Slashdot Mirror
Stop Cell Phones Without Stopping Pacemakers...
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 . "
It's too bad nobody's developed first-post blocking technologies.
My pacemaker just vibrated - I think I have a voice mail.
Block That Ringtone!
By SAM LUBELL
Published: April 8, 2004
T could happen on a train, in a restaurant or during an awe-inspiring aria at a performance of "Carmen": a neighbor's cellphone starts bleating the theme song from "Friends," disrupting the mood and setting nerves on edge. Wouldn't it be great, you think to yourself, if this couldn't happen?
Others are thinking likewise, including companies and researchers developing or already selling devices that render cellphones inoperable in certain locations. Methods include jammers that interfere with cellphone frequencies, routing systems that mute phones' ringers in specific places, sensors that detect active cellphones and building materials that block cellphone waves.
Proponents say that such measures are more effective than "no cellphone" signs, "quiet cars" on trains or even legal restrictions (like a law prohibiting cellphone use during performances, enacted by the New York City Council last year).
The concerns go beyond mere annoyance: casinos are seeking to stop phone-based cheating; prison authorities want to guard against phone use by inmates for drug deals or other forms of wrongdoing. With the rise of camera cellphones have come privacy concerns that have made locker rooms and other areas no-phone zones.
"At some point the American public will become so frustrated with the abuse of cellphones that it will rise up and yell that something must be done," said Dave Derosier, chief executive of Cell Block Technologies, based in Fairfax, Va., which is developing a transmitter the size of a smoke detector that relays signals of "no service" to cellphone frequencies, prompting them to send calls to voice mail.
Cell Block's products are slightly more sophisticated versions of what is probably the most widespread method of stopping cellphone use, called jamming, which renders phones inoperable by disrupting the connection between cellphone towers and cellphones. Jamming devices overpower phones' frequencies with especially strong signals and often with loud noise. Such devices can be found on eBay and at Web sites like globalgadgetuk.com.
That site says it has sold thousands of devices to theaters, businesses, military users and individuals. The jammers range from $200 for a rudimentary hand-held model to nearly $10,000 for suitcase-sized gear sold to governments and the military, with the price usually based on the signal range and the likelihood of disrupting cellular activity.
Other means are also in development, from devices that merely detect cellphone use (and prompt users to desist) to construction methods that render cellphones inoperable.
But not everyone finds this trend encouraging. Cellphone industry experts and federal regulators deride jammers in particular as unlawful, unethical and even dangerous.
"You're not allowed to barricade the street in front of your house because you don't like hearing an ambulance," said Travis Larson, a spokesman for the Cellular Telephone Industry Association, who asserts that blocking systems inhibit customers' rights and can block emergency calls. "Just like roads, the airwaves are public property."
The Federal Communications Commission points specifically to the Federal Communications Act of 1934, which says that "no person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications" licensed by the government.
"It is the F.C.C.'s authority and obligation to determine which transmissions are lawful," said Lauren Patrich, a spokeswoman for the commission's wireless bureau. "If the F.C.C. doesn't have that authority, then what's its point?" Fines for violations can reach $11,000 for a single offense.
Mr. Derosier said that devices like Cell Block's are "questionably legal" in the United States, but he added that with proper disclosure and provisions made for emergencies, there is no reason that they should not be used. The devices are legal in Japan, France and Eastern Europe, and in most of
NO ONE wants to fucking register to read this shit. If you're gonna post an NYTimes article, have the fucking decency to post a login/pass or a mirror link instead. Asshole.
This is definitely a good idea, but can I get one shaped like a cell phone?
There should be a law requiring/prohibiting that (Please circle one)
to post an article with a NYT link that's not the free google partner one
Just a thought, but wouldn't this be illegal somehow?
It would seem this has legal ramifications, but it seems like a genious idea. If only I could shut up all those damn chirping phones that go off in accounting class!!!
What is the legality of these devices? Isn't this sort of like wireless DOS?
with a subtler method of preventing cell-phone addicts from using the world as a phone booth
What about business people, doctors, police, etc. who need these devices to work?
And talk about lawsuit material. Someone gets hurt, but can't call 911 on their cell phone because it is being jammed by this (or a similar) device.
Hell, aren't devices like these illegal anyways?
Casual Games/Downloads
wasn't there a broadway actor who once took a brief timeout from his performance to ask an audience member to "shut off that fscking phone"
...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 .
Does this mean my pacemaker will get 'no service' messages as well? That can't be good.
>> from the ass-hole-arms-race-escalates dept.
I guess somebody is having a bad day.
Public airwaves. What part of public is so hard to understand? You have no more right to shut off someone else's phone for bothering you than you do duct tape someone who's talking too loud at the mall. This is incredibily self centered, and blatantly disregards other people who also have a right to free speech.
Let's look at the bad sides. Public events like fairs would use jammers to get people to pay exhorbitant payphone rates, hotels would use them to force people to use room phone, and on and on. Don't forget that emergency services use cell phones extensively as backup communications mediums. Many emergency radio systems, arguable most, are incompatible with each other.
They are also used for on call personal like plumbers, system admins, fire fighters, and meidcal staff. You know that nice doctor that helps out during a baby's delivery? They aren't standing by in the waiting room, they are out and about and get called in when they are needed.
Now I understand why people get frustrated with people talking loudly on cell phones, so the better question is, why haven't the mic's improved?
Can someone make one of these so that I can stop checking Slashdot every 5 minutes all day long? Thanks.
-Rob
Marriage doesn't have to suck!
I can see churches and assembly halls getting them, as well as theaters and restaurants, just to lower the asshole quotient, but this raises issues.
What if an emergency call is blocked, or a call about something incredibly good?
What if it were Darl's call to Linus apologizing for the lawsuit that was blocked? (Hey, we can dream.)
This shouldn't be used except in controlled circumstances, although personal-sized models of this will be fun to play with.
Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
I've wanted one of these for a long time. Put them in classrooms, lecture halls, airplanes and movie theaters, PLEASE!!! I've long said we should have something like this.
It would be even better if this feature was built into GSM, PCS or whatever standard, so that you could further tell the phone to turn off. This would be useful on airplanes and in other environments where cellphone use is restricted or prohibited.
--JoeProgram Intellivision!
So how soon can my movie theater get these things installed???
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
"Doctor, he could've been saved if only you'd have gotten the phone call!"
"That doesn't matter, nurse, the ring was destroyed and Sauron defeated!"
I truly hope folk don't use this on the sly. Should be law that where they're in use, HUGE signs in obvious-to-see places let you know you won't be getting any calls.
In Soviet Russia, link follows you!
Soylent Green is peoplicious!
Would this also stop the cell phone from telling you there is a voice mail? I know when I am in my basement, I appear to have no signal, but I still get voice mails. I could be way off on this one, but then if you have a little chirpy message to tell you have a voice mail, you may still disturb people.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise - William Shakespeare
This is a good idea if its only for incoming calls. By only blocking incoming calls people can still make their emergency phone calls. And if someone is making an outgoing phone call at the Opera then that is an offense punishable by castration. So I say block the incoming calls.
IAALS.
The NYT article (available here reg-free (thanks, guys!)) is short on details, but the manufacturer's web site has much more detail.
