Slashdot Mirror
Cell Phone Jammers: Coming To An Event Near You?
DarwinDan writes "The L.A. Daily News has an article about Cell phone jamming to prevent terrorists from detonating bombs remotely. Jamming technology is already being used "to protect President Bush." An interesting quote from the article: "Public safety is more important than public convenience.""
It's a small price to pay to guard one of our greatest treasures... G.W. Bush!
A wise man once said "Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."...
;)
Of course, it's only arguable that cell phone usage is an "essential liberty", but then again you can argue just about anything on the Internet
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
Isn't THAT safety as well?
Besides, if someone wants to detonate a bomb they will find a way, and if they have to press the button themselves.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
...they can just wait until January. Once he's an ex-president there will be fewer Secret Service around him.
So sell phones are only a few frequencies out of the million that could be used to transmit "trigger" signals to bombs. What's to stop a terrorist from using some cheap VHF handheld to denonate their bomb? If they transmit the code over airport security frequencies or whatever, you can almost garuntee those won't be blocked.
Can I mount one on my motorcycle to stop idiot car yakkers from running me down?
"Oh my! That looks like a bomb! I'd better call 911...wait, why isn't my phone working?!"
...Followed by an explosion a few minutes later.
We're jammin', jammin',
And I hope you like jammin', too.
Other than that, this is just yet another textbook example of the Bush Administration stomping all over the constitutional rights of its citizenry (but he hasn't really been very supportive of free speech from the get-go anyhow, so you shouldn't be surprised.) When are people going to get pissed off enough at this outrageous behavior and finally vote him out of office? He still seems to be ahead in the polls. Get it together, Americans!
Software piracy is victimless theft.
"Public safety is more important than public convenience"
I'll bet many of the survivors of Sept. 11 2001 made it through because of cell phone communications.
Okay, so lets say you DO run some frequency jammers...and some terrorist decide to use another means of communication to carry out their plans. Now you have a large number of people with no communication outside the affected area. Police/Medics will have a longer time of arriving to the scene. It will take longer to locate injured persons.
$cat
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
A discreet handheld jammer would be the perfect utility at a movie theater. Hell, they should start installing them in all of them.
Anything that helps get those yappy valley girls to stfu is OK in my book.
I don't have a cell phone, and I find most people really rude with them. For some reason people thing the phone takes priority over people who are right in front of you. (and some people just yell into their phone - Thats Annoying!) So, I want a jammer to carry around with me, so I don't have to put up with other people's phones. There is an Interesting Question? Do I not have the right to peace and quiet?
- Your stupidity got you into this mess, why can't it get you out? -Will Rogers
... aren't there laws (or doesn't the FCC have mandates enforceable by law) against this kind of deliberate interference with communications systems?
"It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." -- Zork
This sort of thing does very little to protect the people at large, while inconveniencing them quite a lot.
The politician on the podium, however, has no use for a cellphone, so s/he won't be inconvenienced at all, while his/her safety is increased.
Once again it's public policy taking care of their own. Seems to be a hallmark of this administration.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Change code from:
IF kaboomSignal THEN
blowup
ENDIF
To:
IF NOT dontKaboomSignal THEN
blowup
ENDIF
Ok. Cell phones are jammed. What about the hogillion other frequencies that could be used to trigger the detonator? What about a timed detonator.
And don't forget the terrorists favourite method - suicide bombing.
I think cell phones are just the most convenient method. They'll find another way in a hurry, you can be sure about that.
-kidlinux.
I'm no radio expert, but isn't it still possible that you could simply use some other kind of transmission, rather than cell phones? Say, ham radio, police frequencies, citizen band, or whatever?
Blocking cell phones seems to me to be what's called "security theater." It's all show to make people think they're safe, and (more especially) that the government is "hard at work ensuring the nation's security." (Blah, blah, blah.)
This is good theater, too, because it is something that affects almost everybody at an event, so they're sure not to miss noticing the "hard work." Why, it'll be the talk of the town!
At most, this is 10% security, 90% public relations.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
walkie talker freqs (49 mhz)
block fm radios?
block am radios?
block ham radio?
block light?
unless it's a faraday field in a box, part of the EM spectrum will get through... boom
to paraphrase lelo, bada boom..
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
And exactly what number is that? I had an old math teacher in highschool... err... nevermind.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Taken at face value, that statement would mean that whenever we could imagine any tradeoff between pleasure and safety, we take pleasure. Obviously we all chose a balance in our lives.
The problem with how it was stated, though, is that it sounds kindof valid, and I could imagine lots of public officials getting jingoistic about it and taking that expression as dogma.
