Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Handhelds Hardware

Mobile Phone Abuse and AbUsers 423

Posted by michael from the sssssssssssssshhhhhh dept.
Doctor Hu writes "The Economist has a story ("Think Before You Talk") describing a new range of mobile phone prototypes designed by Ideo to discourage antisocial usage - devices ringing in concert halls, loud proclamations that the caller is on his way home, etc. The first of the series uses electric shocks to condition the user to talk at a non-intrusive level; the others are similarly ingenious. Not intended to be commercially produced, just to provoke discussion (and provide publicity for Ideo, presumably). Nice comment at the end from one of the designers that for devices like mobile phones, "user-centric" design needs to take the needs of people nearby the user into account as well."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mobile Phone Abuse and AbUsers More

Mobile Phone Abuse and AbUsers

Comments Filter:

  • Does it... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ransak ( 548582 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:16AM (#5101695) Homepage Journal
    ... come with a way to zap anyone with a ringtone of 'Mambo #5'?
    • I'd be more interested in having one that uses some sort of electromagnetic pulse to destroy the speaker on any phone with a "Larger than Life" ringtone.

  • HELLO!!! I'M ON THE... (Score:4, Funny)

    by adamofgreyskull ( 640712 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:18AM (#5101710)
    AARGGGHHH! *sizzle*

    *cheers*

  • It's a start, (Score:5, Funny)

    by OldStash ( 630985 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:19AM (#5101717)
    but in a truly perfect society, all phones would cut out after two minutes of monologue.

  • Here's an idea... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Cinematique ( 167333 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:22AM (#5101737)
    If someone is bothering you with their cell phone chatter in a place such as a movie theater... "accidently" spill some of your cola on them. If cell phone users start to have some mild(?) public backlash, maybe they'll get the message. Too bad snacks and pop are so expensive at the movies... :(

    Can you hear me now? Good.

    • Re:Here's an idea... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Darth Maul ( 19860 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:39AM (#5101866)
      > If someone is bothering you with their
      > cell phone chatter in a place such as a
      > movie theater...

      How about just tell the person they're bothering you? What's wrong with us here in the US that we can't confront anyone anymore? Everyone has to just pretend that everyone is nice all the time, then of course talk about these people behind their backs.

      Just say something! You're not being rude; you're alerting this person to the fact that they are out of place in what they're doing. We'll all be better off.

      Yeah, I hate passive agressiveness.

      • Re:Here's an idea... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Pxtl ( 151020 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:55AM (#5101997) Homepage
        You'd think that'd work wouldn't it? I distintly remember, at towards the end of the two towers, one schmuck who no only didn't turn off his ringer on his cell phone, but actually had a conversation on his phone in the theatre. When I was paying $14 to see the movie. People shushed him, people even shouted at him, but he kept on talking on his phone.

        I'm sorry - if you're a doctor or something and have business that important, just get a beeper or use text messages or something.
      • Just like nonsmokers that don't tell people not to stop around them if it bothers them. I get sick around cigarette smoke, and I have found that 9 times out of the ten if you just ask people not to smoke near you, they'll do it without any fuss at all. Most people are considerate, they just need to be reminded to be.


    • Hey, that' great!

      Now, how about this: Why don't we all agree to just pummel snarky wise-assed over-booklearned and under-laid nerds who haven't the social and communication skills God gave to a ferret and might otherwise never learn how to survive in any civilized society not polarized between forces of Absolute Good and Evil where the people didn't runaround with light sabers or rayguns?

      Do you like that idea? I like that idea. How 'bout you?

    • Re:Here's an idea... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by CharlieG ( 34950 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @11:38AM (#5102336) Homepage
      I like what one of the local Movie Houses does

      The put up a short that says "There is No problem with you getting a phone call during the movie , we'll wait"

      An the footnote says that they will stop the movie, turn on the house lights, and wait

      The next slide then encourages the REST of the audience to pelt the offender with popcorn

      BTW The first time I was there after the notice went up, yep, someones cellphone rang. They stopped the movie, and started bring up the lights - you should see how fast the phone got hung up!
  • "They are not for commercial use, but to stir discussion" (not a direct quote). Yup, just like a bad piece of performance art.

    Seriously, the only cure for bad mobile phone habits is common courtesy.

