Slashdot Mirror


Cell-Phone Wars

Makarand writes "According to this article in the Houston Chronicle people fed up with cell phone chatter have declared war against cell phones. They are arming themselves with detectors, jammers and other gizmos to defend privacy, security, sanity and blissful silence. Although jamming cell phones is not legal in the US, pocket-sized jammers are available online and even on eBay. Cell-phone jammers typically work by disrupting the communication between handsets and cellular towers by flooding an area with interference or selectively blocking signals by broadcasting on frequencies used by these phones. The FCC has received very few complaints about jammed cell phones and has never taken action against anyone for that violation."

80 of 992 comments (clear)

  1. Few complaints by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny
    The FCC has received very few complaints about jammed cell phones

    They tried to call and complain, but ...

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  2. No complaints now, but... by DarthAle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...just wait until someone blocks a 911 call.

    1. Re:No complaints now, but... by jaiger · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If the 911 call doesn't go through, how will anyone know that it was blocked?

      Even the 911 caller would likely not distinguish a blocked/jammed call from a normal "no service" area. My assumption is that a jammed call appears as "no service" to the handset. After all, it can't communicate with the tower.

      This is an interesting point however.

      -joe

    2. Re:No complaints now, but... by mugnyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      nice, second mod5 in the comments at the moment. but this theme gets kicked around every time the concept of blocking cell phones comes up: what about blocking emergency calls!?

      look, owning a cell phone is not an entitlement to communication through it, anywhere, anytime. if your cell phone doesn't work, and you feel it's blocked because of one of these tools, AND you are having an emergency, do what prior tech solved in sucessive order : find a stranger to help, find a payphone, run and get help. it's that simple.

      i've been in a few emergencies and having a cell phone may have gotten people there more quickly (moutaineering), but for the most part they are abused by scared newbies. i've waited immobilized for a few hours for the helicopters to arrive myself. anecdotes aside, i don't recall any evidence that more cell phone emergency calls are anything more than a conveinence. they don't really seem to make the difference between life and death. if they do, then relying on one is a foolish mistake akin to causing the accident in part.

      i've not seen any court cases where people sued a cell phone provider because they did not work adequately in a time of emergency. on the contrary, during large emergencies, cell phone networks seem to be the first to overload.

    3. Re:No complaints now, but... by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Informative

      The biggest factor in determining whether someone will survive a major heart attack is how fast the paramedics arive. The 2 minutes it takes to get outside the jamming range or find a land line phone may be 2 minutes more than someone has.

      The good news is that they're putting automatic defibrilators in airports and malls, which are saving lives everyday.

      -B

    4. Re:No complaints now, but... by CaptainJeff · · Score: 5, Informative

      Absolutely not. CPR keeps blood moving in the body in a forced way, very dissimiliar to the heart's natural movement. CPR aims to keep that person revivable by spreading oxygenated blood around the body - it has an approaching zero chance of actually reviving someone. For someone experiencing a cardiac arrest, the most important action that can be taken is early defib. The parent is correct - these AED devices are going everywhere and they are so easy to use that an average 8 year old can successfully use them if need be. True story - I have seen someone defibed who was without a pulse for around 5 minutes, within 20 seconds he was talking and fully aware. AEDs are that effective. I have NEVER seen anyone regain their pulse after CPR - it simply does not happen.

    5. Re:No complaints now, but... by EvanED · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "look, owning a cell phone is not an entitlement to communication through it, anywhere, anytime."

      Um, seeing as I'm paying for service that uses public airwaves that everyone has the right to, I would say that I *do* have the right to not having my signal blocked. Completely ignoring the 911 issue, blocking someone's service is theft, plain and simple.

    6. Re:No complaints now, but... by jcp797 · · Score: 4, Informative

      How did this get modded +5 Informative?

      AEDs are not a magic bullet. AEDs are only effective for two *specific* types of cardiac arrest: v-tach and v-fib. They are not definitely NOT a substitute for CPR. While you may have witnessed a miracle case, recussitation usually requires drugs and constant airflow in addition to shocks.

      It is *essential* to keep the oxygenated blood moving to the brain to prevent tissue death (via CPR), until the paramedics arrive. As the grandparent poster said, The biggest factor in determining whether someone will survive a major heart attack is how fast the paramedics arive.

  3. Telemetry by lostchicken · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cellular Telephones aren't just used for idle chatter. Remember, a lot (not most, but not insignificant) of cellular traffic comes from telemetry systems. So, the next call you might jam could be some heart paitent's ECG telling his cardiologist that he's having a heart attack, or somebody's Saab saying that it's airbag has gone off in an accident, or perhaps it is just a cell call, and it's just the hospital trying to get their neurosurgeon in.

    --
    -twb
    1. Re:Telemetry by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but try to explain that to these people who think their temporary comfort is more important than the possible needs of anyone else around them.

      While I could understand a church or movie theater doing it (as long as they inform the people going there that they are), people that just carry around jammers so they don't have to listen to others talking on the phone while they ride the train need to be shot. The world does not revolve around you!

    2. Re:Telemetry by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So, the next call you might jam could be some heart paitent's ECG telling his cardiologist that he's having a heart attack,

      If the cardiologist is far enough away to need telemetry via cellular to tell him about the heart attack, there's nothing he can do about it. Anyone close enough to help is going to see him clutch his left arm and keel over.

      or somebody's Saab saying that it's airbag has gone off in an accident

      Nobody installs a jammer in the middle of nowhere. The only place OnStar (or the like) really needs cellular to report an airbag deployment is the middle of nowhere. Any place you'd find a jammer, you'd find people.

      perhaps it is just a cell call, and it's just the hospital trying to get their neurosurgeon in.

