Slashdot Mirror
Shutting Up Annoying Cellphones
NoWhere Man writes: "North Carolina-based BlueLinx, which produces consumer applications for short-range wireless systems, and" Hold on I gotta take this call.... " a telecommunications center at the University of Adelaide in Australia are developing a feature for mobile phones that interacts with Bluetooth shortwave radio-link systems in public places. The feature is designed to automatically silence cellphone ringing. Once inside the Bluetooth coverage area, cellphones with the "Q-Zone" feature will be silenced."
sulli
sulli
RTFJ.
Dude... it's not turning the phone off, it's just putting the ringer on MUTE.. or hella low.. You can still use the phone.. chill.
"It's not like your minds are as open as the source you love..." - Me to the majority of Slashdot.
I can't wait till BlueLinx develops a chip to implant into my brain so I can block out Slashdot Troll posts about Natalie Portman...We wouldn't need a moderation system...
Actually, I would like a Q-zone that blocks out genomics patents from the Patent Office Computers!! The best part is, there are no buttons, and doctors are allowed to overide it!! Q-zone sounds like the MacOS.
What the heck?.....BIOTECH!
From the article:
"If you are a doctor, you can override the Q-Zone feature on your cellphone," said Mary Beth Griffin, BlueLinx executive vice president.
So basically, this only works if people dont set up their phones to exclude it. Wonderful. This will help out all of the fogetful people, who accidentally leave their phones on in movie theaters. Both of them.
But for the other trolls who think that the next call is too important to miss, they will turn off the feature anyway.
Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but whenever this comes about, I don't forsee it changing things too much.
At best, this is just a small feature to allow busy people who don't want to have to remember to turn their phones off when they enter a movie theater, to have it done automatically. Fine with me. This isn't going to prevent the annoying noise of cell-phones, unless people make the voluntary decision to do so.
I don't really even find cell-phones that annoying, unless it's in certain circumstances such as theaters. And chances are that some dumbass is going to think that waiting for a call from his buddies downtown is just as important as the call for the doctor who has to rush to the hospital to save a car-accident victim's life.
I'm not suggesting we should force anyone to turn their phones off or down, either. That's a bit stupid and big-brotherish, to me. It also could leave a lot of room for lawsuits and liability issues.
This only serves to make life a tiny notch simpler for those who care to be responsible enough to keep their volume down or off in certain public places. The problem of those who could care less about making those 'sacrifices' will have to be dealt with via old-fashioned intolerance by people around them when their phones go off and they engage in annoying conversation while you're trying to enjoy a flick. That is, next time someone's phone rings in the middle of a movie and they don't immediately shut it off -- or worse, they answer it and start talking, the people around them should chastise them for it. It's better than enforcing some dumb law and the moron still has the choice of leaving the theater or staying there and being a prick, if he can put up with the resulting disapprovement of the other movie-goers.
---
seumas.com
Apple Interface Designer Bruce Tognazzini suggested this in a recent column.
As one poster pointed out, a feature that involuntarily cripples your cellphone will be a tough sell.
Marc Siry || interactive media professional, motorcycle enthusiast ||
invasion of privacy, yada yada.
:P
i think it's great. i can't even begin to count how many times my classes were interrupted by someones wonderful 8 bit rendition fo the fugue toccatta in dmol, played in rich one-tonal harmonies
shaolin punk, activist post-industrial
I, for one, am seriously thrilled to no end by this bit of news. Now, if only children came with this feature...
/* TNW */
"Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"-TMBG
I agree, I think this is the most ridiculous use of technology to control people's lives I've heard of in a long time...
What the heck?.....BIOTECH!
Seattle, WA Shoeboy Industries, a leading producer of homemade bongs, has announced plans to enter the wireless market in a big way.
"Many people are bothered by individuals who use their cell phones in innapropriate places." announced Shoeboy. "Just yesterday I was taking a leak and the guy at the next urinal was on the phone with his wife. I'm sorry, but if a guy is going to say 'I love you honey' in a public restroom, I expect a blow job."
Shoeboy Industries hopes to combat these annoying mobile phone users by introducing a technology called ActiveGlock.
"ActiveGlock will provide a convienient point and click interface to silence those mobile users once and for all!" exclaims John Cheese, tech stock analyst for pointlesswasteoftime.com. "I'm very bullish on Shoeboy Industries stock right now. Shoeboy should be able to mow down the competition and shoot his way to the top of NASDAQ."