    I don't mind people using them in public places, but I regard those with loud ring tones and those who feels like the entire restaurant *must* know of them closing a million dollar deal, the same way I regard those who don't mind picking their nose of spitting in public.
    • Seriously, the only cure for bad mobile phone habits is common courtesy.

      Agreed. This is a societal and human problem, and should be dealt with as such. Though we hope for quick, technological fixes, problems of this nature are best corrected by - you guessed it - good parenting. Smack the kid around a bit if you have to, but people need to be taught respect at a young age. This is something far too rare in our society IMHO. (Sorry for the rant)

  • How about... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Whispers_in_the_dark ( 560817 ) <{rich.harkins} {at} {gmail.com}> on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:24AM (#5101754)
    ... setting up licensed cell-phone free zones (such as concert halls etc) where phones cannot ring. The zones could have a small very low-power transmitter/scrambler that would inform/interrupt the cell phone so that it just wouldn't ring in those areas.

    • Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by filmsmith ( 608221 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:29AM (#5101781)
      While that's a nice idea and I'm in favor of it, it's still a sad state of affairs when we need to enforce what should be proper ettiquite.

    • Re:How about... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bigmouth_strikes ( 224629 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:31AM (#5101799) Journal
      There will always be people who "have" to be reachable for one reason or another - on call, babysitter, etc etc.

      A better idea would be to make people check their phone in the lobby, and having someone answer it for them.

      • Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Peyna ( 14792 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @11:00AM (#5102029) Homepage
        I don't have too much of a problem if your phone rings in a theatre, or a classroom or whatever; so long as you either then realize your mistake and turn off the ringer and answer the call later, or take it out in the hallway. It just bothers me when people have to answer the phone in class or whereever they are, rather than moving to somewhere that won't bother everyone else.

      • Re:How about... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Niles_Stonne ( 105949 )
        So make "dual mode"(ok, bad term, sorry) phones that will vibrate, but automatically transfers the call into voicemail - where there is _no_ option to answer it. Have this Pager-Like option enabled by a low power transmitter located in the building.

        That way the user could still have their phone and still be alerted that there is a phone call, but they wouldn't have to make any sound and could then walk out into a "Cell OK" area, listen to the message and call the person back.

      • Re:How about... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by (trb001) ( 224998 )
        No, I don't think so. If you are so necessary to civilization's upkeep that you have to be reachable 24/7, don't go somewhere that prohibits phones. A movie theater, a play, really anything where the audience is expected to be quiet, should be off limits to you. It's the price you pay for having the job/wife/child that HAS to reach you.

        Or you could just turn the damn thing to vibrate and keep in on your hip, like the rest of us do. That works too.

        --trb
        • As somebody that has needed to be reachable 24/7/365 and actualy enjoys the true theater, broadway, opera etc I see nothing wrong with cell on vibrate. If I get a call (it's happened many times) generaly its for something trivial I need to chew out the noc manager for letting reach me or on the odd occation it's something important you take it out on the lobby. It's no more disturing than somebody that needs to leave to use the bathroom before intermission. I also wait at the back of the theater untill intermission or a quick set change to return to my seat if I'm not on the aisle (I try to get seats there just in case)

          Now this being said I think it's more of an issue in the movie theaters when there are piles of people that dont NEED to be in contact but still feel the need to answer there phone. Oh and for some of us this is what SMS if for if it's realy a problem they leave me a text message that I can read right on the phone and decide wether or not it's important.

      • Re:How about... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by the_machine ( 168692 )
        Right. And I'm going to hand my phone over to the pimply 16 year old behind the movie counter and then be laughed at when I ask the theater about these long distance calls on my bill.

      • Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Chasuk ( 62477 ) <chasuk@gmail.com> on Friday January 17, 2003 @11:35AM (#5102322)
        Sorry, no. Cell phones haven't existed for that long, and somehow people managed without them before their invention. They aren't a necessity, yet, for anybody, they are a convenience.

        My teenage daughter has a cell phone, and I certainly rest easier knowing that she can call me at any time, day or night, regardless of her location, but she, like the millions of young women before her, could live without one. Many are the times that her cell phone has come in handy, but a necessity it is not.

