Restaurant Watches Old Footage Of Customers And Uncovers A Shocking Truth | Hacker News Reader

Restaurant Watches Old Footage Of Customers And Uncovers A Shocking Truth

lifebuzz.com

15 pointsColinWright12 comments

Those that have grown up with mobile phones view the world differently than the older generation. I'm old enough that I only use my phone when I'm with others to mute it. So, I have a hard time understanding those younger than me. Maybe this crowd can help answer my questions.

When we break bread together, why do you respond to texts/mails? Did you know that it sends a message to whoever you are with that you don't respect their time or just as bad that you'd rather be talking with someone else?

I've often seen a clump of friends hanging around, at a mall, or in a pub, yet none are talking to each other. Instead the group is almost entirely on their phones. Please explain what's going on.

There's a great psychological reward schedule for handling text messages and whatnot--so, that kind of makes sense. Spending the entire time on the phone though really just seems silly and sad to me. :(

EDIT: One of the strange parts to me was the increase in number of people wanting to be reseated...maybe trying to find better signal?

Receiving a text message lights up the same area of the brain stimulated by addictive drugs such as cocaine.

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2010/09/08/the-new-drug-on-the...

Reminds me of pg's essay on Addiction.

http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html

These people have grown up communicating not just to humans, but to their devices. They probably consider it rude if they don't reply to their text. After all, someone's talking to them...

I guess the difference is in how people today assert themselves into other people's lives. I've noticed at happy hours when there are lots of people who know each other, someone could be having a conversation, and they'll be rudely interrupted by another friend. It's like in some contexts people just forget that there's other people whose feelings matter just as much as their own.

Finally, there's also a growing trend with modern people where plans are made on the fly - and sometimes broken on the fly - without caring about how these sudden changes affect other people's lives. People seem to plan ahead less and just rely on instant communication methods to determine where to go, what to do and who with. This probably leads to a lot of the conversation-interrupting you experience.

Mobile phones have been the bane of my existence ever since my dad received one from work. Since that time, the interruptions to important events, fun games, etc, caused by cell phones so completely outnumbers anything else that I cannot think of another category of interruption. You aren't "together" if even 1 person is looking at their phone.

Want to kill the moment? Just check your phone and everything will grind to a halt. It's more fun playing a board game with a person who can't focus, than with someone who compulsively checks their phone.

To be fair, I don't think it is limited to the younger generation. Last Valentine's day, my wife and I noticed at least 6 people from 5 different couples who were actively using a smart phone for a significant amount of time. This was at a restaurant. If there was any time that you might have thought that some undivided attention would be warrented, that would be the time and place. The offenders didn't markedly different from us age-wise (~40).

I'm pretty skeptical of this story. For one, it's just a transcript of a craigslist post. Secondly, a couple of those figures are hard for me to believe (e.g. "26 out of 45 customers spend an average of 3 minutes taking photos of the food", and "8 out of 45 customers bumped into other customers..."). This sounds more like social commentary than an actual report on findings. We probably won't know for sure, but even given the lack of verifiable data, I would argue this should not be treated as news.

Good point. The Craigslist post* was under 'rants and raves' dated July '14. Even then this anecdotal evidence fits with observations on society. Is it news? I'd argue it's no less newsworthy than much of the crap published by news organizations--mind you that's a pretty low bar.

*https://web.archive.org/web/20140712154835/https://newyork.c...

While the content highlights modern restaurant visits ([EDIT] or maybe not), this website highlights modern "journalism".

A headline followed by a "share on facebook" button then a "context" paragraph a stock photo then a massive block quote. Finally there is a "via" link at the bottom telling you where they got it from. Which is: http://news.distractify.com/culture/craigslist-surveillance-... by the way. That page then says the source is: https://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/rnr/4562386373.html which seems to be on its way to the virtual dustbin.

Pretty bloody ridiculous.

Happy Place tackles this "study": http://happyplace.someecards.com/stop-sharing-this-crap/a-re...

Linkspam for a duplicate of an apocryphal story (I don't believe this is a true story) already submitted to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8024577

Reply on news.ycombinator.com