Do Cell Phones Make Us Stupid? 514
Noodleroni writes "I came across this article on MSNBC that discusses why it seems cell phone users are so stupid sometimes. A very interesting read." Absolutely no scientific basis in this - 'cept for the DoCoMo study, but it still seems true.
Fallacy: (Score:4, Funny)
~~~
Fallacy #2 (Score:2, Funny)
The chicken or the egg (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The chicken or the egg (Score:5, Funny)
Thought about cell phones (Score:2)
I'm really totally retarded (Score:3, Insightful)
This of course allows waaaay more information for me to try to keep track of - or rather the pointers.
I attribute that to my constant desire to sleep.
here's the thing... (Score:5, Funny)
Now with phones, you actually can hear them talk and they've removed any doubt about their intellect.
Re:here's the thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
No... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:No... (Score:2)
Just thought I'd let you know.
Joke, people (Score:4, Funny)
There ought to be a law (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, you walk into the room
Like a camel and then you frown
You put your eyes in your pocket
And your nose on the ground
There ought to be a law
Against you comin' around
You should be made
To always be wearing a telephone
Because something is happening here
But you don't know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?
How prophetic, eh?
Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:4, Informative)
Lab rats were found to have their short term memory impaired after being exposed to electromagnetic radiation (EM) at frequencies and amplitudes common in portable phones, markedly affecting their performance in a maze after 1 hour/day periods of EM exposure. In a second experiment designed to measure the time needed to complete a maze task, it was estimated that exposed animals required approximately one third more time than the control rats. {1}
Using an apparatus which tested for object recognition, researchers found that exposed rats suffered observable memory loss after EM radiation exposure. This test was done in 1994 specifically testing the effects of portable phones. {2}
The blood-brain barrier in test animals is made permeable to foriegn substances in the blood which would not normally be allowed to pass through brain cell walls. This, according to one group of researchers, was discovered when dye was injected into the blood stream of test rats and found to be absorbed by brain cells in exposed rats after twenty minutes, but not by those in the unexposed control group.{3}
The general effect of EM on the endochrine system, (the system of glands throughout the body, including the adrenal, thyroid and pancreatic among others,) is also noteworthy. The results from a variety of studies were lengthy and, frankly, difficult to briefly document as it seems different glands react to different frequencies and power levels in a wide variety of ways, sometimes having opposite effects simply by changing the pulse rate of a given wave form. Research only scratches the surface, and it seems that the potential for further study is enormous. Essentially, EM radiation as emitted from Cell Phones, pagers, wireless computer hardware and computer monitors does a wide range of strange things to the human body. One researcher simply summed up the overall effect of EM on the glandular system as resulting in, 'general stress disorder'. {4}
Delta Wave sleep patterns of test subjects were found to be inhibited after regular exposure, (one hour per day), to frequencies and power levels commonly emitted from computer monitors and in other tests, higher frequency portable phones. {5}
--With a drive for faster, cheaper and higher power wireless digital equipment, the general public might be well advised to remain cautious of the possible health hazards associated with the increased use of microwave active devices.
In the few instances where the large telecommunications companies have been challenged regarding the safety of their products, it is interesting to note that their public relations stances have been remarkably similar to those once commonly employed by the cigarette industry concerning tobacco use. It will be interesting to observe the direction and ultimate outcome of these trends.
References:
1. Henry Lai, 1998. Neurological effects of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation Presented to the Workshop on possible biological and health effects of RF electromagnetic fields. Project team: Mobile Phones and Health, Symposium, October 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna, Austria. http:// pages.britishlibrary.net/orange/henrylai.htm
2. James C. Lin, 2000. Effects of microwave and mobile telephone exposure on memory and memory processes. University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA http://www.eecs.uic.edu/eecspeople/lin_ieee42_3.h
3. Frey A.H., Feld S, Frey B. Neural function and behavior: defining the relationship. Ann NY Acad Sci 247:433-438
4. Dr. Robert Becker & Dr. Andrew Marino paper, "Electromagnetism & Life" http://www.ortho.lsumc.edu/Faculty/Marino/EL/ELTO
5. Drumanskiy, Yu.D., Sandala, M.G. 1974. The biologic action and hygenic significance of electromagnetic fields of superhigh and ultrahigh frequencies in densely populated areas. In Biologic effects and health hazards of microwave radiation, p. 289. Warsaw: Polish Medical Publishers.
But the most annoying one:
".ahh yeah im on the train now..
Re:Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:5, Funny)
Rats shouldn't use cell phones?