        A cell phone is like any other appliance: once you condition yourself to its use, you can't imagine not having one, but somehow you managed before, and could manage again. So the fat woman at the grocery store who just has to gossip with her friend while trying to write a check and neglecting to bag her groceries, the cell phone might be vital for her social life, but a pain in the ass for all of us who wait behind her.

    • Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by david.given ( 6740 ) <dg@cowlark.com> on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:33AM (#5101815) Homepage Journal
      ... setting up licensed cell-phone free zones (such as concert halls etc) where phones cannot ring. The zones could have a small very low-power transmitter/scrambler that would inform/interrupt the cell phone so that it just wouldn't ring in those areas.

      A better solution than just blocking everything would be to set up a microcell inside the theatre/concert hall/etc. Any calls to a phone inside the microcell get routed to the theatre/auditorium/whatever's reception, where a message can be left. If it's a genuine emergency, the message can be forwarded on.

      I gather this is actually possible, but I don't know why no-one's tried it.

      • Yeah, you'd get into legal problems otherwise. What about doctors who have to be callable by their patients in case of emergency?

        Daniel
        • Have some imagination. They could register with the front desk to have their calls sent directly to them.

        • Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by DickBreath ( 207180 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @11:51AM (#5102427) Homepage
          Yeah, you'd get into legal problems otherwise. What about doctors who have to be callable by their patients in case of emergency?

          This argument does not fly. I have a diabetic daughter, and know something about medical emergencies.

          In case of emergency, you call 911, NOT the doctor. An EMT and ambulance can be there very quickly. (I have two test cases of experience to draw on... 3 minutes to my front door, and at grade school, faster than both me and mom could even get to the school.)

          As for calling the doctor, it is a NON emergency. You call, and get either a nurse or answering service. The nurse, if available, may solve your problem directly. The doctor is paged and then calls you. (This means, she could step out of the theatre into the lobby.) Return call times vary. Usually takes a few minutes. Calls of this nature would be for medical questions or changes in medication dosage, etc.

          When the doctor is "on call", they know this in advance. They know what hours and shifts they are on call. I'm sure they plan accordingly as to cell phone and pager use.

          Finally, doctors generally rely on pagers. Not cell phones. Pagers have fantastic in-building penetration and coverage area where cell phones do not always. If you MUST be reachable when your Linux box detects that your Windows server has crashed again, then a pager is the thing to have.

      • Re:How about... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by spasm ( 79260 )
        There's been a device on the market for several years in Japan that does straight out blocking. Works by blocking the initial cell network -> handset 'are you there' signal rather than the carrier. Cost, from memory was ~US$500 per unit, and effective blocking range was in the 5-10 metre range. Very popular with restraunts, who advertise that they are genuinely a cellphone free space.

    • Re:How about... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LostCluster ( 625375 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:36AM (#5101836)
      A nice tech solution would be an interrupt message that explains to the incoming caller that the user is within a zone where cell phones work, but would not be welcomed. The caller then gets the option to allow a $1.50 charge to their phone to complete the call. Calling a doctor to an emergency is worth $1.50, calling little Jimmy to check up with him when he's out on a Friday night usually isn't.

    • This is already being worked on. In Canada, [wirelessnewsfactor.com]for example. You can buy jammers [phonejammer.com]. Here [212.100.234.54] [theregister.co.uk] and here [212.100.234.54] [theregister.co.uk] are two articles with more info.

    • This is what ushers are for. Cell phone rings, creating a disturbance? Toss the patron out of the theatre. A few lost $8 movie tickets, never mind $50 Broadway tickets, and people will learn to put the phone on vibrate.

      We didn't need fire-supression fields to stop people from smoking in theatres, and we don't need cellular-supression fields to stop this problem.

      • Unfortunately the nature of the beast is that it is dark in the theatre. You can't see the guy who's talking on the phone - and may have trouble picking him out with the usher. Especially if he's a couple of rows away from you. Unfortunately it should be the people sitting closer to him that are getting the usher, but that's unlikely.

  • With apologies to Dom Joly (Score:4, Funny)

    by metamatic ( 202216 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:25AM (#5101755) Homepage Journal
    xxxxx HELLO?!
    xxxxx
    xxxxx HELLO?!
    xxxxx
    xxxxx NO, I'M READING SLASHDOT.
    xxxxx
    xxxxx SLASH... DOT...
    xxxxx
    xxxxx NO, IT'S RUBBISH.
    xxxxx
    xxxxx OK... OK...
    xxxxx
    xxxxx CIAO!
  • My favorite prototype is the Clarinet phone. What kind of idiot would blow on a clarinet to make a phone call? A bored idiot, with lots o money.