This means that I can carry a cell phone jammer at all times, or is it not really public safety that's the concern here?
So instead, they'll just detonate the bomb when there's an excessive amount interference.
I wonder if they jam pager frequencies as well? Pagers seem like they'd be a much more sensible choice. Much longer battery life, coverage is EVERYWHERE, and they don't broadcast a traceable signal.
I love how the goverment spends my money on useless crap instead of trying to make fewer enemies by not being so heavy-handed with the rest of the world.
Which of these is a far more likely risk factor?
1) Terrorists using cell phones to detonate bombs (which can be done with a simple mechanical timer far more easily)
2) Fire, heart attack, drowning, etc. wherein using a cell phone to dial 911 could save lives?
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
It's all very well trying to make it look a balance between public safety and public convenience, but I can't help feeling that if you or I did this sort of thing, we wouldn't be charged with being a nuisance to "public convenience", but quite probably under some terrorism law?
It's very debateable whether the possible loss of life due to disruption to emergency services and the general terror and panic caused to the public is less than the possible lives saved (which requires both that there is a terrorist attack going to happen, and that they are reliant on mobile phones).
Of course, everyone bending over backwards to ensure Bush's safety is nothing new. When he visits the UK, it costs the British taxpayer $8.5 million for security (meanwhile, UK visitors to the US can look forward to such fun as photographing and fingerprinting, but that's another story).
was designed to apply to political speach. You have the right to speak out against the government. You do not have the "right" to public obsentity, profanity, any of the myriad of things "artists" claime are "speach." Using a cellphone is not "speach," although it's "speaking." Where the hell do you have the right to a telephone, anyway? Maybe the 9th amendment. But that's a stretch. Cell phones piss me off. seriously. Personally, I think they should be so prohibitly expensive that only doctors and drug dealers can afford them. The drug dealers could easily be culled out. Then only people who actually have emergencies would be able to interupt the public serenity.
and just to cover godwin's law and make sure no one replies:Nazi Himler Hitler SS Bush Cheney Eva Bruan is hot.
They just need to install these things in movie theaters. Then I will be happy.
This space for rent.
Only terrorists use BASIC.
This is somewhat like banning cars from an area. Sure, cars are a convenient way to move people, but hey, it could also be used as a delivery mechanism for an explosive!
Hasn't anyone in America clued up to the idea that 99% of the impact of Terrorism is exploiting FUD? In allowing the freaky controlling elements of society to make life impossible for the rest of the sane people, don't you lose so much more?
And don't give me that "if we can save just one life" crap. If that's the case then ban cigarettes, alcohol and McDonalds. Hell, ban religion and guns while you're at it.
For goodness sake! Stop letting the terrorists run your lives for you! They're winning! Wake up!
While I think most people will agree that jammers are okay to stop terrorists from blowing things up, I don't like the idea of all police having access to this. It seems to be the slippery slope. There is a valid function for this, but then it gets extended and extended. I say leave it to the air force, if there is a need they can fly a plane over the area and block everything. Then afterwards they will have to explain. Don't give it to the police, where 1000's of departments and chiefs of police might decide for themselves when and how to use it. Plus, everyone has heard stories of bad apples in police departments. The last thing they need is a method to shut down communications.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Probably a bad idea: As soon as they got in range of your jammer, they'd look down at their cell phone to check their signal level, not see you (or any other goddamned thing on the road), and BLAMO!
It's bad enough with them dialing the thing at 80Mph.
eleven plus two / twelve plus one
A high school near my home, which a friend of mine used to attend, used some kind of cell phone jammer because of the issues they were having with students answering phones during class time. It was rather annoying when I needed to use my cell phone on their campus at an after school function (awards ceremony).
Use walkie talkies.
Surely if the gubmint wants to cut off cell communications in an area they could just tell the carriers to turn off some base stations?
the hell with the president...I say we start putting these things in SUVs and Lexuses ( Lexi? ).
No more soccer moms meandering all over the road, screaming at their kids and yapping on their cellphones!
PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
"Public safety is more important than public convenience."
Um, OK. Suppose some family and I are at a rally for J. Random Politician and my cellphone is jammed as a result of these security measures. Now WTF am I supposed to do if a family member - for any reason - needs emergency service? Who am I supposed to turn to?
----
"Ours was a free culture. It is becoming much less so."-Lawrence Lessig
Not that there aren't hundreds of other ways around this useless technology, but your suggestion would just cause the bomb to blow up as soon as the terrorist carried it into the protected area, most likely having no effect on the intended target (who would be at the center of the area, not at its edges).
