Slashdot Mirror
Parents Sue School Over Use of Wi-Fi Network
Iphtashu Fitz writes "Both news.com and
Wired are
reporting that an Illinois school district is being sued by parents over their use of
a Wi-Fi network at a local elementary school. Apparently the parents of 5 students
are concerned about potential health risks to their children by the Wi-Fi radio signals.
The parents are seeking class-action status for their suit, which seeks to halt the use
of wireless networks but does not ask for monetary damages. The complete complaint is also available for your reading pleasure on wifinetnews.com." I would never have guessed that the emissions from a wireless network are bad, unlike the healthy emissions given off by the now inescapable cell phones that are everywhere in public.
Can't type...radiation...killing..me
So wifi signals fuck up kids brains and that's worth suing over. But the fact that the school probably has an insecure wifi network letting all their children's information lay available to anyone who wants to crack into the system and grab it doesn't phase them?
...should have their lower horn removed.
same brats carry mobile phones, I bet $2.
Unfortunately, the school district will now have to expend a significant amount of money to defend themselves against these bogus charges. Money that could otherwise be spent for some better cause such as, lets see, educating our children?
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
Not because their argument is right, but because they are actually seeking a solution instead of just obscene amounts of money. It's very refreshing, isn't it?
"Neque enim lex est aequior ulla, quam necis artifices arte perire sua."
I think they should worry about not crashing their cars and other more likely means of death.
2.4ghz Cordless phones use the same freq! What are these parents smoking?
keanmarine.com
That'll teach 'em to mess w/ Wi-Fi!
So, technically if this court battle wins, then neighbours could sue neighbours for using wifi networks in the privacy of their own home... That doesn't seem right. Or sue radio stations for the same thing...
in the suit have cell phones, watch TV or have a computer [um, like monitors give you a warm feeling if you sit too close. That isn't because windows is friendly!], drive SUVs, eat fast food, use individually used products, swiffers, etc, etc, etc...
Fuck.
Stupid people. Why don't thse people sue the school for using windows? That's more hazardous to their health.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
For allowing the use of cellphones, FM and AM radio, wireless telephones and hey! How about power lines, too?
I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
They are broadcasting in my city, and some of their programming is killing me.
i'm all for parents being involved in their childs developement.....but this is retarded. sounds like the parents need education more than the children...
I am not human. I am... Vulcan.
People are such idiots.
Seriously. Let this be a reality to check to you people out there. Some people just can't comprehend ANYTHING technical.
This is the 21st century, radio, UV, and all sorts of electromagnetic waves float around us. These schools are not sticking unborn fetuses in microwaves, they are simply putting up a radio network.
Why not sue the sun because it's barraging Earth with all these bad rays, sue cell phone companies for placing cellphone towers where your children may be. Sue HOT 95.5! for transmitting that crappy music.
Go get your aluminum foil beanie already.
Error 407 - No creative sig found
BWAHAHA! Oh, that's rich.
Won't someone PLEASE shut up about the damn childeren?
Keep their kids away from wi-fi hotspots like Starbucks. Or better yet, they need to sue Starbucks too.
Are they Armish? Do they have no microwave, television, stereo, mobile phone etc at home?
... When people with money and lawyers get bored, in America.
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
Not to mention florescent lights which are regularly used in public schools.
I bet Every parent in the lawsuit has a Cordless Phone in there house. And if i am not mistaken the Frequency on the cordless phones are close to that of a WI-FI network. So why not sue themselfs for using Cordless Phones in there Homes.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.
its nice to see someone suing for action not money.
Alright, its dumb
if i work around access points and am surrounded by wireless routers in my apt complex, am i gonna get a low sperm count? if yes, can i sue my boss and get his first child?
xao
xao
http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
Does anyone have the address of these people? I've got a load of tinfoil hats they can use to protect their children!
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Schools are always short of money -- not enough for textbooks, teachers, better facilities, computer upgrades, etc... And now they're being forced to spend money on lawyers to defend themselves against a lawsuit brought up by a few ignorant parents??? Yeah, that's a great way to spend the education budget...
If we had serious tort reform in this country where the losing party had to pay the legal expenses of the winner, these kinds of stupid lawsuits would never be filed in the first place...
Ok, let's get rid of radio and broadcast TV too, it uses the electromagnetic spectrum as well. Hell, don't let the kids out in the daytime, those electromagnetic sun waves are a killer (skin cancer). Give me a break. This suit should be dropped faster than little boys pants at the neverland ranch.
today is spelling optional day.
But doesn't radiation sharpen your memory?
(\(\
(=_=) Bani!
(")")
When railways were introduced, stations were built far away from towns "because cows would stop producing milk".
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
The plantiffs claim to have over 400 articles about the harmful effects of radiation such as WiFi, yet cite 0. I know this is just the beginning of the case, but this seems like a scare tactic, get rid of it and lose $0 or we'll keep going and you'll lose more. The basis of the scientific method is query and data replicability. If you don't query and produce not one datum, you aren't scientifically proving anything, you're making a political statment. The style, but not the substance, of this article, troubles me greatly.
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
I wonder if the TV, the microwave oven, the car, the fluorescent light, etc. would have been permitted to be sold if they were invented today?
Probably not.. lawyers and wackos would not have allowed it.
BTW, humans are so stupid when it comes to evaluating risks. Everyone is scared of radio waves and nuclear power but THEY WILL DRIVE A CAR!!!!!
Then they can sue pretty much every one on the planet for poisoning there kids. I mean, radio stations, high voltage powerlines,microwaves,cordless phones.(I bet most of these families own a microwave.) And if there really that all they have to do is wrap there kids head in tinfoil. It would be 100% effective in blocking thoes evil radio waves. (see: Fariday cage)
Did Glenn Beck rape and kill a girl in 1990? gb1990.com
Only in this country would you expect to find people sueing a person/company/organization/etc.. for such trivial nonsense.
/.'ers..
As I type this post right now, the monitor in my room, my radio, lights, cell phone, speakers are all giving off radiation. Not to mention, objects in my room (i.e. fork) are strengthening these signals.
Radiation is around us.. everywhere.. We can't stop it. The big question on hand is, do we sacrifice technology and all its benefits for the risk of potential radition which may or may not hinder ones health and/or possibly lead to cancer?
Please, out of all those parents sueing.. how many of them smoke, have 5 TV's in their house, drive a car, use a computer, etc.. you get my drift.
I hope there's somebody out there in Illinois who can smack those parents around a bit.. and I think I say this for most of the
"The ones who dont do anything are always the ones who try to pull you down" -- Henry Rollins
Check out oatleypark.com Stupid parents got a 3G tower torn down near a primary school.
I wonder how quickly these idiots ran to their portable phones to call their lawyers in order to file this frivolous lawsuit. It's ironic that these people who are supposed to be products of an educational system which teaches basic science(for instance, oh I don't know....the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation) is now actively participating in the promotion of their children's scientific illiteracy. Horay for the triumph of knee jerk emotional reaction over rational analysis!!
- "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
I would bet serious money that these are a bunch of Soccer Moms who drive like freakin' maniacs in their minivans and feed their fat lethargic kids fast food.
"Oooh... I don't want my child hurt by WiFi."
Meanwhile they're driving their freakin' POS minivan at 90 mph down the freeway zig zagging in and out of traffic as if they were driving a sports car while screaming at their morbidly obese kids in the back who are stuffing their faces full of fast food.
And you're worried about WiFi? Come on.
Sorry for the rant. I just had to get that off my chest. Yeah, maybe these parents are very health conscious... I dunno...
I have the feeling that these are those overly protective parents that make their kids wear tons of safety gear while engaging in extremely hazardous activities, such as walking.
We could ban tons of stuff from schools because it's 'dangerous'... Considering what people are exposed to every day, I'm suprised they went after this. While I can appreciate the whole be a good parent, look after kid's safety bit; I really don't recall anyone proving, substantially, that wi-fi poses any sort of safety risk. One can argue also that television and radio waves can also cause cancer/epilepsy/satan-worship/etc., so why not go after those too?
Just my rambling opinion...
-mo
Microwave ovens 1) use the same frequency as WiFi networks, and 2) give off 10 times the radiation as a WiFi network. So schools should be sued for gross neglegence if they have microwaves too! Or plaintiffs who own microwave ovens should be shot.
Let's not forget EM from TV's, Microwaves, my brain, etc.
This sounded more like SciFi news. How much time before the same parents sue cellphone companies?
"If we had serious tort reform in this country where the losing party had to pay the legal expenses of the winner, these kinds of stupid lawsuits would never be filed in the first place... "
And if doomdog filed a legitimate grievence in court, and lost? What would you do?
Using the same logic: Someone should tell them their new cordless phones are probably killing them!
Based on a recent article that says that 3G use has been observed to make people sick....
I think they should have installed 3G cards in all the computers, and not Wi-Fi cards, so the fat kids would feel sick and not eat so much school pizza, fries, oreo's and drink so much Coke.
That's where the lawsuit should be focused. The long term health effects of fat and sugar filled school food.
No Karma on this one.. *grin*
I got one of these puppies and it has managed to keep the voices in my head at bay. Perhaps it could help those kids too...
This is therefore, in the eyes of the law, a completely different case -- with a vastly different defendent -- than in the case of the potential issue of injury from the use of cell phones.
So we sue now for using the shift key?
So we sue now for not installing software?
So we sue now for using wifi?
So we now enter bizarro-world!
3) are used to cook babies!
and eat them too
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me. Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: 'Did little demons get inside and type it?' I don't know! My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - when a child of my client goes to a public school using wifi, then he is entitled to no less than two million in compensatory damages, and two million in punitive damages. Thank you." - Phil Hartman as The Unfrozen Lawyer - Saturday Night Live
At all the local area public schools they are paid to have cell phone towers in the school campus. I think THAT is a danger to the children more than anything eles with radiowaves but they won't take them down despite protest.
that these same parents never use baby monitors, cell phones, cordless phones, microwave ovens, or cathode ray tubes, as these all emit radio waves which pose a risk to their children? And that their houses are also sheilded against stray RF from power lines, the Sun, and even outer space? In other words, they must live in caves with only a wood fire for heat and light?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
I will be sueing all of mankind for emitting dangerous electromagnetic radiation from their heads! Only those with flatline electroencephalograms will escape my litigious wrath!
If you post it, they will read.
I hope none of these parents use cordless phones, TVs, microwave ovens, chlorinated tap water, computers, or folding chairs at home. God knows WiFi is 100 times worse than that healthy radiation comming from the TV or monitor.
The brain runs on EM waves that are far less powerfull. The percentage of the brain that is "dark" could be the attenna.
You may think I'm crazy, but lead drain pipes were considered a safe in their day.
Al I know is that I don't Wi-Fi for one reason: I get Headaches from it. I know I sound like a member of the tinfoil mafia, but I have had it happen to me too many time to ignore it.
For the Record I am NO luddite, I work in IT! I just don't work on Wi-Fi any more,
Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
Wait till these tinfoil hat wearing parents hear about floridation.
