15 comments

  • bawolff 3 minutes ago
    Phone free resturants if you're eating alone sounds kind of miserable. Sometimes i want to read something while i wait for my food to come out.
    • Aboutplants 0 minutes ago
      Good news! If your alone there are other options!
  • 28304283409234 17 minutes ago
    If I had a bar I'd ban phones and call it The No Bars Bar. Alt: The Bar Without Bars
    • petcat 9 minutes ago
      No need to ban phones, just coat the walls in magnetic paint and install faraday cages on the windows.

      You will get "No bars". (and also maybe no customers and a safety code violation?)

  • wolvoleo 1 hour ago
    Hmm I love phone free nightclubs (or rather camera free, they tape off the cameras). Like techno clubs.

    Not so much of a fan of this in bars and restaurants, sometimes you need to stay in touch with friends who are still arriving etc. Or often they change their mind "this place is cool, why don't you come to us instead of us coming to you?". But ok plenty of places to choose from.

    • jermaustin1 1 hour ago
      > sometimes you need to stay in touch with friends who are still arriving etc.

      Do we need to? We are way too communicative now days. Back before everyone had cell phones, you said on Monday to friends and/or co-workers, "Let's get drinks on Friday at 7pm at BarClub" - Everyone put it in their diary, and on Friday at 6:55-7:30, people showed up where they were supposed to.

      We now have this anxiety around not being in constant contact with people, when just a couple decades ago, we wouldn't talk to a person for days/weeks at a time, but still manage to get together without (m)any issues.

      • wussboy 1 hour ago
        Humans used to get on ships and sail away, perhaps never to be heard from again. We can absolutely survive several minutes of confusion around eating arrangements. "Text me when you get there." Let's all just calm down and live with a little uncertainty
        • wolvoleo 1 hour ago
          Go for it but don't force it on me.
          • borski 57 minutes ago
            There will always be other places that don’t care.

            But I think it’s okay to appreciate the world around you and spend time being present while waiting for someone. We used to do this all the time. People watching is fun.

            • wolvoleo 50 minutes ago
              Yeah there'll be others sure.

              There's another aspect: these days most people don't like being told what to do. When it infringes on other people's lives like making photos I understand but anything else nope.

              I couldn't imagine working in an army either. I'd never let them get away with barking at me.

              • borski 31 minutes ago
                People have never liked being told what to do. Even in the military, it's rare that anyone likes being told what to do. The point is that you do it anyway, because you are disciplined and believe in the chain of command, provided you aren't being asked to do something illegal.

                If you don't trust your chain of command, then there are issues. But militaries are decidedly not democracies, because the military often requires swift action, and democracies move slowly by design.

                • wolvoleo 4 minutes ago
                  I am absolutely not disciplined and don't believe in a chain of command though. And I never will.

                  There's talk of bringing military service back in my country but I would honestly prefer fighting my own country than the enemy.

                  I hope more people are going to be like that when they implement it.

      • wolvoleo 1 hour ago
        It is what it is. It's how things work now. Anyway I have great respect for places that tape off cameras because it makes others feel safe. Because they know they won't be photographed without consent.

        But being on your mobile somewhere is more of a "you do you" thing for me. I'm not always on my phone, when I go out I don't go near it normally but getting a quick message is no problem IMO. For example when plans change. When others are on phones around me I don't find that very annoying, there's much more annoying behaviour.

        Personally I hate planning and love chaos so I really like this thing where I see someone online at 2am and they're like "hey why don't you come out to this club". Which happens fairly often.

      • downut 1 hour ago
        In 1989 I wrote and posted a paper letter to a college friend of ours in Northern England, asking, hey, around [June date I forget] we will be in London, want to meetup? A while later I get a reply letter saying sure, how about we meet at Piccadilly Circus on this date at this time. I posted an affirmative reply and there was no further communication. We were in Arizona at the time.

        On the agreed-to date and time we were there, and so was she.

        If we were talk about paper maps, it would blow people's minds. If we were to get further in the weeds and describe how we traveled around communist Czechoslovakia w/o a map, only a phrasebook entitled "Travelers Czech", well...

        Ah I forgot! We, without being specific about the date, knew that other college friends of ours, originally from Czechoslovakia, had told us they were going to be in their home town of Olomouc. We got the barest help in Prague with my wife's bad German on how to get there by train. Arrived, got a room, and called them up. For the next week they showed us around the country and visited family and friends.

        Other than lousy waiters in Prague we had a terrific adventure. Different times.

        But you sure had to able to demonstrate you had integrity in your agreements and were open to changes of plans.

        • pimlottc 59 minutes ago
          What's amusing is that I've tried to do this nowadays, where I make plans with someone a few weeks in advance and then just show up. Only to have them not be there, and when I ask what happened, they said, "oh, I didn't think we were still doing that, you hadn't said anything about it in a while"
          • smelendez 50 minutes ago
            It’s kind of funny that business etiquette has moved much more to scheduled meetings even for short discussions, and social life has moved in the opposite direction.
          • wolvoleo 55 minutes ago
            It depends. My friends with kids have everything planned out months in advance. If they're to come out to something they have to have it all scheduled between judo classes and school birthday parties blah blah

            The rest of us just wing it. Which I really prefer. I hate having plans. Especially in case I might not feel like it on the night in question.