No, a better way would be to use a signal on a frequency that wasn't being jammed, or use a line-of-sight system with a laser, or use a good old-fashioned timer, or use a good old-fashioned suicide bomber, or a good old-fashioned sniper rifle. Or hey, they could always try diplomacy to achieve their goals.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
The cell phone users who continue to scream at their phones during jamming can be grouped in the second category.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
I wonder if these cell phone jammers could be used in places like movie theatres.
Sometimes security people appear so clueless that you begin to think that it must be an act.
Then you discover that they are perfectly serious - it's just that they have zero imagination. They cannot imagine a novel threat mechanism and so assume that nobody else could.
I would guess that 110% of new "security" spending in the US is wasted money as it's targetted at old threats.
If they knew what they were doing, they'd just get a java-enabled cellphone, and if it wasn't called within some time gap, and the signal suddenly dropped to 0 because it was being jammed, the phone would detonate the bomb based on that. Jamming is just one more hoop they have to hop through to set off the bomb.
because if it does then only Terrorists will have cell phones.
Wasn't the athens bomb (100 days before the olympics) made up of some sticks of dynamite connected to an alarm clock?
Police are looking for a brown coyote with suspected association to an organisation known only as ACME.
What about a bomb that goes off if it DOESN'T get a call from its owner. I think they are called 'dead man' switches. This thing might have some use in a theatre though.
Jon Bardin
Of course, bomb makers could just put in a manual switch in series with the ringer detonation circuit to wait until the ring before activating that part of the mechanism. Unless there was some kind of random delay before the ring and/or a second ring at random. Add in unpreditability so safetly activating the detonation mechanism becomes unsafe.
Other things to do would be to make the ring circuit only work if the correct impedence was detected. You could get around that but then making bomb denotators would not be an off the shelf solution.
I have also never seen any sort of cellular phone interfere with telemetry equipment, and I work in a critical care area. Hell, I tell patients to use our land-line phones, but let's be realistic; they fire up their cell phone the moment I close the door... I walk back in and catch them all the time, and the tele continues to function.
Also... setting off someone's defibrillator?? Uh, how about "no" and "hell no." Anyone who thinks a bio-med company could get away with selling implantable cardioverter/defibrillators that were triggerable by cell phone needs their head examined.
I agree... total FUD.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
Video-guided bombs will be trivial to implement as video camera-phones become available. I believe that this is the real threat -- they're just softening up the populace with the current jamming.
Thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
I thought cell-phone jammers were illegal.
Oh, wait. I almost forgot. It's only illegal when "the people" use them.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I don't think a laptop fits in my pocket quite as easily as modern cell phones can.
Honestly though, your post makes no sense, considering that every year the phones become more and more like computers.
I'm sure some Slashdotters have a phone with a PDA built-in.
This is hardly news. At least in europe where just about any official vehicle has some sort of "wave inhibitors" (i.e. jammer) precisely to avoid bomb detonation. This has been widely used way before mobile phones got popular, so it is obvious that they cover a wide range of frecuencies, or at least the most used for this type of bombs.
So, the government impeding on their use isn't any violation of anything, except violating good manners.
Now when they stop people from speaking, then we have a problem. But a cell-phone restriction? Is that all you people can find today to bash Bush on and express your ludicrous unwarranted hatred?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Now I can't get Chief Wiggum's voice out of my head, you insensitive clod.
Pretty much an example that as soon as you beat the bad guys tech, they change it. Frankly the whole issue regards jammers is best illustrated by why are they protecting our President with it and NOT protecting our soldiers in Iraq with it. If you have someone in your family who is serving in Iraq, buy them a cell phone jammer. They are cheap and available over seas.
In the mean time roast the back side of your congress critter for not supplying this tech for our soldiers to be safe.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
SIR!! The radar...it's been jammed! Hmmm raspberry. There's only one man who'd dare give me the raspberry.....LONESTAR!!
Most ( all? ) areas have noise laws. They prohibit people from being obnoxious with loud noises.
I would agree that in many cases the use of a cell phone in public should fall under the same rules and the offenders be fined and have their phone taken away from them, and crushed on the pavement in front of them.
And if they use it while driving, they should have their CAR crushed in front of them. Though this also would include inconsiderate drivers, which would make our roads a LOT safer if all these jerks were driving scooters instead of SUV's and pickup trucks.
( yes I expect to be moderated down.. big deal ).
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Middle eastern countries have been using these for years. Though this is the first time I've heard about the US using them I'm not surprised.
I recall reading somewhere that One of the middle eastern rulers escaped an assasination attempt because of one of these jammers.