Re:Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:3, Insightful)
Not quite right. THESE result have been reproduced a lot of times. But similiar studies have been made to test if EM has the same effect on humans. Some of these human studies have proven the same effect, some have disproven them. This is where the controversy lies, but that mobile phones are bad for rats have been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
Old data? (Score:4, Insightful)
Much of your cited data seems to be conducted during the reign of first gen cellphones -- the analog variety. These older phones operate on different frequencies (obviously) and also require a much higher power output than the digital models used by 85% American cell phone owners today. How valid are these stats?
Re:Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:4, Interesting)
But you ignore the numerous longitudinal and statistical studies before and since on cell phone usage in humans, and the absolute LACK of increased cancer rates or other diseases relative to controls.
Besides, as Drumanskiy, et. all 1974 demonstrates, much more powerful electric fields have been around far longer, so the proximity of your cell phone to your brain is nothing compared to, say, sitting next to the air conditioner for an hour. (don't believe me? get a gaussometer and check)...or using one of those nifty electric vehicles. Or stepping onto an electric train (3rd rail, anyone?). Or standing next to a running automotive engine. Or having a transformer outside your room. Or sitting behind a CRT. Or being anywhere close to a lightning strike.
Re:Stupid Cell Phone Users (Score:4, Insightful)
Wake me up when they get some primates involved in these studies.
{4} Again, I cast out of hand anyone who talks about EM efects of a pager. Pagers do not transmit, and any doctor credible to that title would have either asked someone in the field, or would have noticed the lack of radiation of the device PRIOR to testing. Truly, this person does NOT deserve a PhD title if this is the type of irresponsible trash they pump out. They should be disbarred for publishing such a study immediately before they actually do hurt someone.
{5} Measures the effects of portable phones. At the time of that study (1974) they ran in the 49 Mhz band, or maybe even lower, in the kids walkie-talkie band. This is 20x lower than many newer analog portable phones and cellphones, and nearly 50x less than that of very new 2.4 Ghz phones.
Not to even get into the studies that mentioned "the frequencies of computer monitors" as if they had even the slightest relevance to cellphones. 15 kilo-cycles is the same as 900 MEGA-cycles or 2.4 GIGA-cycles?
Give me a break.
None of these studies has relevant evidence to what you are discussing, sorry.
Try your luck next time, though.
Can I get a grant from the feds to study this? (Score:2)
Do the cell phones make you stupid... (Score:5, Interesting)
stupid? or distracted? (Score:2)
Counterthesese (Score:4, Insightful)
#2 - Some other factor, not owning a cell phone, causes children with cell phones to do worse in school; I recall a study showing that sexually active teenagers do worse in school (now I can't find it). Sex doesn't make you stupid, teenagers with active sex lives get lower grades for some other reason. Personally, I've never observed much relationship between grades and intelligence, but that is another issue.
#3 - remember when we were kids? Back in the day, young people NEVER crossed against the light and then were blaze when a car almost hit them. Nope; that is one thing I can say with confidence never happened ever.
Absolutely no scientific basis in this
but it still seems true
Here's my prejudice:
no scientific basis = seems false.
It's a simple rule that prevents me from believing that aliens visit earth and give people enemas.
Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner! (Score:2, Funny)
no scientific basis = seems false
You must not be religious either.
Score one point for your team!
By the way, have you ever noticed how "everyone" always says everyone else is stupid/an idiot/bad driver/etc? I'll be the first to say, though, that I may be that idiot on occasion. My problem is that most people who think they're "frickin' geniuses" are, sadly, not.
I'm a firm believer in the fact that the human race as a whole has a very low average intelligence (which can be lowered further when multiple low-intelligence individuals are placed in proximity). Thankfully, there are some people who decide to use their intellect for more productive purposes, one of which would be not posting this article on Slashdot.
Absolutely no scientific basis in this
Translation: Either you're not smart enough to understand what you're doing (go ask someone smart), or you're grasping at straws, trying to renew your grant money. At least try to be creative!
Re:Intelligent subject (Score:2)
Something to think about.
Re:Counterthesese (Score:2)
Are you joking? That's obvious. Once you're getting laid, your math grade gets a LOT less important to you. I got a car and lost my virginity 4 weeks apart half way through my Junior year of high school. I went from an A- student to a C+ student almost overnight and don't regret any of it.
-B
Re:Counterthesese (Score:2)
remember, science doesn't know everything. For a long time people said to eat chiken soup even though there was no scientific basis. Much later someone did do scientific tests and found out that chicken soup IS good for you, proving what all the old mothers had believed for generations.