      Hospitals nostly use pagers rather than cell phones to summon on-call physicians. Cell isn't reliable enough.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    3. Re:Telemetry by gnarled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People survived before medicine too, that doesn't mean its unnecessary.

      --
      I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
    4. Re:Telemetry by sphealey · · Score: 4, Interesting
      f the cardiologist is far enough away to need telemetry via cellular to tell him about the heart attack, there's nothing he can do about it. Anyone close enough to help is going to see him clutch his left arm and keel over.
      Two weeks ago a private EMS service got off the elevator with a gurney in tow, walked through our office, grabbed one of our employees, and wheeled her out. Their explanation: "she is having a heart attack, although she doesn't know it yet". Pretty weird experience.

      So no, I don't think your rationalization is valid.

      sPh

    5. Re:Telemetry by toddestan · · Score: 5, Funny

      Two weeks ago a private EMS service got off the elevator with a gurney in tow, walked through our office, grabbed one of our employees, and wheeled her out. Their explanation: "she is having a heart attack, although she doesn't know it yet". Pretty weird experience.

      Sounds pretty scary to me. So did they arrive in black helicopters?

    6. Re:Telemetry by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but try to explain that to these people who think their temporary comfort is more important than the possible needs of anyone else around them.

      Curious... I thought humans only came up with the telephone a mere century ago. How ever did we survive for all those millenia before then? No doubt a mystery for the archaeologists.


      people that just carry around jammers so they don't have to listen to others talking on the phone while they ride the train need to be shot. The world does not revolve around you!

      Funny, most of us feel the same way about all the asshats who can't even get off the damned phone to, for example, pay a cashier, place an order at a restaurant, or just plain drive.

      Personally, I would carry a cell jammer, have one at my house, and in both vehicles, regardless of legality, if they didn't cost a few hundred bucks. You can call me "inconsiderate" or "self-centered" all you want, but I have NEVER interrupted a play, or movie, or other public event, merely because I consider myself too important to miss a call. Phones have an "off" switch for a reason. If you don't consider that its default state, I guarantee that you annoy those around you.

    7. Re:Telemetry by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, you'd consider it appropos to block someone's right to an emergency communication simply because you don't like the method of transmission?

      Yawn.

      As I pointed out, we survived for hundreds of thousands of years before even the telephone, nevermind cell phones, came into existance.

      If the problem occurs in a random location, you won't find me there to bother you (I tend to avoid commotions in random places, rather than gawk like most people).

      If the problem occurs in a car, pull over, and I'll have driven past so quickly that you won't even notice the disruption in your signal.

      If the problem occurs in a theatre, leave. Problem solved. Can't leave? Then you probably can't dial a phone, either.

      You still have every "right" (though I don't think we do actually have any sort of "rights" with regard to using a cell phone) to make an emergency call. You do not have the right to sit near me and disrupt my meal/movie for which I paid. You want to chat? Go outside. Simple as that.

      I will repeat, for the third time in this thread, that cell phone jammers would not exist if the majority of people didn't consider cell phone users as intolerably rude. Whatever you may say about the public backlash to that rudeness, "they started it". Unfortunately for the "good" cell users (No doubt all of them, since despite us all knowing the annoyance of a phone ringing during a movie, "everyone" always turns them off like good little doobies), a technological solution exists, which more and more people have learned of.

      Everyone claims to behave, and points out the "emergency" uses of a cell phone. I call shenanigans. Out of the uncountable times I have wanted to rip a phone out of someone's hand and slam it against a wall, not once have I actually heard a call for help. Sure, they exist - I have no doubt of that. But to defend the majority of use by that? Yeah, whatever... And most people use Kazaa for trading legal files, too.

      If it makes you feel better, go ahead and call me an asshole. Flip me the bird, rant and rave, have a ball. Just hang up and drive (or eat, or watch the movie).

  4. No action taken by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The FCC has received very few complaints about jammed cell phones and has never taken action against anyone for that violation.

    How could they take action? The people with the jammers keep them in their pockets. And the only reason they're doing it is for the entertainment/proving a point aspect. It's not as if Wal*Mart is mass-installing jammers to stop shoppers talking while shopping, so how would the FCC catch anyone?

    Besides, with the way people move around, service would only appear to be patchy, dropping out as you walk past someone with a jammer, then coming back again. Cellphones do this anyway , so how you would you know what to complain about?

    This is pretty much a non story because it's hard to tell if you're being jammed or if you're just getting a crappy signal. Sure, you shouldn't be blocking cellphone signals, but I can't see how the FCC is going to catch you doing it.

    1. Re:No action taken by arkanes · · Score: 5, Funny

      And to me it just makes them even more annoying - people yelling into thier phones and saying "can you hear me?" over and over again are far more obnoxious than people carrying on a normal conversation in a low tone of voice.

    2. Re:No action taken by zoney_ie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A cinema in Dublin (Ireland), the Savoy, mass installed these devices. Needless to say, the regulatory authorities were rather swift to force them to turn the system off.