Plus it could keep terrorists from coordinating an attack by cell phone. Sure they could use radios to coordinate but if a bunch of encoded radio messages start flying around I imagine the secret service would know that something was up.
If a bomb is triggered by cell phone frequencies, wouldn't a jammer be a very, very bad idea?
1. Terrorist builds bomb, triggered by radio reciever on cell phone freqs.
2. Terrorist puts cell phone next to radio reciever
3. Jammer is turned on. Puts out large amounts of RF on a frequency which will trigger a bomb
4. RF from jammer triggers bomb
5. People trapped in rubble, try to call 911
6. People in rubble found 1 week later
There would be a good chance of this happening, since a terrorist bomb won't be very sophisticated - I'm only 14 and I can make circuit that is triggered by any rf (close or high power) in about 5 minutes. The money would be better spent on stopping the bomb from getting in in the first place. The Vatican has metal detectors, X-Ray machines, and people with large-calibre pistols and Uzi submachine guns. And I don't remember anyone bombing the Vatican City.
/rant on
/rant off
I also work in an ICU unit and many professionals do carry their mobiles with them as they are even performing CPR/ACLS/PALS maneuvers.
The fact that cell phones interfere with critical equipment is based on nothing less than FUD as the parent says. We all know they could, IF placed directly on top of a standard computer monitor, cause some flicker and that could be annoying at best but it would not even interfere with the readout and/or interpretation. NO critical equipment EVER is prone to being activated by radio control or FM/VHF waves, willingly or not. Just too damn unreliable.
Pacemakers are another story but even that I know some respected cardiologists that do not turn them off when they are with a patient that uses them.
IMHO the BS that hospitals spread about this is mainly to avoid chitchatter and some patient phoning his advocate telling "hey, that doctor told me I'm gonna die!!" stuff.
though they're probably only affordable by big-city departments.
Whenever you've got barricaded subject(s), you always want to cut off their communications... get them talking to you and nobody else. This keeps other people from interfering with hostage negotiations, feeding the subjects intel, warning them that a breach is imminent, calling in reinforcements, etc, etc.
There was a case a few years back in Tampa, Florida... multiple cop-killer actually called a radio station and gave an interview before killing himself... article here. Now imagine some terrorist doing that to air his "philosophy" or set off coordinated attacks (while the police are busy with the first scene), or call his buddies, or set off a pre-planted device, or, or... the possibilities are endless. Communications are a force-multiplier, and you always want to deny your enemy the use of them.
Also, cell phones and pagers have been used to detonate bombs for years... Madrid was just the most recent example.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
Should be kicked and beaten until dead and pissed on for good measure. Bunch of nelly little cunts.
Our federal government, irregardless of who sits in the Oval Office, can't logically think themselves out of a wet paper bag and this is wonderful example of it. They stuck their wet finger up in the air, found that the wind is blowing toward cell phones, and came up with this technological boondoggle. A doctor who happens to be near an event that one of these blockers is running is being paged because of an emergency with a patient. Patient dies - estate sues physician - "...but they tried to call me on my cellphone and pager and they were both on..." - cell service shows logs "no service to phone" (read turned off or out of range) - oh, he was near a cellphone blocker run by the fed's -> deep pockets - either bury it deep or risk a public relations fiasco. Problem here is that they would have to block the whole EM spectrum and good! But then of course, there are all sorts of openly available technology that can get around jammers. Ah yes, the best government that money can buy...The US Government. If they are indeed the best that money can buy, I WANT A REFUND!!!
Casinos use jammers to prevent people from cheating using cell phones and some federal law enforcement agencies use the equipment during hostage situations.
I can probably concede to the secret service using cell phone jammers temporarily to protect a VIP (though that too is debatable).
But, htf do casinos get away without a $11,000 FCC fine when using the jammers? They aren't protecting somebody's life - they're just protecting their own profits - this new year, I was in Atlantic City, and I remember I couldn't use the cellphone to find my folks when we got separated - come to think of it - that may have been due to the jammers.
Bet Donald Trump and the other VVIP casino owners have enough lobbying power in the Congress to bypass the law. Sucks.
And:
For cell-phone user Phyllis Hines of Lake View Terrace, Baca's proposal sounds good.
"If it's a matter of saving lives, I think that takes precedent over the right to communicate and I would support something like that," Hines said. "It would seem to take some of the danger out of the times we are living in now.
*clap* *clap*. The government has managed to convince Joe Sixpack that it's doing everything to "save lives" and "children", albeit at the expense of strapping everybody in ducttape and muzzles. I commend that.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
How many ways can you activate a circuit remotely? ......