Some interesting notes:
* Their technology currently only works on GSM phones, so here in the US, it'll only block T-Mobile customers. No more Catherine Zeta-Jones hollering "Stop!" in the middle of your bowling tournament. I hate it when that happens.
* The company is Canada-based, so they're outside the reach of Ashcroft & co. The NYT article quotes the company's founder as saying that the technology is useful in mosques... if the founder is indeed Muslim, he's probably wary of landing on Ashcroft's little Enemies List. Heck, I'm worried myself, 'cause I'm not sure what he thinks of Methodists these days!
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
... what if I want to stop pacemakers?
Trolling is a art,
The problem with ever blocking cell-phone signals is that it will block emergency phone calls too, the kind that some people buy cell phones to recieve. If I'm in a theatre I want to be called if someone at home got stung by a bee and can't find an Epi-pen, or what about a hostage taking in a restaurant? And I don't think anyone else in the theatre/restaurant would mind my cell going off in such a case (just so that I could leave the room afterwards to carry the acutal conversation). In emergencies VoiceMail is NOT an option. The only place this might have any legitimate use is high security military type situations. In everyday life the only things that works is public shaming of assholes and the teaching of tact and courtesy (such as vibrate mode only).
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
Sweet mama! I've been waiting a long time for these!
"Admittedly this is better than messing with everything that uses the same frequencies cellphones do . "
I seriously doubt there are any other publicly available devices that operate in the same band as cell phones. Sure, maybe a personal computer, but that does not "transmit or receive", i.e. it is shielded (uh oh lexan cases!) and doesn't transmit (FCC regs). So, while the person who submitted this headline made his/her final sentence "sound good", it is in fact meaningless.
I hope that when such devices are in use, signs stating so will be publically posted in the area so that this does not unknowingly interfere with, for example, on-call doctors.
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.
I'm no expert on cells, but... if a cell can't establish a connection with its network won't it continue to send a signal out anyway in search of a new one?
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.
From the article:The concerns go beyond mere annoyance [snip] prison authorities want to guard against phone use by inmates for drug deals or other forms of wrongdoing.
WTF? I've been to prison (class trip for a criminal justice class). We were required to leave just about everything on the bus - money, credit cards, pack of smokes, car keys, etc. Cell phones were included on the list. (It would've been easier to list what we were allowed to bring)
Inmates are already prohibited from having a cellphone while locked up and while it might be possible to smuggle one in, it's damn near impossible to keep it hidden for an extended period of time. Why would prison authorities be concerned about phones?
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
As you go into a high-class opera house, you check your phone at the desk, give them your seat number, and relax and enjoy(?) the show. Partway through, an usher comes to your seat, and quietly tells you that a Darl McBride is on the line. You then walk to the desk, and take the call there.
It would probably be possible to temporarily reroute your phone number, too.
There should be a law requiring/prohibiting that (Please circle one)
how long until phone companies start paying off contractors to use these special anti cell phone materials so they can sell more land lines?
Can't believe I forgot to link the manufacturer's web site in my post! Here it is again:
The NYT article (available here reg-free (thanks, guys!)) is short on details, but the manufacturer's web site has much more detail.
Some interesting notes:
* Their technology currently only works on GSM phones, so here in the US, it'll only block T-Mobile customers. No more Catherine Zeta-Jones hollering "Stop!" in the middle of your bowling tournament. I hate it when that happens.
* The company is Canada-based, so they're outside the reach of Ashcroft & co. The NYT article quotes the company's founder as saying that the technology is useful in mosques... if the founder is indeed Muslim, he's probably wary of landing on Ashcroft's little Enemies List. Heck, I'm worried myself, 'cause I'm not sure what he thinks of Methodists these days!
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Also, I wonder if it works on all the major cellular (800mhz SMR [Nextel], 850mhz cellular) and PCS (1900mhz) frequency bands, or just a single one?
You know someone will use this as some sort of Denial Of Service gadget.... Walk down Wall Street with one and watch the craziness begin.
I see lots of people (mostly women) walking, driving and shopping with their cell phone glued to their ear. Not only do I think this is rude, but distracted users could easily walk into oncomming traffic. WTF is so important that you cannot put down that stupid phone and pay attention to what you are doing?
I for one welcome our new cell phone jamming overlords
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
What I like best about these jamming/countersignaling devices is that the person with the cell phone, unless told otherwise, really has no idea that he/she is near one of these devices and thus has no way of retaliating. One of the posters below insists rather vehemently that we "better not take away my rights [to use cell phones]". Well, we can take it away, and he won't know about it, and there is nothing he can do about it either.
The proper way to regulate cell phones is for buisnesses and private properties to develop policies, and post them. Most theaters I go to have signs that say "turn off cell phones". If someone does not, they get thrown out. It is simple. Or, if you want to be savvy, you can set your cell phone to vibrate, when it goes off you can quickly see the caller id, and if it is important you leave and go to a washroom or step outside. What's the problem?
What will happen one day if your mom/sister/brother gets sick, and they try to call you to come to the hospital, but you are out at some fancy resturant or theater that uses this device?
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
"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."
What a great idea..now calls to 911 won't work...pages to doctors won't work, meeting with long lost relatives won't happen. Lets see the twin towers gets hit a despreate husband tries to call his wife but no he just gets her voice mail. What a friggen great idea. anyway people talking on the phone in public places annoy me buts nazis telling me that all jews should be killed annoy me even more. But they should still have that right. The alternative is far worse.
cops *everywhere* in the US use cellphones as 1.) a backup to the radio systems, which increasingly have issues as they switch to trunked systems and 2.) a way to have more secure communications than the radio systems which, even trunked, many of which can be listened to by anyone with a scanner and 3.) quite frankly, a way to say certain non-politically-correct things that might get them in hot water back at HQ
its simple... the first time a cop can't make a cell call and realizes its because of one of these devices, 1.) somebody's going to get a trip downtown and 2.) national legislation will be made against them
This device would be illegal in the US (unless they've somehow received FCC aproval).
The FCC will crack down hard on people using this device. All it takes is one complaint from a cell customer or provider to the FCC, you don't have to file a lawsuit.
The fines for transmitting in unauthorized bands are pretty hefty and I doubt that anyone who is attempting to block cell traffic would be willing to put up with repeated large fines and/or jail time for not complying.
-- Is it a right to remain ignorant? -- Calvin
I wish symphony halls would just treat the cell phone as precisely as inappropriate as a handgun.
I wish that the responsibility was placed on the venue to prevent their clientele from bringing one of these things into the hall.
I wish that when it did happen (which is pretty much *always*) that patrons would become irate and ask the venue for a refund because the performance was ruined (due not only to the cell phone, but to the riot, and the unfortunate killing that ensued.)
I attended a performance of La Bohème. During the intermission, some woman was sitting there in the auditorium talking on the phone. I'm thinking "how can you even bring that thing in here?"
Sure enough, towards the end of the show, I hear some fancy ringtone. I really, truly, literally, wanted to kill the person responsible.
And what about the doctor, who is always on call, but had his pager/cellphone on "vibrate" to avoid disturbing those around him. Is he not allowed to go in these areas, or perhaps he will just miss the call that a 12-year-old-girl is dying at the hospital while waiting for a transplant.
Yes, cellphones disrupting public events are definately a growing problem, but you know what: the last movie I saw was more interupted by the girls talking/swearing a few rows up than by cellphones. The solution to either problem: kick 'em out.
