Hacker News Reader

Comment by bobsy | Hacker News Reader

Maybe Matt hasn't heard about turning something off. Matt is worried that engaging technologies interrupt peoples lives and disrupt productivity and creativity. He is probably right, until you realise you can disconnect yourself from these notifications.

Its like Twitter. It can be horribly distracting and engaging. It can interrupt your work and even conversations you may be having. At the same time you can turn off whatever app you have and it will disappear completely from your life until you turn it back on.

The majority of people know their limits and can decide how much they want a specific app/technology/whatever to impact their day-to-day lives.

View on HN

>The majority of people know their limits and can decide how much they want a specific app/technology/whatever to impact their day-to-day lives.

I would say some people know their limits, but if you look at the number of people who walk around with their eyes glued to their iphone, I'd really question that the majority do.

Ten minutes at a busy intersection in downtown San Francisco will yield frightening results.

A colleague of mine has turned this into a game: "Count the Zombies"

I do that too, I stay out of traffic, and I don't see the problem. Of everyday experiences I'd just as soon miss out on, staring at another DONT WALK sign is near the top of the list. When I want to spend time being creative, I wander around a park aimlessly and ignore my phone; navigating busy streets is just enough hassle that it doesn't work for me.

We all likely personally know a person that SMSs all day, especially if you have a teenager.

However, seeing somebody on their phone briefly doesn't tell you anything. How sure can you be that that passing glance at a person while they were on their phone wasn't the first and only time of the day?

What percent of people fit this criteria? I'd wager that a good portion of them only moderately use their devices. It just seems when you are seen by others doing something you rarely do, they assume you do it all day every day and are obsessed.

tldr; People watching isn't an indicator of how often individual people do things, just how many people are doing something at any given time.

I think that was the point of the basic argument.

Matt was saying that lots of people as a whole have a hard time focusing. Sure, there are people that can focus here and there but so many people are tied to their devices that it can be demonstrated as a trend. While every trend has anomalies, those anomalies don't mean that the trend is nonexistent.

Devices have off switches. People's social expectations don't. For instance, there aren't too many salaried people with enough autonomy to decide that they don't want their bosses e-mailing them after hours, over the weekend, or on vacations and that they're not going to indulge them with prompt replies, regardless of the impact.

Separately, what's with the sarcasm? Do you think that tone makes you more persuasive?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com