Cellphones making users stupider? (Score:2, Insightful)
Wrong! (Score:5, Funny)
Just what is it about the combination of blonde hair, motherhood, a cell phone, and a big gas-guzzling SUV that destroys brain cells so completely? I'm not being arbitrary here, I had to fish one of these bimbos out of my front lawn last week... she didn't see the stopped schoolbus at the corner in time so she used my hedge as a deceleration device. She was still on the phone when the cops came.
Re:Wrong! (Score:4, Funny)
How many intelligent blondes do you know? You have to have brain cells to destroy first
Re:Wrong! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong! (Score:5, Funny)
At least one.... my wife. Any husband who would answer otherwise seriously lacks intelligence. Or a desire to live.
Re:Wrong! (Score:2, Insightful)
No, just lacks any sense of self-esteem. Keeping a supposedly less intelligent wife around is the favorite ego boost of below average men.
What these geniuses haven't figured out is, most women can pretend to be stupid. Many do it all the time just so they don't intimidate their husbands.
Any studies being done on "humour impairment"? (Score:2)
Or are we just really, really angry people? (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess my point is this: I will concede, without any doubt, that the same social morons and ignoramuses still exist, and now rather than just talking to the person beside them at 96dbA, now they do it into a cellphone. I also will concede that it is unbelievably irritating hearing an endless chorus of ringtones by people who don't realize that yes, there is a volume setting other than superloud. At the same time though a lot of the anti-cellphone rage just seems to be redirected anger: People just simply can't stand each other nowadays, and cell phones give us an easy target.
Re:Or are we just really, really angry people? (Score:2)
If only it were true ... my phone [lgmobilephones.com] actually has a small number of very annoying eccentricities, one of them being that the ring is either on super-loud or turned off. (You can change the volume setting, but it has no effect.) Still, I chose the phone because it is otherwise all-around excellent.
I don't think we're angry in general (Score:4, Insightful)
I was sitting in class today and a woman's cell phone went off. It wasn't too annoying at first. Then she pulled her purse out of her backpack, and it got louder. Then she pulled the phone out of her purse, and it might as well have been a goddamn fire alarm. All in all, it took 30 seconds or so for her to turn it off, and it completely interrupted everyone's train of thought. When I see someone on a cellphone, this is the type of experience that immediately comes to mind - not the guy who I didn't even notice because he was speaking softly into his phone as I passed him on the walkway.
Think of SUVs, a good example since they've already been mentioned once in this thread. SUVs seem to carry similar connotations. Many people, myself included, see someone driving an SUV and often think "road hogging, gas guzzling, polluting idiot!" Of course that's not true in all cases. My dad's been driving an Explorer since '96 or so. He's never had a wreck in his life, he's never even had so much as a speeding ticket; he's a very safe and astute driver. Perhaps "gas guzzling" and "polluting" still apply, but he's not a road hog and he's no idiot. Yet I'm sure there are plenty of people who think that when they see him driving down the road.
It's just a stereotype. People have come to associate cellphones with rude, inconsiderate behavior (and for a good reason). They salivate when the bell rings, you can't expect anything else.
Shaun
Stand in the corner (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course someone's did ring and they were made to stand in the corner.
About 6 months later at another company wide meeting. Someone was speaking and a cell phone rings. Turns out it was his the CEO's.
He turned it off and went and stood in the corner.
Re:I don't think we're angry in general (Score:3, Insightful)
I think there would still be accidents. But they certainly would do a lot more to keep the population down.
On the other hand, my idea has always been to give everyone a
Of course, there would prbobably be quite a few deaths due to this, not many people are that good of shot and are as likely to hit as not, but I think it would go a long way to keeping people in line on the freeways.
All in all, it would be nice just to see some sort of system that punishes the people that create traffic snarls. The roads are a public resource that we have to share, and from a study I saw a while back, the best way to make everyone share is to allow for those that get screwed, by the one greedy bastard, to exact some sort of punishment upon the one idiot. Sadly, the police are streched too thin to do this effectivly, at least in my corner of the world, so the normal deterent isn't there. Plus, many of the little things that create the problems are not ticketable offenses anyway. Sure, its legal not to merge when you know that a lane is closed ahead, and try and get ahead of as many cars as possible, but by doing so you slow up everyone else. If everyone would just merge early, everyone would move faster. Conversly, when people are trying to merge early, try and let one in. Ok, so the merge thing is a pet peeve with me. But it is the one I have to deal with most often, and the solution is really rather simple.