Disruption is not the solution to disruption... especially if this device were to become to everyone who has a grudge against cellphones.
Ok, so they are developing something that can be seen as acceptable in an otherwise unacceptable field of technology: a device that makes cell phones not recieve calls so they don't ring. So, what stands to question, is can the cell phones still make outgoing calls? Remember, from the description in the article, it's not a normal jammer, although those are mentioned.
Work sucked, until it became unemployment, when it became slightly more tolerable. -Tet
Props to GNAA
-- With Gay Nigger Love
Goat-see
"sends signals of no service"??
That's crap. Jamming is jamming. There is no such thing as a "signal of no service".
or two!
yay! peace and quiet!
I've yet to be disturbed or annoyed by someone using their cell phone. I take mine with me everywhere, but then again, I turn off the ringer and just use the vibrate function when I'm in some place with a lot of people. Of course, I don't disturb anyone because no one really calls me...ever....(sob)
But are people really annoyed by cell phones so much? Also, what's with these draconian laws with driving and cell phones? They say it's because you'll get distracted. But then again, shouldn't they outlaw radios...and talking to others in your car?
Just wondering.
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
So, it's going to cover 850mhz, 1900mhz, TDMA, CDMA, GSM, etc?
Isn't it likely that this thing will whack more than cell phones?
It's probably easier to just give theatre patrons a big stick. That way they can just beat the shit out of any moron that whips out a cell during the movie.
One partial solution would be to have all cellphone manufacturers agree to make ringless vibrating cellphones.
Sure it'll take a few years before existing ringing phones are phased/worn out... then you only have to worry about the loud talkers.
Then again, it's difficult to control hardcore antisocial behavior. Take smoking for example. In most non-smoking places, no one smokes, except the occasional fscktard who needs to have his/her fix.
"The Federal Communications Commission points specifically to the Federal Communications Act of 1934, which says that "no person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications" licensed by the government."
Yes it is.
Anyway, if someone gets hurt where there's a jammer installed, you'd think this would be apublic place, right?
Amazing that humanity managed to survive without cell phones until now, isn't it? What with doctors not being able to be called during a movie or a play, and LInux coders not hearing news about lawsuits IMMEDIATELY.
I can just see it now here in Minnesota*.
.
.
.
At the entrance to a building:
We block cellphone calls.
Guns are not allowed.
No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service
* In Minnesota, we have a conceal/carry law that allows businesses, churches, etc. to not allow guns in the building when the sign is posted at the entrance.
As soon as a story is posted about blocking cell phones, everyone chimes in with reasons why you just can't take away the precious cell phones. So here's my new low-tech, royalty-free method to stop people from using cell phones in movie theaters.
1. Post a sign saying that use of cell phones in the movie theater is prohibited and cause for removal.
2. When you notice someone on a cell phone, or get a complaint about someone on a cell phone, remove the offender.
3. Do not refund their money.
- if you are in an area where you can't lock onto any cellular control channel, either due to there being insufficient signal from any cellsite basestations, or
- due to jamming from an interfering signal on the same frequencies, or
- if someone installed a bogus cellsite emulator that would act as a honeypot for all the cellphones in a particular area, by broadcasting control-channel data at a high signal strength. The cellphones would then be blind to any traffic happening on the real network.
It is unlikely, though, that you could get an FCC license to do any of the above, and if you really want to kill all the cellular traffic, you need to do one of the above to both the 800 and 1900 MHz bands (in North America). It is probably easier to just ask people to be polite and shut the damn things off.
Less is more.
If it's typical there must be examples.
In any place where one of these blockers is in use, it should be required that anyone entering the "zone" be a) notified that the blocker is in place, and b) given the option of disabling it for their device if they sign a usage agreement dictating that they will not annoy others with it. That way you get the best of both worlds, and you make those who really really want to be assholes legally responsible for being assholes.
Same with the use of items. If you drive on my parking lot I set the speed limit. Nobody else. If I tell you you can't park motorcycles in my car park then that is the law.
AND if I tell you NO PHONE then you better not use the phone or you will be kicked out by my bouncers and they are insured against breakages. Hope you are.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I keep my phone on vibrate all the time...in my front pocket.
"Sure enough, towards the end of the show, I hear some fancy ringtone. I really, truly, literally, wanted to kill the person responsible."
Well, then, it's really a good thing they dont let handguns in the symphony hall.
Sorry, but you are not as important as you make yourself out to be, and that "important call" you're waiting for is 99% crap. If something is going on in your life that is truly urgent, perhaps you need to be in a place where you won't be a danger to others (e.g., off the road) or inconsiderate to people who have better things to do than listen to your stupid conversation (e.g., away from any public place where talking loudly is not a norm).
In all interest of fairness, I say let businesses who care about decorum and style have placards or signs that say, "Cell Phone Blockers in Use" and all the people like you can belly up to the trough at a place more suited to your lifestyle, like McDonalds or Ryan's Family Steakhouse; with all the people screaming into their cell phones about those "highly important" things, you'll be right at home.
Yeah, right.
Here, impoliteness is in restaurants met with patience and over-politeness. If you tell off the waiter for asking you to keep your voice down, odds are for that they will apologize.
If you politely ask people to tirn off their cell phone where it shouldn't be on (theatre, quiet areas, etc.), however, they will very likely feel offended and talk back.
Too bad Tucson is in a capitalist country, since I don't mind paying 50% taxes.
I keep my cell phone on vibrate all the time anyway (I like the feeling) but this would really piss me off. My phone works twice as hard when it is trying to find a signal and drains the battery like nobodys business.
I think most people wouldn't want thier phones to ring during an opera or a funeral and such. Why not a transmitter that says to the phone, "please do not ring". This would be optional. Users could override this behavior so people like doctors, or police could get emergency calls. But most people would be more than happy to turn off thier phone they just forget to.
... take a chance on broadcasting something that I am sure is not even remotely legal in a public space, it's gonna be something that will make consumer products RFID tags scan as 2CENTS no matter what you plop on the checkout counter. Nice stroll around chinamart, TWO CENTS the whole store. heh heh heh Enough people do that, they might think thrice about that stuff.....
How about toll road smart cards? Make everyone pay 1000$, they'd get rid of that, too. How about replacing TV signals, say, during "the big game" or "secret days of our stormy lives" a signal appears YOU IDJIT, AIN'T YA GOT ANYTHING IMPORTANT TO DO? LOOK AROUND, STUFF IS MESSED UP, POLITICIANS AND MEGACORPS ARE BRAINWASHIN YA AND RIPPIN YA OFF!!
or EVERYBODY WALKS DAY, broadcast a signal that shuts down all the new whizzbang cars with computer controled everything, including NeoConStar. ZAP, it's WALK day!
Back to the phones, don't shut them off, just replace any call with YOU ARE SERIOUSLY ANNOYING, TURN THE DANG PHONE OFF FOR AWHILE AND ENJOY SOME LIFE!
electronic activism, gotta luv it!
of course, I would never do anything like that...
err.. where's the URL for the sourceforge project for this device, umm, just for "educational and research purposes".
I think movie theaters are already using cell-blocking technology. I saw a movie at the discount theater the other day and noticed that my cell reception went completely dead inside the movie but was at full strength in the theater lobby.