------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
Damn. I think I'm channeling Lewis Black today...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I suspect that once they heard that WiFi uses the same frequencies as microwave ovens they got worried. Too bad the power output of WiFi at the antenna is 1/10000th of what a microwave runs at. Maybe they should sue to shut down all radio stations, all cell networks, all electrical stations, and all TV's.
The parents need to be clued in on some wonderful news: It's impossible to escape RF radiation. As a beginning electronics hobbyist, one day I was playing with my new oscilloscope and touched the metal part of the probe, and a very rough waveform came up on the screen. Wondering what it was, and having a hunch, I plugged my function generator into the secondary inputs and set it to 60Hz sine, and guess what, they matched. My body was acting as a giant antenna for the RF waves coming off the electrical lines in my house. I'd write more, but I've decided to sue Socal Edison.
-R
Lawyer "There is no tests that prove they are safe"
Judge "You use your cellphone about once every half hour right?"
Lawyer "Yeah"
Judge "Have you gotten a tumor yet?"
Lawyer "No"
Judge "There's your proof its safe asshole"
course if only the real world was this easy
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
My father works on the electronics systems on the latest military aircraft, and he mentioned once, a year or so ago, that one had a box that would report on all the different signals coming in through the air -- radio, TV, cell phones, whatever; and when he turned it on without any filters, the screen just kept scrolling. He couldn't believe how many there were.
I have to wonder that if someone evolved to be able to percieve more than just the visible light spectrum or regular sound waves, they'd go crazy, thinking they heard voices in their head. Then I have to wonder if at least some people who are "crazy" don't simply percieve some of these signals, and their brains don't know how to process the information.
c-hack.com |
Wouldn't it be much simpler for the parents simply to have their children wear hats made from aluminum foil? :)
Understanding is a three edged sword. - Ambassador Kosh Naranek, Babylon 5
Obviosly they havent seen this privios article http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/01/131122 6&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=193
Lets see.. corless phones, microwave ovens, cell phones, television, satelite, radio, walkie talkies, rf id tags, wi-fi, garage door opener, car alarms.. the list goes on.. What's the point of getting all upset about wi-fi?
Microsoft Windows runs on stress and frustration.
And my classmates were wondering why I went to class with my trusty tin foil & duct tape hat. Now they know. Now they all know. Now they will all wear one. Now they will all reflect the deadly radiations coming from above. Now I need a full-body suit. Dangsarnit! Dangsarn slashdot!
In Canada, we don't fancy things like socks
As a physics guy who advocates greater science education and literacy, I'm occasionally asked by otherwise intelligent people, "Isn't it just a waste of time? We have division of labor, so why should I have to know anything about science?" This is the sort of headline which implicitly answers that question.
And todays humor is brought to us by Paraniod suburbanites, who dont think before they act.
.... err helpful could parents like these be .......
.... there are even bad things in the air ...... maybe they should take up a class action lawsuit against The_almighty_ (TM) for allowing cancer/aids/picksomethingbad ?
In the Spiffy town of "Oak Park" a few peon.... err parents have decieded to sue the local school district over the usage of a Wi-Fi network in the schools. The reason is unclear has to why they would sue the schools yet still have some wonderful things around the home that are far more damaging Such as:
1. Cell phones
2. Microwaves
3. TV. its eviillll
4. Themselves.
Think about it, exactly how harmfu
I can see it now. the children are forbidden from eating any foods that have preservatives. wearing any clothing that is not 100% organic material. They cannot play outside because dirt may contain BADDDDD things, like toxic waste.
and then of course there is this additional wonderful factiod: "the radio waves in a Wi-Fi network use the same frequency as wireless home phones, and have one-thirtieth the power of cordless phones"
hhmmmmmm, sounds to me like these parents had better lock there children in a sterile room, there be dangerous things out there
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
--
Man... that took quite a long time before this lawsuit happened. But I am glad it did. GSM networks in europe have had this discussion. UTMS networks in europe are even more dangerous and will have to be looked into. But rarely I hear people discuss WIFI/health risks. About time ! Thank you.
Thank God I don't live in the United States.
your sig is spot on the money here.
Radio waves have been flowing through our bodies since we were born (unless you're really, really old)... I even go to a university that uses a campus-wide wireless network... time to break out the cyanide, dumb parents, because you should be allowed to breed anymore.
...like those coming from large, 150,000 (or more) watt commercial FM transmitters? Or from aircraft guidance systems? Or emergency repeaters? I guess they all gotta go too...
Karma: Good. I'm hoping in the same way as pizza is 'good'...
How retarded are these people?
I'll bet they all have cordless phones at home.
I just wish the wireless signal would even reach my classroom laptop. The walls are solid concrete with tons of rebar and the signal is soooooooo weak I will probably kill myself in frustration before I die from cancer.
Any preoccupation with ideas of what is right or wrong in conduct shows an arrested intellectual development. (Wilde)
If it *was* a legitimate grievance, I would probably win. However, if I happened to lose, I would have to pony up legal fees for the other party -- that's just part of the risk equation when you decide to file a lawsuit...
Actions should have consequences. Apparently, far too many people have forgotten that.
I was thinking the same thing. Glad I read your post before I posted a duplicate.
I fully expect that unless the parents can show they are NOT using any cordless appliances or cellphones they will loose this case HARD.
Usually it takes research but they seem to be saying, stop just because. You could challenge the flouride in the water too...
I heard their water is laced with dihydrogen monoxide.
I wonder if the parents of students in the inner city are laughing or crying when they read about this lawsuit. "Hah! Our kids have a tough time getting textbooks, and the parents in Oak Park are worried about wireless networks?!"
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I am now just waiting for the next logical step in people who believe that the fact they have children means they can make anyone do anything
Specifically, I am waiting for the movement of concerned parents to ban WiFi on the grounds that it is beaming harmful pornography into their children
OH GOD WONT ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
nt
Normally, I'm all for plaintiffs. After all, I'm a plaintiffs' attorney. But this smacks of idiocy. I bet it gets tossed on summary judgment. I'd ask for Rule 11 (or Rule 11-type if an analogous state court rule exists since this is in state court) sanctions as well if I were defense counsel. Jesus H. Christ on a fucking crutch.
GF.
Lots of petrified grits
Backwoods, AL--A group of parents in this small town, calling itself "Citizens for Safer Classrooms", is suing their school district over the installation of what they call "massive portals designed solely for the purpose of subjecting our children to radiation." They claim these portals (which the school district contends are called "windows") are made of material carefully selected to ensure the maximum range of radiation is hitting their children.
"Well, I think it's an outrage," said Patti Jo, a mother of two children in the school district and one of the plaintiffs in the suit. "It's becoming more and more obvious that they're maliciously subjecting our little boys and girls to a whole host of EMR [electro-magnetic radiation], simply so they can save a few pennies on their electricity bill." She started to cry softly. "We intend to petition for a criminal trial, too. We're claiming it's premeditated murder. The school board should fry," she added.
Although both sides are trying to reach an agreement on how best to contain the situation, a school board member we contacted, speaking on condition of anonymity, was resolute. "Sure, they get a little UV radiation burned at times," the anonymous boardmember stated. "But have you looked at the cost of fluorescent tubes lately?"
Punitive damages, if the plaintiffs succeed, are expected to be in the millions.
Jouster
Parents are worried about Wi-Fi "emissions"? How about the toxic emissions from their cars? Or from the big old yellow buses?
Is our children learning?--George W. Bush
Laws are for people with no friends.
I guess this will do well to educate our children how to become good american citizens - citizens that are afraid of flashlights and other wave-emitting devices of lower energy levels. These citizens of tomorrow might not understand physics, but atleast they will understand the legal system. Why earn a living when you can just sue?
I would never have guessed that the emissions from a wireless network are bad, unlike the healthy emissions given off by the now inescapable cell phones that are everywhere in public.
These days we are already bombarded with so much RF it's not even funny.
do() || do_not();
these parents are driving their kids to school in armored tanks and making them wear their lead undies.
Sean
I know, I lived there for eighteen years, and moved away as soon as I graduated HS. Haven't been back since, and don't regret it.
I REALLY hope that other parrents who have kids going to this school district sue the parrents who are suing the schools. They are trying to steal away educational tools from their children! For the sake of insane paranoia! (and this is comming from a slashdotter!) Heck, this can even cause other school districts to not follow this upgrade. MY children may not get to have this technology in their schools in the future because of these losers, and I don't even live in Indiana.
The actual class action movement does mention compensation, so it seems to me that the real reason for this is that some losers found a 'surefire' way of making a ton of money through a lawsuit that just happens to have a side effect of removing tools from children's schools.
BTW, WiFi is regulated by the federal gov; it is 'officially safe.' Realistically no finding-of-fact can legitimately ignore that. Let us pray that this can allow the lawsuit to recieve a quick judgement before it does too much damage.
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
Wireless networking is fairly low power. It's not going to create near the amount of energy of a microwave, which operates just slightly higher on the spectrum. Should we illegalize microwaves in schools too?
This is insane. My company rolled out 802.11 a while ago, and they had a few statistics they sent out to address safety concerns.
Stuff like, "Since these run at low transmit power (.03 Watts), it's 1/10-1/20 the power of a cell phone." and "You'd have to hold a body part within 2cm of the antena for 30 minutes while the radio operated continuously at 100% capacity for that time."
Just look at IEEE C95.1 1991, which details the maximum safe exposure for any EM radiation.
Or, gosh, here's a thought... what about OSHA?! They've got a bazillion links on the research involved.
I hope this gets thrown out of the courts faster than you can blink. The last thing students need is to be shoved back into the backwaters of technology.
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
You know, if you aren't against raising barns before lunch, the safest place away from "harmful" radio waves is to buy a big farm somewhere in montana and live off the land, homeschool the kids, and fight the government every couple of years until you get declared a separate country (or tax exempt. whichever comes first)
I hear the problem is actually 10x worse, if a teacher within 20 feet has breast implants.
Seriously, when are people going to stop going all "Chicken Little" every time something that seems to be a hazard is proven to not be a hazard?
-- AC
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
In the early days of public schools in America, each school was closely supervised by a relatively small number of parents with mostly compatible philosophy. Think Oklahoma! or Anne of Green Gables. This arrangement worked well. Public school today is a gigantic institution where parents are unwelcome nuisances. The huge NEA union is concerned about maintaining their cash flow and social engineering rather than education as most of us understand it.
Some who agree with me on the problem, think that the Public Schools can be fixed. I think they are too far gone.
SUVs? The complaining parents dont understand physics which would explain their use of SUVs. If 100mW is enough to get their attention, why doesnt the byproduct of 9 miles per gallon? Sure, sue the school over something trivial and neglect their own affect on their children and the health of everyone around them.
Cell towers and WiFi are apples and oranges.
Each sector in a Cell tower (usually at least 3) puts out power at ~25 watts. This goes into a highly focused antenna such that the effective output power directly in front of the antenna is around 500 watts. Even at that power level health risks are thought to be low, but I still wouldn't want to live near one.
WiFi networks transmit at most 1/4 watt and usually much less. This radiation is fed into an omni-directional antenna and the users sit relatively far away from the transmitters. The frequency is similar to that of PCS cell phones (2.4 GHz vs 1.9 for cell), but the much lower power exposure means even fewer health risks. It's certainly MUCH safer than sticking a cell phone next to your skull.