Re:Or are we just really, really angry people? (Score:2)
Why is it that cell phones are banned in some coffee shops, for example, and people feel morally victorious? I mean, what's the damn difference, as the places are usually so damn loud you can't hear anyone else talk anywey?
I think people like to bitch. Today it's just the cell phone they're bitchin' about. Tomorrow it'll be something else.
Re:Or are we just really, really angry people? (Score:2)
Now I am not against anyone owning or using cell phones. There really isn't any moral principle I can hold up and say "there, that's why cell phones are bad". I know that all sorts of exceptional situations exist.
But for too many people, cell phones are a symbol of their self-importance because at any moment they can interrupt any conversation to speak with someone who they can deem at their will as "more important" than the person you are speaking with.
Still not with me? Imagine these scenarios. Two strangers meet each other at the airport. Neither have cell phones. Because of this, neither have leverage over the other. So they will feel more free to talk to one another.
Second scenario: one of the two strangers have a cell phone. In this case, the one with the cell phone has the leverage in this social situation. Why? Because he has a group of people who could only possibly talk to him. If you have ever been interrupted in a conversation by a cell phone then you know what I mean. It suddenly makes the cell phone owner seem more important and inversely, yourself seem less important.
And you wonder why cell phones have become so popular.
So it would seem that the solution would be when we all own cell phones. Then we'd all be at equal leverage, right? Not quite. Imagine the third scenario. Both strangers have cell phones. But for both of them, the investment to strike up a conversation is much greater since the risk of being interrupted by a cell phone is also much greater.
So we end up with an even less friendly society than we had before cell phones become common.
Now anyone reading this knows what the solution is. Ignore cell calls when you are talking to someone. But how many people do you think will know to do this? The same as how many people don't email word attachments or how many people leave the toilet seat up.
But I can't look into your mind to determine your ethical character. So I'll probably be less likely to strike up a conversation with you. Even more importantly, since you walked into the area I feel less important than you for the reasons I went into above.
What we need is a clear etiquette for the use of cell phones but so far, I haven't seen any such thing. As cell phones become more common, I hope one gets stirred up. Until then, I know I'm not going to buy a cell phone.
Again, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with cell phone use. Perhaps I am saying that certain circumstances with cell phones can be frustrating, notably--getting interrupted by a cell phone.
Now I wouldn't be shaking my head or making rude noises if you walked by with your cell phone. Perhaps the best word to describe it is intimidation--not by you but by your cell phone.
Just some things to think about.
My proposal for an MSNBC.com story: (Score:3, Funny)
lets generalize more... (Score:2, Interesting)
honestly in my opinion, we have always been a bunch of collective morons...now were just trying to find excuses as to why...so its more than just a little ironic that its a dumb excuse.
dude.
My opinion (Score:5, Interesting)
Up until a few years ago, if someone wanted to talk on the phone, they'd be safely in their homes, confined to a single room, or within 3 feet of a payphone booth. The opportunities for trouble due to their all-consuming conversation were minimal. Cordless phones allowed them to wander so the phone wouldn't hold them by a leash any longer, but they were still confined to the house. Cell phones solved that "problem". Now they can wander freely, not paying attention to ANYTHING.
And not only an issue of convienence, it might also be one of status. 10 years ago, some people had cell phones, but the majority of the public was still somewhat in awe of them. Most people with cell phones back then didn't wander around conversing about the products on the grocery store shelves because it was TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE. They kept the conversations to important, serious things. Others in public that witnessed this equated cell phones with an artifical importantance. If only they could get one of their very own.....
And eventually the phones became economical for everyone and their dog to have one, or two or three. And with the average plan including enough minutes to pretty much occupy all waking hours of the month, and even some of the sleeping hours, there was no reason NOT to jabber aimlessly at all hours of the day. And since once upon a time only important people had cell phones in public, they figured the best way to look important is to talk on their cell phone in public. AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. Movie theatres, restaurants, anywhere is acceptable to take that important call about who's dating who at that particular moment. I mean, this kind of information simply CAN'T WAIT.
Still, I think the most appropriate comment I saw once was a cartoon of someone sitting in an outside diner, talking on his phone and he says "Sorry, I need to let you go now. Nobody can see me talking on the phone"
-Restil
Re:My opinion (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember reading a sociological study (sorry no URL, not even sure if it was on he web...?) which found a definite correlation, in public places populated by males, between
Re:My opinion (Score:2)
often times, yes (Score:2, Insightful)
After about 10 secnods, he started to get annoyed. Finally, someone front row center leans over to her bookbag, and takes her sweet time shutting the phone off. The look on her face was "oh, that's my phone!"
