Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stop Cell Phones Without Stopping Pacemakers...

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the ass-hole-arms-race-escalates dept.

metoikos writes "A company based in Fairfax, Virginia, has come up with a subtler method of preventing cell-phone addicts from using the world as a phone booth than a faraday cage or even those little hand-held jammers. Cell Block Technologies (that name must go over well with law enforcement) is developing a smoke-detector sized device which sends signals of 'no service' to cellphone frequencies, prompting phone to send calls directly to voicemail. Admittedly this is better than messing with everything that uses the same frequencies cellphones do . "

7 of 552 comments (clear)

  1. Rights by Anonymouse+Cownerd · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Although I agree that there should be places where one should not use a phone, what right do you have to take away any of my legal rights? There are no laws that state I cannot place or receive a cell phone call out on the street or in a theatre for that matter. The ban on smoking here in NYC is different (whether or not I agree with it is another matter). This is analogous to someone walking up to you, taking your lit cigarrette from your lips and grinding it dead with their shoe. If I am paying for cellular service, you better not be denying me of what I paid for.

    --
    http://www.rayn.net . Funny. Stuff.
  2. This is a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    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.

    The courts would see it my way, as well. As would the service provider - after all, by interrupting their service, you are proving malicious intent to disrupt services, in much teh same manner as you would be if you cut the power lines to my building.

    I recommend you not do this.

    1. Re:This is a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
      1. It wasn't a "movie," as you so coarsely put it; the proper term is "film."
      2. The deal I finalised during that global conference call netted me a princely $200,000 in commissions. Had you asked nicely, I would have reimbursed you the $8 that you spent to see that so-called "movie."
  3. NEW YORK TIMES DETECTED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Someone needs to double-check the facts to make sure they're not lying again.

  4. Re:Doctors by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "LEAVE IT WITH THE HOUSE MANAGER AND/OR USHER, WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO GET YOU IF IT RINGS.

    Sorry to shout, but isn't it bleedingly obvious?"

    It's bleedingly obvious that in the case of a doctor, that won't work.

    1.) That call is PRIVATE. It's for the DOCTOR.

    2.) We already pay $10 per person to see a movie. Like they're going to hire extra ppl and reserve space to be a phone valet.

    3.) Dare I bring up the privacy issues that arise?

    Don't be bone-headed.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  5. Re:Send Incoming Calls directly to voicemail? by Obfuscant · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    So I say block the incoming calls.

    I hope the very first incoming call that is blocked on my cellphone is the one calling me to come look for you or your lost child. I'll happily sit watching a movie instead of volunteering my time out in the forest looking for your sorry selfish ass.

  6. Re:Doctors by 110010001000 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Oh please. Get over yourself. You are not as important as you think you are. If you are, then just sit in the firehouse all day because GOD FORBID your precious pager malfunctions or batteries die.

    Yeah, yeah, I know: "I hope you still feel that way when I save your kid from a creek". Whatever.