        • megous 34 minutes ago
          Czechia has a very dense public transport network and if you want to walk a very nice network of marked tourist tracks. Not that different form 1989, except for marking an explicit cycling network since then.
    • markus_zhang 30 minutes ago
      It's just to create a brand to attract targeted customers. If you really hate phones in restaurants you are going to stick to them. Not an issue for me TBH, it's their free choice. It's kinda difficult to compete in food quality and such, but rather easy to just create a brand. You see this kind of things in politics a lot.

      Yeah gonna be downvoted, but whatever.

  • anonymousiam 2 hours ago
    There's a breakfast spot that I visit sometimes, with a sign on the wall that reads; "We do not have 'WiFi' -- Talk to each other -- Pretend it's 1995"
    • Teever 2 hours ago
      I totally support the phone-free bar and restaurant experience and encouraging people to socialize verbally instead of online but the thing is that I like to eat breakfast alone.

      It's a meditative process to me. There's nothing better than sitting in a greasy spoon looking out at a rainy day eating bacon and hashbrowns while sipping coffee and reading the newspaper. Just watching the world and gthe people go by while flipping and folding the pages of a large newspaper. That's bliss.

      Now that newspapers aren't really a thing anymore I like to read the news on my phone, or a paper about a topic that interests me.

      It's good to promote socializing as long as it doesn't come at the expensive at reflective processes.

      • heeton 1 hour ago
        > I totally support the phone-free bar and restaurant experience

        If you then expect an exemption because your phone use is different then I challenge that you don’t actually support the experience.

        If you want to read news in a phone-free environment: bring a newspaper, a kindle, etc.

        • bawolff 0 minutes ago
          What experience are you expecting in a phone-free breakfast joint if you are there by yourself? Interupting other patrons meals to randomly talk to them? That sounds kind of like hell.
      • senko 2 hours ago
        > It's a meditative process to me. [...] I like to read the news on my phone.

        I don't think reading news, especially on the phone, is meditative.

        With paper you might pause & reflect while turning a page, with phone even that is lost.

        > Just watching the world and the people go by while

        Why not do that without looking at the phone?

        • Teever 1 hour ago
          I knew someone was going to pull on that little thread.

          So let's use a dictionary definition: meditative -- of, involving, or absorbed in meditation or considered thought.

          In that context I have for decades now enjoyed sipping coffee, reading the news, and watching peope go by, smiling at the waitress, and considering how it all fits together. The cream in my cup, the man crossing the street, the price of tea in China -- it's all connected. Sometimes do this without a phone or a newspaper or a book. Sometimes I don't.

          This is just how I like to spend my Sunday breakfast. Alone. Not talking to people. Watching them and the world.

          • senko 1 hour ago
            Beautifully said, thank you.

            I'm glad I pulled on that thread :)

            • Teever 28 minutes ago
              Thank you for the kind words.

              I agree that a phone provides a suboptimal experience for this kind of thing.

              I loved seeing the pile of newspapers that have already been rifled through by previous patrons who have finished their morning meal. Picking the exact paper or sections that I want, perhaps grabbing a finished section from an old man who has already sat down and made it half way through his morning breakfest ritual.

              thumbing through the pages, holding the paper up to fold it over, putting it down on the table and pressing that edge of the with your thumb to make a sharp edge and then sipping your coffee.

              There really is nothing like it.

  • markus_zhang 41 minutes ago
    Well if they don't want businesses from phone-carrying people that's perfectly fine with me.

    Restaurants are too expensive anyway. A random breakfast in a random diner now costs around 60 CAD (include tax and tip) for two persons nowadays in my city. It is difficult to justify eating out unless I'm financially free.

  • raincole 46 minutes ago
    To increase table turnover rate for the restaurant.
  • hdbebdhdh 39 minutes ago
    I don't get it. If you don't want to use a phone, simply don't use a phone O_o
  • quchen 2 hours ago
    There are a couple of communities that have almost no phone presence. Certain kinds of music festivals are an example, and it's really quite nice not having to worry about being filmed.
  • SilverElfin 2 hours ago
    Great. It would be nice to normalize that as a feature. A cafe near me sort of has this by simply not offering WiFi and having a sign about it, and it works - there are people having conversations with their kids and with friends and with strangers there, while all other cafes seem to be mostly people on their phones and iPads (especially kids) and laptops. Also we need a total ban on meta glasses and other similar surveillance devices.
  • Acrobatic_Road 1 hour ago
    Yes! Phones should be treated like smoking.
    • wussboy 1 hour ago
      I like this idea. You can use your phone but you have to go outside to do it.
  • gosub100 2 hours ago
    You could enforce this by making a farday cage out of the building. I looked into this for an irrational (5G is government poison) family member. I wasn't going to debate how RF works, just buy some points by helping her indulge her fantasy. But actual RF blocking copper mesh material is very expensive. I wonder if this could be done via wallpaper and printing using a conductive ink printed on the same pattern?
    • nahkoots 32 minutes ago
      Linus Tech Tips made a Faraday cage out of an employee's house using graphite-based EMF-blocking paint. MMS messages with images couldn't be sent from within the house, although text messages and phone calls went through. They didn't do anything to treat the windows, though, so maybe if you combine the paint with some sort of fine wire mesh over the windows you'd get a more comprehensive blocking effect.