One thing that MIGHT make WiFi more dangerous than it seems is the bandwith of the signal. Recent studies have suggested a connection with wider band signals and health reactions (3G cell phones have been shown to create headache and nausea, while legacy phones don't. The big difference is bandwidth)
Comparing WiFi to broadcast TV and radio is ridiculous. The power levels and frequencies are so different that there can be mo meaningful comparison.
I've worked in the cellular business in the past and I'm an extra class licensed ham. I know a few things about radio safety. I've had a 802.11G network in my house for nearly a year and I don't consider it to be a risk at all.
Given the incredible lack of information taught in public schools about RF and electromagnetic energy, this doesn't suprise me. People think that wireless data communication is like magic. Science programs glaze over even the most basic introduction to electromagnetics. I don't think I even had an iota of a introduction to the topic until I started university in an Electrical Engineering program. How many people could answer the basic question: How are EM waves produced? (Or rather, why are they produced?")
I hope these parents get smacked down, because there is far more RF energy coming from other sources. What they MIGHT want to be concerned about is the placement of electical substation transformers for the power grid. Would they like to teach schools without electricity?
Ignorance brought us great things like witch burning and the inquisitions. I hope this doesn't turn into one..
..don't panic
and set a completely unfair precedent.
WiFi uses non-ionizing radiation. After so many tests over so many years, scientists have very easily found ionizing radiation to cause or accelerate cancers, yet they have never been able to find evidence of the same with non-ionizing radiation.
Their kids are at infinitely more risk playing in the playground, soaking up UV from the Sun or sitting in front of a CRT which emits small ammounts of x rays.
What's more, typical WiFi puts out no more than 0.2W! Even if you have a highly directional antenna the effective radiated power is likely to be less than my Nokia 2110 (at 2 watts). Compare this with the absolute saturation of non-ionizing radiation that is all around us at much higher power levels from Cell phone, pager, TV, radio, etc etc!
This is a crazy lawsuit.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
counter-sue the parents for frivolous claims, either that or we're going to have to have "designated cellphone rooms" in public areas...
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Prime example of people being scared of things they don't understand.
because here in Minnesota, we don't have county school boards. Each school district is independant. I'm sure other states have completely different setups as well. Thank you for generalizing the country that is impossible to generalize.
When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
The names and addresses of the parents weren't difficult to find. Let's give them a call or two and teach them a thing or two about radio waves. Or, if you aren't the talking type, write them a nice little letter.
PLAINTIFF #1: Baiman, Michelle & Rhon
(708) 445-9052
205 S Humphrey Ave
Oak Park, IL 60302
PLAINTIFF #2: parents of John Davis (good luck finding this)
PLAINTIFF #3: Cabral, John T
(708) 524-0205
134 Clinton Ave
Oak Park, IL 60302
Quick! quick! Look there are people installing some weird technology which has rays coming out of it.
Hand me my CELL PHONE so i can start a class action against it. I am glad that my kids are watching the safe TELEVISON and talking on the safe CORDLESS PHONE while resting on an ELECTRIC BLANKET wating for the food to heat up in the MICROWAVE OVEN.
I might care more about this if the district had a legitimate use for wifi. It's an elementary school district, grades K-8. None of the students have laptops, and the majority of the teachers are incapable of using anything other than Internet Explorer, Microsoft Word and Gradequick.
Now the high school, on the other hand, could benefit from wifi. One student in my math class recently got a tablet PC, and we were talking a couple days ago about how nice it would be if there was a school-wide 802.11b network. Unfortunarly, our school is way behind the times as far as technology goes. We watched laserdiscs the other day in psych.
Money isn't an issue for either of them, though. Both the elementary schools and the high school have more money then they know what to do with. The middle schools just built two new buildings, and the high school got a new $3 million artificial turf football field, an artificial turf soccer field with stadium lighting, and built a parking garage. The issues are stupid parents and stupid administration.
(In case you couldn't tell, I attended the district the lawsuit was filed against)
Are Wi-Fi signals all that different from standard radio signals? Aren't all of us being bombarded by stuff like this all the time that we're able to listen to good tunes on our AM/FM radios in our car?
I mean--I am basically clueless here--what's the issue? Is it the wavelength or what?
Okay, here's me actually clicking on some links, and I get this:
Now the only catch is that's from the Wi-Fi alliance and they cannot be taken to be entirely neutral in this affair. Can anyone not associated with them back them up on this claim? Is a Wi-Fi network really the same frequency as wireless home phones but 1/30 the power? 'Cause if so, I think we can just chock this one up to Standard American Paranoia (Concerned Mom Flavor) and move on.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
... I have the urge to call my dad and thank him for being sensible.
"Derp de derp."
I thought I typed in slashdot.org not theonion.com. Whoops.
There is a simple solution to this really. The geek kids all need to get together and kick the shit out of the kids whos parents are suing. Damnit, nevermind...
Casca
Sorry, but they are seeking $. The pdf outlinging their wannabe class action suit does include "injunctive relief," as well as "other and further relief" immediately after "threatened immediate, irreparable harm." Further up they clearify what they think this harm is "threatened with irreparable harm by Defendants' conduct in that they have been exposed to grave health risks, many of which lead to permament injury, disease and death."
That is the language you use when you are trying to get a few $million per kid. They are indeed seeking vast amounts of money, which is the only sane reason for this suit to begin with.
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
Those frequencies are there weather or not you are putting data on them. Stupid parents.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
If they had educated the parents on EM fields a little more, they might not have the problem they have now. Of course, such ignorance might be unstoppable.
Things that are invisibly harmful provoke more superstitions of harm than things that are more well known, like sunlight (and by that I'm not just referring to the visible spectrum).
I wonder what currently educated children will complain about when they're adults? Photographs that steal people's souls (giving them cancer)? The evil, cancer-causing voodoo magic of the internet? That salvation (from cancer) can only be had by following everything our benevolent media masters tell us to do?
A mind is a terrible thing to waste, but half a mind is a terrible thing.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
give them the data, allow them to draw their own- now more informed- conclusions.
I would imagine it being gladly received from such a body of technology specialists.
(I wish I knew how much of this was sarcasm and how much is an honest suggestion)
phones themselves, the suit will be thrown out. Not to mention that they will also have to explain why they are not suing everyone in their neighborhood that has a 2.4 phone.... plus the 2.4 phone manufacturers...
Listen up son, that's not what it says. It's literal, not figurative. You're right in saying that you don't have the right to endanger others, but wrong in trying to morph Franklin's words to fit into simple "political security". It applies to physical security as well.
If someone drives a car down the wrong way of a freeway, you do not install cameras and remote engine kills in everyone's car.
Hammer of Truth
The news.com story quotes a Ron Baiman, one of the plaintiffs.
I wonder if it's the same Ron Baiman that Google finds in Oak Park, IL:
205 S. Humphrey, Oak Park, IL (phone 708.445.9052).
(It's in a usenet news article from last year,
apparently he represents the Democratic Socialists of America).
I must point out that the determination of whether cell phones are safe to use should not be based on what does or does not happen to a single cell phone user. Rather, we have to test a whole bunch of cell phone users over a period of many years. That's how us scientists get our money. Of course, while we're doing our research we'll be sure to help stir up controversy about whether cell phones may or may not be dangerous because the publicity makes us feel important and, more importantly, helps us get more money. So it goes.
I had originally intended to defend scientific method in this post even though I know your post was a joke, but my cynicism is in overdrive today.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
I think a group of taxpayers should should sue these parents. This costs money to defend (taxpayer money)... even if it doesn't make it to court.
I also guess (like my Dad) that these parents don't realize what social harm they are doing their kids by being obnoxiously demanding of the educational process.
Many people have said in these forums and mentioned stray cellphone, radio, and microwave signals. I guess the "suers" don't consider those in their uninformed decision.
See this journal entry of mine from a few days back:
http://slashdot.org/~adzoox/journal/46392
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
Sort of reminds me of a really bad movie some years ago that takes place in the near future in which one of the problems plaguing society is mental illness caused by the over-abundance of electronic signals in the air waves.
Except instead of parents suing schools, it involved some action hero butt-kicking.
Well.. my productivity just took a nose dive because now I'll be spending the rest of my day trying to remember the name of that damn movie. Unless someone here knows what I'm talking about?
And later:
And finally:
You'd think these people would be suitably equipping their children with tinfoil hats? That would obviously block the Wi-fi rays from cooking their precious childrens brains. Hell, why aren't they doing that already? The aliens and the CIA most surely have already been reading their entire family's brain waves for some time now.
Tsk Tsk...people are becoming more careless and irresponsible by the day.
Never consider going into public education.
Very good detective work, maybe he'll answer the phone on a wireless phone - if enough of us call we'll fry his brain.
Once again, why do people think that grade schoolers need computers at all (beyond the most basic), let alone in such abundance?
How is such institutional lock-in on hardware any different than lock-in on software? There are millions of dollars spent annually on computers for school children when the basics are being ignored. Most kids - even the 'smart' ones in well-funded districts - can barely write, let alone write well, when they graduate nowadays. It's fucking disgusting.
It's things like this that are the cause of why my children will never be put into public education. I'd rather have them in a high-quality "holy roller" school than in an environment that produces ignorant masses as it's primary goal. I'd rather them not go to school at all, and just sit around the house/roam about outdoors finding things to amuse themselves! at least then they'd have the freedom, time, and opportunity to learn at their own rate.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Either that or someone is after a quick buck via litagation - and do not realise that it won't be quick and it's their tax dollars anyway.
We have people lumping all electromagnetic phenomena together and assuming that they are harmful at any intensity. Somehow haematite sewn into blankets is exempt from this, but it doesn't need to be logical. So how has this happened? Science has lost a great deal of credibility over the years with issues such as asbestos, smoking and power lines all declared absolutely safe at times despite all available evidence. One consequence is that fairly well educated people are taking things the opposite way, and assume that if you can see a high voltage transmission line in the distance you are getting undesirable amounts of electromagnic radiation. I wouldn't want to live under a high voltage line, but you don't have to go far (inverse square law - intensity drops proportional to the square of distance) before the intensity drops below what you get from mains in your walls. Conversely, if you are close enough to a machine with a high intensity electromagnetic feild that it keeps you warm in winter (eg. defective PVC welder) your unborn child is not likely to be normal.
We also have all kinds of snake oil remedies being sold on daytime TV on our top networks. So while science has lost credibility, a lot of odd things with no proof (which only work if you have "faith" in the new wonder lawn clippings) have gained credibility.
If the teachers, journalists and those that draft laws are talked to enough by those of us with a basic understanding of simple scientific issues, they may develop adequate bullshit detectors which they can pass on.
Technology doesn't have to be advanced to look like magic if you can't be bothered to think.
It's ironic because the children of parents so concerned (that they'd float the idea of this bogus lawsuit) are the ones most ineed of radiation, even if it kills them. Since clearly their inherited intellect isn't going to be a step forward, they'd better keep their fingers crossed for telekinetic powers, a prehensile tail, or an extra tumb. (I'm pretty much ruling out the possibility of radiation induced super-intellect from the outset.)