A representative for the Disgrunted Postal Workers Association revealed that it's members had been evaluating ActiveGlock technology and hope to implement it "When those bastards least expect it."
Others are less optimistic. "Technically it's murder," declares University of Utah law professor Dr. Rajeev Papshigali, "we wish it was justifiable homicide, but it isn't."
Dr. Papshigali's warnings went unheeded on wall street where Shoeboy Industries closed at 2.25 for a gain of 2.24 points on the day.
--Shoeboy
Am I going to be the only person who realizes that this is censorship?
Yes. Here's the clue: Censorship can only be done by the government.
You don't like the fact that the theatre you paid to get in to blocks cell phones? Walk out.
So, wait... when M$ used their leverage to block all of E-Bay's auctions of M$ products, that wasn't censorship? When private corporations try to stifle you, what is that? Bad business practice?
Actually, the most irritating thing I find about wireless phones (come on folks, lots of them aren't technically CELL anymore) are those vanity rings. It's incredibly annoying to hear La Cucaracha, Fur Elise, Ode to Joy and any number of other songs blaring when someone has an incoming call. I realize that it makes things easier in crowds where there may be many people with wireless phones, but they could at least use a different ring instead of obnoxiously long and high pitched snippets from a song...
I registered my hate for Jon Katz
If they could only develop some piece of hardware (or software too) to silence or turn down loud car stereo's I'd be happy.
:)
Sorry, I don't want to hear Britney Spears at 3000 db at 2 am in the morning. Come to think of it, I just don't want to hear Britney Spears, period!
Geoff
Hardly. The basis of this technology is to keep things in perspective. If I have to pay $9 a ticket to go to the movies, or $125 for a seat to a hockey game I don't want to have a million cellphones ringing the whole time. Same if you paid 20-30,000 for you kids wedding and people disrespect you by having thier cells ring the whole time. You can say this is censorship but I say its more an issue of forced politeness. It has become painfully obvious that no matter how many times people are asked to shut off thier phones for this and that they get irate and this could keep that from happening. With people becoming enraged for stupid shit like being asked to turn off thier cellphone why should anyone have to endanger themselves and ask you to turn off your phone when common decency should have told you to do so ahead of time. If a you are expecting a call that makes you so important that you have to have it no matter where you are well you should obviously not be in a place like a theater or arena where your 'important' call is going to inconvenience everyone else.
Prospecting Stinks. Stop Wasting Time on Cold Calling.
I can't count the number of times I've been driving to/from work and seen idjuts talking into their cellphones, weaving around, largely oblivious to their immediate (and dangerous) surroundings. So, assuming I were a complete and utter, is there some cheap litte bit o' nastiness that would "hang up"/crash/cancel/annoy all cell phones say, within a 25 foot radius?
Not that I'd ever do anything like that. No.
Just curious, ya understand.
Hrm, I wonder if this feature was funded at all by university professors. :) At least at my school the number one annoyance for professors is probably the two or three times per class that someone's cellphone rings. It's like the professors are beaten into submission too. Most times they just shake their head in disgust and go on with the lecture. The funniest (and most annoying) incident was when a classmate of mine asked the professor a question. The professor started into answering it, then the student's cellphone went off. Now, most times they'll just quickly smack the thing off like an alarm clock on a monday morning. Not this guy! He proceeded to get up and go out into the hall and take the call! I dont think the professor actually believed what had just happened as all he did was chuckle and move on. Could have been worse though, at least he had the decency to leave the room. He could have taken it right from his desk. :)
Now I just need to get a mobile version of this so that when I go somewhere with someone their cellphone doesn't go off every 5 minutes.
Better yet, get the 1 mile radius version installed in my car. I should get an insurance discount for this due to all the people around me guaranteed not to be distracted by ringing phones.
Of course, someone is going to invent the Silencer Override, followed by the Silencer Override Override, etc, much like the "Caller-ID", "Caller-ID blocking" and "Caller-ID blocking auto-refusal" mess we've gotten ourselves into.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/09/10/0826258.shtm l 1 772,00.html?chkpt=hpqs014
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,233
Mmmmmmm....HERF guns....
...using cellphones while driving. Will public highways start setting up Q-zones?
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
Personally I find it much more fun to take care of annoying cellular user the Old Fashioned way.
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
And, I can see the slogan now, as doctors can turn it off: "More Doctors Use Q-Zone than Any Other Phone!"
sulli
sulli
RTFJ.