    Maxwell Smart's shoe was the first mobile phone that i remember seeing. Or maybe it was the evil stepmother in Jerry Lewis' "Who's Minding the Store".

    All I know is that now it's damned annoying when you've got a driver acting like he's drunk, and you get closer to get his license plate number to get his ass arrested, and you see that he's just talking on his cell phone. (I often the drunk line anyway on my cell phone:)

  • Have it transform into a really old and unfashionable phone so they are too shamefaced to use it.

    Now what about the other way around though, having your phone ring to get you out of a dull and boring conversation or meeting. I'd stump up cash for a phone that called me when I'm bored with an excuse to leave a meeting.

  • Bluetooth? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:30AM (#5101792) Journal
    Why not just institute a bluetooth "reminder" feature that causes the phone to beep prior to entering a restricted area. Or perhaps you could have a submissive mode where the phone automatically goes silent upon entering the zone.

    I dunno... Cell phones are just evil.

    • Re:Bluetooth? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by 1984 ( 56406 )
      This was one of the suggested applications of bluetooth. The example was your phone being told to switch to silent ring, vibrate or whatever when you went into a concert hall.

      Haven't heard of any actual examples, and I suspect it might not work that well, since you'd have to leave the phone doing its bluetooth thing (be "discoverable" or "discovering" I suppose) and then it'd have to be happy to pair with some unknown transmitter and change its setup. Difficult to see how that could be authenticated to prevent fun and games with setting people's phones to silent for a laugh (maybe other commands). Of course, setting them all to silent always may be no bad thing...
    • I heard about the possiblity of this years ago. And I think it's a GREAT idea. If Nokia would start putting these in phones and sell "Cones of Silence" for $99 to movie theaters, it would take off.

  • -THE- Stupidest thing I ever read! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FortKnox ( 169099 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:32AM (#5101809) Homepage Journal
    Mobile Phone Abuse and AbUsers?!?!

    Abuse?!? You are putting a VERY harsh term onto people that are discourteous.

    What about that jerk that won't let you into the left lane? Should he be shocked?
    How about the idiot at work that makes you feel like a tool whenever you ask him questions. Should he feel pain?

    Courtesy is not law. Yeah, you are a better person for practicing courtesy, but it is not within your rights to punish those that aren't. Its not illegal to be an ass.

    • Re:-THE- Stupidest thing I ever read! (Score:5, Funny)

      by fuzzybunny ( 112938 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:47AM (#5101941) Homepage Journal


      What about that jerk that won't let you into the left lane? Should he be shocked?

      Well, in Los Angeles, he gets shot.


      How about the idiot at work that makes you feel like a tool whenever you ask him questions. Should he feel pain?

      He does. I'm the systems administrator.


      but it is not within your rights to punish those that aren't

      No, it's my moral duty.


      Its not illegal to be an ass.

      No, but it's awful gratifying to physically abuse people who are.

    • What about that jerk that won't let you into the left lane? Should he be shocked?

      Yes. Especially at rush hour when they can create long lived mile long traffic snarls. Heck, I'd like everybody who does incredibly stupid and or dangerous things on the road to get some sort of instant punishment, especially when they are completely oblivous about it. Next time I see someone in an SUV cut off 3 lanes of traffic so they can stay in the far left lane as long as possible before getting off on the ramp without signaling or even putting down the cell phone, I want them to notice.

  • Talking in public (Score:5, Insightful)

    by the_Bionic_lemming ( 446569 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:32AM (#5101813)
    I can understand the frustration when folks talk in a movie theater during the show, or in an art gallery. At those times it should be right to express frustration and tell them to STFU (if they are or are not using a cell phone it doesn't matter).

    But a grocery line? A bus? A train? What the hell is wrong with using a cell phone there?

    I mean really - I never saw a parent staple their annoying brats mouth shut to stop it from yammering about how it wants that candy bar by the cash register - I don't see people duct taping their mouths on a train instead of conversing.

    If a cell phone user keeps it quiet, what the hell is the problem?

