Privacy Issues

[Mr.B]

"You decided to brag about driving while talking and throw in the gratuitous "non-professional people" about an expert on the topic. Did you really think that wouldn't get a response from one whose career is employing science in the service of health promotion?"

Condescending much?

[Mr.B]

"I never had a need or desire to have a cell / car / portable phone.... I also don't do counseling or surgery on Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Flitter, Flopper, or Flipper."

If one were to check my call/received call lists, they would only find calls made to/received from the wife or other relatives. I don't give out my number to anyone as an alternate contact number. My phone is a pay-as-you go; no contracts, no penalty for shortened contracts, or for slinging in the French Broad river. I do none of that social media crap, selfies or poopies* either.

(*saw this today...a poopy is a selfie on the potty)

[neoplacebo]

"I never had a need or desire to have a cell / car / portable phone.... I also don't do counseling or surgery on Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Flitter, Flopper, or Flipper."

If one were to check my call/received call lists, they would only find calls made to/received from the wife or other relatives. I don't give out my number to anyone as an alternate contact number. My phone is a pay-as-you go; no contracts, no penalty for shortened contracts, or for slinging in the French Broad river. I do none of that social media crap, selfies or poopies* either.

(*saw this today...a poopy is a selfie on the potty)

Yeah, well, there's people that check your call list that you don't know, and they're up to no good. I have thought of getting one of those pay as you call phones just in case I break down on the road somewhere in the middle of the night while on a counseling or surgery run, as my car is fifteen years old but as of now have not done so. And even if I did that I would put my number on the "do not call" list as my first call.

[O Really]

Well, duh - that's why it's called a "mobile" - always on bluetooth or earbuds, never texting ... distractions can be managed. I've been using a car phone since they were called "car phones" back in 1990 or so. I'm aware it can be a distraction and I use it cautiously.

Sure sounds like denying the data and claiming exemption to me. Did I misunderstand?

I only care about about your driving while talking and the consequent risk to yourself and others. I don't care if you're an addict or a responsible user, and if I'm ever lost with you I'll appreciate the GPS. I just posted the questionnaire because we were already discussing the topic and figured people would take the test if it interested them.

You decided to brag about driving while talking and throw in the gratuitous "non-professional people" about an expert on the topic. Did you really think that wouldn't get a response from one whose career is employing science in the service of health promotion?

OK, let me rephrase. The data is what it is. I don't care. Statistics that apply to a population overall don't necessarily apply to every individual in the population. Statistically, males under 25 get into more accidents than anybody else. But that doesn't mean an individual kid who learns good driving skills, and is careful and responsible is personally more likely to get into an accident. If you want to call it an "exemption," fine. I don't - I just call it a correct interpretation of statistics.

BTW, my use of "non-professional" may have appeared to be directed at the author. It wasn't intended so. There are a lot of people around who are not professionals who talk about people being "addicted" to one thing or another, and particularly on the tech topic, starting way back with terms like "CrackBerry"

[O Really]

Well, as you may have noticed, I will sometimes hold up the "other side" of a discussion just for sport. I also despise the current "safety" trend where more than half the news segments report something bad happening in Boondock, UT, and using some variation of the line "we'll tell you how to keep your family safe..." All crime all the time. Scare'em, make 'em insecure and frightened of their shadows...yada. You may also recall that my father was a shrink, so I picked up a little knowledge through osmosis. One of those things is that terms have real definitions and should be used correctly. For example, "insane" is not a medical/psychological term, but a legal one. "Imbecile" and "idiot" used to have real meanings as a description of specific levels of intelligence, but are obsolete now. "Schizoid" isn't just your "crazy" girlfriend with mood variations.

So give me a fluffy pop-psy article (regardless of the legitimate credentials of the author) about "cellphone addiction" and it might be predictable I might take exception. But to give an accurate answer regardless my being a danger to you and your family and friends, truth is I rarely (not never) use my mobile while driving. On the interstate more likely than on city streets, and never with serious traffic conditions. If I'm making a call, I find somewhere to pull over. If I'm on a call, I don't chat. Say what needs to be said and hang up. But whether those activities increase my danger level or not, I'm not likely to change them, and the quiz questions didn't offer any shades of gray in the answer.

[Mr.B]

"And even if I did that I would put my number on the "do not call" list as my first call."

Inasmuch as cell numbers are not on a directory assistance or are even listed, that would be a moot move. If anything, it would open you up to nuisance calls. I get very few nuisance calls on my phone, and those I do get are probably from a robo-call computer.

On my home land-line, I got more nuisance calls after I put my number on the 'Do-Not-Call' list.

Most nuisance calls now are from 'spoofed' phone numbers; meaning that someone has hijacked a legitimate phone number and is using that number to call you. Your Caller ID may show a legitimate name and number, such as one I got from St. Jude's Children's Hospital where the caller was seeking "research" donations. I checked the number online and found it originated in California and they had been using the number to seek donations from a long list of legitimate organizations.

According to AT&T, those calls are impossible to trace. Believe it or not, I even gotten spam phone calls from my own telephone number! How weird is that?

If you do have Caller ID, do not call the number back...all you're doing is letting the spammer know that your number is an active working number.

If you have blocking that blocks your number on outgoing calls, that is only guaranteed to work on your carrier's system, and many times only within your state. Therefore, if you do call the spammer back, he sees your name and number and will call you by name.

Bottom line, as you've already stated, don't answer calls if you don't recognize the number.