No, it isn't censorship. They were protecting their patents and copyrights. What E-Bay was doing wasn't exactly illegal (rather, the people on E-Bay selling the M$ products) but it was a pretty bad loophole that was costing them (actually, just their marketting people more than likely) money for a product they worked years on to produce, which is where the patents come in.
So, wait... when M$ used their leverage to block all of E-Bay's auctions of M$ products, that wasn't censorship? ?
Of course not! The fact that you know about it should point that out. Just because one stinking site (ebay) wimped out to Gawd-Amighty Microsoft does not censorship make. The fact that we are talking about it here, now, makes my point.
Censorship is when you and a bunch of your friends gather around a street corner yelling "Bill Gates Sucks!" and the governing body shoots you all dead.
See also Tiemenn Square (sp) in China. When you've been run over by a tank because of your views get back to me.
So, you're saying that if you walked into a movie theater and started screaming about how Natalie Portman should be the next president because aliens kidnapped you and told you so, then the movie theater should not have the right to throw you out if you don't quiet down? A movie theater is private property, which means they have the right to decide (within reason) what you can and can't say on those premises. Granted, most don't do anything unless someone complains (they wouldn't get any business if they did) but they can still do that. Free Speech applies to the government, public places and your own private property. If I purchase some ink, paper and a printing press, I (ideally) have the right to print anything I want. The alternative to a bluetooth type of system is to have people check their cell phones at the door.
"My religion is to live --and die-- without regret." -- Milarepa
In Australia, and (presumably) the US and the UK, having a mobile phone ring while in the cinema is considered *extremely* rude. However, when I was in Hong Kong last year, it seemed like this was perfectly acceptable behaviour. What differences in acceptable mobile phone etiquette have other Slashdot readers noticed from place to place?
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
this is absolutely obsurd, cell phones are there for a reason, i for one would not like to be the person missing an emergency phone call, where possibly my child (if i had one) was in danger and i didnt get the phone call because i was in the friggin Q-zone so joe-shmo can not be annoyed. this is cencorship. If this goes in to effect do you have the option of Q-zone feature when you get the phone or will it be automatic for every phone? just my 2 cents
No where in the article did I see exactly what it does. It said that it silences the phone, but does that mean it makes it more quiet or that it shuts off the cell phone sound completely. There was a line in the article that implies the former, but just in case...
I think it would be nice to make the "silencer" customizable by the organization Bluetooth is installed in. Say, for instance, the organization would rather turn it to buzz mode than have any sound at all, like a church where everything is really quite quiet. Plus, who couldn't use a little "buzz" to keep them alert at some services! ;-)
Personally, I wouldn't mind some organization "buzzing" me while I'm busy. "Gets me all tingly inside!"
I think this is the most ridiculous use of technology to control people's lives I've heard of in a long time...
(Assuming this is from the United States...)
Might I suggest you take a long, hard look at your Social Security Number and just how many places that puts YOU in some database?
Sounds like another way for these already successful wireless communication companies to make more money (even off of organizations like churches.)
I'd like to see all new movie multi-plexes built with a temptest-proof (ie: RF-proof) wire cage around every theater. If you *elect* to go in, you should be aware that your cell phone, your pager, and any other obnoxious and rude device you may have, just *won't work*.
If you don't like it, I hope you choose not to patronize these places - I expect business will pick up as a result!
A.
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
(Disclaimer:I'm no expert on jamming radio communications.) Is it difficult to jam the mobile phone system in a local area? I imagine all you would have to do is disrupt communications between the phone and the tower such that the phone doesn't manage to get on the network. (In much that same way that you can kill arbitrary TCP connections on ethernet by injecting FINs) Hell, you wouldn't even have to transmit all the time. You could just detect a phone searching for a tower and jam it then to stop connection.
The best part about this system is that it would be backwards compatible with older phones, doesn't require getting manufactures on board and losers can't override it.
>;-)
--
Simon
Couldn't this protocol be used to assist in cellphone spoofing? It's already well understood that most cellphones are vulnerable to eaves-dropping in the absence of encryption. What about the following scenario:
1) set up a transmitter to broadcast the "silence" command to my victim's area
2) intercept incoming calls
3) since the victim is not notified of the call, I open up on the channel and pretend to be him/her.
This was one of the reasons our old friend the Denial of Service attack was invented oh so long ago.
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
Just because you don't get shot, you aren't censored? Sounds like telling me that if I'm not eating a 48 oz steak, I'm not eating... Just because it's not extreme doesn't make it right...