    • Re:Talking in public (Score:2, Interesting)

      by BenjyD ( 316700 )
      I think the problem is more the volume at which people talk on the phones. The number of times while commuting I've sat while somebody bellows at a mobile:

      "I'm on the train. ON THE TRAIN. YES. I'LL BE THERE IN FIVE....hello? HELLO..."

      is countless. Travelling on Connex southcentral was bad enough without having to put up with that as well.
      • Is that any more annoying than a parent yelling at their child in a similiar place? Or perhaps a child crying on the bus?
      • People seem to have bad ideas when it is a good time to call. Like in an elevator. Reception is obviously going to suck in an elevator, and raising your voice in a small crowded space with other people is NOT A GOOD IDEA!

        Most commuter trains I've ridden on are pretty quiet; there's not a lot of noisy kids or parents yelling, just people sleeping or reading a book.

        The problem is that a lot of people talk louder on the phone in general than they would to the person next to them. They also tend to have more private conversation that they would not have if the person were seated next to them on the train, but see no problem advertising this information to complete strangers. (I had a girl sitting near me outside school once call up her bank and read off all her personal information on the phone to access her account information. She's lucky I'm nice enough not to write it down and make a few withdrawals!)
      • Oh, you should try riding an urban bus. Guys yelling out the window, "Yo, Shorty!! Shorty!! Yo! Yo, man! Shorty, yo!", people yelling down the aisle, "Yolanda, hey man, I saw you on this bus yesterday, man, and the day before, and on Monday, too!", mothers yelling at their kids, "Sit down! I said, sit down! You'd better sit down, girl! Don't make me come back there...sit your ass down!"...after a while you start hoping the bus will hit something. Cell phone users are silent ninjas compared to the average citizen of Baltimore.
    • With me, it's not so much that they're talking, it's that I have to hear what they're saying. And 9 times out of 10 its:

      "Hey! Guess where I'm calling from!!!! McDonalds!! No, I'm SERIOUS!!"

      I mean what toothless rube is still impressed by this?

      Why can't I legally choke these people to death? Whatever happened to survival of the fittest?
    • If a cell phone user keeps it quiet, what the hell is the problem?

      I think that's the crux of the problem. (Well, that and the custom ringtone. As far as I'm concerned, the 0.01% of cell phone users who like to sit in restaurants and play all their ring tones at full volume to their friends to show off their new phones are enough justification to make custom ringtones be punishable by lethal injection.) There seems to be some sort of natural instinct to speak loudly to someone you can't see, because most cell phone users I know (to my chagrin, I must admit that group includes me) will immediately raise the volume of their voice when entering a cell phone conversation.

      The SoMo1 is an interesting, if not entirely humane, solution to the problem. Maybe a more marketable solution would be one where the phone discourages speaking too loudly by actually getting more quiet in response to the user increasing his/her speech volume above a given threshold. Make it the person on the other end's responsibility to determine how loud your voice needs to be using the handy-dandy volume control.

  • What A Design Idea! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SamBaughman ( 74713 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:33AM (#5101821) Journal
    The SoMo4 (the knock-knock phone) is a great idea, though. By being able to communicate not just that I want to talk, but the importance I place on the conversation, it makes it much easier for the other person to decide if it's a good time or not. Even for me, as a call receiver.

    "Caller ID" phone numbers are a bad method of determining priority. People call for multiple reasons, and people call for all sorts of devices... including devices owned by another person. Any method of letting me know that someone who I trust is there and wants to talk to me is good. The "secret knock" would be tremendously functional, so that someone could get my attention regardless of where they're calling from.

    Not that we explicitly need the "knock-knock" style, but if my cell phone provider always asked the caller "Select a Priority" before ringing me, and then letting me see that priority, it could enhance the experience for me. So when I'm just sitting around I can take those Priority-5 "Hey what's up?" calls, but when I go into the theater I could set my phone to reject everything but Prioirty-0 calls (which I would leave the theater take).