      It's a matter of principle really. In this instance, one could argue that there's no need for calls to be made in the theatres and that there's no automatic "right" for someone to do so. However, the State regulatory bodies quite rightly take the view that no interference with regulated signals should be created - illegal signals can have wide/unforeseen reprecussions.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    3. Re:No action taken by Cynikal · · Score: 5, Interesting

      yes but how long till they come up with jammer detectors?

      as a cell phone user myself who gets incredibly frustrated when i cant get a signal, i can easily see myself carrying a jammer detector and beating the piss out of anyone i find tampering with my service.

      it could even be prosecuted under the same laws as tcp/ip denial of service is, since in essence you ARE denying me a service that i'm paying for.

  5. jammers by happystink · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, they sell jammers? That is terrible, so disruptive and bad, it's just wrong. Where do you buy those by the way?

    --

    sig:
    See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.

  6. Re: Not good by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


    > As a top IT executive for a fortune 50, I spend a lot of time on global conference calls. I would be extremely annoyed, and would consider it an attack on both me personally, and me professionally (and, by extension, my company) if someone were to jam my cellular during an important conference call. ... I recommend you not do this.

    As a normal person, I consider it an attack on me both personally and professionally, when someone use a cell phone in an inappropriate context.

    I recommend you not do this.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  7. Re:Not good by marklar1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm tired as fuck of all the self-righteous pricks running around who think their one-on-one conversations are more important than my conversation over the phone. If I'm at a restraunt dining alone (traveling for business or just a loser....) unless everyone can't talk then I'll talk on my phone till the cows come home. Ms. Manners can shove it... Never is it acceptable where no one should be talking, movies, churches, etc....but unless it's unacceptable for everyone to talk, then find something else to bitch about.

  8. I jam cell phone conversation MY WAY by Roofus · · Score: 5, Funny

    With a swift kick to the nuts!

  9. DIY plans? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Funny

    While 'warfare' may not be the right answer, Its about time people are fighing back.

    About the only thing i can think of that is more rude, is a SUV driver .. and thats why god made paint balls :)

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:DIY plans? by NineNine · · Score: 4, Funny

      I find children in public to be much, much more offensive than any cell phone could possibly be. I propose that children under the age of 18 not be allowed in public. Who's with me??

  10. All is needed... by dabadab · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...is just to learn some proper manners.
    Don't shout loudly if it bothers people and don't jam other people's cell phones.

    --
    Real life is overrated.
  11. Cones of silence by Avihson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jamming sounds like a great solution at first. but wouldn't Faraday cages be simpler? I drive past a theater that overpowers my FM radio along a few hundred ft stretch of roadway. If they lined the theater with copper foil, it would stop the cell phones and the interference the theater itself is producing.

    Tin foil may be an answer after all...

  12. 'War on' cell phones by ToadMan8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ah, first the war on drugs, the war on poverty then the war on terror.
    I see we've solved those issues to now have the time to wage war on those annoying annoying people on cellphones.

    I think those people who are complaining must be the people who don't get enough cell calls and feel left out. Amusing as it would be I'll break the fingers of the first person cellphone jamming I see.

    Why is it socially acceptable to talk to people but as soon as the person is separated by a bit of technology is it considered obnoxious and socially unacceptable?

    --
    I haven't posted in so long, my sig is out of date.
    1. Re:'War on' cell phones by DoorFrame · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because people on cell phones invariably talk much louder than people having a face to face conversation (where you can accurately gauge an appropriate volume level for conversation based on your partners volume level). That's why.

  13. Just needs one improvement by eraser.cpp · · Score: 5, Funny

    What we really need is a jammer that will only effect 13 to 17 year old girls.

  14. Misleading article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The 'Safe Haven' system by Iceberg is not a camera phone jammer.

    It's basically a feature that needs to be built into the phone. When it receives a certain signal it disables the camera. Iceberg claim it could be used for laptops and PDA's but neglect to mention that disabling the technology would be trivial for any determined pervert.

    The complaints over camera phones are pretty idiotic anyway. The determined pervert could just use a tiny camera if they really wanted to take photo's anywhere.

    I'm not paying Nokia et al to integrate technology that selectively disables my phone. It reminds me the recent debacle about printers with built in mechanisms to defeat currency copying. I'd rather Nokia and HP spent their time working on useful new features than trying to nursemaid me.

    If you are worried about someone taking your photo in the locker room, that is your problem.

  15. Re:Not good by marklar1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    who cares if it's vital or not. If you're sitting there conversing with your mates, then I have every right to talk to my friend/associate/whatever virtually... again, if it's a library, chrurch, theatre, where NO ONE should talk to anyone, fine....but to have a conversation with a person on the phone in a normal tone is no more distracting than listening to your annoying drivel to your table mates.... the logic is total BS: the first paragraph alone where some asshole is jamming conversation at a coffee house????? come the F*&^% on....tell the prick to go to a library...IF I caught someone doing this I wouldn't hesitate to take a swing at him... And you know the only people running around with these devices would be greasy little geeks without friends to bring in person or to call on the phone that you could wipe the floor with one hand..

  16. Re:Not good by rot26 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm tired as fuck of all the self-righteous pricks running around who think their one-on-one conversations are more important than my conversation over the phone.

    Those are my feelings EXACTLY. The only difference that I've thought of is the tendency for some morons to talk a lot more loudly on a cell call than during a one-on-one conversation. I've found that imitating them puts a stop to that, usually.

    --



    To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
  17. who needs cell phone jammers... by froboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    when you have AT&T's GSM: its like having a legal cell phone jammer at all times!

  18. Not cool by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My cell phone is on vibrate 24/7. Why should I get jammed? The only good solution is a bluetooth type technology that silences any phone in the area without disabling them.