They should have the right to throw me out. But they shouldn't have the right to gag me as I come in, just in case I decide to yell about Natalie Portman...
For this feature to work, the user is going to have to allow it. Once Bluetooth enabled phones come out, users are going to quickly learn that they should not automatically connect to any bluetooth enabled device- first of all, the local Bluetooth piconet (limited to 16 devices, I think) is going to go quickly to capacity. Of course bluetooth will quickly be adopted by spammers and their ilk, which will cause most people to quickly disable the automatic discovery and promiscuous communication.
I have a feeling that the features that allow this sort of thing (stopping ringers) will not be automatically enabled (unless Microsoft dominates the technology). Would you be willing to share the contents of your PDA with anyone who walks by?
Could you imagine the joy of having designated areas where both cell phones don't ring AND babies don't cry????
sigs are a waste of space
There are a number of companies that now sell cell phone jamming devices. I've seen some models that a very compact and fit into a small area of your briefcase.
Of course, these devices are only sold outside of the US and are completely illegal to operate in the US.
The first commercial one that I'm aware of was developed in 1998, here is an article about it.
-- Virtual Windows Project
Does anyone remember a Japanese device that was supposed to obliterate cellular phone conversations within a 25' radius? Or was I just dreaming? How about a site about making such a device?
Basically this is just a way of automating something that people may want to do anyway. It's not for everyone, but not everyone has to use it.
In conclusion, it's a good thing.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
Just because you don't get shot, you aren't censored? Sounds like telling me that if I'm not eating a 48 oz steak, I'm not eating... Just because it's not extreme doesn't make it right...
We really are belaboring the obvious here, but what the heck, I'm bored. Here's the difference:
If a theatre manager shoots you for using a cell phone, that's murder. Because we have laws about killing people, and where and when you're allowed to do it. They are answerable to a higher authority, the Government.
If the government shoots you, it's because they felt like it. It's perfectly legal, because they write whatever laws they like. They answer to no higher authority than the people, and so far the people don't seem to have any problems with the Government blowing away folks in order to "Save the Children".
Hope this helps.
Now, instead of ringing, phones are also able to vibrate.
Which means users who don't want to disturb other people are already able to do so.
Doesn't that turn that feature pointless?
Reality check...
Instead of spending all that money on new technology and creating lawsuits, why not just put up a big yellow sign outside movie theaters, university classrooms & other un-cellphone friendly places (like my house, my car..) as a reminder:
Turn your cellphone/pager on vibrate or off or you will be shot. Dead.
Seems like a simpler, and more elegant solution to me. It's so logical it appears that no-one's thought of it yet. Then you don't have the hassle & expense of installing the bluetooth transmitters or whatever in the appropriate places. Let's stop getting gadget happy, you gadget freaks.. (myself included)
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
Censorship can only be done by the government.
Censorship, enforced by anyone is still censorship.
What if all theatres did this? Do I still have the freedom to choose not to go in? Yeah, you can claim I don't have to go in there. But no one had to buy computers with Windows installed either. What if Microsoft added something to Windows which (I'm stretching here) disallowed you from typing the word Linux? Would that be censorship?
Any sufficiently large or powerful group restricting freedom of thought, speech or other form of expression is committing censorship.
Disclaimer: I'm not claiming banning the use of cellphones is censorship - just that it doesn't have to be done by the government for it to be considered censorship
Mmmm.. Donuts
Why can't the up/down ringer volume buttons on the side on the phone go LOUDEST, LOUDER, LOUD, SOFT, ***SILENT***? Perhaps switching to light up ring or vibrate at the bottom of the volume range. But so long as nixing the ringer means navigating through menus, most people aren't gonna do it because let's face it, we dig through every menu even looking for secret menus just to see what's there. But Joe Marketroid has his "menus all set up" for him by the shop and never goes in there himself.
M$ could learn a lesson from these guys - an "off" button for visual basic scripting in outlook...
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
Strap one to your waist. and as you move no one is a 33 foot radius will bug you with their rigging phones....
No, it isn't censorship. They were protecting their patents and copyrights.
No, MS was enforcing an illegal clause in their software license which didn't allow one to sell the software.
Scuttlemonkey is a troll
You forgot: and where walkmen stop, and loudmouths shut up. And women said "Yes." when they mean "Yes."
Stefan.
It takes a lot of brains to enjoy satire, humor and wit-
The truth shall make you fret. (Ankh-Morpork tImes motto)
Well, actualy, yes they could....but I doubt many people would want to go to that theater. Now, if they gagged only you, or say, only Democrats, that would be illegal. They could, however, have a dress code requiring a gag.