:)
1) Timers
2) Counters
3) RF
4) Pulsed Light from a laser pointer
5) " " " " Focused IR Beam
6) " " " " Strobe / Camera Flash
7) Sensing the distinct vibration of an approching vehicle
8)
For us creative folks, the list goes on.
Good thing for you, I'm on your side.
PS- I'm glad to live in a country where I can openly state that Bush (GW) is a complete fucking moron and a dick to boot.
Cheers.
So this means that Bush, his associates AND his security people cannot use a cell phone while moving outside the white house?
Is a president worth preserving if it takes this amount of effort to keep him from getting killed?
In order to prevent threats from time-detonated devices, Homeland Security has initiated a study into the creation of a technology to jam the progress of time in a specified area.
This will prevent timers on devices from reaching their trigger point, thus protecting high value targets.
Public safety is more important than public convenience.
It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
when the Prez rolls around. They don't jam them.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
I read a while ago about this technique also being used to switch off mobile phones in places like theatres, cinema's and churches. So, it has yet another 'feature' for the public.
I don't want to be interrupted by a ringtone while watching Van Helsing, but I think switching my Nokia to 'silence' enables this far enough, I don't need help from others silencing my cellphone.
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
"Public safety is more important than public convenience."
FWEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!
False dichotomy.
On the offense.
10 sentences back from the original argument.
Still first down.
FWEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!
maybe this works for other frequencies as well, maybe someone could enlighten on that subject
Obviously inspired by Hollywood. So what if they decide to use the frequency that the Secret Service uses to communicate? I guess we better block that too. What if they broadcast a codeword on a talk radio show, and a bomb-laden terrorist is listening on a portable AM radio. Better block that band too. So, to cover all the possible frequencies, it'd have to be one heck of a powerful broadband jammer. I guess that's going to interfere with adjacent police and rescue frequencies because of intermod.
Look folks, Al Qaeda didn't use cellphone-triggered remote bombs, tunnels under schools, IRC, or even orbiting brain-lasers, or whatever stupid possibility has been dreamed of by the Department of Paranoia. They used box-cutters. I'm fairly certain that whatever choice they make next is going to be a surprise. It's not going to be something that the US Gov't expects, so let's stop trying to list the millions of possible ways and monitor the thousands of possible targets.
I really wish the hype and paranoia would stop. I used to listen to ("conservative") radio host Monica Crowley, until one night she bleated like a sheep stuck in a fence for an hour about how "we should do everything possible" in regard to airport security. I mean, come on Monica, that's something a 7th grader would say. There's a balance between cost and safety, and nobody in her right mind would suggest spending an unlimited amount of public funds just to make sure we can catch someone who has a box-cutter, because there's a one in a billion chance he might want to also fly an airliner into a building.
Likewise we have El Rushbo, trumpeting that the fact we haven't had an Al Qaeda attack on US soil for one and a half years is proof positive that Bush's strategy is working. As much as I'd like to believe that, the fact is that it costs Al Qaeda money and takes lots of time to plan an act on US soil. The second WTC attack happened almost 8 years after the first. The attacks aren't likely going to stop as long as we're involved in the Mid-East (as long as we back Israel and pull the strings for the Saudi monarchy).
So once again, it's not a choice with absolutes. Either we continue our current policy and some of us get killed every ten years or so, or we trade some other lives for our own, and watch the slaughter of the Jews, the Kurds, or some other religious minority that is sufficiently westernized to perhaps believe in freedom, interest on money, rights for women, or perhaps not stoning people to death for breaking society's rules. Or, we pick something inbetween, and successive presidents jump to either side of the fence (like the case now). One thing I can be sure of is that some US citizens are going to have a shot at stopping the next attack, just like the last one. So maybe this time we won't behave like subservient little hoplophobic sheep, and someone will fight back with deadly force to spare the lives of others.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
The cell phones used in the Madrid bobmings were used for their timers. That's why they found one undetonated bomb, the clock read PM instead of AM. None of the bombs were detonated via recieving a call.
Are you...Are you some kind of genius?
No, ma'am, I'm just a regular Slashdot reader.
In a major city, it would be far worse - large enough buildings would interfere with the signal, and cause the DF equipment to give all sorts of false readings. And the person would have a thousand times as many places to hide.
ever since we put police on every corner of the street,
ever since one left-alone box is suspicious and might be a bom instead of a box,
ever since cellphones have to be blocked,
ever since people are affraid to get on a train,
ever since terrorists don't have to do anything to disrupt my normal life, they have already won.
Privacy is terrorism.