    Sure some people are inconsiderate jerks. People talk to people sitting next to them in movies all the time. We don't duct tape everyone's mouthes shut on the way in.

    Actually they should have screened the line for Return of the King. If you didn't see the first two movies, you should not have been allowed in. There were people all around me having the first 6 hours of film described to them on the fly.

    -B

  19. Cell phone jamming on private property by hillct · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While cell phone jamming in public spaces is illegal, my research suggests that jamming on private property is not illegal. It appears this has never been challenged in court. The big question though is, whether or not it's a good practice.

    I finally relented and got a cell phone vary recently. I (like almsot every other slashdot reader) work in the tech sector 8 hours a day 5 days a week and have revused until recently to bring some of this technology into my home. I don't have cable TV, I don't have an answering machine and until a few weeks ago I didn't have a cell phone.

    I for one, would be in favor of movie theaters jamming cell phones inside the theaters themselves, and any other private institution (museums perhaps) who wish to, being able to legally jam cell frequencies at their discression, within their own premisis. It should be considered no different than banning smoking in facilities on private property. The owners should have discression here, And if cell phone users don't like it they can take their business elsewhere. This will cause the business owners to carefully consider the practice before enguaging in it.

    I do believe that signage should be requires when such jamming is in effect, so patrons would be aware they will be incomunicado while they are within the given facility, such that they can make an informed choice.

    --CTh

    --

    --Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
    1. Re:Cell phone jamming on private property by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Informative

      The act of jamming a cell phone is illegal no matter where you are, even on your own property. Simply put, it's transmitting on a licensed frequency without a license to do so.

      Cell phone companies hold the licenses to any frequency being used for cell phones, and that license extends to their subscribers for using the service only. If you're jamming, you don't have permission to transmit on that frequency, and that's where the FCC can come down on you.

  20. What a bunch of assholes. by juuri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jamming cellphones in an area greater than your personal space is incredibly fucking selfish. When you go out in public, you are subject to the social norms of the area you live in. If other people in your city think it is cool to be obnoxious on the cell phone, deal with it, try and change it through non passive-aggressive means or move.

    When I lived in San Francisco I would be amazed when people would get pissed at others for talking in normal tones on cellphones while on the bus. As I told this one old guy who was yelling, "Why don't you yell at the couple in front of her who are talking even louder?!". Personally I don't use my cellphone in crowded places and always keep my ringer off. I don't see why so many people who have vitriol for those who conduct themselves with decent manners.

    --
    --- I do not moderate.
  21. Fun by Z-MaxX · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A couple years ago, I was working in Santa Rosa for a company, developing cell-phone test equipment. There was a nice little Mexican restaurant where the my coworkers liked to eat lunch, across the street from a school.

    The first day I there with them, one of the hardware engineers pulled this thing that looks like a cell phone out of his pocket. He looked at me at said, "Watch this," and pointed toward a guy crossing the street, talking on a cell phone.

    My coworker then pressed a button on his "cell phone" and a second or two later, the man on the street took the phone away from his ear and looked at the display as if to see if the call had been dropped. He put it back to his ear, appeared to say something, and then repeated this sequence a couple of times before giving up.

    The device was a jammer that my coworker had built into a cell phone case to make it inconspicuous.

    It was pretty funny to see hordes of people rushing around, all looking at their phones trying to figure out what's going on.

    I could only imagine what they were saying: "Hello? Can you hear me now?"

    --
    Dr Superlove 300ml. I use my powers for awesome
    1. Re:Fun by NineNine · · Score: 4, Funny

      Cut to the next scene:

      I see somebody using a cell phone jammer. I tell my friends "watch this". I take a normal looking boot that I happen to be wearing and get it lodged up that guy's ass. It's pretty funny to see the look on that guy's face as he's laying on the pavement in pain. I can only imagine the idiot saying, "What did I do?"

  22. A better soltution - Cellphone Detectors by lxt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the theatre industry we have to think of other creative ways of stopping cellphones even from being switched on (even on silent - as most tech people know, digital cellphones can badly interfere with electronic equipment). Thus, a company does produce a "cellphone detector", picking up cellphone radiation. An automated message can inform people to turn their phones off - failing that, in cases where phones MUST be turned off (live recordings etc) you can refuse to start until all phones are off.

  23. There shouldn't be a problem with mobiles by RandBlade · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For most people on mobile phones (cell phones) they're used properly, no shouting and no louder than if you're talking with someone who's next to you. I use my mobile regularly and always try to make sure I'm not being disruptive, not in the wrong places (eg libraries) and no shouting. Just because a few people abuse them, does not mean most people do.

    Someone carrying a jammer is being deliberately and obnoxiously selfish. They're worse than the ignorant fools who talk to loudly.

  24. If people used better judgement by Coolmoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    then this would not be a problem. Society has functioned for many years without cellular technology. If you have an area such as a movie theatre or a classy restaraunt you should be expected to use some judgement and turn it to vibrate or off to go to VM. This is the ideal, but people have shown time and again that this is not in line with reality. I am all for business owners jamming these devices. I think that there ought to be a large sign stating that the devices will not work and to use a land line if you need to make emergency calls. I have seen so many times that people will take calls anywhere and talk completely disregarding your feelings to have a peaceful dinner or watch a movie without hearing about somebodys personal crap. This could be a great niche market for people that want have a peaceful shopping or viewing experience that is uninterupted. I pay money to get away from pagers, cellphones and others screaming kids and I expect that this will not be a problem. If I want the noise of everyday life I will go home or to work. There ought to be a place to get away from this stuff.

