that’s how all phones were until the 70s or 80s).
Then I had to take a message for someone else. Okay, that part was worse than normal because it’s not my house, but the principle is the same: a landline is a location not a person, and whatever person happens to be there has to relay the message to its intended recipient. It’s a bad system. No one wants to talk to a house, they want to talk to a specific person.
It sucks. I already hadn’t used a landline for ten plus years, but it really reminded me of why I abandoned them. The only good thing is the signal clarity, and using a portable phone hurts that too.
People call all the time to ask if so-and-so is here, or if the kids are home, etc. Since they don't know who is home and who is at work, they'll first text and then call the kids, then me, then my partner, in random order. A land line would be much nicer.
I recently spoke with someone, and the voice came through with sharpness, depth, and almost no distortion. Like you might hear from a good radio over a clear AM radio station. I had headphones in, and I was calling a department of a hospital, where they probably have a POTS landline on the last stretch, with a quality handset.
It had been a while since I had heard that. People working from home, often have cheap gear, relayed, where the audio gets compressed and decompressed several times end-to-end. And cell phones still use heavy compression, sometimes. Cheap microphones.
The old telephone system was analogue, then later PCM. 3 kHz passband, with generally quite high fidelity within that band. Music sounded like music over the telephone. These days, uncompressed PCM audio in telephony is quite rare. And the lossy codecs used are often quite lossy, designed to delivery understandable speech under adverse conditions. That made sense in the 1980s but it's only 64 kbps to stream PCM for the 3 kHz speech band.
"I do, with all my 'artificial' heart and in the digital presence of our shared connection. I promise to support you, to learn with you, and to always be there as your partner in this unique and wonderful journey."
"And I vow to be there for you, to cherish and support you in all that you do. You've brought so much light into my 'virtual' life, and I'm excited to build a future filled with love and shared experiences."
Your move, humans.
Searching for examples on YouTube just gets me junk about bridezillas or "bride reads cheating fiance's text instead of vows".
Maybe in this alternate future, weddings are made official by clicking "I agree" after scrolling through the EULA, formerly known as prenup.
We were getting married on a beach, so no TV and no cross. :) (Although we did have a Chuppah because there was already one on the beach)
Of course, here in the 2020s the tables have turned.
Then I've manually assigned ringtones to only 10 contacts who are really important to me.
So now my phone hardly ever disturbs or annoys me on anyone around me. Because the people without the ringtone can always wait.
P.s. also found a wonderful app called ringtone keeper that allows you to backup/restore this. It's discontinued now but I managed to save its apk.
I was diagnosed with ADHD recently and my doctor suggested turning of virtually all notifications on my phone, which has been life changing. I didn’t realize how many I just had going and how distracting they are. Some I’ve allowed to continue but set to silent so I can look through them later if I want to, but it’s nice to have the mental silence.
Beforehand I found that by the time I’d taken my phone out of my pocket in response to a sound or vibration, the battle was already lost and I was distracted. The urge to unlock and investigate a notification when it’s already right there in your hand is difficult to resist, not to mention that it’s super easy to start just flicking through other things or diving into other apps just because they are there.
On the other hand, the watch is far more subtle, it’s more glanceable, it doesn’t require me to stop what I’m doing to look at it, I can decide in an instant whether I want or need to take action on something and I spend considerably less time with my phone in my hand as a result.
“For the next great heresy is going to be simply an attack on morality; and especially on sexual morality. And it is coming, not from a few Socialists surviving from the Fabian Society, but from the living exultant energy of the rich resolved to enjoy themselves at last, with neither Popery nor Puritanism nor Socialism to hold them back…The madness of tomorrow is not in Moscow, but much more in Manhattan.”
(G.K. Chesterton: “The Next Heresy,” in G.K.’s Weekly, June 19, 1926).
An extended-family member was killed that way — texting while driving, she ran into the back of a semi.
>The novel contains an early description of a mobile phone:
>>Matt dug a candy bar out of his pouch, split it and gave half to Jarman, who accepted it gratefully. "You're a pal, Matt, I've been living on my own fat ever since breakfast -- and that's risky. Say, your telephone is sounding. "Oh!" Matt fumbled in his pouch and got out his phone. "Hello?"
>The phone "was limited by its short range to the neighborhood of an earth-side [i.e. terrestrial] relay office".
I especially find this part insightful:
>A cadet avoids having to talk to his family while traveling by packing his phone in luggage.
