No its not perfectly socially acceptable, in contrary. Rude is the best description, be it personal or professional life.
When I see such person who simply can't resist looking at their displays during conversations, I know I am seeing a hard addict with host of other attention disorders. And the fool is feeding those, actively making them worse for some ultra short dopamine kicks that keep getting shorter till they make new baseline.
Not a stellar person in any meaningful way, rather an addict or an asshole. So much for perfectly acceptable.
Are we talking about momentarily checking if there's an important interruption and continuing with the conversation? If so, I'm confused as to why you possibly think it's unacceptable and rude.
I can see how this could be considered rude in a very formal setting, or when matters of high importance are discussed and uninterruptible focus is a must. But for most casual situations, I perceive glancing at incoming notification as normal. Assuming this happens reasonably infrequently, of course - that is, a glance in a while, not constant checking every other minute.
Java is around for much longer, has exactly same architecture re transitive dependencies, yet doesn't suffer from weekly attacks like these that affect half of the world. Not technically impossible, yet not happening (at least not at this scale).
If you want an actual solution, look for differences. If you somehow end up figuring out its about type of people using those, then there is no easy technical solution.
There are no goodies in this conflict, it doesn't matter whether some folks refuse to acknowledge their own tribe or ethnicity is doing or done some absolutely horrible things. No amount of whatabouttism is changing that, rest are details.
When anybody has doubts about how fucked up world and humans are, I just direct them into this medium-term conflict, facts are easy enough to find.
Yeah that approach can't be scaled to cities. Folks go there to chill or do alpinism, not live their lives and work. Otherwise those narrow steep streets would have very quickly rush hours and traffic jams, its really not a place designed for any traffic apart from walking.
One day, cheap automated electric self driving taxis will cover cities, thats unavoidable I think, but we are not there yet.
Cities are experimenting with traffic free areas like Barcelona's superblocks. You could imagine something like that but with cheap automated electric self driving taxis added. I agree we are not there - Waymo basically just substitute normal taxis.
Trains are not panacea some people here keep thinking they are. You would need to have train stops every few hundred meters changing it into some city subway or tram, interconnected with dense and fast local public transport.
I live in Switzerland, the place for trains, efficiency and its small and dense, an ideal situation right. Tons of people use trains every day, tons of people also bike for closer distances in good warmish weather but still highways are chock full and getting fuller every year. Public transport for out-of-city commuters is simply slower, often much slower.
This morning I was considering taking a motorbike to a train station that is 5km away, then 40 mins trains and 10 minute walk to work. I took the car instead for a change, I was faster despite having to cross the very center of bottlenecked and car-hostile big city (Geneva) in top rush hour. 65 mins door-to-door via public transport vs 45 in car. That's one way, meaning 40 minutes of my private life daily saved that I can spend ie with my kids and not staring in the phone or out of window.
Normally I take the motorbike if weather permits, if not I take the public bus to the train, adding additional 15 minutes each way. That sucks pretty badly. I doubt other countries have this figured out better, and not everybody can or wants to live in city centers, especially when raising small kids. We did it for 10 years, had a work commute of 5mins via escooter, but I rather have current commute and live and raise kids in small commune next to wild forest and vineyards than that.
All above is usually much worse in many parts of US.
Its pretty safe to assume all of them up there are exactly the same in this, each of them with their own little unique twist. There may be somehow magically an exception (probably not 2 though), but I am not holding my breath.
This was pretty much known since Day 1 (famous dumb fucks quote about people sharing their personal details), and as we all should know at this point people don't change, not for the better at least.
Depending on the technology and individual, there is very little 'healthy' technology for teens. I don't say 0, far from it, but given whats usually available its really a minimal set.
Also there is very little of 'technological skill' to learn, clicking around could be understood by little kids, rest is just usage. Sure, hackers and generally brilliant folks may actually thrive, but they are rare and far apart in general population.
There is endless stream of highly addictive technology, and those kids have absolutely 0 defenses against it. Alcoholics also never notice when they crossed the threshold of a proper addiction, its quiet and sneaky business as usual till you hit the wall hard in some way.
What a great way to prepare for adult life, entering it with some heavy but peer-accepted psychological addiction or two. What could go wrong, raising a strong balanced individual right. Pride for any parent.
Sadly, you are right. Everything is made to retain attention, feeding into the addiction. Games do this with live services and 'daily events', social media apps are tailored to keep you constantly hooked (I'm reading 'Algospeak' at the moment which talks about how linguistics plays a role here, recommended read).
I don't think I know of a good parenting solution to this, to be honest. But if parents read this and want to chime in, I'm quite curious to see how others handle this. And I'm assuming the HN parenting crowd is a technical audience that understands the risks involved.
I have a toddler. We never let them play with a smartphone or tablet. Occasionally we show family photos, and rarely we will show them a video. But an adult is always holding the device and in control.
The toddler does have a "Yoto," which is a thing that plays music and little stories for kids. They love it, and I think it's kind of cool. We also let them watch a few shows on TV, but only during the afternoon. It usually gives the adults a chance to do something else, like cook dinner, but if there's an adult available, we try to do something else besides watch TV. Jellyfin has been great for curating a small list of parent-approved shows, with no other shows vying for my kid's attention.
When they get a little older, I would like to introduce video games. It would be either a home console with no online connection, or maybe some kind of Linux box that I've locked down.
We will be avoiding social media and similar platforms for as long as we can. That is where I feel the most worst, brain-warping dangers exist.
When I see such person who simply can't resist looking at their displays during conversations, I know I am seeing a hard addict with host of other attention disorders. And the fool is feeding those, actively making them worse for some ultra short dopamine kicks that keep getting shorter till they make new baseline.
Not a stellar person in any meaningful way, rather an addict or an asshole. So much for perfectly acceptable.