The person was in other classes of mine that semester, and was the first of many "oh, that's me" moments. I dont think she made any attempt all term to shut off her phone in a timely manner. We all leave the ringer on every now and then and get a call, but good grief! At least make the effort to shut it off when it does!
Re:often times, yes (Score:3, Funny)
On the other hand, I will never forget my favorite cell phone mishap. I was in my psychology class when another student's phone went off. Realizing his serious mistake, the student quickly turned the cell phone off and apologized to the teacher (students with manners, imagine that). However, the teacher wasn't quite satisfied. He wanted to know the same thing I did, who was calling at a time like that. (keep in mind this was in highschool when durring a certain set of hours every day, you are in school). The teacher asked the student to take the phone out and call the person back. The student did so and then at the teacher's request turned on the speaker phone aspect and pretended to be the student. Much to the amusement of the class, the student and the teacher, the person on the other end was a college friend of the student who was completely drunk and had no idea what he was doing or saying. Needless to say it was an entertaining class.
Re:often times, yes (Score:2)
Smart teacher. After that escapade, I suspect that the student *never* forgot to disable the ringer or completely turn off the phone for school again.
Re:often times, yes (Score:2)
She knew it was her phone all along. She was hoping that if she ignored it, nobody would realise that it was hers and she would be spared the ridicule and embarassment of everyone knowing that her phone rang in the lecture. I suspect that this is the same problem in movie theaters when a phone rings. Not being identified/embarassed is more important that shutting the thing off.
giggle (Score:2, Interesting)
*vodak drive on the highway like a madman on his phone, eating, and bitching at Hoawrd Stern for making fun of O&A.
I'm Seen it on Campus (Score:4, Funny)
At my university, the business college is in a building that is separated by the rest of campus by a road. Every Friday, all the business majors play dress up (the department has a policy that they all have to wear suits on Fridays).
They all have laptops and cell phones. They circle around tables in the building with their laptops open, busy hammering out assignments in Excel and taking important calls.
And they narrowly avoid getting sqashed on the crosswalk between the business building and the rest of campus. I see it almost every day with my own two eyes: a young man in a suit, busily yapping away on his cell phone, totally ambivilous to the fact that he is crossing against a green light. I saw a guy almost get creamed once; the driver slammed on his brakes and honked, stopping just inches from the business major. The business major didn't skip a beat in his conversation. He just waved and kept on chatting away as he crossed.
Someday, someone is going to get a "wake up call."
Re:I'm Seen it on Campus (Score:2, Funny)
How do you tell the difference between a business major hit by a car and a deer hit by a car? Skidmarks in front of the deer.
Re:I'm Seen it on Campus (Score:2)
"I see it almost every day with my own two eyes: a young man in a suit, busily yapping away on his cell phone, totally ambivilous to the fact that he is crossing against a green light."
I am ambivalent on this one -- I can't decide whether you're slightly unskilled or just oblivious when it comes to English vocabulary...
It's actually a word game I play. I make up words that aren't "defined" words that can be derived from their roots and their context. I know, it's a bad habit, and it's going to haunt me some day. Don't be so criticismal :-)
it's an editorial... (Score:2, Informative)
The only thing related to cellphones that may make you stupid (or look stupid, at least) is walking around with the full headset on, without talking, like a complete tool. Many of you know who I'm talking about.
Re:it's an editorial... (Score:3, Funny)
you (Score:2)
Either that, or I'm getting smarter
It's about communication. (Score:5, Interesting)
Because all of these are so convenient, the message is sent before it is even thought out at all, much less thought out fully. Convenience is good. As long as I'm at my computer and thinking about someone, I can mail them. No getting paper or a stamp or walking to the mailbox. Email is so easy that today's kids (the few that actually know how) rarely bother to spell anything correctly. With a phone's address book, 3 or 4 buttons are all that stand between one and a rambling, meaningless conversation.
What it boils down to is this: the inability to complete a thought is stupidity.
All of our wonderful commo toys make it too easy to concentrate on the act of communicating even when we have nothing at all to say. They are making us more stupid even before you look at the dangerous driver/ pedestrian problems.
An interesting occurance... (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyway, my girlfriend and my mother and I were all sitting around playing Monopoly when a friend called on my cell. I answered and started to chat. It was a very light conversation, no deep thinking, but I kept playing Monopoly as I talked.
Bad move.
We played two complete turns, with my opponents landing on a property owned by me EVERY TIME. Guess what? I didn't even notice. In my mind, I was playing just as well. Of course, I was seriously mistaken. I lost something like $2000 in that short time.