"My religion is to live --and die-- without regret." -- Milarepa
like prisons and everything else, this sounds like a good idea except no one wants it to apply to *them.* do you think any self-important SOB is going to voluntarily make himself unavailable just because he's in a movie or something? no F'ing way. the fact that we are considering something like this is proof that it will fail. in other words, laws that try to regulate behaviour that should be taken care of by common courtesy will continue to, as they always have, universally fail. want a quiet movie experience? three words: D V D.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Why only go cell phones. Let's go whole hog!
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
No matter how much it costs.
:)
I'm going to mount it on the dash of my car, so I can actually get somewhere on the freeway without some asshole doing 80 in front of me and weaving all over the road because he's in the middle of a business meeting with his right hand.
You can take that ANYWAY you want to..
-Erik-
Perhaps it would also be possible for BlueLinx to implant a chip in the heads of people that clap in movie theaters that makes them burst into flames in a non-disruptive manner.
A handheld EMP generator might be more effective.
Would work on ANY cell phone. As well as my neighbors blaring TV. Dangerous drivers with their fancy electronic ignition. The machine at the grocery store that claims my checks are bad. Those androids that the CIA has used to replace my family members.
All kinds of useful things.
This might be an interesting idea if bluetooth were already in todays phones. However, this application alone certainly doesn't justify inserting bluetooth technology in phones. Bluetooth is reasonably complicated standard (1000+ pages for the core specification alone!), why on earth would you need all this when a simple RF transmitter would do? (ie, if receiving particular wavelength, mute phones.) No digital communication, piconets, etc needed!
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a fine idea, and when the bluetooth people have their way in a couple years, we'll all be living in a wirelessly connected world and have our phones muted in q-zones without giving it much of a thought.
>I think there's a good future in a device, that
>kills all stereo's and cellhpones in a, let's make
>is 500 meters or yards cubic, area. I promiss I'll
>stop smoking then, even if it's allowed, provided
>I find a cure for my need to.
Well, I can't help ya with the stereos... but as for the cellphones, check out this article in this week's SF Weekly:
http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2000-07-05/bayvi
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Imagine all the people...
Let's see here
First of all, it's not censorship. Grow up and stop complaining every time someone does something that means you can't run around being a jerk.
Second, let's see my list of places I'd like to see this deployed:
That's just a partial list, but then I'm in favor of ridding the world of all the morons when I become the evil overlord of the world. (Click the link for my homepage to see the details.)
Matthew Miller,
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
I hereby call on Slashdot's paranoid faithful to find a way that is a violation of someone's free speech. C'mon, I dare you! This is YOUR RIGHTS that are at stake here!
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
Just what did people do before they had pagers and cell phones? The world didn't grind to a halt.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Studies have shown (sorry for the lack of links) that talking on a hands free cell phone while driving is just as risky as talking on a normal cell phone while driving. Think about it-- you only need 1 hand to steer the car anyway (or else 1 armed people couldn't get drivers licenses).
The conclusions of these studies was that cell phones took away from the drivers' concentration, which slowed reaction time in the same way alcohol slows reaction time. And in the same way shaving in the car slows reaction time, I suppose...
If you really need to both shave and drive but can't find time for both, why not just wake up 5 minutes earlier?
-Ted
Erm, Bluetooth uses spread-spectrum in the microwave range, not the shortwave range. It's much shorter than shortwave.
Short distance is perhaps what was meant?
The building where I work has notoriously poor cell-phone coverage inside, so people tend to migrate to the windows, where my office is. Once I arrived in the morning to find a guy in my office on his cell phone who would not leave even after I made it clear that it was my office. Much like traffic engineering, improvements in technology like this may merely push the problem somewhere else.
When are we going to be able to do what we could do -before- cel.tel's came out?
Namely, talk -direct- to nearby wireless handsets, i.e. -without- having to schlepp along another gadget to supply this function. (Remember your first set of Lafayette or Radio Shack Walkie-Talkies?)
I think two parties have made investments here:
The cel.tel carriers (infrastructure) -and- the cel.tel owners (handset).
I don't see why -both- shouldn't win from their investments; I pay for air-time for my essential communications with those on POTS networks (and GSM, et al).
I'd like also to be able to use my handset for a private chat with a local handset (at least one)...
e.g. if we're both outside any coverage area and close enough to each other to establish direct handset-to-handset communications.