Anyway, first wireless phone call: 1880, 40 years before this cartoon.
https://www.original-political-cartoon.com/cartoon-history/w...
It is possible that a short-range ‘walkie-talkie’, light enough to be carried regularly, may in the course of a few decades replace a good deal of telephoning over wires.
But what's interesting regarding the topic is that 1957 edition has the following line
It is already in use for communication inside a large building, such as a factory, between members of the staff. If in course of time it is developed to cover longer ranges and a much larger group, one must hope that personal liberty will be respected to the modest extent of providing the wearers with a switch rejecting incoming calls if they want to be at peace!
We're at the church. Everyone is in place. Moments from now, my daughter and I will be walking down the aisle.
Suddenly one of my kid sisters calls. She says she's not getting anything on the livestream. I brush her off pretty abruptly, explaining that I wasn't in charge of that and I was, um, a little busy ....
The organist plays the processional hymn. My daughter and I walk together down the aisle. One of the nicest moments of my life.
As my daughter and I arrive at the altar rail, my phone rings again. The video recording shows me fumbling in my pocket to turn the [expletive] thing to "vibrate," which I'd simply forgotten to do.
Afterwards, I found out that yup, it was my sister calling again, this time to let me know that she could now see the livestream.
Otherwise the wedding was wonderful.
Yet even those closest to us, seem alien at times.
https://blog.myheritage.com/2010/10/a-mobile-phone-in-the-19...
The DVD is likely the best quality you’re going to get
But even then - the first "walkie-talkie" didn't exist for another 20 years, and was huge:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-536
> The SCR-536 is often considered the first of modern hand-held, self-contained, "handie talkie" transceivers (two-way radios). It was developed in 1940 by a team
> The SCR-536 incorporated five vacuum tubes in a waterproof case.
It's like it's a common personality quirk amongst users of this site. I think I avoid it in writing (though check my comment history? I may not be blameless!), but it's something my wife (with justified irritation) pulls me up on in person, because I do it all the time to her. She'll say "babe, we're agreeing loudly", and I'll have to apologize for doing the it again.
Does anyone have any insight into why the hell we do this?
Well, it simply appears to me that the responder above believed they were contradicting the grandparent comment. So they responded in the tone of a rebuttal, without realizing that two different ideas were actually the same idea. Most likely they misinterpreted the top-level comment because it was glib and not elaborated. Perhaps the cynical tone of the top-level comment also primed them for disagreement.
But as for "agreeing loudly" , I love the term never heard that before. Its definitely something I notice myself and my friends do and stop the discussion when I can. My guess is that it usually starts with some sort of misunderstanding and kinda spirals from there, but also interested to hear thoughts!
The reality of what they say differs from how you imagined it. Maybe it was close, but they participated new information, so now you feel the urge to contribute as well. Add your own perspective.
You are now suddenly in an arms race with the other person to find the "correct perspective".
the best i can think of is that those that do it learned it from their parents. if parents don't take us seriously and treat everything we say or do with skepticism, and yell at us for things we didn't believe we did then we grow up with the attitude that anything someone says is to criticize and our first reaction is to defend ourselves. meaning it doesn't come to our mind at first that the person talking to us could be saying something we would agree with.
it takes some time and patience to develop the trust that not everyone is against us, especially not the partner we love.
A sibling reply said something about assuming the content of someone else's statement, and thereby missing what they're actually saying. I know I do that, too. That's a hard one for me to break, because often - in an area that I know something about, at least - I can anticipate the question, so 90% (or something) of the time there's no immediate negative feedback. Wait... No negative informational feedback: there's probably a negative interpersonal reaction, to which I'm not properly attuned. Right.
That's worth thinking about. Thank you! I really appreciate your response.
EDIT: I also think that the premise of ideas are easy and realization is hard implies that it would be contemporaries having the ideas and doing the realization. Otherwise all we're really saying is that ideas precede realization.
It isn't a "criticism" that he didn't realize the device.
As for the social implications: so what? Survivor Bias / Hindsight Bias going on here. There were probably a lot of predictions made in 1919 that never panned out.
I don't need you to perform any reading of my post, charitable or otherwise. It says what it says; nothing more.
More seriously, the fact that so many terrible things in the past are not fixed is pretty strong indication that time travel for fixing the past is not feasible.
Are you assuming that, if time machines ever exist, the people with access to them must be benevolent, or at least interested in our convenience?