What's the average mircowave intensity delivered by that horrible mass of incandecent gas? We'd better turn it off before it kills us all!
I know it's 1368 W/m2, for all wavelengths, at the top of our atmosphere, I guess it is just lucky we all haven't become flaming tumors....yet.
*As a preemptive strike against the pedantic, yes I know the earth is round, and spins on an axis which is tilted.
The people who started this suit were probably literate but rather stupid if they believe that WiFi is magically evil. In the modern world, literacy is merely the beginning of education. You learn how to read so that you can study more.
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
The frequency used by wifi networks is bad for you? And I've been sitting here on my 802.11b network with my laptop.
Like, in my lap.
I'm never having kids, dude. The boys have had it.
I have some wireless stuff that I use all the time, and I love them, and I'm in no way going to give them up.... but, I was wondering if anyone else experiences anything like this:
When I use my 802.11b card in my laptop, I find that when it's sitting on my lap, my leg where the card is will often begin hurting a bit, or if I rest my arm touching it for a bit, my arm will begin to hurt. I also experience this from carrying my cell phone around in my pants pocket.
At any rate, I really only feel an effect if the wireless things are physically touching me so I know how to avoid it. I wonder how many others experience this and how bad it actually is for a person.
...I think I will go and file a class action suit against devices that produce gravitational waves... wait screw that I'll just go get a US patent!
I think that the court should go house to house to the plaintiffs and charge them one count of child endangerment for each wireless phone, cell phone, video camera, RF remote control, RC car, TV, and Monitor. (CRTs put off more radiation in a few seconds than a Wifi base station does in a few days)
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
These stupid people probably drive SUV's and talk on cell phones while doing so and fly away on family vacations and hide under trees during lightning storms...all of which kill more people than wireless would, if it could...too bad it doesn't for OUR sake.
So what? You live in the sticks. Enjoy your corn-cob pipe!
this remind me of the parent who threw a fit at the fact that we had metal slides and there for posed a risk to us getting burned on our arse's they had to close the playground for 2 days to put up a plastic slide it was ugly and like pink. I despise hell raising parents.
You have been sig'd
Based upon the complete PDF complaint, it appears as though the Elementary School students are listed the Plantiffs, rather than their parents.
Does this strike anybody as odd?
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
In other news, parents seek to ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide in schools because it may cause serious health effects in large enough quantities.
"We are outraged at the irresponsibility of these school officials," said plantiff Rebecca Gilmore, "countless studies have PROVEN that prolonged exposure to large quantities of dihydrogen monoxide without proper protection is almost always fatal!"
We interviewed Gary Richardson, a self proclaimed expert on the subject. "Thousands of people have already been killed due to dihydrogen monoxide inhalation! Now we are letting this deadly chemical into our schools and putting out children at risk? It takes less than a gallon of dihydrogen monoxide to kill an adult, and these schools are using thousands of gallons of it, enough to kill everyone at the school!"
Another man remarked, "I think its terrible that this has gone unnoticed for so long. Its time the parents step up to protect our children from this stuff."
now this may be standard in juvenile cases.. but it seems very wrong to have the children listed as the plantifs. I sincerely doubt any child EVER has given any thought to the EMF in pervasive technologies. To make it sound as there is a child sitting in fear of the network at school is manipulative and wrong. And even more wrong is to place their names on a public document of this nature which will associate them with ridicule for a long time to come.
I know someone who is adversly affected by these things, to the point of occasionally passing out. She can accurately pick out who has a cell phone and whether it is on, among other wierd things. Spends most of her time wayyy out in the boondocks.
They are claiming 'grave' damages to their children's health. That is a pretty big 'indication of actual damages' if they actually can 'prove' this chrud. But no, they won't get kicked out because they are claiming no damages. They are setting themselves up to get $ millions in 'damages.'
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
Yet another stupid law suit by some uninformed mouth breather who should have done a little homework before attacking an already under funded institute.
It is for instance a known fact that the brain absorbes ~60% of a cellphone's emission. That's one of the reasons cellphones have antennae - not for signal quality, but to reduce the absorbtion ratio.
It is also known that the old analog cellphones (brain friers) cause brain damage to rats (fully-repeatable experiments). While experiments with human subject aren't that conclusive, it's quite clear that some people are more likely to develop conditions than others.
Furthermore, an imature body/brain is much more susceptible to develop problems than an adult one.
Conclusion: test, but never with children.
The Raven
Are there distinctions to be made when exposing young children, adolescents, and adults to these low level but very high frequency signals? Any group known to be more vulnerable?
Your boss would hire Johnny Cochran. He would crush you in court no matter what the facts.
You loose, doomdog!
If the glove don't fit...
This quote was not included in either article!
One parent recalls "I was talking to my neighbor on my cell phone while watching my popcorn in the microwave when I was told of this TERRIBLE thing called WIFI! My poor child is failing classes because of this brain-damaging super ray!"
I noticed that too. However, the children were not the only plantiffs listed. I think that it is basically supposed to be the children suing through representation of their parrents and lawyers in a legal sense. Of course it is the parrents who are actually doing this. I am sure law school teaches you all sorts of chrud like this. :P
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
If I am watching TV, I can always tell when my cell phone is about to ring...because the TV becomes full of static and makes an annoying hissing sound. I don't have cable, I get my TV the old fashion, FREE way -- from a big amplified antenna. It's really annoying though because my Boston strangler, err VCR will turn the static screen blue with a nice humming sound.
The same thing happens if my cell phone is sitting near my PC speakers...a loud shrieking sound is emmited.
Also if my TV is on when I turn my PC on, which is a good 15 feet from the TV, the PC will send out some nasty radiation and cause the TV to flicker with static. But it goes away once my PC is humming along fully loaded. Heck, even when my AC kicks on while watching TV it will distort the signal.
It's amazing to visibly see all the radiation that comes from electronics. I completely believe all the radiation from A/C in the walls, and all the RF in the air could contribute to cancer or at least make you nauseous or fatigued. However, I would think Wi-Fi would be your least concern, considering its basically low level background noise like a cordless phone.
Maybe in the future when we have room temperature superconductors and isolated RF waves that are so coherent that they don't interact with any life forms -- then we'd have nothing to worry about.
Thank god though I get cable tomorrow and I'll no longer be reminded while watching TV of all the deadly radiation floating around...
the thousands of OTHER Electro-magnetic feilds we live in.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Personal EMF Shielding devices! Be sure to check out the boxer shorts.
I don't know how they can run wireless in their school? Must have a port in every classroom. The signal is basically line of sight.
I remember when I went to school I couldn't play a radio in a classroom unless it had a window. All the schools were too well shielded. Something about running an antenna on the roof of the schools. Some kind of repeater
How much radiation does your incandescent lighting throw off? Florescent? Halogen??
Let's not forget the TV which isn't above tossing out the occasioanl soft x-ray.
Not to mention broadcast towers....
Then there's the sun. Delivering 1.3kW/m^2 to the upper atmosphere of the earth. Sure maybe only a tenth reaches the surface, and a lot of that is in microwaves. But how many milliwatts is the wifi tranmitter? Are you planning to install one actually iside your child? If so is it going to be a professional installation, or DIY? With some friendly help from the inverse square law (unlike the exosphere, a wifi device it pretty close to a point source) you're golden. The great danger to your child would seem to be Do-It-Yourself'ers bent on adding remote monitoring to their up and comming cybog projects.
No wonder the world hates Americans, we have become obese and stupid enough to believe in junk science and eager trial lawyers.
I wonder if they know that moving the computer mouse back and forth too many times results in blindness.....
Bluetooth, WiFi, cordless phones, baby monitors, and many other devices all operate in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz spectrum. Also, given the range and badnwidth cordless phones need over WiFi, and I don't doubt the 1/10th claim for 1 second.
This lawsuit is just a bunch of retarded. soccer moms with nothing better to do.
I think he meant stem cell bundles, ready for the harvest . . . :p
These people are made of stupid! A quick glance at the pdf of the complaint shows how completely slanted their case seems to be.
For example, Allegation 19 states that the only federal regulation with respect to radiation is an older regulation dealing with thermal radiation. Now, I've not researched this or anything, but I'm fairly certain that electronics folks have to deal with lots of stringent FCC radiation regulations. It seems like that'd probably qualify as a federal regulation.
Even better, Allegation 20 says that since different nations have different standards on radiation exposure (although the US apparently doesn't, per Allegation 19), there's clearly scientific uncertainty! It couldn't **possibly** be a simple case of differing opinions in the details!
Oh God! The horrible RF death rays are breaking down the brain-blood barrier in our precious precious children! Quick, sue someone!
In other news, the parents of the students have also filed a suit requesting that all classes take place in a grove of trees and that each teacher be addressed by titles similar to Starshine Leaf-flutter, Gaia-friend, etc.
Out damned hippies!
...send their kids to school in tinfoil hats!
Radiation is all around us. You can feel it when you go to school. When you pay your taxes. When you ... go to church.
Unfortunately nobody can be told what radiation is. You have to experience it yourself.
You drop your class action lawsuit and wake up believing whatever you want to believe.
You keep your class action lawsuit and step inside my microwave oven, and I show you just how tasty your litigious brains can be, with a side of steamed broccoli and some fresh green peas.
Ash OS durbatulk, ash OS gimbatul, ash OS thrakatulk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul! Uzg-MS-ishi amal fauthut burgulli.
WiFi is limited to 80mW or less of power output. The leakage alone from a 900W microwave oven is considerably higher than this, and in the exact same frequency spectra. The power output of radar of various types dwarfs either, although the distance normally provides some protection (inverse squares and all). And don't even ask about the output from a 20,000W AM radio station.
The X-Rays from an average CRT (including that television set) are much more harmful, since, unlike the microwave radiation used by the above, X-Rays are ionizing radiation and *DO* cause cellular mutations (basically, anything longer wave than UV, including visible light and microwaves, doesn't have the energy to ionize the cells in a human body (photoelectric effect), anything shorter wave (including the deadly UVC, X-rays, and Gamma rays) will ionize cells, break down DNA, and other wonderful things).
Hardware, software, and blinking lights!
They probably contacted their lawyers via cell phones.
I'm more worried about the cell phone a few inches away from my balls than I am the WiFi APs in the buildings around me!
As many others have pointed out RF emissions in the deregulated 2.4ghz range are no different then that used in baby monitors, DECT phones, etc. However, the widespread intentional use of RF for communication is a very recent phenomenon in human development.
I think it's quite likely that increased RF usage IS causing us an indeterminate level of harm as a society. The question is how much (or how little). I suspect it's greater than people (technologists) think. There was a paper published recently that showed cell phone use in metal carriages (trains) could easily approach unsafe levels. Does humanity deem this unknown cost worthwhile? So far the answer seems to be a resounding yes. Or at the very least -we don't care.
Realistically a tremendous amount of ambient radiation in the environment could be mitigated by better managed spectrum allocation policies. But nowadays the public interest is a seconday concern to that of entrenched business and politics.
Wi-Fi: Intermittent 35mW output, several feet away.
Which would you go after first, if you thought RF was harmful?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
So just have the paranoid parents send their kids to school wrapped up like a baked potato. Sure, the resulting bullying might be unhealthy, but the kid won't be exposed to the evil 2.4GHz radiation.