    There are all sorts of "permission" issues for things, but this can be handled with passcode-type answers (where anything above a certain level requires a code to be accepted) or automated system permissions (calls from hospitals would always be allowed to go to a higher level than other calls), without requiring me to identify based on phone numbers.
    • Of course, you still have to rely on the other person to give a faithful priority. How often do you receive SPAM marked as high priority? This same feature has been available with E-mail for quite some time, but is seldom used, and more often abused.
    • On the note of priorities and permissions on phones, does anyone have one of those "walkie-talkie" phones that are out now? What's the point of those? From what I gather from the commercials, they allow you to get right through to the other party without it ringing. It that really a desirable feature? I'd rather have the ability to ignore whomever is calling me if I feel like it.

      I think a system with priorities like the poster above mentioned would work much better. The callee would still have the option of answering/ignoring the call, but would have somewhat of an idea of the importance of the call. Of course, you'd have to trust them not to cry wolf.
      • It's really only useful under certain conditions - think any situation that you might need to use a walkie-talkie - but the cell phone typically has a much better range.

        Two IT workers could go back and forth in different cities, troubleshooting a connection or something without tying up their phone the entire time.

  • Sounds like something to give to your enemy. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mockura ( 524860 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:33AM (#5101822)
    The first of the series uses electric shocks to condition the user to talk at a non-intrusive level

    So, just wait for them to use it, then walk up next to them and scream, yell...whatever!

    You: "Hey, Joe!!!!"

    Them: "Wha? AAAARRRRGH!"

    You're happy, they're dazed, and all is right with the world!

  • Those would be really popular in the S&M commu (Score:3, Funny)

    by The Evil Couch ( 621105 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:38AM (#5101858) Homepage
    *ring*
    "Oh no. It's Master. If I answer, I get shocked, but if I don't answer Master will punish me."
    *ring*
    "here goes nothing"
    *ZZZAAAAAAPPPPP*
    "Hello, I'm with Capitol One Visa and I'd like to talk to you about..."
  • Just think of the possibilities if they take over /.. Everytime a story is posted with typos, CmdrTaco gets a shock! The whole moderation system could be loads of fun and cut down on "First Post", "All your ...", "In Soviet Russia ..." posts. That's right, just giving a user -1 isn't good enough any more ;)
  • "The first of the series uses electric shocks to condition the user to talk at a non-intrusive level; the others are similarly ingenious."
    • April 1st already?

  • the problem isnt the phone.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Maeryk ( 87865 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:50AM (#5101960) Journal
    It is the user! Zapping the annoying Cell phone user in the theater wont stop them from A) letting their annoying screaming child run amok during the movie B) chatting at normal volume with the person next to them C) loudly snoring D)
    being generally obnoxious with their squeaky straw or nearly empty soda.

    We went to my son's 4th grade chorus recital last night. The family perched behind us A) let their 3? 4? year old child spend the entire half hour screaming to his (presumed) relative on stage, they carried on a conversation that came out louder on my camcorder than the singing, and when the kids did "hard knock life" with the snapping part, they got into a rampant (and loud) discussion of how to snap, and proceeded to practice throughout the rest of the show.

    Yes, I politely asked them to quiet down. No it didnt do any good.

    Its not the phone, its the jerk using it, and those same jerks have ALWAYS A) worn hats to theaters, B)jammed their knees into your seat (partially the theaters fault for building seats for 5' 100 lb people) and C) insisted on sitting dead center in a row of people and getting up three times during the movie.

    I would much prefer the devices be in the SEATS and controlled by a consensus of people in the theater.

    Maeryk
  • Perhaps new phones could listen for a local signal that said "no noise"? Then, phones that could vibrate could do so. People who REALLY need to take the call can do so. And text messages would quietly get through. I also like the idea of charging a fee to get through. Combine the two ideas, and you'll get a situation where if people call, and they pay the fee, the person who needs to get the call gets the call.. but doesn't unduly disturb his neighbor. Instead, he can quietly get out of the theater or whatever.

  • Non-intrusive ringtones (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Gudlyf ( 544445 ) <.gudlyf. .at. .realistek.com.> on Friday January 17, 2003 @10:56AM (#5102001) Homepage Journal
    I was thinking about this the other night while at the movies. Why doesn't someone develop a ringtone that sounds like a person coughing? Coughing is a natural act that, unless happening repeatedly over and over, shouldn't cause someone at a movie to be pissed-off at you. Set your phone's ringtone to "cough", and that should at least help if you're not prone to setting your phone to vibrate, or OFF for that matter.

