From the article:

When we went to our seats, the wait staff let us know that despite the fact that the previews were playing, we wouldn’t know until the movie actually started whether we could see the film or not. If it didn’t work, the screen would just turn black. Luckily, the film went through without a hitch.

    • shrugal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m sorry, but I think that’s a little far fetched.

      Are you really suggesting that we run the risk of being too disconnected to receive emergency messages?! In an age where everyone has a smartphone on their person at all times, as well as at least a dozen internet-connected devices in their homes, offices, classrooms etc?!

      You would’ve had a point maybe 20 years ago, but technology has changed a bit since then.

        • shrugal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s not, because the statement is much more accurate in the case of internet-connected devices, and for emergency messages it’s enough to have someone around you who has one (e.g. a neighbour). I guess it would be really hard to find someone - in the areas where this change is made - who doesn’t have access to such a device in that sense, maybe even impossible.

          It’s really more like assuming everyone breathes air because most people do.

      • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah this was nonsense. Like it is mandated to have a TV always on to receive such emergency broadcasts. Same thing can happen to someone not having or not using a TV