I took it as a serious lesson. Before, I had "kept the talking/driving to a minimum." Now I won't EVER talk while I drive. Do cell phones make people stupid? No, but it's most certainly a distraction, "hands-free" or not, and those little details that slip one's preoccupied mind are often the most important ones.
Brandon
Re:An interesting occurance... (Score:2)
Bad move.
We played two complete turns, with my opponents landing on a property owned by me EVERY TIME. Guess what? I didn't even notice. In my mind, I was playing just as well. Of course, I was seriously mistaken. I lost something like $2000 in that short time.
Cell phones make you lose @ Monopoly, too? Cool!
Now, how do I send a cell phone with a 1-800 number to one Steve "Monkey Boy" Ballmer ? (Back charged to him of course)
Soko
Re:An interesting occurance... (Score:2)
Lucky for you, you learned this lesson the 'safe' way. Now that you know what can happen, you will be more careful.
People who do know that cell phones steal your attention will pay MORE attention while driving. If, on the rare occasions that I am driving and taking a call (with my hands free set of course) I deliberately become more alert, checking mirrors, speed limits, blindspots, indicators, lights, road signs, etc very carefully. There's only so much 'attention' to go around so when I'm on the phone, I temporarily heighten the 'pool of attention' that is available so I don't flatten some pedestrian by accident.
Those fools who use their phone and drive like mad people have never had a close call where they could have gotten injured, or gotten in trouble with the law because of a cellphone related driving offence and will keep driving badly until they realise firsthand that they drove over a pedestrian and their insurance bill doubled.
Re:An interesting occurance... (Score:2)
I'd be much happier seeing more people pulled over talking on their cell phones.
Re:An interesting occurance... (Score:2, Interesting)
The synthetic voice over a cell phone is nowhere near as natural or easy to understand than a real voice.
I don't know about you, but my voice doesn't get choppy when I'm a little far from the cell tower.
Correlation != causation (Score:2)
Did it ever occur to them that maybe the kids with cell phones might have more active social lives and thus spend less time focused on school work? I know the chatty little social butterflies where I grew up were dumbasses. Or on the contraverse, smarter kids choose not to use cell phones to call their friends all the time because they know they'll talk to them eventually.
I study done by a real sociologist should have a lot more data than those two variables. No statistician worth his/her salt would be proud of that relation without additional supporting data.
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:2, Funny)
Those are some smart fucking kids!
Yeah, but look at this other MSNBC article (Score:2)
Favorite quote from article: "the survey indicated 39 percent say it's OK to make a mobile call when in the bathroom, down just slightly from 47 percent two years ago."
Re:Yeah, but look at this other MSNBC article (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, but look at this other MSNBC article (Score:2)
I think I'll be taking up a hermitage soon...
Heh (Score:3, Funny)
But I cop to it: The use of the cell phone made me temporarily insane.
Er.. ah.. hey, works for me!
Judge: You are on trial today for killing 40 pedestrians while driving. How do you plead?
Defendant: Well, you see, Judge, I was on my cell phone at the time..
Judge: Ohhh.. our mistake. You're free to go.
Other interesting questions.. (Score:2)
"Is Everything Microsoft Does Really Bad?"
"Is the RIAA Just Looking Out for its Artists?"
"Are Linux Users More Adaptive than Windows Users?"
"Should we Ban Crying Children From Movies?"
And so on...
Yep, I think questions like these will bring out just as much insight as this article did.
Re:Other interesting questions.. (Score:2)
"Should we Ban Crying Children From Movies?"
[/quote]
Fuck movies. Ban the little shits from everywhere. If I can't smoke there, I sure as hell don't want to hear the next potential cell phone user practicing being as loud as he/she can in a public forum.
Ahhh... My Courier Days. (Score:2)
In my early 20s I worked as a courier. We had radios in our cars. No full duplex. You had to key the mike and "capture" the channel. On more than one occasion, I was asked to change routes, rendezvous with other drivers, or even take a different exit while driving. This was an inherently dangerous and stressful business. I had two accidents, neither of which I attribute directly to use of the radio.
The first one was caused by speeding and an oil slick. The lady I rear-ended even slipped on the oil as she got out of her SUV and commented about it. Damage to my beat-up little 4-cylinder Mustang? $600. Damage to her SUV? $600.
The second time I was going through a parking lot and this woman backed out. She said I was speeding, I said she was an idiot not to look back before reversing. Insurance said neither party was at fault, so I had no access to her damage figure. Mine was $1100 because she scraped 3 side panels.