Using cell phones to detonate Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) is a major method in Iraq. If they can do this for Presidential convoys, why can't they do it for the military convoys in Iraq? Yes, there are other methods to detonate IEDs, but this has been a huge one.
Is it because Dubya (who I voted for, much to my regret, as he has proven to be pretty incompetent) and his cronies care about their own hides more than they do about protecting GIs?
It's been widely held by police intelligence that protesters coordinate their demonstrations by cellphone.
Maybe, just maybe, this absurd bomb detonation thing is being set up as a pretense now, so that when terrorists^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H protestors arrive in NYC at the end of August, they will not have the use of their cell phone during demonstrations outside RNC meetings.
Ironically, the thing they fear could theoretically be accomplished using surplus police radios with CTCSS or DCS. Using the NYPD's own repeaters, the person pushing the button could be anywhere in the metro area.
Though I doubt that cellphone jamming will change protesters' plans one iota, it wouldn't surprise me if they jammed parts of NYC come August. I'm pessimistic about our government's plans for reducing or eliminating freedom of speech, and this is just another strike against G.W.
During pre-911 times, while the police got heavy-handed with protesters at times, I'm now expecting them to pull out all the stops and take whatever steps are necessary to finish building the image in the public's mind that protesters really are, somehow, terrorists. End this silly desire for free speech, public assembly and right to redress grievences. What were they thinking ~230 years ago, anyway?!?
Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma
"Public safety is more important than public convenience."
Yeah, tell that to all the people who are killed by drunk drivers who have never spent time behind bars and just get slaps on the wrist for repeat offenses. Tell that to people like myself who have been hit while in a crosswalk by drivers of speeding cars.
Clearly, public convenience trumps safety ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
"The FCC rules are clear," said Travis Larson, spokesman for the international Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association. "Jamming is illegal, but whether there is an exception made for law enforcement is a decision the FCC will have to make."
There should be an exception for common courtesy. Who hasn't wanted to shove that cell phone down that loud-talker's throat. All I'm trying to do is catch a bit of sleep on the train!
A handheld jammer would be just as effective and a bit less violent.
Terrorist have marked all movie theaters, concerts libraries and classrooms as potential targets.
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
Eg in a theatre, the cell could act as a normal relay outside performance times, but suddenly become a black hole when the performance starts. (obviously it has to pretend still to be working, or the phones will just use another cell)
Such a system could allow emergency calls while blocking anything else.
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
Just wave around the "safety" word or the big T and everything else is trivial stuff that of course the powers that be should take away and of course the people should love it and agree with it. Taking away the technological extensions of 21st century citizens is Assault on our persons. Until people look at it as such and treat it as such we are all simply consumer peons whose lives, tools, abilities are at the mercy of our "public servants".
All they needed for 9/11 was
1) just some boxcutters
2) a moderate amount of brains (buy ticket, learn some minor piloting skill, look at a timetable)
3) an _enormous_ amount of will (unfortunately spoiled by religious extremism brainwashing exacerbated by a borderline religious, opposed ideology propaganda)
When catastrophes occur, there will be an info blackout around the affected area until the facts can be cleaned. Victims with (camera) phones must scare the hell out of our keepers.
"Jam the radar!"
This story was on CNN last night/early this morning. They can't legally jam cell phones because the FCC has deemed the waves public space. Therefore, no ONE person has the right to jam any airwaves. Granted they're trying to pass some legislation or some hoopdela like that which could only be approved by the oval office. I'm sure they'll try to rush this through before dubya gets out of office...
see sig. see sig run. run sig run.
Please go back to using alarm clocks to trigger your bombs. Preferrably not the digital kind. We want to hear it go "tick-tick-tick" please.
This will do nothing more than give a warm fuzzy secure feeling to whoever thought this up. Think 9/11, did they use cell phones? No, they used humans and a big airplane. Watch the news about Israel. Do they get attacked by remotely detonated bombs? No, it's a person running in strapped with explosives pressing the button.
Even the bombings in Spain, they did use cell phones. But, they were just using the alarm clock function of the phone, with the phones ringer/vibrate function wired to the detonater. Cell phones were just a cheap reliable timer. They didn't have to send any signals out, or have service, just a small battery to tick away.
My point is that these attacks have not been technologically advanced, and they usually involve suicide. Cell phone jamming will just annoy and possibly terrorize the population you want to keep "safe". Maybe a suicide-jammer or an actual bomb-jammer might work, but let's see someone invent those.
Cthulhu Saves.