In the discount theater! You know the technology has to be cheap and pervasive if the $1.50 theaters are using it...
The apostrophe is used to indicate either possessive ("Onyxruby's brain hurts") or contraction ("Isn't it sad how American education sucks ass?"), not plurality ("You look good in them tight's!")
Manufacturers could be encouraged to build technology in phones which detects when the user is in a 'quiet-zone' (by a particularly encoded low-power radio signal). The owner could then have the option to pre-set the phone to be silent, or vibrate, or even just to ring as normal when in a quiet zone (meaning the user still has full control).
I like to be able to recieve calls whenever and wherever I want, but its important to know that sometimes its not appropriate, why not let me recieve my call and send out a signal that makes it vibrate or something instead of having no service. What if I am awaiting an important call. I hate those loud ass polyphonic ringtones as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean we should block cell phones out completely. Silence is not a right, my freedom to speak is a right however.
People are always whining and yammering on about their rights--but never a word about responsibilities.
I live in los angeles, a place where one finds many cell phones, and I have yet to be bothered by their use. I've very rarely had one bother me. Where is it that cell phones are being so abused? The only place that i can think of is in class, where they seem to go off once every couple of weeks, but this is nothing more than the most minor of annoyances.
Photos.
http://www.cell-block-r.com/
I just don't see how you can equate the right to Free Speech with the right to use a mobile phone whenever and wherever you choose. The two just aren't the same thing.
In the United States, we have the right to come and go as we please, as well. Even if you're not a U.S. citizen, you have the expectation that you can be walking down any public street in America and nobody will demand to see "your papers, please" before you can pass.
Does that mean I have the right to walk into any room of the White House any time I want? You say they're the "public airwaves." Well, after all, the White House is "public property," isn't it? Our taxes pay for it.
Does freedom to travel mean I can drive on the wrong side of the road?
Obviously, no and no, and neither of these restrictions undermines my "rights" in any way. Cellular phones are an invention of the last 20 years; telling me I can't use them at a particular place and time is hardly equivalent to sewing my mouth shut, or threatening to send my kids to prison if I make certain statements. Making that argument just sounds like typical, greedy, self-centered American materialism.
Breakfast served all day!
A handheld, portable EMP generator to knock out cell phones, stereos, vehicles, and anything else electronic. It would be good to fire one of these off in the mall or at your local electronics store.
Wake me up when they invent a way to block every singal except the ones to doctors on-call. This is a social problem, not a technical one. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater by blocking all cell signals is dangerous.
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
you are a pretentious wanker
No Service "honeypot" would only work if it overpowers everything else AND creates horrible interference. Otherwise anyone who's phone is put into "my own network only/disable roaming" mode won't pay any attention to strong signal from alien network (just like AT&T's phones prefer even weakest AT&T signal over stronger signal from other networks). Interference creation is illegal. So back to illegal "noise on all cell phone frequencies" devices then... :(
I like Quiet Zone bluetooth solution way more, but all CDMA operators hate bluetooth technology
Hyperom.com
Don't doctors carry pagers? Wouldn't it make more sense since pagers have better coverage than cell phones? The doctor in question would get his silent page, quietly check the message, then go out to the lobby to call in.
Did you ever think that it was the persons fault, NOT the cell phones fault, and NOT the symphonies fault? The problem here is that people are assholes, some people don't understand that some etiquette is required if you are to have your cell phone on you all the time. MY CELL PHONE GOES ON VIBRATE EVERY TIME I ENTER A RESTAURANT, MOVIE THEATRE, OR OTHERWISE "QUIET" ATMOSPHERE. Does that make you want to kill me for bringing my phone with me? And what does it matter if she talks during the intermission, at least she isn't talking while its going on. Go cry to your mommy, maybe she will console you.
Such a device would have to transmit, which is the whole reason that cellphones are prohibited on airliners.
This is an example of using technology to solve a social problem and it's overkill. This is why phones and pagers have a silent/vibrate mode.
I want to receive calls in a movie theater or anywhere else I am. It's part of the convenience of having a portable phone. I put my phone on vibrate and I check who is calling and if I want to talk to them I step outside.
I'm surprised here of all the places that a lot of people are supporting a sweeping solution like this that inconveniences everyone because of a few rude assholes.
You ever talk to somebody who was listening to music loudly on headphones, and have them respond to you by yelling (unintentionally)?
It's the same thing. I'm not saying they're not stupid, that's just why it happens. They're too inept to adjust their phone's volume, and instinctively speak as loud as the other person sounds when held to their ear.
There's also the "shout through static" effect, where people try to yell through whatever reception difficulties they're having.
Personally, I prefer mobile IM anyway. It's quiet and unobtrusive.
this just makes me wonder about the legality of this... Not that I disagree... few things irk me more when out at a restaurant or movie than a cell phone ringing... I leave mine in the car or turn it off out of courtesy, why cant everyone else?
anyway... the way I see it is this:
This is a device which transmits on the same frequencies as cell phones. Now, Cell phones are FCC licensed devices licensed to transmit in that range (800MHz range). This device, AFAICT is NOT licensed... which means, that If I were a cell user, the cell company's FCC license rights extend to me in one form or another, I could, under part 15 rules, require that the restaurant using such a device turn it off due to its direct interference with my licensed device. Failure to comply could be met with a complaint to the FCC, followed by an investigation, fines, etc etc.
SO, I guess the question is, since technically any jamming device is illegal (which is why true radar jammers are illegal in your car) AND having this device, or any cell-phone jamming device is against part 15 rules unless licensed by the FCC, what is to stop cell phone companies from suing restaurants, movie theaters, etc who employ these devices. After all, if the FCC finds that the device is not licensed AND caused harmful interference, the people using the device could face severe fines, and jail time even, AND would be open to civil litigation...
it seems like a big can of worms, but I just wonder about the legality of these things, AND whether or not they can be sued for any interference to the licensed cell signals...
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
Someone needs to double-check the facts to make sure they're not lying again.
What the heck is this article talking about? There is no such thing in cellphone technology as "signal of no service". If the cellphone cannot detect a compatible network/ get no signal, it displays a "no service" message. There is no freaking way in hell you can send a "no service" signal to a cellphone! If it does, it's just jamming the service provider's signal to make it unacceptable to the mobile device.
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail." - Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)
Low power transmitters do not need licences.
I seriously thought those cool ads they play were effective. They rotate them every few weeks, everyone laughs, but you actually see people in the audience take out their phone and check it. It always makes me think about my own.
I guess the assholes wouldn't notice, but it can stop true accidents.
"Mauled by a TIGER!?"
-Patrick
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
To avoid kidney donation to NYT
u its/08cell.html?ex=1082001600&en=348516b568cf570e& ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/08/technology/circ
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail." - Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)
What? Nobody misread "Symbian" when used in a post that also contained the word "vibrate"?
/. coming to?
What is
Tim
For Sale : Device to send not in service signal to ___________
Now fill in the blank with the following:
I go to the movies a fair bit, and I can never remember hearing a cell-phone ring. The cinema shows a short clip before the movie starts telling people to turn their phones off/to silent, and it seems to work.
Read the Study!
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
The same people who want to block your cell phone are probably the same people who sit in a restaurant blowing cigarette smoke in your face.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
Public Shared Spaces.