Although I wasn't talking on the radio during either of these accidents, the stress of the job pushed me to drive in an unsafe manner. The radio was part of that stress. Since I no longer do that job, I have had no moving violations and more importantly, no accidents.
Re:Ahhh... My Courier Days. (Score:2)
Parking lots are not government regulated roads and insurance doesn't cover it if your car gets creamed in one of them. (IANAL) If she said you were speeding in a parking lot, you might have wanted to ask her what the speed limit was. As far as I know, only governments can set legally enforcable speed limits on their roads.
I know this one girl who has had 3 accidents and they were all in parking lots and insurance did not cover any of it.
As to backing out, I think that there ARE too many fools who look around BEFORE they get into the car, and then back out assuming that the place is still clear. Your only defence in a parking lot is to be alert and keep your horn-hand at the ready. (does that sound dirty?)
Know what's funny? (Score:2)
Use a book instead (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Use a book instead (Score:2, Funny)
Oblivious to the impending danger of two far cooler students, he was unprepared for the inevitable shoulder barge.
The nerd learns a valuable lesson : book + urinal = wet in the worst possible way.
Re: Do Cell Phones Make Us Stupid? (Score:2)
Too Damn Small (Score:2)
It occurs to me that this may also contribute to the inability to multi-task while speaking on a cell phone. Most people don't have significant problems carrying on a conversation with another person while performing some other task: eating, walking, driving a car. But it's well-known that talking on a cell phone distracts from other tasks. This may be because the poor clarity requires the speaker to concentrate more on comprehending what is being said, and having to speak more deliberately to be understood.
It's not the phone, it's the multitasking (Score:2)
There was a study done on this (Score:2)
Many studies done on this... (Score:2)
Need more proof? (Score:2)
you can tell by the way they hold it (Score:2)
Probably a philosophical issue (Score:2)
Cell phones don't make people stupid. They're already stupid for thinking they need to use it. They rank right on up there with people who "need" television.
On a more serious note (Score:2)
We have mobile phones, email, irc, and slashdot. These communication mediums are meant to be part of the communications revolution, but are we losing the art of effective communication?
How often do you send 5 or six emails for what could be covered off in a 1 minute phone call? With email people miss your mood, tone, and oftne misinterpret what you mean.
How important is a face to face meeting? Meeting people face to face allows you to project senses that you just can't with a phone call or email. You get to guage each others body lnaguage and alter your communication to meet the changing mood. This is much harder on the phone, and almost impossible on email...
So mobile phones probably are making us more stupid, I also switch off to the world in a similar manner when I am writing emails, so email is also making more stupid.
Note to self, must meet the
No, Dependent. Not stupid (Score:2)
What I see going on, and it comes from regular phones as well, is that people are becoming too dependent on others.
Rather than research a subject or situation, and solve it themselves, they are calling someone else to provide a solution.
Tp illustrate, some years ago a student in a public school had to go to the Principals office to make or receive a call. The extra 'cost' of the procedure to make a call etc encouraged problem solving by the student. Students tended to remember to bring things they needed each day.
But now with cell phones, no one seems to have any decisive abilities. Children (and adults) call parents and others to ask the most trivial things. What to wear, what to eat, where is the sugar, can't find the peanut butter, should I buy this (insert some inconsequential object), etc.
It seems the power of reasoning and decision has all but disappeared.
And, wasn't that what school was all about? Getting away from home and learning to survive and prosper on ones' own?
Public Transportation (Score:2)
One terriffic anecdote tho - I was coming home one night and the woman sitting in front of me was talking to her friend sitting beside her, and the conversation was making a lot of people on the bus try not to laugh. It doesn't matter what it was about, the point is that her cel went off and she started to tell whoever called the same stupid story. The greatest thing was her ringtone - "If I Only Had A Brain." She really couldn't understand why she was getting such strange looks.
Triv
I'M ON THE TRAIN! (Score:2)
Well, OK, but I was a student back then and these things _were_ funny...
.02
cLive ;-)
What I would propose to my lawmaker: (Score:3, Interesting)
e.g., you'd be prepared to explain the nature of your emergency to
a cop and a judge), using a portable phone while operating
a motor vehicle on a public roadway constitutes a moving violation.
Exceptions could be provided for licensed amateur radio
operators, service personnel, security guards, etc.
Violators to be fined heavily -- as a moving violation.
One that raises your insurance rates, carries substantial fines,
and can cause you to forfeit your license to drive
AND your cell phone after multiple violations.
Let's make it worthwhile: a $500-1000 fine for the
first offense, which will generally be waived AFTER a
court appearence, on the condition that the violator will sit
through an uncomfortable class or do some service work.