    The problem, of course, is making sure you always have the phone's ringtone set that way. Forgetfulness is the most common reason for ringing phones in movie theaters, I imagine.

    • Mod this up, please. It's actually a really good idea.

      You should also be able to use the sneeze ring, the ahem (clear my throat) ring, and of course the fart ring (with or without incoming call notification odor).

      All kidding aside, it's a really simple, good idea.
  • I'm looking forward to the day when I walk into a resturaunt and am asked "Would you like the Cell section?" instead of asking about the smoking secton.

  • Who the hell do they think are going to buy these? IT's not like you can force poeple to get something like this and who cares enough to want to not be rude, can just, well, not be rude and doesn't need conditioning.
  • BZZzzzzzzzt!
    ...
    ...
    er...Good!

  • Wearable Mobile Phone (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Aloril ( 6529 )
    Wearable phone with head up display, bone conduction headset and twiddler like 'keyboard' would allow non-disruptive use at theaters, etc..

    It could work like this: You get call. You hear it on your bone conduction headset and see on head up display. You type replies with twiddler and synthesizer converts text into sound and sends it to the person at other side.

    Other people might not even realize you have wearable phone and are 'talking' on it, see modern wearable computer example here. [wearcam.org]

    Downside: Don't see anybody with above like product out ... yet.

  • I have had a cell phone for 6 years or so. My first one was one of those giant Nextel walkie talkies. Man that thing was a pain to tote around. I was in great shape, though, from the arm curls with my mega-talkie. It was annoying and embarrassing when someone would beep in, or if the phone would ring in a restaurant. It was for work, though, and when you are on 24/7 support it's hard to get away (especially when you are "the dog")

    From there I moved on to the smaller flip-phone nextel. Better to carry. That was when my midsection started to go downhill, but I had more energy. The accessibility was still annoying, though.

    Now I am on a motorola v60 with a different service. no more beep-beeps demanding my immediate attention and pissing off everyone within 30 feet that doesn't care what my drive-through-clerk sounding co-worker has to say or why they are stupid tonight.

    I have always been self conscious about using my phone except when I need to. I don't chat on it, I take care of work items quickly, and beyond that try only to use it to coordinate meeting times and so on.

    Other people yak away all day long about whatever, trying to squeeze all the lemon juice out of their "whenever minutes" or whatever minutes they might have.

    And still others hate cellphones to the point where they refuse to own one. My girlfriend fits into this category, which forces me to never be late to meet her because I can't call up with an excuse, and most of the time to have to gather her up and bring her places because of her challenged sense of locality. Not that these things are bad, I like treating her like an important person and not an extension of my electronic self.

    You do have to wonder when and how the cell phone will successfully integrate itself into our collective social senses. Probably not before there are as many laws governing the use of phones as there are defining when and where the poor sods that smoke can prepetrate their slow demise.
  • There are times when slashdot descends into the morning talk show mire. This topic has to be right up there with those amazingly annoying people who drive slowly in the left-hand lane. Rich veins for lame indignancy.

    Loads of technologies we accept every day are more obnoxious than cell phones. Gas lawn mowers, for one: there's a 50-year-old design, and a travesty against peace and quiet -- not to mention modern emissions standards. If a bunch of designers want to be clever about something, they could identify everyday stuff like that for which their might be a technological answer, rather than just cooking up supposedly clever ways to shock the slow drivers in the left lane. Designers who fix the problem have a little something over the ones who just spoof it.

    The only example of real cell phone abuse in my presence was a drunk fool at a Bruce Cockburn concert. Like a few awake people have said, the problem there isn't the technology, it's the lack of common consideration and just general stupidity of the user. News break: we always had drunk idiots at concerts. Before they had cell phones, they found ways to get on your nerves. (Granted, I don't go to crap movies, but it's never happened -- maybe your problem is that you're going to MIB II, the audience for which is 15 years old?)

  • I have often thought that it would be a good idea (and I mention in here lest someone patent it sometime in the future and make ludicrous amounts of money), to have ones phone monitor the background noise and alter the volumne of the ringer based upon it.
    i.e.

    In a quiet theatre, on a long distance train journey, there would be little ambient noise and the phone would ring quietly.

    In a noisy bar, or whilst walking near heavy traffic it would ring loudly.

    It would be trivial to implement - all phones have built in microphones after all.