What part of public is so hard to understand? You have no more right to annoy many people around you by spewing into your little plastic box, then you do to urinate on someones shoes because the bathroom you need "right now" is somewhere else.
This is incredibly self centered, and blatantly disregards other people who also have a right to peace and quiet, not to mention dry shoes.
Let's look at the good sides of jamming.
Public places like fairs would use jammers to provide people with a more mellow, quieter, stress-free experience, hotels would use them to enable you and your friends to have a relaxed, intimate chat without some buffoon bellowing in the background, and on and on.
Don't forget that emergency services use public spaces extensively to get to accident scenes, most of which are caused by people who TALK instead of DRIVING. Many emergency radio systems, arguable most, are incompatible with each other. Thats why any intelligently run municipality will have standardized on one radio system, so that different services can communicate.
Also, radio is a BROADCAST medium, which means that all emergency personnel can listen at the same time to central commands. Cell phones are useless in a big emergency, because panicked citizens will overwhelm the cell phone network.
Public shared spaces are also used by personal like plumbers, system admins, fire fighters, and medical staff. You know that nice doctor that helps out during a baby's delivery? They have a very stressful job, and it helps them a lot when there is a little more peace and quiet in their day. Several doctors are always on duty at a hospital, and pagers can easily summon more if needed.
Now I understand that some selfish people feel that their immediate want is more important then sharing a peaceful public space with other citizens, just as in the bad old days a few people would pollute the environment the rest of us live in with toxins because it was public. So the better question is, when did some people get so self-centered that they feel free to pollute the commons with their asinine bellowing?
And why do the rest of us tolerate it?
Hello! Why not just take the phones away from prisoners?
If the manufacturers would just get together, they could easily come up with some sort of a "mute" system.
Basically, you have a small transmitter that broadcasts at a certain public frequency. Cellphones have a receiver that catches this signal, and automatically flip the cellphone to mute/vibrate. This way, when the person leaves the building, his/her phone will revert to the old function.
This could be extended to disable the phone's radio, or just individual components, such as cameras, video, etc., as well.
All it would take is the manufacturers getting together and coming up with a common protocol.
It'd be a hell of a lot better than jamming all signals outright.
... and all I wanted for xmas was a magic 8 ball, but i got this lousy
Second as I understand it the air waves are not "free" but "public domain" hence you are definatly NOT free to do what ever you want over them. HAM operators have to be tested and licenced in levels, each level granting more freedom to broadcast on the air in return for proving you know what you are doing. That is why the 'boob incident' was such a big deal. The FCC regulates the hell out of what can and can not be done over the airwaves.
There is no situation you can not make worse. -Jim Lovell
So, you want to take away others rights to use their LEGAL product in the manner for which it was intended (cell phones), but you want to stop others from enforcing the similar rights rules for digital content? I suppose that next we'll hear "my rights are more important than yours" arguments. Folks, it's all the same thing. It comes down to some people restricting rights to a (product|action|method) that is otherwise legal, execpt for the (prod|action|method) being used where 'certain' people don't want it to be.
Saying "I like this" is the same as endorsing Paladium technology, DRM, and the RIAA
I am one of the people who actually has his phone set to vibrate mode nearly all of the time but this type of "you can't use your own phone" attitude really pisses me off.
If such a practice of blocking signals ever became legal and prevelant in the US I would go to such places and manually activate my ringers then pretend to carry on a conversation ANYWAY and encourage others to do the same until the nonsense was repealed.
Cell phones are a fact of modern life. Mature, grow up and deal.
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Legality: In theory if your radio transmissions do not exceed your property boundaries then you can practically transmit anything you want. Practically, though, radio transmissions are 'infinite' in distance, so they are regulated by the FCC to a specific power level at various frequencies, and a license is often required when the power exceeds the regulation. In other words, these devices may or may not require a license, but I doubt they are 'illegal' already according to current regulations.
Safety: Yes, they will prevent emergency phone calls from being received or made. With well posted signs this could be mitigated (ie, you can't be held liable if the doctor or liver transplant candidate were aware of the cell phone blocking upon entering the establishment) However, I wouldn't want to be the owner when the place is taken hostage, landlines cut, and no one from inside can use their cell phone.
Ideally such a technology would allow ring signals to get through, but would disable call initiations (answering or dialing). This is not impossible, but technically expensive (snoop on all frequencies, short jamming bursts on specific activity types)
This is a social problem which can really only be taken care of in a social manner. Theaters, restaurants should alert guests to turn off or silence their phones. If they must use them they should leave to a cell-phone allowed area (near pay phones, for instance) or be escorted out if they forget to do so. They should not be allowed to re-enter if it will prove an interruption to other guests (ie, during intermission only, if one is available). If there are no penalties and immediate actions taken against anti-social guests, then they will assume their behavior is allowed in that establishment.
Very short text messages and pages would work very well for many emergency situations. One-way text pager coverage in the US exceeds cell phone coverage significantly, and those who have to deal with unexpected emergencies know this and use it, relying on the cell phone as a contact and status device only.
-Adam
sized device which sends signals of 'no service' to cellphone frequencies, prompting phone to send calls directly to voicemail.
Uh, WHAT???
Doe cell phones honor a signal of "no service" over the ACTUAL signal?
Do phones even LISTEN for a "no service" signal?
Isn't that a little too Col. Klink'ish: I HEAR NOTHING!!!
Why would you even program something to say "If you get this signal, PRETEND there isn't a signal"
---"What did I say that sounded like 'Tell me about your day?'"---
I'd like to think I'm a responsibile cell phone user. In theatres, the first thing I do is either switch it off, or to vibrate only. If a call comes in for me in a public place, I step outside into an uncrowded area, or I let voice mail catch the call.
Unfortunately, in the U.S. today, the concept of personal responsibility has been killed. It's gone. It's pushing up posies. This is the same argument used by the gun control fanatic types: "An average person isn't smart enough to own a gun. So, instead of making them take responsibility for their actions, we'll just make it illegal to own guns."
So, here, instead of politely tasing (using a Taser) on rude individuals who insist on using cell phones rudely, we have people that want to make cell phone use impossible, thus taking away the ability of people who truly do need them from being able to be in those areas.
You don't need to have a cell phone to be rude and insensitive: Miss Manners existed well before the cell phone was invented.
Ahhhh... I love the smell of my karma burning in the afternoon.. It's the smell of victory.
Karma: Chameleon - mostly influenced by bad '80s New Wave music
What did we do before cell phones? I am sure in case of emergency there will be a wired phone for someone to use close by.
Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
There needs to be a standard for this. A small, short-range transmitter just like the one described in this article can send out a code that says "silent mode only" to phones, rather than "no service." It would allow vibrating rings, and prevent answering until the user left the area to pick up the call. Even better would be if the person on the calling end could receive a message telling them that the party on the receiving end is in a silent-mode zone, and that they should hold on longer for an answer while the person leaves the silent-mode area.
Unfortunately, this would require some sort of cooperative standard from the handset manufacturers-- not likely.
It's your choice to go to a restaurant where your phone is jammed. As long as it's posted, you really can choose to go elsewhere. If enough people make the same choice, the jamming will stop, but I think more people will be grateful.
...or to the usher, or to the receptionist, or to whoever else is the appropriate contact person.
If your situation is really that much of an emergency, the employee will be able to take your call and appropriately inform you of the fact, leading you to an area where you can use your phone.