    --
    Got hosting
  25. Re: Not good by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If YOU had a cell phone and YOU had something that you deemed important enough to talk to someone about wherever you were, who do you care about most? Your job, your success in business, or some nearby person who you'll never see again, and who has some kind of insane twisted fixation on someone else talking on a cell phone? Seriously...I don't mind when other people are talking on their cell phones. You guys are acting like nut cases here. Why don't you pick something else to notice about other people and hassle them about, like loud footsteps, breathing, blinking too much, not laughing the same way you do, or anything else that will send you into a blind rage? Psychos.

    --
    ...
  26. Re:Safety? by MesiahTaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Scenario: You're a soccer-mom and your kids are at school. Their listed emergency # is mommy's cell phone. What then? Mommy can't go to the coffee shop because her phone might be jammed? That's a bit ridiculous. Same goes for a Doctor. Same goes for people who *need* to be able to receive calls for their jobs.

    Cell phones are a fact of life. If you don't like, move to Elbonia.

    --
    Are you an open source warrior?
  27. Legal Way by silas_moeckel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not legal to activly jam Cell phones because your not supposed to be broadcasting on that piece of spectrum. Now anybody that has ever had eletronics 101 should remember a faraday cage and how easy they are to build but let me elaborate:

    Your a Movie Theater and you dont want cell phones or other wireless devices to work so as to not have people gabbing on them during the movie.

    When you build or do any extensive renovation your prbably going to use a lot of drywall if you install a few layers of chicken fence or other suitable fine grid or wire. Make sure the doors are metal (fire code I would think) and that they maintain a good contact to the grid etc etc etc. When the doors are closed yours not going to see an increadable ammount of attenuation to any RF signals with a wavelength longer than the mesh pitch and a good attenuation to most everything else.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage Gives and overview and a link to tempest the DOD's solution to RF leakeage.

    Now you have a movie theater that cell phones dont work in. It would be nice if we could clasify transmision types say via bluetooth since thats a hot new thing on cell phones and have the possibility to ask the phone to switch to silent mode while not affecting paging functions for doctors and other on call critical people that can be assumed to be more responcible than a 15 year old with and "emergency" call.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  28. In other news... by po8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to a story in Modern Luddite , folks annoyed with the constant noise, danger, pollution and clutter of those damned horseless carriages are arming themselves with sugar for gas tanks, spike strips, and similar means of improving their lot in life.

    Also, moving beyond the portable, folks annoyed with the whirring and buzzing, bright lights, heat and refrigeration of electrical devices in general are using wire cutters, shorting busbars, and plowing cars into power poles in an attempt to regain the peace, sanity, and universal happiness of a pre-electrical world.

    Jerks like this should go live in Colonial Williamsburg. Let the rest of us get on with the 21st Century, where we can talk to our friends and business associates anytime with just the push of a button. Not that it's a Utopia or anything, but...well, yeah, in at least this one aspect it kind of is.

  29. Re: Not good by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful


    > I recommend you grow the fuck up and realise that world does not revolve around you.

    That's just about the ultimate in irony, in the context of a discussion of the annoying habits of cell phone users.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  30. Re:Not good by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it's that important, find a land line.

    It's people like you that cause huge traffic jams because you're talking on your cell phone and not paying attention to the road, then you cut off a tractor trailer who then in turn jacknifes, and runs over a bus full of nuns which catches fire, burning alive all those inside.

    You're lucky that people only jam your cell phone calls, if it was up to me, I'd stab you in the face with a soldering iron.

    ...but at least I'm not bitter.

  31. Re:Not good by mabhatter654 · · Score: 5, Informative
    As somebody who's spent a lot of time in the service industry [i.e. Mcdonalds!] it really is rude how many people will answer the phone while ignoring their place in line...not paying attention to the service they're requesting, but of course they won't step aside and allow the next person to place their order....so they then snear and shout at the cashier or other customers because Those other people are in the way?

    It's about respect for your fellow person...starting with the one in front of you!!! I can understand the shopkeeper who deals with this 50 times a day. people come to your shop and you can't give good service because they interrupt your transaction with them for the phone....and OFTEN have the nerve to get mad at YOU "because you're taking too long!" Not to mention disrupting other customers patiently standing in line with loud disagreements, or lack of attention to what's going on around them. It's a menace!!!

    That said, jamming or blocking phones isn't the answer, it just makes people ruder! Cell phones have spread the general problem of computers to the masses...computers have allowed businesses to micromanage and interrupt business plans on moment's notice...cell phones allow thoses same types of people to deal with everything NOW...instead of budgeting their time and attention to allow their responsibilites to be properly performed...And THAT is the bigger problem with "instant everything"!!

    The main tool to fight this would be better voicemail/sms messages...allowing people to be notified of messages, but keep the phone off until they can give proper attention, those tools are available, but still don't work that well for every minute use. Businesses with "quiet, private places" for phone conversations would help too...they wiped out most phone booths about 10 years ago and didn't replace the "space" to make communications in.

  32. Re:Safety? by Avihson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Soccer mom can't figure out voice mail? I guess soccer mom can't go to the theater or to class because her kids are in school.
    God help her if she works in a hospital! Or in this enlightened age, if she is a flagger on a construction crew. Her cellphone is off in blasting areas!
    What happens to all those doctors who must turn off their phones when they are on the ward, or spending hours in the operating room?