Perhaps the first company that builts this in will increase the cost of the handset so that I'm paying for it, but I like the once-off nature of the extra functionality that I'd be buying enough to part with a bit more $ to get it.
That's where I'd like to go next cel.tel makers of this planet... so, tell me: 'If not now, When' are you going to offer the means?
Urban Applications: a couple who goes shopping at a mall together or - at a park - have to search for a lost child (in either case, they decide to separate to increase their efficiency).
My Samsung SCH-3500 has an up/down button on the side that cycles through ringers with the following options: "Loud, Medium, Low, Silent, Vibrate." :)
No menus
Lovely phone, btw
Okay, I still want an idiots guide to making your own... but I dont want to stop anyones heart or anything. So I look around online. (still no sign of the legendary Wave Wall but WTF) http://www.sesp.co.uk/ http://www.cguard.com/English/latests/index.html http://www.cb-security.com/catalogue/products.htm ttp://home.earthlink.net/~montyhenry/surveillance4 .html Yes, I do personally hate cell phones. You see I ride a bike to work. PAY FUCKING ATTENTION.
Implementation of this technology changes the question of decorum from "does this impact others?" to "does something prevent me from doing this?"
A jerk with a disabled cell phone is still a jerk, and given the opportunity will engage in acts conducive to his station. Also, others are encouraged to become inconsiderate, secure in the knowledge that automatic facilities will do the thinking for them.
Further down the slope we encounter a considerable number of individuals who conduct themselves without thinking about their actions, relying instead on little gizmos to stop them from being idiots. That is probably a quality society should not boast.
This will probably work better in the GSM part of the world, where there's usually only one major system. In the US, we have as many as six completely separate cell phone systems in some areas.
So... Slashdot has been getting all worked up over Net Nanny et al. for no good reason?
-Dead Lesbian Witches! Think about it!
Certain window coatings that are designed to block the sun's UV rays also have the unintended side effect of weakening the airwaves used by cellphones. Couldn't this be used to block cellphone usage in certain areas (operas, concerts, restaurants etc.)? Advantage: only the owner of the place can impose the restriction, rather than some random stranger who just happens to walk by and has a beef with cellphones. What's the matter about cellphone usage on a bus? It's a noisy place anyways. And what's the difference about learning about somebody's private life by overhearing a phone conversation, rather than by overhearing a conversation with their seat-neighbour?
Say no to software patents.
So... Slashdot has been getting all worked up over Net Nanny et al. for no good reason?
You have the right to climb on top of your soap box and declare that the King is a Fink. You do not have to right to a free, tax-payer subsidized soapbox.
Freedom of the Press does not mean you get a free printing press. Freedom of Religion does not mean you get a free church. Etc, etc.
This is pretty damned silly. The only thing that will happen is people will turn it off. If they can't turn it off then they won't buy a cell phone equipped with it.
This goes back to the idea of trying to correct another person's stupidity or ignorance. Sorry, but you can't create a system intelligent enough to deal with human stupidity.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Or at least have faith that Slashdot will post a way to circumvent it :)
--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
"If I'm a doctor or if I'm on call when a server goes down, I can over-ride the feature and still receive my call."
If you were a doctor you would need to switch off your mobile phone in certain parts of the hospital. Having technology that would automatically switch your phone on/off as you rush down the corridor would really be a Good Thing.
[English is not my native language, so please excuse my spelling and grammar.]
and where is this "Government" entity?
i grew up in america and i seem to remember "the government" was the people. and that's true here in europe in most countries.
and since companies are also run by people, who would also be part of the government, then companies can censor people.
so you're saying that the government - the people - can censor people, but companies - also the people - can't by definition censor people. but they're the same people. by definition. your argument makes no sense. it disproves itself.
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
I'm doing a lot of travel by train at the moment and cellphones are becoming the bane of my life.
:-)
:-)
:-)
Why is it that even though people are sitting *right next* to their phone that they insist on having the ring volume at maximum? It's surely not necessary.
Personally I need my mobile since I have to be in contact when I'm travelling. However, and maybe I'm just weird, but my Nokia ring volume is set to 3, the ring sound set to "Discreet" (short beeping ring) and the ring method is set to "Ascending" (volume steadily increases until I answer).
This is *not* rocket science. I can also silence the phone completely with *two* button presses. Why do some others have a problem with this?