It's no more of a burden for you than everybody had 20 years ago; less, in fact, since you don't have to give people a different contact number. If you've got a little common sense, it's nothing more than a minor inconvenience.
Two rebuttals:
Phones would power up after the timeout to a half-awake state--receive only, no broadcast or tower searching--looking to see of a damping refresh is happening that would extend their sleep. Thus, if you get stuck on the runway or in a holding pattern, you wouldn't get this sudden burst of cell-phone activity near the end of the flight.
Alternately, phones that have been put to sleep by the beacon would only power up to the "half-awake" state afterwards only, for some period longer than the specified ##, and a separate beacon in the jetway and/or the terminal would be able to cancel this compliant state.
Make sense?
--JoeProgram Intellivision!
Stopping the use of cell phones is a reason people come here and if you don't like it find somewhere else to eat.
if the next generation of phones accept a command to go to Vibrate mode from an external source (theater/restaurant) with verification from phone owner.
This would require action from the standards groups/phone manufacturers.
another feature I wish would be built into the next generation phone: Garage door opener.
I cannot believe this would be legal. How many people depend on the cell phone for their jobs? What about the doctors on call or IT professional who need to know when a server or something goes down?
Plus, wouldn't this infringing on peoples right to own and use a cellphone? Sure some might abuse this, but is it not wrong to prevent people from using a service they *are paying for*?
I hate the guy who's cell phone goes off during a movie, but then again I also hate the kid who kicks the back of my chair or the baby that cries during a theater performance.
How am I justified in preventing this person from using their technology?
-Mark
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
Logically, using a cellphone and driving isn't any more distracting than using one one hand to steer and talking to passengers.
Demonstrably, it IS more distracting, though.
Try this test for yourself (which has been used in several studies).
Crank up any task-intensive video game. Driving sim, FPS or similar. Get the best score you can. Now try that game while having a phone conversation. You can even use your fancy hands free thingy. Do you get a lower score? Do you get killed out faster? br>I'm betting you do.
on the road, if you get killed out...there is no reset function.
I know someone who works at the front desk at a gym/swimming pool. He says they have recently banned all cell phones after discovering people had been discretely taking pictures of children in the change room and sending them off immediatly, destroying the evidence. This jamming device would be useful in this situation.
On the other hand, is there a liability issue when someone phones for an ambulance and their cellphone is jammed?
Why? Oh, simple. I've long since realised that people who want to make sure my cellphone is unusable, either by taking it away from me or jamming or whatever are my sworn enemies. Now it gets proven to me again - this time, not on personal experience.
My folks just got scammed out of a rather large sum of money solely by the virtue of someone posing as a law official and convincing my brother to turn off his cellphone - with undeniable malicious intent, since they used this fact to convince my father that his son's in trouble and he can help by providing the aforementioned sum.
This was, in the current circumstances, quite a plausible story they told. And it was trivial to confirm it or deny by merely calling my brother on his cellphone.
And that was the thing that was made impossible by turning the thing off!
The instant I see a jamming device like this one, I'll jam something sharp into it. My cellphone is first and foremost the device I need to call for help. People who stop me from calling for help are my enemies.
Simple, trivial logic.
In Soviet Russia... RUSSIANS comment on YOU.
cell phone jammer and keep it on all the time in my backpack. The difference is astounding. My commute has become infinitely more bearable...And I can even sometimes catch a snooze.
People with cell phones are consistantly obtrusive...Women in particular can't seem to shut the fark up once they get a cellphone in their hands. Women are also the ones who freak out the most when their precious cell phones are jammed. They act like I've just cut off their oxygen supply.
Why don't you just use text messages?
My friends and I use these all the time. They're not only completely silent (provided you remove the 'received message' bleep), but they're cheaper than calls.
With these I can use my phone during movies... lectures... whatever...
Is exactly as long as it takes for it to prevent a 911 call resulting in someone's death and the lawsuit resulting from it.
Of course terrorists would be more than happy to blow up theaters knowing the victims may not be able to get help fast due to the scanners.
> If you have a grinding need for your cellphone to work...
...give it to the usher, tell them where you'll be sitting, and have them come get you if there's an emergency call.
Kinda like what we did 20 years ago, only more convenient.
Phone companies would rather sell you cell phones.
paintball
And yours is the second post ;)
Really, how did the parent get modded up to +5 Insightful? With this kind of pandering:
> Why should only people who can afford $100 dinners be able to eat dinner without cell phones?
> Sounds pretty discrimanatory to me.
It's discriminatory in the way expensive clothes are discriminatory; that is, it isn't. This has jack shit to do with a rich/poor divide.
> Free speech often means interfering / annoying those around you
Not often, although occasionally. Nothing guarantees you a right to run electronic equipment of your choice on someone else's private property, though, so what's your point? What right does shutting down cellphones on my property violate?
> If someone is rude during a movie, they can always be asked to leave - the cell phone is a moot point.
No - it's a very valid point, because very often people don't _intend_ to be rude and have their phone ring; they're just forgetful.
Moreover, pre-emptively stopping disturbances is well-established: how are "no shirt, no shoes, no service" and "working cellphone, no service" so fundamentally dissimilar?
I used to work out at a local YMCA up until a few months ago. While I was a member they started a policy prohibiting cell phones from anywhere except the lobby. They were concerned about the new picture phone technology and people taking pictures of others in locker rooms or of kids or whatever...
That policy was in place for a grand total of 2 weeks before it was reversed (probably because of *valid* legal threats). Why? Because a private organization cannot prevent you from using a legal FCC contracted product. It is your right to use these phones where and when you want.
Now then, if you abuse them, that is a different story. Anyone caught using the phone in a 'malicious' way was excorted out and their membership terminated. I actually saw this happen once.
My guess is these devices won't last long. The correct solution to this social problem is to do the same. If you are in a restaurant or movie theater and you abuse your cell phone, you should be asked to leave, with no refund. That will shape up people really fast.
-Mark
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
Now carjackers won't bother about police being called by victim or nearby car -- they will jam cellphones around...
A lot of people have a really bullshit attitude about this. It is almost like any conversation about TV where I sift through a million posts of people talking about how great life is since they don't watch. You know what? Pat yourself on the ass, great job, nobody cares.
Listen. I don't own a cell phone. I don't say that to insinuate that I'm better than people who do. I want one! I just don't have room for it in the ol' budget at the moment. People who have a cell phone should have every right to have it on and recieving calls where the fuck they choose to be. If the phone is ringing throw their ass out for not turning it to vibrate. Eventually they'll get the picture. However, if I had a cell phone and I missed a call about a loved one being in an accident or something because some asshat thought he had a right to run a jammer in his movie theater you can bet your ass there'd be a lawsuit.
People here are all about saying P2P isn't the problem, it is irresponsible users. Well, that's true. Same with cell phones. I don't want a fucktard with a GED and a jammer messing up my day anymore than I want the RIAA suing kids.
>>>Why? Because people all around you paid for a show.
There is nothing in the silent vibration of my cellphone that anyone around me will notice. If they notice me pull it out of my pocket and look at the screen, then it wasn't a very interesting show and you owe them their money back.
People should be more educated, even those tree-huggers, who may get a life-or-death call while watching LOTR.