    I do some consulting at a university medical center, everyone has phones and everyone turns them off in certain areas. I carry a phone and a pager. I turn them both off - when I turn them on, I get alerted to missed calls and missed pages. It doesn't curtail my productivity, how can it hamper soccer-mom's?

    There is no excuse for antisocial behavior, unless you are an immigrant from Elbonia

  33. Re: Not good by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're in a public place, if they want to talk on a cell phone, it's their right. Hell, if they want to sit there whistling "It's a small world, after all" while banging on pans, they can do that too.

    What makes people think that one person's silence is worth trampling on everyone else's rights to do the things they want to do? If they don't want to hear people talking, they can get earplugs.

  34. Re:Jammers and Dampers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    Sorry to hear about your problems. Here is another way to approach the problem:
    • Check the ARRL for a ham radio club in your area
    • Ask them where you can find an Official Observer (or OO)
    • The OO has the expertise to track down the interference and will try to resolve the problem.
    • If the OO can't resolve the problem, they should pass the information on to the FCC.
  35. I don't get it by ajagci · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First of all, I should say that I don't actually use my cell phone in restaurants or close to other people just because it is so disapproved of.

    But, frankly, I think this dislike of cell phones is irrational and itself annoying. People talk to other people everywhere, often in loud or annoying voices. It makes no difference to me whether someone talks into a cell phone or to someone across from them; at least, when they talk into a cell phone, I don't need to hear the responses.

    I'm beginning to suspect that what really annoys people about public cell phone usage is that they are missing out on half of conversation that they would really like to listen in on in its entirety.

  36. YOU TALK TOO LOUD by wfolta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is not talking on the phone. It's that most people talk WAY TOO LOUD on a cellphone, way above the appropriate level. Personally, I keep my voice down, but most people don't.

    So, yes you have a right to talk where talking is appropriate. No, you don't have a right to SHOUT FOR AN HOUR because you're too stupid to realize that people naturally talk louder on the phone.

  37. This would be in America. right? by Tim+Ward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even the 911 caller would likely not distinguish a blocked/jammed call from a normal "no service" area.

    This would be in America, right? In much of the rest of the world there is no concept of "a normal no-service area". Somewhere you can't get service is abnormal.

    1. Re:This would be in America. right? by GQuon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't know about US networks, but in the GSM network, emergency calls (112) have to get through even if you are on a different network, or haven't paid your subscription.

      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    2. Re:This would be in America. right? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about US networks, but in the GSM network, emergency calls (112) have to get through even if you are on a different network, or haven't paid your subscription.

      AFAIK, US is the same - in fact there are charities that will collect old, in-active, cell phones for use as portable 911 (our emergency number) phones.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  38. Dinner in peace? by MorePower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you want to have dinner in peace, I recomend you eat at home.

    Restaurants are noisy places by nature anyway, with the restaurant's music system playing, couples chatting with eachother, co-workers laughing and joking, single guys hitting on the waitresses, people at the bar cheering or booing at whatever sports thing is on the TV sets, etc.

    Where does this notion that restaurants are innapropriate places for cell-phones come from?

  39. Re: Not good by Datoyminaytah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who the hell decided talking to someone on a cellphone while in a restaurant is any different than talking to a person physically there?

    That's my own criteria for using a cell phone. That is, if I'm in a situation where I feel it's appropriate to talk to a "real" person, it's fine to talk on a cellphone, as long as it can be done at a "normal" volume level (normal for the context.)

    So, movie theaters are definitely out. Museums? Why not, as long as you're not disturbing a tour, and other people are talking freely to companions.

    Yes, there are inappropriate situations in which to use a cell phone, but what makes me mad is all the self-righteous people who glare at you if they see you with a cellphone to your ear ANYWHERE, even in totally "appropriate" situations. (Yes, there are quite a few such people.)

    --
    assert(birth_date<time-86400)
  40. America can be funny. by Gray · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's do what you want nation, but no loud talking.

    In the rest of the world, where cell phones adoption is way higher, this issue is so 1995. Cope and move on, it's progress sucker.

  41. Re: Not good by Jim+Starx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not the every day chatter that annoys people. A large majority of the people with cell phones know how to use them respectfully. But some people don't. Don't answer your phone in a movie, and if you really need to at least step outside or towards the back. Don't think that when the pickup is less then an inch from your mouth you have to project your voice 50 feet away in a quiet room. Don't think you can hold up lines, lanes of traffic, or elevators just because your not through with your conversation when your time has come. Cell phones aren't inherently rude, but the way some people choose to use them certainly is.

    --
    The darkness... controls the music. The music... controls the soul.
  42. Re:Agreed, inconsiderate users are the problem by Steve+B · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Er, what's the point of asking people to turn off cell phones in a government office waiting room? Do they think the spectacle of one of them working and four of them dozing is so fascinating that no one will want to have it rudely interrupted?

    --
    /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
  43. Re:Safety? by iantri · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If their is a 'real emergency' at school (i.e. kid's arm gets torn off by paper shredder or something) , the number to call is 911.. not "mommy's cell phone".


    Need is a pretty strong word. We need food, water and shelter. We don't need cell phones.


    Cell phones have only existed for the last 15-20 years... people got along just fine before that.


    As for the "need to receive calls for your job" argument, if you need to receive calls you should be at the office, not at the local cafe.