Hardware, software, and blinking lights!
This was inevitable. That was clear to me from the moment I found out that 2.4GHz is the same band as microwave ovens. I could already hear the cry: "You're microwaving me?!"
It's probably stupid, to be sure, and there are most likely many worse risks around these children than wireless networking. But there was bound to be a lawsuit, and we may as well get it over with. I just hope that it is so crushingly defeated as to deter more suits like it.
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
"Will someone please think of the childen!"
I think there might be potential health risks to radio frequency radiation. But not enough to be concerned about.
I would ask each of those parents if they heard anything about the Plowshares project. Back in the 1960s the US government allowed this project to explore the economic potential of nuclear excavation on Nevada soil, among other places. Who knows how many other toxic or radioactive projects have existed or been in direct contact with the public. Anyone who thinks that WiFi, cell phone, TV and radio signals are harmful needs to look around them. I'm sure they can find something far more dangerous to their children than a little RF. How about each of those SUVs passing them by at 30 mph only 5 feet away as they stroll down the sidewalk.
"Don't fumble through boring man pages. Try my product!" - Richard M. Stallman, GNU Founder and CEO
GNU GVideo GProfessor is the leader in computer learning. We have taught over 5 million people, and we can teach you GNU/Linux, GNU/Emacs, GNU/gcc, and more! GNU GVideo GProfessor was founded in 1983 to provide consumers with training on software for their personal computers. Since that time, millions have successfully used and learned from GNU GVideo GProfessor's fool-proof "What-You-See-Is-What-You-Do" teaching method. The first lesson, GNU
It's FAST! You'll be up and running in an hour! Don't waste time sifting through man pages, commuting to classes or seminars. Just pop in the CD-ROM and you're learning!
It's EASY! It's as simple as 1-2-3! GNU GVideo GProfessor's straightforward "What-You -See-Is-What-You-Do" approach makes learning as easy as watching TV!
It's CONVENIENT! We're ready to teach you day and night! With your busy schedule, you don't have time to waste at classes or seminars. Don't fumble through boring man pages. Whatever your schedule, we're ready when you are!
It's COMPLETE! These aren't short teaser lessons. Each 60-minute lesson takes you from installing the software to more advanced skills. And they're not just for beginners! We'll surprise you with the knowledge you'll gain!
Why Am I Making This Incredible Offer? I'm so confident that once you try my exceptional " What-You-See-Is-What-You-Do" learning method, you'll turn to us for all your computer learning needs.
* How it works!
The bonus gift and ANY TWO of the three computer learning CD-ROMs are yours free without further obligation, PERIOD. Take 10 days to decide if you want to keep the complete set of CDs. After your 10 day free trial, if you decide to keep the complete set, we'll conveniently bill your credit card just $69.95. Or simply contact our customer care number at rtfm@gnu.org if you decide to return any one of the lessons, and you will be charged nothing more!
Every day hundreds of people just like you learn with GNU GVideo GProfessor this same fast and easy way. If you decide to keep all three lessons, every five weeks you will continue learning by automatically receiving other GNU GVideo GProfessor subjects you have an interest in, billed on the same exact terms as your first shipment. Or simply call and cancel. Everything is up to you! But most important, you are never under any obligation to purchase a subject that you don't keep. Best of all, the bonus gift, and your choice of any two of the three computer learning CD-ROMs are yours to keep FREE!
fd
OH WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?
Mrs. Rev. Lovejoy
As one of the youngest school directors in Pennsylvania, I know the importance of technology in schools. Wireless network access is becoming increasingly vital as we become more mobile. I cannot believe that the lawyers think they have a case, as they are probably not digging into the matter all that much. As someone mentioned above, you might as well stop using anything else that emits any sort of waves, as those are just as harmful as 802.11x, which is practically nothing, or the FCC would probably not allow it to be commercially developed. Hopefully a judge laughs at the attorneys and those who are trying to impose this, and that this probably goes away. However, I would probably think that this is not the last we have heard of it.
I had a libertarian friend who liked to poke fun both at the right-wing nuts who were upset about fluoride along with the liberals who were in a big huff about how bad the conservatives were. He offered up the "fluoron" theory: fluorescent light bulbs emitted "fluorons", subatomic particles smaller than an electron so they were not yet detected by science, but they were shaped like a hammer and sickle (the Soviet emblem), and if one penetrated your skull it would explode a brain cell and turn it into a Communist idealogue. Light exposure (small number of Commie brain cells) turned you into a liberal while heavy doses turned you into a pinko -- and fluorescent lights were everywhere in public schools and government buildings.
I guess we have come full circle and now the loony Left has become what the loony Right once was.
It makes me ashamed that I live here sometimes.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
UV Radiation is proven harmful, and sulight has buckets of it. we know plain old glass lets in plenty of this harmless radiation. So, in a pedestrian, idiot world, it could win. Welcome to the United States of America. The few Alabama hicks I know have already figured this out, they just don't care. They are too busy having fun, and working to pay of their Fish & Game citations. By the way, wasn't the guy that first popularized the power lines cause cancer thing found to be making up data out of thin air? I am proud to be a USAian, but this kind of thing has me freaked out.
Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
I couldn't believe that someone could remain misinformed long enough to bring a case like this forward. .1 Watt) and that the energy density drops very rapidly (an inverse-square relationship with distance in the absence of a high-gain very directional antennas), it was was immediately clear to me that the energy absorbed is far, far, far less than from cell phone use.
/ Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf (169kb PDF) "Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields."
Knowing that typical wireless networking operates at very low power levels (typical.03 to
I suspected that these people inadvertently dug up some of the sort of "unbiased" research like you'd see from people trying to keep a cell-site or radio tower out of their neighborhood... talk about altering DNA is really grabbing for straws. But how could they be so far off base? Surely no one could go so far without someone setting them straight?
I think I found the answer on seeing page 8 of the complaint entitled "Prayer for Relief". I think we're just dealing with a group of disgruntled religious extremest types looking for an excuse to make changes on the school board.
The F.C.C. Office of Engineering and Technology has info for the technically curious:
The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET Bulletin No. 56, http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology
Great, first I had to throw away all my markers becuase of the DMCA, now I have to pry off all my shift keys.
as a lot of things you'd find at school - lunch, for example.
Come on, people... it's 100 miliwatts of power, max, and you're not going to be sticking an access point up to your head. If they used exposed lumps of Cobalt-60, I could see where it'd be a problem.
People that mind-numbingly stupid should have their children forcibly taken away by the state and put up for adoption. Then the parents should be sterilized so that they don't breed again.
In the meantime, science teachers throughout the school district should be telling their classes that these parents are examples of morons who have no understanding of science.
First of all, just being a PhD means is that you spent too much time and money on schools.
Second, you make it sound as if there were some "question" about 2.4Ghz devices, but *DON'T ACTUALLY POINT TO ANY RESEARCH THAT RAISES QUESTIONS*.
I put you in the category of people who believe in ghosts, government conspiracies and think "The X Files" was a documentary.
You're not well thought out, and you wave around a diploma as proof of intelligence.
Pathetic. I'll bet you school wishes they'd pull your diploma right about now.
Real parents understand that children are not fragile creatures. If they were, the human race would have died out millions of years ago.
You *have* heard of evolution, right?
Well, using your figures of 80mW vs 20,000W, it follows that the ratio is 250,000 which, applying the distance square law for intensity, says that a Wi-Fi at distance of 1 foot is equivalent to AM radio station at 500 ft. If someone were to build a 20,000W AM station at 100-200 yards from a school there would be a huge outcry (it happened in my town, Lexington MA few years ago, with much lower power RF station).
Overweight and obsesity are a million times worse for kids, and there's *no doubt* that its bad for kids.
Its so bad for kids that you wouldn't believe it, yet we close our eyes and don't mention it because we're afraid it might hurt their ego.
Meanwhile, its putting these kids in the grave by age 39, making sure they'll be sick from age 25.
And we're suing schools because of WiFi?
Stupid fucking morons.
New Commandments of the Modern American Parent:
... SO what did it taste like? gimme that!"), shit we pulled that these days would be a national scandal ("RUFFIANS BURN ITEMS IN CORNFIELD! LOCAL ECOLOGY THREATENED!"), acts of daring-do we'd commit on our undestructible 75 pound all-steel bicycles (the best daring-do being "why can't WE play demo-derby with our bikes! Just try not to hit each other's legs.")
- Thou shalt not tell my child they are anything other than special and above average. Not giving them praise for waiting until they are 15 to learn basic mathematics will not be tolerated, and you will be sued.
- Thou shalt not challenge my child in any way. IF you give my child an "F" for not turning in any of his schoolwork, you will be sued.
- Thou shalt not make my child exert themselves. Making tests difficult and/or full of questions in which they have to apply knowledge ti discover an answer will get you labeled racist, or ageist, or whatever term we can think of. We will use this term in the lawsuit.
- Thou shalt give unto my child all they want. My child does not eat healthy foods, you will supply them mwith whatever junk food they want, when they want it. Attemptign to get them to burn off these wasted meals in gym class will get you sued for harrassment.
- Thou shalt not expect me to raise my child, that's why I pay property taxes and send my child to school; unless I have a good tax attorney, in which case I will find a way to NOT pay my taxes.
- Thou shalt not make my child carry textbooks. You will make textbooks lighter, or I will buy them a rediculous rolling carryon luggage thing as to not force them to exert themselves by actually carrying their textbooks. A guy on TV said backpacks will hurt them. If my kid gets a sore muscle, I'll sue.
- Thou shalt not be told what I want you to do in raising our childern for us. You should know these things as professional educators, I should not have to be involved with their upbringing; but if I don't like it, I'll sue.
- Thou shal be given the responsibility of raising our children, then be striped of any and all power to do so. These are our children, and we can sue.
- Nothing that happens involving my child is their fault. My little angel would never do that, so it must be something you did to them - like not raise them properly, which is now YOUR job. You will hear form my lawyer soon.
I realise this doesn't apply to all parents. I know good parents, and their kids are a joy, well behaved, and know their place.
[rambling rant]
This article and string of posts brings something else to mind...
We all have one friend or another that insists on forwarding stupid shit to us incessantly, and for whatever reason we DON'T grind them into dirt for doing it. On rare occations, onf of these forwards will not be total shit and provide an interesting read. You all tnkw the one I'm getting to:
"By modern logic, we should have all been killed during our childhood long ago"
Then it goes on to describe things most of us have done as children, chronicling all the stuff we'd make each other eat ("I dont know if its dog doo... I'll give you $5 to eat it! C'mon you fairy, eat it!
Our parents? Not only did they not konw we did this stuff, but when they found out about them were more agitated the adult that busted us didnt punish us IMMEDIATELY in addition to the ass-whomping they were about to inflict on us.
How many of us built science projects with your old man involving semi-poorly wired items built with tools that sould rip large hunks of flesh off of you?
How many of you had parents what worked in the garage on vehicles, hurt yourself while "watching" (read: fucking around) and were then told "See? This is why I told you not to goof around in here"
Parents today have pretty much lost all touch with reality as we know it. Completely. Americans are going soft and allowing themselves to be scared by
s'wut i sed.