      At $200/gallon, the cost of the paint would also be a major consideration.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5BOFsiDpYQ

    • silisili 1 hour ago
      You really don't need a full on faraday cage. Signals in the phone frequency range are pretty poor at penetration, especially brick or concrete. I once lived in a house with lath and plaster walls, and I had to leave the office door open to even get wifi in there.

      Perhaps some well placed metallic material on or near the windows would suffice?

    • gruez 1 hour ago
      >I wonder if this could be done via wallpaper and printing using a conductive ink printed on the same pattern?

      AFAIK they have to be grounded so it'll be a massive pain to install, even if you can get it printed.

      • kibwen 1 hour ago
        Last I checked there was no consensus on whether or not a Faraday cage needed to be grounded to function properly, which seemed surprising.
        • avidiax 53 minutes ago
          Well, what does it mean to be "grounded". There isn't something special about the voltage potential of Earth.

          If a Faraday cage blocks interstellar signals only if one part of it is stuck in a ball of mud and rock... well, I have some questions.

          There is the possibility of the ground being a return path to the transmitter, but if that were effective, radio infrastructure would interfere world-wide, and you could transmit through the earth's core. And even that argument would suggest that the Faraday cage should be floating, not grounded.

    • madaxe_again 2 hours ago
      Just run a jammer - much easier and just as illegal - although if you use a busted microwave from the 80s it gives you good plausible deniability.
      • wikibob 1 hour ago
        Faraday cages are passive and not illegal. Jamming is.
      • gruez 1 hour ago
        >although if you use a busted microwave from the 80s it gives you good plausible deniability.

        Not every radio runs off 2.4G, the frequency that microwaves would affect. Even for wifi there's 5ghz and 6ghz bands. For cellphones there are far more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR_frequency_bands

      • gosub100 45 minutes ago
        "just"
    • cyanydeez 1 hour ago
      SImilar, except their belief is part of a illness that's some kind of dementia. It went further into all kinds of radiations, including things that are meaningless, like the 911 frequency.

      It degraded slowly over a decade. It's "stabilized" but just a bunch of word salad.

  • afron_manyu 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • webdoodle 1 hour ago
    [flagged]
    • logicchains 1 hour ago
      Not everybody has such a troubled personality that having the ability right at their fingertips to access all the world's information and communicate with anyone in the world somehow causes them problems, maybe you should touch grass.
      • Acrobatic_Road 1 hour ago
        No, he's right. Smartphones are a socio-demographic catastrophe. The fact that they exasperate mental illnesses is just a detail.
  • throw949449 2 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • amazingamazing 2 hours ago
      the vast majority of restaurants are already dog-free. which cities are you in where this is a problem? in Manhattan for instance basically all of them prohibit dogs under very particular circumstances like there's an outdoor area.
      • throw949449 2 hours ago
        Not my experience, everyone has assistance dog and ban does not apply to them.
        • amazingamazing 2 hours ago
          so you're in the USA and want service dogs to be prohibited? again, where is this an issue? most people do not have service dogs...
          • antonymoose 1 hour ago
            I constantly see people with obviously fake service dogs abusing the service dog system in the US and have for the last decade. I see them in bars, airports, and in the grocery store riding in the carts even!

            I love my dogs and happily patronize dog-friendly bars with them, but the abuse is a moral plague and health hazard even.

            • amazingamazing 1 hour ago
              Your dog doesn’t have to be a service dog to be in the airport. For your other examples it depends on if the establishment allows dogs or not.
          • throw949449 2 hours ago
            I want refound, if the establishement does not follow basic hygiene rules for serving food!
            • kevin_thibedeau 1 hour ago
              Actual service dogs are uncommon. Lots of emotional support proxy children out there but they have no business around food service.
              • lagniappe 1 hour ago
                Youre getting baited by a green name, Boudreaux
    • ghaff 2 hours ago
      Don’t come to many countries in Europe then.
    • gremlinunderway 1 hour ago
      Talk about a complete non-issue. The amount that this actually happens beyond the anecdotes of a few reactionary people listening to to many JRE podcasts is near zero.

      Besides, most places are dog-free. However, the ADA and other supporting legislation accommodates people with disabilities so this means that sometimes there's a balancing act between you enjoying a dog free experience (99% of the time) and then 1% of the time someone might have a dog with them that can detect low blood sugar for diabetes or stroke. Frankly, even if this is abused, just enabling people to have this accommodation without demanding it or disclosing medical information to strangers is worth it.

      Now I'm guessing you're one of these savant medical geniuses with super powers because you can "just tell by looking at em" to determine if they're faking it. With such powers I'd recommend medical school because those powers of diagnoses are being wasted for being a pathetic reactionary who can't stand anyone different than them.