  44. Automatically block calls in the car while moving. by innerweb · · Score: 4, Insightful
    My biggest concern with cell phone users are those who insist on carrying on conversations on them while driving (I have the same issues with those who eat, smoke, apply makeup, sleep or anything else that interferes with driving - heck in the Cinci commute, I used to see people getting dressed while driving).

    Most people I know do pull over to use the cell phone when driving. But, there are those idiots out there who think that multi-tasking while driving is a good thing. They should have to commute through the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky bridges on a daily basis, see all the accidents that happen. Maybe witnessing a few deaths will help instill the true meaning of distracted driver.

    Beyond the drivers who use them at the wrong time, the rest are just irritating jerks. I always take my conversation away from those who might be interrupted by it. That is outside, down the hall, private room. It is called being polite. That aside though, I would be pissed if someone were jamming my cell phone. I think the appropriate action is to ask politely (first time) for a rude cell phone owner to take it elsewhere. If that does not work, we have done everything from turning our own volume up to the point where said arse had to leave to hear to pointedly telling the individual we were not going to put up with their rude interruptions anymore (to which we have actually received applause from those around us). Honestly, such drastic measures are rarely needed, as almost everyone once asked has been polite.

    InnerWeb

    --
    Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
  45. Re:Not good by BinxBolling · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Nobody is going to try to jam your cell phone while you are on your business property or the property of a client.

    Uh, the whole point of the article is that with these jamming devices being sold to private, unlicensed individuals, he can't be sure of that.

  46. Lemme tell a story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A couple of years ago I was visiting the North rim of the Grand Canyon, when I encountered some prick sitting on a bench in one of the little tourist areas. He was telling some poor gullible woman on the other end of the conversation that he was sitting alone on top of one of those spires in the canyon which he had just finished climbing (not remotely true.)
    He proceeded to tell the woman (I assume it was a woman from his lothario manner, tone, etc,) that the view of the canyon was so beautiful from where he had climbed, that he just had to call and share the experience with her.

    Myself , and others around me heard this bald-faced lie, and we all looked at him and then each other - keep in mind that none of us there knew each other, then we all spontaniously started making background sounds to illustrate to the woman on the other end that this loser was not where he claimed he was. I said something like: "Sir, you're gonna haveta move your car!" Others made similar noise.

    The look he gave us was wonderful. Then he started to explain to the woman that there must be cellphone interference happening.

  47. Re:Jammers and Dampers by tiger99 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The guy is an idiot, you don't need a 40 fooot antenna!

    Two things you can do, corrupt the signal from the base station near the mobile, or corrupt the signal from the mobiles (all of them!) near the base station, in both cases by swamping with in-band spurious signals. The power required in each case is quite minimal, except when a mobile is near the base station. The only difficulty is that you would have to jam every channel. Placing a jammer close to each base station would likely as not be regarded as an act of terrorism by the Unelected Imbecile.

    Not that you should do such things of course, but cellphones can be very annoying. They are also an unreliable means of communication, which has its own nuisance value, and they are generally used to make people work harder, or "be more productive". IMHO they simply add to the pressures of life, and are a bad thing generally, especially in the hands of children or teenagers.

    The way they are sold in some countries is partly to blame, you get a phone for nearly nothing, which deceives many into thinking they are getting a bargain. I only know of UK practice, it may not be the same everywhere, but if it was made illegal to subsidise the phone from line rental and call charges, a lot of people would think again, if they had to pay the actual cost.

  48. Re:Jammers and Dampers by tiger99 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Damping as you describe is basically screening, and is never entirely effective. A door or window is much bigger than the cellphone wavelength, the best you can expect is some attenuation, if the whole building is screened, which only makes the mobile and the base station turn up the power level, increasing the health hazard......

    True damping using absorbtion of the signal is well-nigh impossible, even stealth aircraft don't work very well and the process is expensive. It also needs quite a thickness of material at cellphone frequencies. AFAIK, on certain aircraft (where use of a cellphone, even switching it on, is a major safety hazard, and is illegal) there have been experiments with simulated base stations which transmit inside the aircraft (very minimal power required) and will command the phone to turn its transmit power down to minimum. That will of course prevent it frokm accessing any base station outside. A jammer based on that principle could be justified in certain circumstances, but would no doubt need the agreement of the cellular companies and the regulatory authorities. It would also be difficult to accurately control the boundary of its effective area.

    The vast majority of areas where cellphones are banned rely on people being fooled by the signs, and switching them off, because they imagine that they will not work. Still, it seems to work (usually). Fortunately, most of us who know about the probable limitations behave ourselves and switch off anyway.

  49. Re:Jammers and Dampers by ElNeo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I do really not see the point with jamming or materials for damping the signal - this is a social problem!

    In Norway, as in most of Europe, cell-phones is very common. You would need to look hard to find anyone beyond the age 13 that does not have one. In the beginning there was some problems with people talking everywere, kids sending SMS to each other in class and stuff, but this has been solved by other means then jamming!

    Nobody would ever recive, and take the call in a theater. Kids are not allowed to use cells at school. Trains have "Quiet-wagons", where you are not allowed to use your cell-phone. On the Subway, there are no quiet-wagons, but people would seldom take long conversations here - cells are usaually used for quick calls or SMS/WAP.

  50. Re:Jammers and Dampers by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Blocking them in residential areas is not. Someone uses ham equipment in my area, and it's easy to see who, due to the 40 foot antenna in his yard. The guy is known to hate cel phones.