That said, the ringing settings seem to have no effect on the notification tone for incoming voicemail or SMS. And guess what - those are the two most annoying sounds my phone makes. Sigh. (Well, except for some of the ridiculous ringing tunes that phones have these days - but that's another rant
Fortunately, some UK trains now have "silent" carriages where mobile phones must be either switched off or on vibrate/silent. This is a great idea, but unfortunately I also want to smoke and the smoking carriage is not silent. I guess I've made my choice
I'd love to see a system whereby this remote silencing could be implemented on trains. Perhaps even electively - a silence button near my seat whereby if enough people in an area activate it, mobiles in the vicinity are automatically silent. Plus a carriage (or two) where people who *must* use their phones can go that has no such system.
I want silence, but I appreciate that others have more vital needs to use their mobiles. An elective system would be fair to all.
Sorry for the rant, but I'm old and cranky - I'm allowed
This should be extended to cell phones, beepers, digital watches, and those GameBoy things. I taught physics once in a 300-student lecture theater, and I had a devil of a time with students who wouldn't turn off their beepers/cell phones. Once I had a student in the front row take a call and talk audibly on her phone for about 5 minutes, with all the obligatory giggling and Valley Girl idioms, about where to go to lunch.
The next lecture I brought in a big hammer and laid it on the front table. "Any physicians in the room? Any paramedics?" (silence). "Good. Please turn off your cell phones and beepers. You have been warned."
Pity I never got a chance to use it.
I am so friggin tired of this argument. Censorship is not exclusively a government activity.
Lets hop on the ol' dictionary and find:
I presume that the reason for suppressing wireless phone communications is because they're considered objectionable, therefore the action of doing so would be censorship. Would it be justifiable censorship? I personally don't think so, but then, I'm not for technology and laws that are used to impose civilty and polite practices.
If you're going to lob out a smart-assed, smarmy answer, make it the right one.
-Jer
When I was living in Japan, I solved this problem by putting my phone on "vibrate" mode. My phone also came with a keychain attachment that also vibrated. Whenever I got a call, I got an exciting jolt (I kept it in my front pocket) and could discretely leave the room to answer the phone, with none the wiser.
I've never owned a cell phone in the US, but I have always assumed they US cell phones have this feature as well. Is this not the case, or are people just rude?
>And what point was that exactly?
OK, technically you're right. The real problem is that teh technology in the article is redundant with the existing low-tech gunpowder solutions.
If letting it ring *at all* in a restaurant or theater is part of the "intended use" of a cell phone, then possession of one of these devices should be a crime.
OK, maybe something less lethal than a glock should be used to aprehend the perpetrator, but . . .
I want these things *jammed* in public places. Restaraunts should have wheeled vats of battery acid, and waiters should seize ringing cellphones and drop them in--the rest of the patrons will cheer loudly . . .
>If you really need to both shave and drive but
>can't find time for both, why not just wake up 5
>minutes earlier?
WOuldn't growing a beard be a more reasonable solution? Running a piece of sharp metal across your throat every morning before you're fully awake is hardly a rational act . . .
:)
hawk, the bearded
I stop and tell a tale on the first day of class about a law school friend's wedding. THis person's watch regularly went off in class, to the dismay of, well, everyone.
At his wedding, his wife ordered the watch off, and hannded to me with instructions to grind it under my boot heel if it made a peep. This, I note, would have made me a hero at the school when we returned.
ALas, the watch remained silent. SO I'm still waiting for my chance.
Additionally, I"m checking with the administration on my new policy of summary confiscation or ejection (permanently) from my classroom.
Prof. Hawk
Theaters should have a simple policy. If your phone rings in the theater, you have to leave. You are not allowed to reenter. If you can't be bothered to turn your phone to vibrate or off before you start watching a movie then thats the penalty you pay. If you are a doctor or something, put the phone on VIBRATE. If the call is so important, you should probably be leaving to go to where you are needed anyway.
---
"What is that sound its making?"
---
"What is that sound its making?"
"It thinks it has a virus, but its actually just linux."
So if this gizmo will turn my phone off, then on again automatically, I'd buy one for sure. Of course, these "quiet zones" should be carefully chosen and easily identified.
That's gotta be the silliest work around ever. Because it's tedious to shut off your ringer, some company is making a system where new phones that support it that detect a signal to know when to shut off. If they're going to make new phones, why not just make them easy to shut off. Or is it easier to install transmitters all over the place that will work with some phones?
If only cellphones had a "Make This Guy Forget My Number" button.
sulli
sulli
RTFJ.
- "Thanks to XXX's YYY technology, you won't be bothered by your phone wherever you are not expected to use it..."