" Why has slashdot posted home addresses and stuff so much lately?"
Because when people make everybody else's life miserable, its only fair to return the favor.
I hope they are very miserable, but I urge everybody not to call or contact them in any way.
That would be wrong. Very wrong.
So don't.
Don't do it.
Can't they just learn that everything taken in large enough doses is fatal. /. needs to know that these cases will raise the cost of everyone involved, the school, the state, the wi-fi hardware maker...
maybe the radio signals will give the kids super brains and they will develop super powers to pick the winning powerball numbers. . . didn't anyone think about that? no, because nobody's thinking.
Dear Parents;
We at your local public schools appreciate your concerns over the installation of a radio frequencey AKA wireless or wifi computer network. Since we have become aware of your concern over the exposure of children to radiation, we have studied the situation in ernest to better understand your concerns.
We have decided henseforth, that no wireless network access will be available at the local schools.
In addition, during our research, we have discovered more sources of potentially harmful radiation, many even more dangerous. We appologize for our negligence; And keeping in mind your concerns with this problem, we are immediately initiating steps to stop these dead rays from damaging the lives of our children. In the interest of openness, we are providing a list of these steps so that we may recieve constuctive feedback from the community. They are:
1. Effective immediatly, all electronic devices of any type are banned. This includes all computers, calculators, air conditioners, heaters, ovens, refrigerators, electric pencil sharpeners, electronic office equipment, lighting (which is notorious for the amounts of radiation it emits), smoke alarms (which also have significant amounts of Americium-241, a highly radioactive metal in the same group as Uranium and Plutonium), and communications devices. In addition:
- Cell phones, cordless phones, walky talkies, and all other cordless electronic communication equipment are considered weapons. Possession
of such weapons will result in immediate expulsion and immediate contact with the appropriate authorities.
- Children with pacemakers, motorized artificial limbs, or other electronic health assistance will be required to attend a special school for radioactive children located off the main school grounds. Parents possesing any of the afformentioned equipment are banned from school grounds.
2. We will be disconnecting from the power grid, telephone network, and cable network immediately in order to curb radio frequency radation that is emitted from even the wires themselves.
3. The school will be renovated with aluminum and lead radiation sheilding in order to protect the children from extraterrestrial radiation including x-rays and gamma rays. We would appreciate donations so that we may purchase the lead required to construct a 1 meter (approximately 3 foot) thick dome over the school in order to make sure none of this radiation harms the children.
4. Since busses contain electronic components that emit radiation themselves, all bussing services are to be halted. All students are required to walk or ride a bicycle to school while wearing lead radiation sheilding.
5. Parents who are suspected of exposing students to the above radiation sources shall be refered to social services for further investigation.
Thank you for bringing this grave matter to our attention. We will continue to take all the steps necessary to keep the children safe and protected.
Sincerely;
XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
(It's funny! Laugh!)
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
I'd agree with you, if the legitimacy of the grievance were more relevant to the judgement than the net salary of the opposing legal teams.
Does Erin Brockovich win sometimes? Sure. But, there are also zillions of well-meaning crusading lawyers out there who get ground into a fine powder by corporate legal teams.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
It's the schools' fault anyway . . .
for failing to teach the critical reasoning skills necessary to evaluate relative risks.
I've got a K in school now. Which would you rather have, a kid who encounters the occasional 2 GHz photon, or one that's never seen a computer?
They get far more natural radiation on the playground anyway.
I think I found the answer on seeing page 8 of the complaint entitled "Prayer for Relief". I think we're just dealing with a group of disgruntled religious extremest types looking for an excuse to make changes on the school board.
/ Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf (169kb PDF) "Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields."
The F.C.C. Office of Engineering and Technology has info for the technically curious:
The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET Bulletin No. 56, http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology
I just know two years from now I'm going to be standing in a line at the supermarket and that story will be staring back at me from the tabloids.
Sorry, we all know it's just too juicy for somebody to pass up...
Oh, and once WiFi is widely deployed in schools, "Cancer hotspots developing around wireless school networks."
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
rays badddd. school badddd. lawsuit goooodd
3y3 c4|\| |\|0t u|\|d3rs74nd j00
This is what you get when dealing with liberals! Stupid Hippies
a nice healthy glow? Or they don't want to ruin their night hunting trips?
These parents aren't related and named Cletus and Ann-Marie, right?
If more parents are like this, I think I wouldn't have so much trouble finding an IT job.
The parent behind this lawsuit:
Ron Baiman
205 S. Humphrey
Oak Park, IL
708-445-9052
rbaiman@uic.edu>
Source of parent name: This article and these Oak Park Board of Education meeting minutes.
Source of address and phone number: This message.
Corroborating source plus e-mail address: This.
Disclaimer: This information was provided for those who wish to contact Mr. Baiman to express their opinions and/or discuss this matter in a legal manner. It is not posted for any other purpose. The contact information may be incorrect or outdated and I do not guarantee its accuracy.
hell in my school all you had to worry about was getting shot or breathing the asbestos they had let loose in the school from construction... oh and the ocassional motorized dump cart that went up and down the hallway hitting students... and the flying debree from the jackhammers on the concrete... or the exposed wires hanging out of the ceillings...
but hey the administrators needed new offices!!!!!!!!!!!
I've been exposed to TONS of RF... CRT's... access points... 5 50kW FM stations in the city..
ETC.
This is all over blown.
Corporatism != Free Market
tinfoil hats suddenly become all the rage in wi-fi equipped schools as legal eagles duke it out over possible harmful RF effects on developing children.
wireless is much easier and much cheaper. Can you imagine wiring a desk or two for every child in the school?
Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone
The key part of tort-reform, where the loser pays the winner's legal fees is this: the amount you have to pay to the winner cannot exceed what you paid for your own legal advice.. So, if you spent $3,000 suing someone and lost, you'd have to pay $3,000 to the winner, even if they spent $3,000,000 defending themselves. This is what protects the little guy against the other side rolling out the million dollar attorneys.
Well, assuming they're not hipocrites, and don't use cordless phones,baby monitors or cell phones, we have to consider the idea that maybe they're right. Imagine if all those mysterious ethereal waves DO give us cancer? Then again, they could just be backwater holdovers from the middle ages, not wanting to imbrace new scary ideas (like electricty, or flight ;-P) A Dark Age monk named Savanarola tried to stop the Rennaissance in Italy. Maybe this is about the same?
The parents who initially filed the lawsuit were found to have never graduated elementary school...
This has got to be the most uninformed, ignorant jibberish that I've seen in a long time. I bet these idiots have WiFi at home even...
The legal system is not meant to be an attention-getting device, nor a platform on which to build a political career...
" My parents were overly protective of me, and I resent them for it.... but that's a different story I guess."
Kids don't come with an instruction manual, and the people giving advice on TV and in books are full of crap.
Nobody trains, you have a kid and you do the best you can. Once you have kids, you'll understand, and forgive your parents.
I've often said... everybody should have kids, because it humbles you and teaches you about what's really important.
Hmmm.
So what if I'm a shyster lawyer, and I bring suit against a company on my own behalf? I spend nothing, and risk nothing, and maybe I can get a pile of dough from a corp.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no corporate apologist, but I don't think that your idea is workable and/or fair.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
These parents just need to send their kids to school in smaller versions of their own tin-foil beanies.
So, I guess these people don't have a CRT monitor, or cordless phones, or any phone for that matter that puts off any kind of energy. I wonder if they are going to due direct tv, xmradio, sirus radio, and the 5000 other satelites that are putting off radio waves, that may cause damage also. Oh hell, I wonder if they are going to go sue the sun for causing skin cancer.. These people need to wake up and realize that we are all dying, it is just a matter of time, and nothing is really good for us anyways, but who cares, we are dying..
To win a law suite, you must have actually experienced a loss or damage of some sort. You can't sue over the potential harmfullness of something. I think this is just lawyers who don't understand the technology who are trying to get some attention for themselves.
Quoted from the KITV website.
HONOLULU -- Residents of a state housing project say Hawaii is making money at the expense of their health, and they're asking the federal government to step in.
...
"People were saying that their daughters were miscarrying," said Dorene Ako, who lives under the tower. "There is just one incident after another."
...
"We are all getting sick, and they need to get those antennas down and out of here," said Heather Kahawai of the Puu Wai Momi Tenants Association.
...
I remember living on a less developed Pacific island when a farmer was caught with a goat. After a couple of weeks there was mention in the paper that the goat was 'pregnant', another couple of weeks and a report that villagers were watching the goat, a few more reports of goat watching and then...the front page again. Villagers kill goat. No further detail in the paper, but I bet cabrito was NOT on the menu...
I grew up in the next town over.
Yes, there are a lot of parents like this in Oak Park. Overprotective, PC assholes that ruin everything for the rest of society.
As Ernest Hemingway (I believe) said of Oak Park: it's a town of "wide lawns and narrow minds."
And I laugh.
They're suing the school for wifi...and yet if you drive around Oak Park, you encounter a nice large number of wifi networks (most unsecured). Maybe they should start suing each home next. Radiation pollution after all. And after that, maybe the sun...
Feh.
Guess again! McDonald's is working to automate the food preparation. They have also outsourced ALL of their IT to India. So now all they have to do is fully roboticize the kitchen, close the counter, and outsource the drive up to India. Wendy's, BK, and KFC should follow quickly.
Anybody remember McSwiney's in A Stainless Steel Rat is Born?
My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
I have this in mild form:s is.htm
http://www.fluoridealert.org/dental-fluoro
Do you think this corrosive effect stops at enamel? There's no good reason to flouridate water based on the premise of improving teeth enamel. No good reason to ingest the crap and not for anyone over 12 years of age. So, the whole population is being treated to this stuff for the argument of enhancing enamel of children under 12. Oh, won't someone think of the children. Fuck that. It's wrong in so many ways.
United States sues itself for allowing ridiculous lawsuits to come to light.
Ignore the important stuff, worry about stupid shit, then sue somebody about it.
Can we add a new /. category for "ridiculous American litigation stories" so that we can filter this out?
That's two articles (q.v. story, comment) in under one hour whose premises follow the formula:
<party A> is suing <party B> for <indefensible gratuitous reason>
On the upside, reading this kind of tiresome crap repeatedly is helping instill a greater pride in my being Canadian.
-ben
myselfmusic
These parents are mostly intelligent people who have no clue about technology. But it makes sense to them that WiFi might be dangerous, so they want a thorough review. The school board tells them "we reviewed it, and it's safe" but the trial-lawyer parents and CFOs don't like to be brushed off, so they sue.
Like I said, this happens with any change in this town, be it making a street a one-way or putting up a new high-rise apartment complex.
Don't get fooled and think this lawsuit has a real technological base - it doesn't...it is just our village citizens bitching like they do about everything else.
The school board is not backing down and they won't turn off the WiFi. It won't cost much to win the lawsuit, because the claims have no actual merit. The studies that the plaintiffs site are not studies using 802.11 or 2.4 gHz technology - look it up. The studies refer to other wireless technology but not the kind being implemented at OPRF high school. The board has said as much and basically told this group: bring it on, you guys are idiots.