    If I were able to write my own firmware and UI for my phone (i.e. If the APIs were available, and everything didn't have to be signed). This would be one of the features I would add.

    Of course there would be complications - what volume should be used if the phone were tucked away in a thick coat, or in a ladies handbag?

  • Spider's Truth Bomb (Score:5, Funny)

    by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @11:36AM (#5102326) Journal
    What's funny is that now the non-phone users have become the assholes in many cases. I can understand not liking phone use in restaurants or movies, but the prissy indignation of some of the addle-brained losers out there has gone too far.

    Example: I was with a friend at a large home improvement center, and he phoned home to the wife to check on her color preferences for some mini-blinds. A lady nearby did the big, exaggerated sigh and shook her head.

    We're standing in the middle of a noisy, cavernous store big enough to have an independent weather system, and she's upset someone is using a phone. What's the difference between that and him talking to one of the store staff, or talking to me? I mean, the resident birds in this store have evolved into their own sub-species, sparrowus homedepotus. This store is big!

    I looked back at the woman and quietly asked, "What do you do when faced with a real problem?" She walked off in a huff, the big fat bitch.

    On the flip side, the same friend, who always claims talking on the phone does not distract him from driving called me from the road last week. In the middle of the conversation, the call is cut off. He phones back a minute later and said he had to drop the phone because he turned the wrong way down a one way street. Fortunately the nearest traffic was two blocks away. Doh!

  • ...just don't work. We've seen that with attempted copy prevention on CDs, we've seen it with attempts to fight spam, we've seen it with speed cameras, and a hundred other eexamplse.

    These technological solutions are blunt instruments; they prevent some valid (legal and/or moral) use, and they don't prevent some invalid use. Regardless of the morality of applying such blanket solutions, they simply don't solve the problem, even though they may help to mask the symptoms in some cases.

    The problem of inappropriate mobile phone use is little different from that of people speaking to each other loudly, playing digital watch tunes, or any other disruptive activity. As many others here have said, the problem isn't the phone; it's the user who allows the phone to sound and/or takes a call at such a time. It's entirely possible to set most phones so that the ring tone starts silently and slowly increases in volume; combined with a vibrating alert, I usually answer my phone (or reject the call) before anyone else was aware it was ringing. If only most other users applied similar consideration, I doubt options like this would be considered for a moment.

    The bottom line is that you can't force people to be considerate/moral/caring, neither with technology nor with the law. People must want to behave like that.

    Here endeth the lesson.

    • People must want to behave like that.

      Good point, but I think part of the problem should also be placed on the shoulders of our society, as well.

      Why are people so rude? What do you see people do when others are rude? I know when I have been in a theater, and a cellphone rings - everyone just ignores it, maybe a few groans are ellicited - but no one does anything. I don't know exactly where or when this sort of behavior among groups of people in public started up (I have a sneaking suspiscion that loud and obnoxious children being ignored by their parents may have something to do with it), but instead of those around the annoying stranger publically telling them to "get off the damn phone, moron!" - they are "pussyfied", and would rather sit and stew about it, looking the other way.

      Do we really want this issue to stop (and it isn't just this issue - same with loud people, loud kids, in general - unchecked, obnoxious, and sometimes dangerous - behavior)? If so, we as a society need to quit being subserviant, docile sheep and instead loudly proclaim our displeasure (in public) over the acts we witness. If enough people did this, over time people would realize that society frowns upon this behavior, and would not engage in it.

      After all, you don't see people running around willy-nilly punching people in the nose, do you (well, most of the time)...?

  • How about... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by stephanruby ( 542433 ) on Friday January 17, 2003 @06:43PM (#5105313)
    How about a cell phone that knows when the car is parked (or in driving mode). The cell phone would have an (optional) safe driving setting. When set and when driving, the cell phone would automatically go into voice mail and once in a parking position it would start ringing only once the car was safely in a parking position. This shouldn't be too hard to implement, when the power is cut off to the engine, there is already a small power variation going to the cigarette lighter.

    If this idea (or another idea) works commercially, my only concern is that the government might try to jump on it and make it mandatory. The government has the tendency to ruin good ideas. Eventually, our technological advances and our own self-interest in making our own cars safer will solve these kinds of problems (without coercion).

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close