If I see someone using a cellphone on the theatre, I educate him. I stand up, walk up to him/her, and tell him, very politely:
"Would you shut the fuck up!! please!"
And then I proceed to hit the shit out of them.
If everyone did this at theatres, cinemas, operas, whatever, people would be more educated with their cellphones
And text messages aren't completely silent. I still hear DTMF when I hit a key.
Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
What about people like me who use their phone to wirelessly surf the web? Doesn't make any noise, but you're willing to stop me from surfing the web just because you don't want to hear others? Any establishment that blocks my internet will find themselves short one more customer. What's next, dumping buckets of water on each person as they enter so they don't smoke?
Which amendment gives you that right? Private organizations can make whatever rules they want while you're on their premises. Think dress codes in restaurants, loitering in stores, etc. Plenty of health clubs have cell phone bans.
> It isn't your airspace. It's a public place.
Not true. Public place is a park or the sidewalk, basically anything maintained by the government (local, state, federal). A restaurant is a private place. Ever seen those signs saying "We reserve the right to refuse service to anybody"? A public place can't do that, because they aren't allowed to discriminate. Private places can do so. I can well imagine a restaurant (mine, if I had one), to automatically take away all food and drinks and bring the check the moment the customer's phone rings. As the ovner of that particular private place, I may feel like refusing service to those who wish to keep their cell phones on.
So, someone starts talking abnoxiously on their phone in the middle of a restaurant? Hit them over the head with a chair, problem solved.
Seriously, how many cell phones did you see in the good old western movies? I rest my case.
That's a paddling!
If contacting a person was that important, there would be a less intrusive redundant method. If you are that important, don't leave the house and keep your noise to your damn self.
Else...
SHUDDUP/HANGUP AND DRIVE!
SHUDDUP/HANGUP AND EAT!
SHUDDUP/HANGUP AND WALK!
Noisy motherfucker, you can count on one of these being built, and installed and running on my car an all times. If you don't like it, blow me and go home and sit by the phone and flap your whining lip.
The hell they don't have the right on THEIR *private* property that was NOT designed or intended to be the place where a bunch of loser douchebags call their cells phones to look important.
SHUT THE FUCK UP AND HANG THE FUCK UP!
You wanna use that phone around me, you will be talking out your asshole and digging your fingers in to dial. As much as you want to take pictures of people with your phone and try to look like you are not a waste of life, you should stick to getting your porn on net not the locker room or kid's room. I also have the right to blow a whistle or air horn in your ear and deafen the loser talking to you, how the fuck you like those apples?
A handheld cellphone jammer like this would be fantastic for stalkers, serial killers, robbers and rapists.
the fuck up? I went to see LOTR but ended up hearing stupid hip-hop-ghetto comments for 3 hours. I suppose I should be happy there wasn't a family with their 3 todlers running around screaming.
Nextel
CDMA system.
..well at least for blocking of a certain type of first post troll - using the "browse at" filter.
For instance, I think it's well over four years since I last saw a first post which referred to a Beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman pouring hot grits over her...well you get the idea!
In fact, most first post trolls I see now seem to be modded +5 Funny - just like yours in fact.
I thought the whole point of no service was that you couldn't even receive a signal.
A professional who is on call should be responsible enough to avoid places where he is not allowed to use his phone.
I'm an amateur, you insensitive clod.
...i just usually start making fun of people using their cell phones in areas where it's not wanted.
:-)
So far, it worked best at the times i had a banana at hand. Most people get the idea pretty fast when you are demonstratively holding a banana to your ear and mouth, repeating sentences the guilty party says to his/her cell phone while showing off a really stupid face
Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
Ok, I admit I don't know everything about wireless service, but how does sending out "no service" messages constantly "better than messing with everything that uses the same frequencies cellphones do"? I don't get it. I thought that if you used a frequency then nothing else could use it for that period of time. Doesn't sending out "no service" also block everything else?
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
...so I can zap those morons that pay no attention to their driving because they're on their cell phone.
on your ability to communicate, check your equipment when you change location.
gewg_
You're right, people don't NEED their cellphones everywhere they go. However, I'll offer you this childhood story.
;) This takes place during my high school days.
:)
Years ago, when I was in elementary school, my sister had to undergo an operation at the hospital. I went to school like normal that day, however my mother told me that she may not be able to pick me up from school. She said that if she didn't, she would send someone else to pick me up. The day passes, and the front office buzzes the teacher; she has a call. I can't remember if she didn't take the call or what, but I clearly remember that I was never informed (by the school) that it was from my mother. When school let out I waited, and waited, and waited, but my mother never showed up. Finally I spotted the friend of hers who was sent to pick me up. She approached me and I acted a bit bewildered.
"..uhh.. Why are you here?"
"I'm here to pick you up. Didn't the school tell you?"
Now, if I had a cellphone (not that schools allow them anyway, especially for grade school kids, heh.) I would have have been able to receive a call, or even better, text message from my mother informing me of this. Or, perhaps if the teacher had her phone go off during class?
Just to drive the point home, I'll mention another awful childhood story. It involves me at school, much the same as the first, waiting, and waiting, and waiting for my mother to pick me up. She was getting her hair done, or something, and sent (a different) friend to pick me up. This said friend completely forgot about me after she picked up her own child, and I was left waiting at school for an hour or two before she finally realized this.
Cellphone, anyway? If only I (or the office) had been able to contact mum, or the said friend via cellphone, this could have been easily avoided.
And for the heck of it, one last story.
I had a fairly young math teacher (early 30's) who had a toddler, about three months old at the time. She had gotten sick and was prescribed medication that had to be refridgerated. The said medication was left out one night and the teacher was frantically waiting for a call from the pharmacy to confirm if it was safe or not to continue using it.
It was interesting, actually, because he apologized up a storm to the entire class about it afterwards. This as compared to a different teached I had who let everyone know he had a cellphone, although school policy didn't allow it (yes, even for him!) but since he was a teacher and we were only students (we'd get in trouble, he wouldn't), that the joke was on us.
Finally, the moral of the story(/ies). Cellphones are fine if used properly. Or, erm, make sure you live in walking distance from school. Or... ride the bus? I don't know.
(Somehow, I think this got a bit OT. Ohh well. Enjoy laughing at my childhood.
--
PH
Why is there a "no service" signal in the first place? Do phones really rely on a special signal to tell them they don't have a signal?
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
I'm waiting for a device that logs frequencies nearby that have recently received calls. If the ringer was loud and annoying, you can change their ringer to a loud, annoying song with lyrics to the effect of "I'm an asshole with a stupid ringer and I want everyone to hear my stupid little ringer song when they're trying to eat a pleasant dinner with their girlfriend. Somebody please punch me in the face."
No collateral damage this way.
-Lucas
<mood=angry>Then turn off the bloomin' keytones. Most people I know have them turned off because they're just too annoying for everyone concerned.
Of course, you can still hear the clicking of the buttons if you listen carefully. Perhaps such infidels who attempt to communicate with other humans in such a minimalistic style should have their fingers chopped off?</mood>
I think the "from the ass-hole-arms-race-escalates dept." slashdot description describes this entire story quite well. Reacting to the small number of complete pillocks, who would be complete pillocks whether or not they're shouting into a mobile phone at a funeral or not, by punishing everyone is just silly.