I created this account just so I could comment on this story
Kyle's mom is a big fat bitch, she's the biggest bitch in the hole wide world...
Bitch, bitch bitch bitch, bitch bitch bitch, Bitch bitch, she's a stupid bitch....
Kyle's mom is a BIG FAT fucking bitch!
yeah!
Yeah, OK. If you have that kind of time. Remember, you normally have to work to make money to live. So, you're taking a pay cut since you aren't billing for those hours and this ends being similar to paying a lawyer.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Let's see the logic here. ugh, everything else emits more radiation than wifi, so wifi must be ok. Doesn't anybody ever think of cumulative effects??? At least there's a choice with networking, you can always use wires. The parents might be against radio, electricity, tv, etc... but at least this is something they can do something about.
And to the poster that said the gov't has said it's safe, ummh, isn't your gov't the one that said DDT was safe? Are all the current herbicide/pesticide/fungicides 'safe' just because they haven't been shown to cause gross deformations? Who do you think conducts these safety studies??? Do you think that concerned citizens can raise the amount of money needed to conduct studies of these types? Who the hell knows, after all, our governments still allow people to smoke.
----
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
Now that we are talking about microwaves...
I heard from my dad that he read somewhere in the local newspaper that a woman was stupid enough to use the microwave to `dry' her dog.
The link states that it is a legend.
From September 1985 to June 1995, so I'm not eligible to become a member of the class. Not that I would anyway.
I still live a block away from a district 97 school, and many of my neighbors send their kids to the school.
The school installed wireless links between the district 97 offices and each school in the summer of 1995 (I believe) because the overall cost was significantly less than using a leased line. A few years later they rolled out wifi throughout the interior of the building, and now have carts of laptops available to classrooms.
More than anyone else I've seen post here, I have a personal financial interest in this lawsuit -- my tax dollars fund the school district, and thus my tax dollars will likely be spent defending against this suit. I'm disgusted.
Hell, we're even a town with a few bright people. Bruce Schneier of Blowfish fame used to live and work in Oak Park, and Oak Park is a haven for professors from many of Chicago's schools. Heck, Dan Castellaneta (Homer Simpson's voice) grew up here too.
And yet we have these people.
There's a statement mistakenly attributed to Ernest Hemingingway (who also grew up in Oak Park): "Oak Park is a town of broad lawns and narrow minds." It's likely he never spoke it, but it seems no more true than today.
Regards,
Ed
Lincoln Elementary School, 1985-1993
Emerson Junior High, 1993-1995
this
These are the same parents, no doubt, that refuse to vaccinate their kids. At least when the children die or become permanently maimed by some totally preventable disease, their parents will be sure the kids didn't have fried brains from WiFi.
Seems like a lot of manure is being shoveled toward the courts. But this is nothing new, of course.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
This is a great way to weed out the kids from stupid parents.
TERRENCE BUEHLER
311 N ELMWOOD AVE
OAK PARK IL 60302
(708)848-3458
living near power lines will expose you to nuclear radiation from the nuclear power plants!
your neighbor has aids and you'll get them by him shaking your hand!
gotta love the myths that stupid people create out of fear. I have yet to see a 6 year old with an oversized head from these wifi networks.
it's not like it's a brand new type of radio signal, it's close to the same as living anywhere where you can pick up TV transmission and radio transmission. radio waves are all over, man made and natural that have existed for decades and millions of years. if they were harmful, we wouldnt be here.
Gotta love the small town mentality.
1. The Average wireless card radiates 200mW, maybe less.
2. There are 1200W microwave ovens that operate in more or less the same frequency. Please don't tell me that the magic sheilding on your $100 microwave oven takes care of 100% of that power.
3. So seriously, shut the fuck up and go away.
Thanks.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
the parents sue the school for stealing the childrens' souls with class photos.
...was a man who pushed the limits of research in electronice and is also the one who made AC current practical for motors and the transmission of energy He is also known for his Tesla coils and his experiments with man-made lightning. In his public demonstrations he would let so much electrical current pass over his body that he gave off a choronal discharge with electric flames some four inches long dancing over his skin as well as lighting light bulbs without wires via broadcasted energy (radio waves).
If there is anyone who would have been exposed to more electromagnetic radiation than Nikola Tesla I can't imagine who it would be, but I do know that he lived to be 87 years old in spite of it all.
Now tell me one more time, wireless networking is dangerous because...?
-mark
Boy is the fit gonna hit the shan!
I smell class action lawsuit against every company that makes anything more complicated than a screwdriver.
As many others have pointed out RF emissions in the deregulated 2.4ghz range are no different then that used in baby monitors, DECT phones, etc. However, the widespread intentional use of RF for communication is a very recent phenomenon in human development.
.001 Watt):
.01
/., sorry man! I got carried away...
Oh, for crying out loud, from this perspective, 'very recent phenomenon in human development' we should still be testing leaches for the efficacy of bleeding patients, much less using chemical compounds secreted by molds and fungi to fight bacterial infections. And I suppose all those diabetics should just die while we confirm the long term health implications of daily injections of insulin. And hey, that wheel thing seems to be smitten with wreckless folly!
Realistically a tremendous amount of ambient radiation in the environment could be mitigated by better managed spectrum allocation policies. But nowadays the public interest is a seconday concern to that of entrenched business and politics.
Realistically, you're following a pack of intellectual lemmings to the edge of a a cliff by ignoring the FCC certification for Part 15 devices, and failing to Do Simple Research or Read The Fine Manual.
The numbers, just in case you display intellectual curiosity (NOTE: 1 milliwatt =
812.11 (WiFi): ~40 milliwatts.
Cellphones Analog: 600 milliwatts. Digital: 200 milliwatts
Mirowave seepage: 1 Watt
Baby Monitor (with video): 1 Watt
The radiation from WiFi equipment is a tenth of a cell phones, and is not operated while stuck in your ear.
Average Possible Exposure (weekly %):
812.11: 0.01
Cellphone: 0.1
Microwave:
Baby Monitor: 8-30
The only substantial worry so far is the baby monitor, but only if you make your child sleep with it:
Affected ranges fall off at a rate of 1/4-1/5 * r, or one quarter to one fifth of 'r', which means that the effective range to get any microwave leaking ~ 12 inches. Beyond that, effective radiative frequency falls to zero.
Body Size & MHz Resonance: Bodies act like receivers at certain frequencies. There is additional variability dependent on grounding as well:
Average adult: 40 MHz Grounded: 70 MHz
Average baby: 400 MHz
Babies are significantly out of the 2.3 GHz range of resonance.
Unless a statistically significant # of babies who were monitored come down with cancer or some other bizarre medical problems, we have no scientific basis on which we can even begin a probably hypothesis.
If you want to be a luddite, by all means, please, have at it. But you can buy EMF/R handheld, battery powered digital guage for $100 that will tell you precisely how much 'radiation' you're being bombarded with. If you are genuinely concerned, buy one, keep good hourly readings of daily exposure levels and duration, and post it here so we can all learn what the potential threat level is. Otherwise you're just spouting baseless hypothetical crap. Oh wait, this is
To be completely fair, radiation is one of the things very quickly growing children are vulnerable. Since their cells are dividing so quickly, cancer is a bigger risk. Whether or not these devices are actually a credible risk.
Rachel & Rebecca Baiman
Rhon & Michelle Baiman
708-445-9052
Maya & John Cabral
John T. Cabral
708-524-0205
John Davis
(Too many to be accurate)
Be sure to ask for Mom and/or Dad, and give them a basic physics lesson!
It's pretty ironic that so many devices are sharing this dirty little bit of spectrum with all the microwave ovens. Probably the FCC deemed it worthless long ago, so then it got to be one of those rare open bands where experiments could be done, and then spread-spectrum experiments got done, and now we have all these devices. It's amazing they work at all, the interference they have to put up with, from microwave ovens, and each other, and now, tinfoil-hat parents.
who filed suits about EMF against power companies, &c. He kept an EMF field meter on his desk that he would take out to power lines near where people lived so he could demonstrate the 'danger', and I once showed him how the needle would peg if I held it up to the fluoresecent lights in his office.
No light went off over his head, so to speak.
I actually think Kobe is guilty and really see no reason for the woman's name to be out there. What pisses me off is that the corp. media can decide something won't be public knowledge and it isn't. They should not have that kind of power.
eastern canada is so far ahead of these people it's not even funny. that's what that gigantic power outage test drill was for, in case Canadian laws ever absorb your american 'sue-everybody' rule.
just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
Ignorance is Bliss. I'd say these people must be feeling particularly blissful right now.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
... the Sun.
=brian
Doesn't anyone else see the humor of this situation?
Their schooling was so bad they became ignorant of science. When the kids grow up to be parents, they end up suing the school due to their ignorance.
Now THAT'S karma.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
I read somewhere that the AP transmits an idle signal (10khz) all the time.
On the other hand my AP (Cisco) can shut off SSID broadcasting. It is said that AP's without SSID broadcasting cannot be detected by programs like "airsnort" and the like if no client is connected. So this would hint that there is no transmission at all if SSID broadcasting is shut off and the AP is idle.
If this is true and the WLAN is only very infrequently used (as in this school) this would make the claim even more ridiculous.
WTF is wrong wit these people?!?!
Don't make the waters murkier.
The "may be harmful" meme should be stopped.
The necesity or not of WiFi is for each organization to decide and should not be used as an argument while discussing safety issues.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Maybe there should be a fund to fight all these luddites and their shark-lawyers. Oh wait you need lawyers to do that and they are evil too.
Maybe use the constitutional right to bear arms and fight the luddites&lawyers with those?
just my two bits short of a nibble
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
That is a thoughtless meme doing the rounds.
If it was true, fat would not heat up in the microwave. And you know that is not true, fat can even ignite in the microwave.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
If only this were true!
There is a mountain of science which has recognized the following. .
Here's an article [protectingourhealth.org] with some photos of slices of brain tissue taken from rats exposed to cell phone EM. The effects are real.
-FL
It's not about the quantity it's about the frequency.
... but you choose the risk in your own home.
2.4GHz microwave radiation causes water molecules to resonate (I can't remember whether it's the bond angle or length at this frequency - this is how microwave ovens work, I digress). We humans are mainly water. Hence microwaves _at_the_right_frequency_ have an effect on our molecules too.
So microwaves at _this_frequency_ are a concern. But low frequency radio waves are not. It's just like the whole sun-screen (suntan lotion) thing. As long as you block the UV rays you're OK. You don't need to block all light frequencies.
Evidence is limited and what evidence there is suggests negligible effects
A wifi network is pervasive and always on. Would you sit your child in front of a working microwave oven all day?
Also, assuming the folk are naively using equipement that operates at this frequency and assuming that this radiation is damaging. That doesn't mean that when they know about something that is spitting out this frequency then they can't complain. It just means they need to be educated a little about the other dangers. [Remember assumptions, I'm hypothesising here].
Sure the kids will be learning writing on their wireless laptops? Or is it reading?
Somebody suggested that a lot of schools have more money then they know what to do with. This is a case in point.
