←back to thread

279 points geox | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.82s | source
Show context
trentnix ◴[] No.45211888[source]
Texas banned phones in schools as well. A local school administrator told me “in the high school, the lunch room is now loud with talking and laughter!”

There are still parents that complain. Turns out they are as addicted to texting with their kids all day as their kids are addicted to the same.

Regardless, it’s great to see that the ban has seemingly nudged things in a healthier direction. Its a failure of leadership that schools needed a statewide ban to make such an obviously positive change.

replies(13): >>45211928 #>>45211984 #>>45212110 #>>45214354 #>>45214551 #>>45214632 #>>45214959 #>>45217107 #>>45217232 #>>45218074 #>>45220431 #>>45220551 #>>45221678 #
softwaredoug ◴[] No.45211928[source]
Phones might be as much a symptom as a cause

The related issue is parents are overly protective of teens and don't give them enough independence. You see this in a lot of different ways from parents wanting to text their kids, to only letting kids do highly managed structured activities, to treating teens as their best friends, to helicopter parenting protecting kids from all adversity, etc etc

And a similar thing happens not just with parents, but society, there are not a lot of places teens can just hang out. A lot of fun things teens would do increasingly ban minors.

If you want teens off devices, you need to give them alternatives

replies(6): >>45212177 #>>45212853 #>>45214298 #>>45215958 #>>45216299 #>>45216354 #
soupfordummies ◴[] No.45212177[source]
There's also the symptom that almost our entire society is addicted to staring at their phones for at least 4 hours a day. Go literally ANYWHERE and just look at the people around you if you don't think so.
replies(4): >>45212192 #>>45212230 #>>45214305 #>>45214432 #
bsghirt ◴[] No.45214305[source]
Why is the exact device the problem?

20 years ago everyone on suburban trains would be looking at a newspaper, magazine or book throughout their journey. Then they would watch a couple of hours of TV at home. Why is 'looking at a phone' such a problem, when most of the looking replicates those activities, with much of the rest being basic utilities which didn't exist previously - consulting a map, ordering food or shopping, looking up timetables or schedules?

replies(8): >>45214499 #>>45214584 #>>45214613 #>>45215046 #>>45217128 #>>45217866 #>>45218596 #>>45218821 #
throw0101d ◴[] No.45214613[source]
> 20 years ago everyone on suburban trains would be looking at a newspaper, magazine or book throughout their journey.

Some folks did this, others chatted with the 'regulars' that they sat with that had the same schedule as them. There were television series based on this:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_48

Some folks didn't want to chat, and in the Toronto-area commuter rail there are designated zones for that:

* https://www.gotransit.com/en/travelling-on-go/quiet-zone

replies(1): >>45214821 #
1. bsghirt ◴[] No.45214821[source]
What you are demonstrating is that already in 2003, people talking to each other during their commute was a fantasy rather than an actual occurrence.
replies(1): >>45215472 #
2. throw0101d ◴[] No.45215472[source]
Do you think the airborne drops of Operation Overlord were a fantasy because someone made a television (mini-)series on them (i.e., Band of Brothers)?
replies(1): >>45215897 #
3. bsghirt ◴[] No.45215897[source]
Certainly I would not take the television series as proof that they happened with regularity or in the way depicted.
replies(1): >>45221577 #
4. throw0101d ◴[] No.45221577{3}[source]
You have simply gone in the other direction: taking the television series as proof something did not happen, that it was "fantasy".