    Why would you assume that a guy with a 40 foot antenna in his yard is blocking your cell phone signals somehow? A 40 foot antenna like that would be used for HF communications and wouldn't have anything to do with the wavelengths your cell phone uses. Amateur radio operators are much more respectful of the limited radio spectrum than your average suburbanite cell-phone using panty-waste.

  51. In the US by jobugeek · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Unfortunately, in the US people regard freedom as complete and that includes being rude and inconsiderate.

    I don't know if everyone has just decided they are more important than everyone else or if they just don't care, but it seems to get a little worse every year. From people talking on a cell phone in a theather to road rage.

    --
    I'm not drunk, I just have a speech impediment. And a stomach virus. And an inner ear infection.
  52. Re:Jammers and Dampers by chrispycreeme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Theaters are one thing, but last week at my cousin's funeral there were no less than THREE cell phones going off at full volume while the pastor was trying to speak. This seriously pissed me off, especially since two of these clueless dickwads actually took the call during the ceremony.

    If people can't learn basic manners then I am all for blocking or jamming or taking their fucking phone and smashing it with a big rock. Whatever works.

    I'm not asking for "miss manners" type behavior, just a tiny bit of common sense and respect would do just fine. Then people wouldn't have to resort to illegal jamming...

    But that is the world we live in..

  53. Re:Jammers and Dampers by Moofie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't like cell phones? Don't own one.

    However, in free countries, other people are allowed (within certain broad arenas) to do things you don't like.

    I don't like cell phones because I think the service is priced by collusion, not competition. However, that does not lead me to say that other people should not be allowed to use them.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  54. Consider this before jamming... by X86Daddy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... Yes, there are annoying people who speak very loudly on their cell-phones in restaurants and the like. There are people who answer them in theaters, classes and other "non-talking" environments. There are people who talk on the phone (or to passengers) while driving, and give their talking process a higher attention priority than the driving process.

    However, these are the ones that get noticed. The ones who speak quietly while dining alone in a restaurant or on the subway; the ones who speak on a phone or to other passengers safely while driving; the ones who set the phone to vibe and then surreptitiosly look at the caller ID during a film, class, meeting, etc... these people are not noticed and probably outnumber the annoying ones by far.

    If you jam cellular frequencies, not only are you screwing with all the safety devices already mentioned, but you're screwing with people who are behaving politely and reasonably.

    Would you start spraying febreeze at everyone entering a store because occaisonal patrons come in without having bathed recently? It might help with them, while pissing off people who do behave properly. Jamming makes You the nuisance who should be removed.

  55. CDMA can't be jammed by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    [Oh goody, another cell-phone-jamming story that I get to fruitless post this to]

    600+ comments on this story and not a single one mentioning that you can't jam CDMA, which is what SprintPCS and Verizon are. TDMA systems like GSM and AT&T and Cingular? Sure they can be jammed, but not CDMA, and not any of the 3G systems, which are ALL CDMA based.

    CDMA was originally researched and refined by the military for precisely this reason. Because it uses a spread spectrum, a single carrier (or several) can't jam it. You'd need to jam the entire BAND, at a high enough power level, and that is physically impossible. Well, it might be possible with military grade gear, but we're talking huge amounts of power here. You'd need an entire destroyer to carry and power it.

  56. Re:pay phone? by Atryn · · Score: 4, Funny
    Once upon a time, there were no cell phones. I know, its hard to imagine, but it's true. When people had a heart attack, someone used the phone by the restrooms to call an ambulance.
    Once upon a time there weren't even any ambulances. And my what an annoyance they are! I'm trying to peacefully drive down the road and here they come barreling along blaring their sirens and thinking they should have all the right of way. Well, I'm setting up roadblocks on my streets, because it should be me who gets to choose who can and cannot use these public roadways.

    [/sarcasm]
    --
    Come play Moral Decay!
  57. Re:However, your rights end. . . by technos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Private property owners are well within their rights...and/or jammers

    While you see it that way, me, the FCC, and Johnny Law see it another.

    You jam my cellphone, or my pager, or my cell-modem, and I'm going to see you get a nice fat fine from the FCC. I'll even come down there with a camera and a frequency analyzer to give my FCC submission some teeth. And if I missed something important? You'll be hearing from a company lawyer before the FCC even knocks on the door. Wasting my time is wasting company time, and company time can run thousands of dollars an hour in an outage.

    Remember, some of us carry these accursed things for a reason, and when the boss calls you to let you know half the west coast fiber has gone dead, or the hospital staff calls you to get you to come in and save a car accident victim, "Some bar owner decided I shouldn't be able to use my cellphone because he's too much of a wussy to tell people to turn them to silent" doesn't cut it to save my job or the dying persons life.

    --
    .sig: Now legally binding!
  58. Re:Jammers and Dampers by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it really that expensive or difficult?

    In my kitchen, I've got a 1.3 kilowatt transmitter. It operates at ~2.4GHz (which isn't very far removed from modern cellular frequencies). There is a screen on the front of the thing that seems to do a good job of keeping the RF from escaping (my nose hasn't gone necrotic from years of watching microwaves cook food) - and I can -see- through it! I can't possibly imagine that the screen contributed substantially to the cost of my microwave.

    Therefore, effective shielding is not only readily achievable, but is also relatively inexpensive and already in common use.

    Luckily, your short-sighted prose on the operation of stealth aircraft leaves little doubt that you're a dim-witted moron, and just spreading FUD. (RF fud, but FUD nonetheless.)

    I hope you haven't fooled too many people.