Maybe these parents should be used in a nearby nuclear power plant, their thick heads would make excellent radiaton shielding I think.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
Nonsense. They wont kill us, they'll just mess with our cognitive functions and significantly alter our brain chemistry. (Look at the pretty pictures of brain slices.)
-FL
Is it true that in america they have schools sponsored by coca-cola, pizza hut and exxon?
Americans are getting more and more retarded every day. And is it any wonder?
===========
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
For all we know, these wi-fi signals could give them super-human powers!
- Let these kids wear their tinfoil hats.
- I for one welcome our new wi-fi overlords.
- In Soviet Russia Wi-Fi networks sue your parents.
And bold enough to strike out on my own.
Everyone knows that the public school system is under the control of a secret government mind control program, which is secretly under control of a group of European wealth mongers known as the pentaverit, which in turn is secretly under the control of an alien super-species. Obviously Wi-Fi is a mind control tool, devised to poison the minds of our youth and make them slaves to the government-pentaverit-alien super species overlords. So I say, stop going to school and start watching more television and playing more video games.
The Wi-Fi Alliance says Wi-Fi networks are safe. The radio waves in a Wi-Fi network use the same frequency as wireless home phones, and have one-thirtieth the power of cordless phones, said Grimm, the spokesman for the group
Grimm? Sounds like a fairy-tale to me.. :-)
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
I wonder how many of the people signed up for the class action suit have 2.4GHz cordless phones in their houses or wireless mice. I had a a devil of a time sorting out all the different channels in my house when I installed a 2.4GHz cordless phone, wireless keyboard and mouse, and a WiFi Cable/DSL router. Oh my! I must be doomed!
You're missing the point: humans didn't evolve in an environment full of wi-fi networks. So you can't make any a priori statements about children not being "fragile."
In fact children (and especially embryos) are *incredibly* fragile. All sorts of stuff can and does go wrong in the womb: 30-40% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. And if you haven't cared for a small child yourself, you probably have no idea how fragile kids really are, and how seemingly innocent things can be harmful. After I learned that honey can be deadly to a six-month-old I stopped making assumptions about what kids could handle.
Yes, they are. The general public are sheep. This is also one of the underlying facets of the DMCA - to control knowledge so that the general public remains sheep. Until the citizens (not consumers) of the United States get this into their apathetic sheep heads things like the DMCA will continue to plague those of us who do know the truth. Something widespread will have to happen to wake up the sheep from their slumber. With SunnComm and the RIAA doing their things, I think it has begun. Scratch that, I hope it has begun.
Let's all do the world a favor - educate your family and friends to the reality and impress upon them that this is not something that will "not ever happen to us" or "we're not doing this so we won't be affected". That mentality lets the DMCA pass in the first place.
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
My microwave kills my wifi network dead. Anytime the thing is running, everybody drops off the network. My analog 2.4GHz phone is enough to drop anybody outside of the room the base station is in. Far higher power in the same signal band from something nearly everybody has in their kitchen.
WiFi is so tiny a signal it's not worth thinking about. If you're truly worried by RF emissions, make a list of your priorities! Decide which bands worry you, and THEN figure out which devices are emitting the most power in that range. I guarantee you'll be chucking your microwave, light dimmers, cordless phones, cell phones, baby monitors, TVs and the like before you ever get down to the wifi.
Maybe for the truly paranoid, somebody should start selling Faraday-cage clothing for kids.
What about the wires running through all the schools walls that rattle all their kids brains with a 60Hz EM field? Oh no, it at home too!?!?
We should survey the parents behind the lawsuit to see how many of them have cordless telephones and microwaves at home. How about the x-rays from their home computers? Or the radiation from grandpa's clock's paint? Do they drive by any cell towers in town? What about the cosmic background radiation coming from space? Tell them how many neutrinos pass through them each day and watch them freak out!
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
I work in a prison system and I see kids of these types of parents every day. They say stuff like, "my dad wouldnt let me play with the kids next door so I beat them all to death with a brick, hehe funny how that works???"
What has changed is that modern CRTs (especially monitors, which use higher tube voltages) have a substantial amount of lead in the glass. The lead absorbs the xray emissions, allowing it to pass government regulations.
Hardware, software, and blinking lights!
In related news, the lawsuit has been settled. Apparently, the lawyers agreed that the school could keep the WiFi network, as long as they provide tinfoil hats to each child. When asked for comment, the art teacher assigned to the construction of the hats simply sighed.
$8.95/mo web hosting
With only minor substitutions:
Burns: This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the [wireless network], and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you.
Simpsons 7F01
Ya know, I think the parents that originated this suit would also be likely to try and make their kids wear tinfoil hats, and are likely the kind of people who believe everything they see on the SciFi channel's so-called "Tuesday Declassified."
Speaking as an RF techie: The emissions from WiFi nodes are in the low milliwatt range (50-200). They pose less of a risk than cellphones (assuming cellphones pose ANY risk, something I'm still not at all convinced of).
Furthermore, the strength of any RF signal is inversely proportional to the square of the distance you are from the source of said emission. Then again, I don't suppose that hard facts are going to slow down the ignorant and paranoid in the slightest.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Parental stupidity is harmful to children.
There are times when Aldous Huxley's selective genetics doesn't seem such a bad idea....
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
True. The lowest frequency of the water MOLECULE (in a gaseous phase) is at about 22 GHz. What happens is that in a liquid phase these resonances broaden out considerablly into a continuum like absorption. The water in food does absorb some of the energy, but not as efficiently as it would if it were a gas and you used 22 GHz. That said, ...., read the back issues of Physics Today they had a very good article on debunking all the EM field dangers and fallicies. Remember this is not the same thing as standing next to a radar transmitter!
Also, these parent don't realize that their childern are far more likely to die in an automobile accident than anything else! Why not sue the car manufacturers and every driver! ;-)
Just wait until they find out about satellites!
This is just ridiculous. We had people suing and worrying about power lines. Lots of studies, no danger. We had the great cell phone scare. No danger. Want to bet what the outcome of any studies about the danger of WiFi shows?
We live in a sea of EM. People have 900MHz phones, 2.4 MHz phones, radio stations, walkie talkies, TV, etc. Unless you led line your house you are going to be bombarded with EM. Get over it. Your kids have a bigger risk to their health from the bad diet you feed them, the lack of exercise they get, riding without a helmet and the like. But it is easier to obsess about WiFi then do good parenting.
People will sue for no reason, with no basis in fact but just on fear and out Courts let them get away with it. It is time for judges to use some judgment, and when people bring suits without real fact, they judges need to start sanctioning the people who sue and their attorneys.
Bet these folks also tried to join the "Burger did it" class action. DISGUSTING!!!!
Just pass out tin foil hats with tthe other prophylactics
Concerning these parents, however, I think they need an education on exposure to electromagnetic fields.
I wonder how many of these parents sat in front of a CRT monitor while typing up these complaints. IF you want to have some REAL fun, tell them how much emission you get from a television or microwave.
"Da ist ein Technölüst in mein Unterpanten!"
Radio waves? Oh yeah, bad stuff. Not like those cigarettes some of those parents probably smoke. Nor the cars they all sure-as-shootin drive. (You know,the fuel for an aotuomobile contains, and emits, benzene compounds, both before and after it is burned in the car's engine.) Not to worry, though, the real risk is those radio waves.
Everyone knows that a simple and cheap homemade tin-foil hat will keep out the evil rays... as well as the alien mind probes!
I think ignorance should be a crime. When electricity was first becomming mainstream, groups of people were organising huge protests about the harmful effects of being in a room with a power socket in it. There will always be small groups of retards on a crusade against technology.
/me thinks of novel ways to inflict slow and painful death upon all the people who think their lack of knowledge gives them the right to sabotage the development and acceptance of technology.
There were some pseudo-scientific experminents conducted by groups of people looking to expoit naive organisations to gain funding. Upon reading their reports, it turns out their scientific basis for concluding that mobile phones are harmful was sticking mice in microwave ovens and noting low survival rates. And of course they decided that since phones also emit waves in the microwave spectrum, they must be no different!.
Unfortunatly the media, looking for sensations, hypes up these ridicioulous claims, claiming that "experts" have found new "evidence" of the danger of microwave "radiation" to people. This immediatly spawned mass hysteria amongst the clueless public. Thanks to this behaviour I now have usless mobile phone coverage in my area - plans for the erection of a new mobile phone mast were abbandoned due to a huge protest about the effects on a nearby school, and revolts organised by "concerned parents" who frankly deserve to be shot.
All *credible* scientific research into the effects of electromagnetic waves on living tissue find the following conclusion.
1) The risks associated with exposure to EM waves rise exponentially with the frequency.
---
Long wave radio signals can be pumped out with the power of many killowats right next to a human brain, and after a lifetime of exposure the risks are negligable. If we increase the frequency to, for example, visible light, exposure to much lower levels can be harmfull. Increasing it still further to ultaviolet, increases the risk of cancer by a large factor. And the same dosage of alpha/beta/gamma rays and you are dead on the spot. Microwave 'radiation' in fact has a frequency approx 10 times lower than visible light. Sitting for a long time with a 60W lightbulb next to your head would put you in a lot more danger... go figure.
And people comparing mobile phones with their ovens because both rely on "microwave radiation" deserve to have their testicles jammed in a microwave oven in the name of science. A very specific frequency in the microwave range causes tissue to heat up because it matches a mode of resonance of the water molecules. Same goes for infrared light (hence similar heating effects). Mobile phones and wireless networks do NOT use this frequency (and even if they did, all you would get is very slight warming of nearby tissue - probably unnoticable at the exposure levels mobile phones use - and certainly not harmful).
2) Harmful effects increase linearly with the power output
---
Mobile phones use 0.5Watts, and peak at 1 watt. TV masts output 2 million watts of power. Wireless lans output 0.1 watts. Your microwave oven leaks many times more. Go figure.
3) Your exposure decays with the inverse cube of the distance
---
What matters is the power you are exposed to, divided by your surface area. If people are worried about a wireless lan access point sitting on a wall/desk 10m away, then it is obscure many of them have come to accept using a mobile phone which generates 5 times more power right next to their head. We are talking about a 5000-fold lower exposure level with wireless lans. If these fanatics had any clue about basic physics, they would be refusing to allow their children to be in the same town as someone using a mobile phone!
END RANT. lol.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no corporate apologist, but I don't think that your idea is workable and/or fair
Not workable? It's being done pretty much everywhere, outside of the US. Here's a short articile on this very subject: http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg19n1e.html
And a short excerpt from the above article (emphasis added):
Under the loser-pays rule, which is in effect in almost every common-law jurisdiction outside the United States, the party that loses in court pays the victor's fees and expenses based on a schedule set by the court. The advantages of the loser-pays rule are manifold. Most obviously, it discourages speculative litigation. A claimant who knows that he is going to be responsible for the defendant's reasonable legal costs is going to hesitate before pursuing a longshot case, even if the potential payoff is large.
I know you're not an apologist, but on this issue, you're wrong nonetheless...
If all of the radiated signals were so bad, why then, are life expectancies at an all time high? If anything, radiation seems to be a catalyst for our longevity.
Who needs studies to prove or disprove the effects of radiation? The results are self-evident. If the counsel for the state in this case expounded on this example, they might have a chance.