Thanks to this great invention called the Internet, it has opened up a totally new way to commit crimes without leaving the comfort of your home. Is this a great world, or what?

[Mr.B]

"...truth is I rarely (not never) use my mobile while driving..."

That's one thing I like about Bluetooth technology. My cell is linked to my car radio; all I gotta do is press a key on the radio screen to answer incoming calls. If I have to make a call, I pull over and stop because the radio won't allow you to make a call while the car is moving. I can continue the call after making the connection if I want to, and both hands are on the wheel.

If I'm in my old truck, I still have one of those thingys called a Bluetooth earpiece.

I still get a laugh out of seeing these people who think they're so important they gotta walk around with their BT stuck in their ear with the little blue light flashing!

[O Really]

So give me a fluffy pop-psy article (regardless of the legitimate credentials of the author)

That's a bit of a contradiction, but leaving that aside they are meant to get the attention of people who might need and want help. It's not like most of us read academic treatises or that the pop-psy articles are meant as definitive diagnoses and guides for treatment.

about "cellphone addiction" and it might be predictable I might take exception.

Denial?


Maybe future data will, it sounds like what you already know guides your usage.

Being a legitimate expert doesn't keep one from writing fluff. Right, Dr. Oz?

I would indeed deny that I'm "addicted" based on those questions. The questions seem to imply that a person who turns around to go back home to get his mobile tends toward addiction. I already offered one valid reason why I would do that. If I were going to the grocery for much of a shopping trip, I would go back home to get my mobile, too - because my list is on it. (Well, maybe not really if I thought I could remember most of the stuff and nothing was of earth-shaking importance, but in principle, sure I'd go back to get it.) The question "do you spend more time than you should?" is relatively meaningless unless one has a definition of what "should" is. I'm guessing I "should" be on mine more than Mr.B is on his; I might think Neo "should" get a mobile, but that's not my call. IMNVHO, I "should" get the most use out of my tools and devices as I need. "Should" I not consult Gas Buddy because it increases my usage time? Or carry around a paper calendar and address book? I have to carry little bits of plastic around instead of using KeyRing? And keep a calculator in my pocket (along with my slide rule and plastic pocket pouch, I guess? Keep Post-It notes around so that using Evernote doesn't get me more usage than I "should"? Must I really look for a posted Metro, PATH or NJ Transit schedule or call the airline to check my flight's status - opps, that would be increasing my usage too. More than I "should?" Save the Sunday paper for the TV guide? Opps, I don't get a hard-copy paper. So tell me, guru, how much "should" one use their mobile before being "addicted?"

[JTA]

For me, it depends how far along I am before turning around to get my phone. If I'm more than 1/4 mile away from home I probably won't turn around depending on how far I'm going. It's a matter of "what if I break down or something bad happens and I need to call someone". If I'm driving a long distance to parts unknown it's also convenient to have an easy way to look up things to do and places to eat and make ad-hoc plans without having to do a ton of planning in advance. I don't know it's just so convenient. I'm new to smartphones, haven't even had mine a year now. Much easier to do things than my old brick phone.

I also use mine as an alarm, so it's the first thing I pick up in the morning to make it quiet down. I also use it as a clock so I can know what time it is. If I'm out with others I refuse to pick it up unless I absolutely need to. That's a pet peeve of mine. Especially when you're talking to someone and they bust out their phone. WTF!?

[Mr.B]

'....you're talking to someone and they bust out their phone..."

I've had that happen to me...I just walk away. Maybe that's what they wanted, I dunno; however, at that point, I'm through.

[O Really]

My definition of "fluff" (which isn't necessarily identical to anyone else's) is a type or style of writing that is light-hearted in approach and tends to be for entertainment, with maybe some real facts thrown in. It's not necessarily derogatory. I write some legal fluff pieces from time to time for a magazine or HR group publication. "Beware the Holiday Party" or some type thing. Little bit of fact, little bit of advice, mostly light entertainment. Doesn't mean I'm not a "real" expert.

[O Really]

I would never answer the phone while with others, unless I had given them warning ahead of time that I was expecting a call, and would need to step away to take it. Even then, it would have to be something really significant. But I return calls 100% of the time 100% within the same day, or if for whatever reason I can't, I get the legal assistant to do it. I kinda like keeping my job.

[Mr.B]

"Notice that the guy in the orange tried to block it with the wrong hand . . . . . . because he had his phone in the near hand"

Notice the one holding the phone wasn't even fazed......didn't even look up until afterwards. K---B

[Vrede too]

Man steps on a (4 foot) snake while busy on "smart"phone (and gets bitten)

[Mr.B]

It's unfortunate that people buying "smart phones" can't be tested to ensure compatibility.

The average smart phone user (according to a recent news article) has the attention span of a goldfish, we have become an exceedingly selfish and self-centered society with no manners that care very little about other people; we have become a nation of “sheeple” and “zombies” that are so addicted to electronic entertainment that we can’t even see how our society is rotting and decaying in thousands of different ways all around us, never mind the fact that more accidents occur while walking with a smartphone rather than in a car.....

[Mr.B]

"It amazes me that people spend over two thousand dollars a year on (cell phones). Crazyness! I can understand for business purposes, but these aren't, and they aren't rich people either. Yet they always complain about not having any money..... I wonder why?!??!..... Then they proceed to make fun of my flip phone that doesn't have texting or internet that I spend less than $200 a year on."

"I live on my mobile. And of all the things I use it for, phone calls are among the least. I don't even really consider it a "phone." It's a portable multi-purpose information device."