I say we take-off and slashdot the site from orbit... it's the only way to be sure
You know what might be really cool? If, instead of jamming, the device could communicate with cell-phones and force them into vibrate-only mode. Eg. the cell phone sends out a signal and the "jammer" responds and instructs the phone that this is a vibrate-only area. Communication with the cell phone network would not be interrupted and any activity wouldn't bother people. That would take care of ringing... and people talk through movies anyway - even without cellphones.
;)
There could even be a "no conversation" signal to instruct the phone to not allow the user to converse. You could set it up so that the "jammer" would be able to recognize emergency cell phones (eg. doctor, fire fighter, etc) or calls to emergency numbers (eg. 911, local police, etc) and allow those but block all others. Of course, that might lead to privacy issues..
Oh wait. Nevermind what I just said. I'm off to the patent office.
Price, Quality, Time. Pick none. What, you thought you had a choice?
You wanna use that phone around me, you will be talking out your asshole and digging your fingers in to dial. As much as you want to take pictures of people with your phone and try to look like you are not a waste of life, you should stick to getting your porn on net not the locker room or kid's room. I also have the right to blow a whistle or air horn in your ear and deafen the loser talking to you, how the fuck you like those apples?
So how is this different from loud obnoxious people talking to each other? You may be nearby and be offended by what they are talking about, but they have the right to talk as loud as they want about whatever they want.
Now then, there might be repercussions to this act, but you cannot stop them from doing it in the first place. It is their right to do so if they choose.
And by the way, you're apples are rotten and dumb. Anyone who uses that line has an IQ of about 10.
-Mark
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
If they can broadcast a "no service" signal. Arent they using the frequency that they are trying to make us NOT use.
If they can use it.. I CAN use it.
This proves the entire "dont use the cellphone" line is total crap. Besides... look on the roof of every Hospital. Yup. You guessed it.. A cell tower!
On the other hand. It looks like a great way to make money.
Stop imposing your beliefs / holier-than-thou attitude on others...fascist.
People like you should stay home and stop 'flapping your whining lip' at those that don't agree with you.
How did you make the leap that this person is a pedophile? Do you see something of yourself in that post? Thought so.
but I hope someone makes a huge blocker to shut everyone's off.
Better yet, I hope it is found that cell phones cause major health problems. Okay, I don't want cell users to have health problems, but I just want an excuse for them to not use their damn phones.
Folks, give it up. Cell phones are annoying and useless. If you need a phone on the go, try a pay phone. (And it pisses me off that they are taking away pay phones because everyone uses their freaking cell phones instead, leaving me searching for a way to call someone.)
Go ahead and mod me down, I don't care. I just had to say it.
From Mr Derosier
"the system works by making the cell phone believe that a smoke-detector sized control unit is the ceiling is the best tower to camp on. Once the phone camps on the control unit it becomes captive and off the public network. Incoming calls are sent to voicemail by the public network because they think the phone is turned off. the control unit will not let the phone make outgoing calls.
as for the name, a large market for the Cell-Block-R (cellblocker) products are prisons."
IMO, the biggest problem with cell-phones in cars (and elsewhere) is that they ring. If the phone rings while you're driving, you take the eyes off traffic, find the phone, flip it open, and answer. The noise is distracting (we modern folk seem to have Pavlovian conditoning that we must answer the phone NOW!). Then there's the fumbling in the console, purse, etc. to get to the ringing phone. Then you're expected to carry on a conversation in a situation not of your choosing, such as when negotiating a highway interchange in heavy traffic. Stop the ringer, and the cell phone is much safer on the highway. Or let your passenger take the call ("Honey, I'll take the call while you drive. OK?").
"quiet cars" on trains
Sweet!! When do we get these on BART? When when when??
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Block Technologies is developing a smoke-detector sized device which sends signals of 'no service' to cellphone frequencies
So it sends a 'no signal' signal? That doesn't make much sense. Wouldn't the absence of a signal indicate 'no service' to a cell phone? It must jam the cell signal.
Some people are on call 24 hours a day. It it absurd to think they shouldn't do anything but sit in their car waiting for a call. Doctors can have a life too.
I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
There is nothing in the silent vibration of my cellphone that anyone around me will notice.
Maybe you have a better phone than me but mine is not silent in vibrate. Oh, it's a lot quieter than ring but it is clearly audible those those near me.
Whispering to the person calling isn't very silent either.
What I'd like to see is:
1) Ring through an ear piece. Maybe some do this already. I have an old phone.
2) Programable keys that will allow me to answer the call with my choice of canned response.
For example I could program one key to say:
"Can't talk now. Try again later"
Another key would say
"Give me a minute. I need to find a place where we can talk"
it's not the cell phones that are the problem. it's the users. just like with everything else in life. the devices are awesome, very handy. but when someone answers a phone in a movie and instead of asking the person to hold and going outside they proceede to talk loudly and interrupt everyone, that's annoying. once again to be clear. the phone isn't annoying, the idiot user is. I think that jamming the signal is opening up the wrong can of worms. and is going about it all the wrong way. maybe required cell phone carrying classes? hehe zeb http://www.zeb.hznet.us
http://www.zebpalmer.com
I've always had a theory on cell phone calls in public places: If the other end of the call could be heard as audibly, the amount and length of these calls would be reduced significantly.
That said...
- people should be able to use a cell phone in public places if they so desire, but I would expect some level of common decency (which is usually, sadly, absent)
- people should be able to block cell phone usage in private places if they so desire. However, I do far prefer warning signs on audible cell phone usage. Phones set to vibrate should not pose any problem. So far in any movie theatre I've been to, this has been respected*
- people who have a problem with such measures, be it for personal or professional reasons, are in tough luck; just don't visit those private places
Cell phones are part of daily life now, so we'll have to live with them - and I think that's perfectly possible.
* The thing that bugs me about cell phones in movie theatres, despite lack of ringing, is their displays. I can't see any movie these days without at least 5 fairly well-illuminated areas in the seats in front (I typically sit in the mid-section) from cell phone displays - text messaging seems to be "the 'in' thing" in the U.S.
There is already a law against this in most states. It's called reckless driving. If the cell phone user is really distracted, pull them over and ticket them for that. There's no need for a whole new law. Just thickening the thick books...
I wish they'd just leave my cell phone alone. It's mine, and I can turn it to silent for movies, or off in a hospital. Last thing I want is someone else regulating how I use a service I paid for.
My wireless company
Progress has value only if it is shared by all -- slogan of SNCF [French Railways]
Fucking commies.
When a cell phone receives a signal at a particular frequency:
- The phone will vibrate only, never ring, and
- The phone will not work for actual conversations (i.e., a person can't answer the phone).
Install devices that broadcast at that frequency in movie theaters and funeral parlors, along highways, etc.A person will be able to detect an incoming call because the phone will vibrate, but will have to leave the quiet zone in order to answer it.
Further, the signal could indicate one of two different levels of quiet zone.
For example, it could allow a person to make calls on a highway (in case of an emergency), but not allow a person to make calls in a movie theater (because if it is really an emergency, the person could leave to make the call).
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
I didn't think you were worth the responce, but I am in a mood right now...
I am a aerospace engineer, not an IT professional. Also, I work out about 10 hours a week. I bench press about 200 lbs, I have run multiple marathons, My BP and cholestorol are both good, and my resting pulse is in the upper 40 BPM range. So yes, I am rather healthy...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...