> "relax" or "do not disturb" modes - curious if that actually works for anyone?

Ever since I've owned a smartphone, they have been on "do not disturb" 24/7. People that know me know they won't reach me directly, but that I will call them back eventually. I do have a couple of voice calls every day; I schedule them ahead of time based on my own actions, and set an alarm to take out the phone.

I am typically involved in something and I don't want to be disturbed during it; it may just be thinking, or reading, or actually talking to a human being present with me; why would I ever want to be disturbed? I only check my phone when I want to actively perform some task with it anyway, e.g. to look at maps, and then I put it away again. I don't mind carrying it around and needing to use it increasingly for tickets and such. I do not experience this as "self control". I don't have the urge to take out my wallet or keys or umbrella unless I need them either. Why would I.

I typically (also) carry a paper book to read on public transport or in cafés.

I limit the time I can spend on apps that distract me. I can use youtube, twitter, etc. for a combined 30 minutes, then my time is up, and I can only use essential apps (whatsapp, calendar, notes). On iPhones it's super easy to set up rules like these, using the screen time manager, and then giving the pin to a friend who only gives it to you if you need to change the settings. On android it's not as easy but solutions also exist.

It's difficult for apps like chrome that are distracting but also useful, I personally also limit chrome, if this means I can't look something up so be it, it's worth it for me.

Why more people aren't doing this is one of the main things that confuses me. People are constantly complaining about using their phone too much, but they don't just do this. I guess I'm an extreme outlier in terms of how willing I am to restrict the actions of my future self.

Do you still leave if you’ve gone out to eat with someone else?

I've been fairly successful at avoiding spots like that myself, also by just walking out. But its completely impractical if you're meeting up with (multiple) people.

I've thought about doing that, but it seems to require multiple Google accounts - one for the "child" and one for the "parent", which is hard to achieve without also having multiple SIM cards with different phone numbers that can be used for the account registration. I assume the process is designed to be full of friction to prevent people from freeing themselves of the addiction.

I'm thinking more and more of doing that, but prompted by the fact that the phone is a second-factor authenticator for so many things. I really don't want to lose that phone. I should just leave it home and carry another one just for urgent stuff.

It certainly is when you only look at the social media aspect of it. But always carrying a phone with you also brings an availability aspect with it. I know that saying "develop some self control" is usually a well intended advice, but it is very challenging for some people considering they are carrying their "trigger" basically everywhere.

Oh without the exception of the occasional ticket checks or checking a connecting train, there really is no actual reason. But as everybody knows, old habits die hard.

Humans are not rational. Even if you are 99% of the time, with a smartphone in your pocket there's a good chance you will use it for your emotional 1% within 2hours (and unravel). Read Rutger Bregman's goal for 2026: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2026/jan/04/lifes-t...

As a parent of young children I've found that I need my phone on any time my children are not with me. Calls from school or day care don't always come from the same number, so I answer every call when my kids are in the care of others (but none otherwise).

The problem with the reliance on self control is the self control. You have it or you don't. While I generally agree just exercising pure self control may be a viable strategy for some, it does not work for everyone. Particularly people with ADHD do have a tendency to be easily captured by screens.

I've personally struggled with adherence to my reduce screen time goals and while exercising more self control has helped, making active choices about my environment did help a lot more. And I like it that way, and I hate to see these choices be torpedoed all the time

easier for some brains than others, no? It's a sad loss of agency (for those whom it matters) to not be able to make such a simple choice to control the environmental conditions they are weak to

but i am genuinely glad for people who find that level of self-control readily accessible, that's just not me.

There's some interesting implications around the "default mode network" that's worth thinking about, and the sort of world we might be inadvertently bending toward [building] when everyone is constantly struggling to engage internal control mechanisms and depleting their ability to do other unconscious sorts of processing: https://archive.is/fYqtB