I'm totally 100% serious here. You can still squawk on the
phone while driving if you have an emergency (what the
LAW says is an emergency, not necessarily what YOU say),
and you can still get a special license that will allow you
to do it after passing some tests that show you're capable...
But the routine, always-on nature of the doofuses out there
who *are* contributing to highway problems has got to stop.
You want to hear my views on road rage, and my
ideas of how to stop the trend?
it's obvious... (Score:2)
There's an interesting article [wired.com] in Wired [wired.com] that sheds light on this problem, sort of. The article is relevant because the problem is similar: being dangerously distracted.
Basically, it boils down to concentration. People walking around talking on a phone aren't paying attention to the important things, like who is about to squash them. People can't multi-task nearly as well as they assume, which is why people get into these stupid situations.
The big problem; (Score:2)
when people think it's somehow appropriate or
nice to have the monotonic rendition of a mozart
aria or bach partita as their ringer. As if that
makes them sophisticated somehow. It literally
makes me want to kill the owner of the phone.
Cell phones (and SUVs) do expose stupidity... (Score:2)
Dogpile (Score:2)
Always fashionable to pile on the cellphone users. Here's my contributions:
People were the same way at the dawn of the automobile age. The funny part is, they were mostly right. Cars are more dangerous[1] than horses and buggies, and an annoyance to civilized society. They also transformed civilization, in most ways for the better. (Try taking someone to the hospital on a horse sometime and see how it works out.)
The cellphone is here to stay. If costs come down just a bit more, everyone in the civilized world will have one. Might as well just enjoy it. If the conversations of those around you are bugging you, call a friend of your own and drown it out, or listen to that next technological marvel: the portable MP3 player.
-------------
1. Although folks forget how dangerous horses and buggies were, per road mile travelled. Horses are irrational: they buck riders off, run away with carriages, etc. It would actually be interesting to see a risk study sometime.
Re:Dogpile (Score:2)
works way better to listen to the conversation and butt in. Also rude, but way more fun than a cellphone
Would you believe... (Score:2)
Re:technology and intelligence (Score:5, Interesting)
Did you know that kids in school NEED their cell phones today? What's up with that? When I was a kid, which wasn't so long ago, if there was an emergency your parents would call the school and the school would track you down.
Sure, cellphones have had some positive benefits. For example, Finland has an economy now because of cellphones. But how are we actually BETTER OFF being able to instantly call anyone or be called anywhere?
Remember pay phones? They are dying faster than FreeBSD because noone needs them anymore, everyone has a cell phone.. Personally I liked pay phones, and you hackers should too since your 300bps acoustic coupled modem will get the job done anonymously from a pay phone.
Remember when if a pager went off in a movie or theater it was because the person getting paged was ACTUALLY A DOCTOR and had to do save someone's life right away? What makes ubiquitous synchronous communication So Freakin' Great That EVERYONE Has To Have It? I was on vacation a few weeks ago and it took me three days to really be at peace with not checking my email. What's up with that?
Cellphones might give us freedom, but then you lose your cell phone with everyone's phone numbers in it and you're back in the stone age. As much freedom as your phone gives you, it's that much of a tether too.
But don't take my word for it, listen to some Stereolab:
(insert HTML for mucical notes here)
We communicate more and more
In more defined ways than ever before
But no one has got anything to say
It's all very poor it's all just a bore
Someone has got to make the difference
Between the seeming and the meaning
The seeming over runs the meaning
The Great Douglas Adams Once Said (Score:4, Funny)
I think this explains it all. . .
Re:Well duh (Score:5, Insightful)
1.) Humans rely on hearing a lot more than people realize. This causes people to do stupid stuff like walk out into the street without looking. "Well, I dont hear anything, must be clear." In other words, we take hearing for granted. If you're listening to somebody on the phone, then you're not listening to stuff you typically hear.
2.) Holding a cell phone can lead to restricted head movement. You're not looking around as much. Couple that with point 1 and you start taking silly risks without even realizing it.
I'm sure people are drawing the conclusion that people burn up too much runtime while on the phone, but common sense should tell you that's not the case. Ppl talk and do stuff all the time and behave quite normally without cell phones. It's simply a matter of senses being disrupted. Use a hands-free kit and some of the problem goes away. I don't have an easy answer with the first point I made, though.
Re:Well duh (Score:2)
Re:Well duh (Score:2)
I was thinking of an earpeace you stick in your ear and look like Sam Beckett while you're walking down the street.
Sorry, now that I think about it, I DID use the wrong terminology. Sorry to be confusing!