I disagree. Most people are able to self-regulate in more instances than you give credit for. In instances where someone is unable to do so, I would agree that a full prohibition probably makes sense; such as with alcoholics who are unable to stop themselves, but this is not the case for most people.

Interruptions - fear not the notification, for you hold the power to calibrate your notifications to the level that suits you. I'm particularly aggressive about disabling notifications and especially notification categories that do not add value, and you can too.

Resisting - many humans have reported experiencing even more enjoyment engaging in activities they enjoy if they delay their engagement until meeting a predetermined goal. If you know that scrolling through your favorite app for 5 min will give you a dopamine hit, you can choose to delay using the app until after you've completed a chore, for example, and that may offer enough incentive to complete more tasks than you might otherwise be able to perform.

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Those are really good points, and I appreciate the input. I could see why alcohol being on someones desk isn't a problem, e.g. depending on the person its possible the bottle doesn't have a "gravity" tempting them.

I'm going to guess that reality is somewhere between my points and your points. Notifications can be configured, but my grandmother isn't going to figure it out. Having a bottle of alcohol on every person's desk is probably completely neutral for a lot of people, but could be detrimental to others. Etc

[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov 1 points 4 days ago

Agreed. As with most things, the answer is neither black, nor white, but some shade of grey.