...let's stop selling gasoline, so terrorists can't drive up with carbombs. And stop using fertilizer, so terrorists can't make bombs. Let's ground the airliners, stop selling guns, ban walkie-talkies, blunt all sharp objects, turn off the Internet, and live an idyllic pastoral lifestyle with no scary technology that might be used to hurt someone. Back before the Iron Age, nobody ever killed anyone.
One of CDMA's most intriguing properties, is that it is extremely difficult to jam effectively. That's the reason it's being used by the military in combat theater. CDMA is used in the US, Japan als a few other countries' cellphone networks.
But even if it were possible to build an effective jammer that operates on wide bandwidth, a custom sender/receiver pair could still circumvent jamming effectively. Building this is not easy, but it's possible.
Finally, what would prevent terrorists from using a combination of timer and cellphone triggered detonator? Imagine a detonator being reset every 15 minutes by a remote phone call. If they don't get a special call within a certain time period, BOOM. Or even worse: they could detect the jammers and assume that an important protected target is approaching, so they would detonate when the jammer's signal reaches its peak.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Though I am not a shortwave radio user myself, I do know that a skilled shortwave operator could bounce signals between the ionosphere and the Earth's surface until reaching the right place. A less skilled one with a higher-powered antenna could use a powerful omnidirectional pulse.
It suffers from the same problems as other radio signals, and I'm not sure how good the signal quality would be at that point so too specific a detonation signal might get garbled beyond recognition, but it does have a long range compared to conventional radio, which is basically line-of-sight(though it allows for some penetration).
But yes, the sheer range of cellular is its biggest logistical advantage. Still, since you need to be able to plant the charge(the longer it's left unattended, e.g. on an incoming shipment of stuff rather than placed right on site, the more likely it is to be discovered), that might be a moot point.
NB: YMMV. IANAL. Take the above with a grain of salt.
I think this has less to do with a terrorist using a cell phone to detonate a bomb and more to do with preventing people from using text messaging to organize flash mobs to protest Bush. After all, GW doesn't tolerate dissent. **FUGW**
When all else fails, run.
Bomb: Yes
Terrorist: Good!
Terrorist: Can you hear me now?
Bomb: Wha--=-a---t?
Terrorist: I said "can you hear me now?"
Bomb: Oh, yes. Terrorist: Now detonate!
Bomb: What?
BEEP BEEP BEEP. Call is dropped
Terrorist: FUCK! I wasted all these anytime minutes and still didn't get my explosion.
Ok, so that was pretty lame, but it illustrates the stupidity of this whole idea. No terrorist who wanted to succeed would use cellphones for any part of their activities. They are inherently insecure and are also prone to horribly connection and sound quality problems, and if you didn't know that you haven't used a cell phone ever. This whole thing depends on criminals being idiots, and I don't think someone who can set up a remote detonation of any sort is going to be a complete moron. This is similar to the new "feature" found in many car trunks now that allows someone to open the hatch from inside, should they be kidnapped and placed in the trunk. It really doesn't seem like it should be a big concern. If the kidnapper didn't tie up the victim in the first place, then they probably will escape soon anyway. Instead, we feel the need to put people who are already in danger into potentially worse danger, by escaping into a completely unknown and potentially worse environment.
Basically, what I'm getting at is we in the US thrive on a false sense of security. Just a quick FYI, the entire effort to make flights more secure and all that nonsense hasn't done a damn thing for us. If someone wanted to get a weapon of some sort onto an airplane, they certainly could, and it wouldn't just be a random chance. If we think things need to be more secure, then we need to rethink our whole approach. Simply making everything a bigger pain in the ass than it already is doesn't make things more secure. Considering the fact that a strip/cavity search is the only 99.99999999999% effective means of discovering all weapons on an individual, we should only be performing such searches if we truly want to prevent terrorism and whatnot. By extending Kant's categorical imperative, our approach to security in general is hopelessly flawed and in terms of terror prevention almost exactly the same as doing nothing at all. The only good thing is that we make the "bad guys" work hard to cause mayhem, but the sad thing is that they can still do pretty much anything they want to. We are in some ways lucky that most criminal masterminds are also insane, because they are so effective and could do much more damage if they wanted.
I am feeling fat and sassy
>overwhelm the hijackers and crash in an empty >field
Anyone care to explain why you would 'overwhelm'
AND THEN crash the plane?
Just to be safe?
I guess the possibility that the US planes that showed up a few hours late and then did the only logical thing (shoot the 4th plane down) doesnt sound as good as the made for TV "They overwhelmed the terroriste and then flew the plane into the ground" version.
But hey, 60% of yanks still believe the lullabies about Bin Laden, WMD and Iraq being responsible for WTC. This is about right...
zack
Actually, the whole issue regards the question of "What the hell are American soldiers doing anywhere outside USA, especially in Iraq?"