- "Be smart! Show yours but don't show you can't use it !"
- "Winners pays for this, Losers can't even pay to have this kind of modern problem."
BTW, I have to apologize for the last one: Being sysadmin, I didn't pay for it and it's really pissing me off.I believe I'll soon have a clue in my contract forbiding me to disable it...
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
WTF is it with you people? Social security number does not control your life in the same manner as this "we'll mute your phone in places we deem appropriate".
Please regale us with the stories of all the drivers' licenses, bank acounts, rental cars, airline tickets, jobs et al that you've managed to score without a SSN.
Seeing as I've done all that without a cell phone.
Next time someone's phone rings in the middle of a movie and they don't immediately shut it off -- or worse, they answer it and start talking, the people around them should chastise them for it.
I tried that at a Sonny Rollins show about a year ago, and I'm pretty sure that the guy would have beaten me up if his wife hadn't been there. Get an usher to throw them out. Nobody paid to hear some asshole talk on their phone.
Put my clarinet beneath your bed 'till I get back in town.
Can't stand to miss a call? Get a cell phone service package with voice mail. If your phone is off or in use, callers can still leave messages. Just don't check your messages during a movie (or a concert, wedding, graduation, church service, etc.).
Put my clarinet beneath your bed 'till I get back in town.
I have moderator points!!!! The power is mine!!!! I AM BECOME SHIVA, DESTROYER OF WORLDS!!!! MUHUHUHUHUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
+++ATH0
I mean... cellular operates in a licensed band.. sure... but.. licensed how? At what power levels? A low-power jamming signal with an effective radius of say 10 meters or so should be completely legal.. and if it's in a private building, you could jam (or shield) any room or even the whole building, provided it didn't affect the otuside world. I believe these 'jammers' are used in Japan, mainly in theaters and conference rooms.
Many seem to have a beef with people and their cell phone ringing at inappropriate moments (like a movie theater). Similar feelings are brought up by hearing a child screaming, and the parent doing nothing, or the parent screaming at their kid in a public area, because the child did something inappropriate. We get bothered by other inappropriate behavior we see (can anybody tell me why latino youths are always lifting their shirts, rubbing their bellies in a strange fashion - or why other (generally black, but I have seen white, asian and latino as well doing it, so it isn't a race issue) youths are always "touching" their groin area?), or at least we should.
However, what do we do about it? We either ignore it, or we try to create technological solutions to the problem.
The problem isn't technology folks - it's society.
I can think of the one solution that would stop this distress, and in a hurry - if we all did it:
We politely ask the person to stop. In other words, you should go up to them, say "Hi", and tell them that what they are doing (or not doing), is offensive to you, and ask them to please alter their behavior (please silence your phone, please don't touch yourself in public, please calm down). Doing so may bring curious responses (startlement is most common, embaressment follows - but in some situations, a punch might be thrown). However, if we all did this, whenever there was a problem, and weren't afraid to back up our fellow man - these issues would go away...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
In Japan, it's legal to jam cell phones and there's a good market for jamming boxes. They tend to work within a given radius, depending on their power. Unfortunately, I can't find a good link about this in Japan, but they get a passing mention at/ chronicle/archive/1999/12/17/ED59334.DTL&t ype=news
0 06
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=
There are other places where jamming happens. Check out
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980422S0
for an article on an Israeli company making jamming devices.
Finally, maybe someone can dig up an URL for paint that blocks cell transmissions. I saw the stuff discussed on a television magazine show a while back. The manufacturer indicated it worked pretty well most of the time. In a restaurant with lots of glass, it would at least interfere with cell phones, making the reception bad enough for most people to give up on the call. In a windowless environment like a theatre, where the cell phones inside would be entirely enclosed in a box of the paint, he indicated that reception was nearly impossible. Unfortunately, I can't find a link to anything about this product.
Personally, I wish my favorite restaurants would use both technologies. Or employ bouncers to throw rude cell users out on their butts the instant their phones start ringing.
Hell, I heard one of the damn things go off at a funeral a few months ago. Right there at the graveside! The dude with the phone grabbed it and walked away from the area, but still...
Get a Bionic ear with cellphone capabilities. A microphone will be implated in your jaw and a speaker in your ear. No need to bother others as only you can hear the ringing and the other person. Only prolem is when you speak.
Maybe some day it will be possible?
Nokia's (or at least mine) can go to silent mode by hitting the power button, and selecting silent mode from a menu.
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.