If I remember correctly, it's actually a felony in the US to jam cellphones. You bet your ass if I'm in a building that I think are jamming my phone, I'm going to report them to the FCC.
Just because other people don't have the common courtesy to put their phones on silent mode in the theatre does not mean that my phone should be jammed. I get my pages for work and other sorts of alerts via SMS, and I also get calls that I cannot miss (in which case I can leave the theatre and call them back).
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
The whole problem with jamming cellular phone
service at any time is the larger threat to
public safety. Considering how poorly the
cellular service held out in NYC on 9/11/2001
due to system overload, it is rediculous to
consider ACTIVE jamming. Communications is
key to any "rapid responders" whether they
are using cellular service or service radios.
Any policy of jamming is a big, big mistake.
It is not as if those people so inclined to
commit terrorist acts would not have the
ability to circumvent "high-tech" measures.
The USA has screened for guns and (bigger)
knives, only to be thwarted with terrorists
using boxcutters.
GW Bush and company have spent billions of
dollars on a missile defense system which
still does not work. It is more likely that
someone crossing a USA border with one of the
USSR's missing suitcase nukes, or shipping
a big nuke in a shipping container will be
the real "next big event".
There is almost always a "low-tech" solution
to the barriers erected by a "high-tech"
defense. There has been plenty of IEDs
made from converted artillery shells, and
controlled by wire, that have taken lives
in Iraq. And the military still hasn't
arrived at a solution to the destruction
of a $25 million dollar Abrams tank with a
couple of $50 RPG-7s.
I agree. US soldiers should never leave the US. After all, what would have been wrong with giving Europe over to Hitler and the Nazis. There were objectors to that war, saying we had no business in Europe, Hitler never attacked us (Japan did... kind of like "It was Al-Queda, not Iraq"), we should use diplomacy, etc.
I guess there are a few Jews that are happy most of the US are not people like you, who would stick their heads in the sand and watch millions be killed by the likes of Hitler and Saddam.
Preferrably a small-format directional-beam cell phone jammer. So when I'm on my way to work on the motorcycle in the mornings, I can hang up as a courtesy to the nice soccer moms chatting on the phone while putting on makeup, eating a breakfast bar and reaching back to wipe the noses of the young'uns. I know of too many close calls for other motorcyclists that involved someone too busy talking to look over their shoulder before controlled-crashing over into the next lane.
"Public safety is more important than public convenience."
I agree! We should make sure our public conveniences are safe.
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
Have you ever thought, smart ass, that perhaps,
when they tried to storm the cock pit and over-whelm the people that took them hostage, that the terrorist would have crashed the plane?
I mean lets think about this, your a terrorist, the cock pit is stormed, you can ether give up, or crash the plane and kill yourself and other infidels like orginially intended.
It wouldn't have taken that long to crash considering they were so low, (as evidence by the cell phones working) and if you move the controls real sharply, it's really hard if not impossible to get the plane back into control. Ever thought about that?
No one in America beleives Iraq is responsible for the WTC, only fuck heads like you think that we believe that. What some of us beleive is that instead of sitting back and doing nothing like fucking Clinton did we should meet threats to America early and over seas. Iraq had terrorist camps in it. Fucking Saddam Hussien tried to kill Bush Senior, you can't tell me he didn't try to at least help out some people that also hated America.
He had fucking WMD, we fucking gave them too him.
He had missiles that went further then the UN limit. There were 100's of reasons why we invaded Iraq, most the public heard where excuse, the real reasons we might never no. It sure as fuck wasn't for oil cause the price in America right now is damned right outrages.
Fucking up Iraq got every damn terrorist within the region to come over and fight in Iraq. We are killing 100's of them every day. Now, you can aruge that American soliders shouldn't be used like that, but that is another conversation.
But your argument shows you haven't done much thinking at all.
I'm not saying it wasn't shot down by a missle. I have a friend who is a FAA certified pilot, and person who tried to sign up for the military, but had asthma. He beleives it was shot down, and I admire him very much so I take his word to heart, the jury is still out in my head as to what happended.
Who the fuck do you think was responsible for the WTC? If you think America did it with all this BS Paranoia theories I'm sad I even wasted the time to write this message.
Actually, pull your head out of your ass, the US one of the offending parties here. You must be pretty fucking retarded to compare this to WW2. Like the US is invading iraq and mutilating prisoners out of the goodness of their hearts... gimme a break, fucking retard.
though with a slightly different frequency range... the troops found the terrorists were using the circuit boards out of remote control toy cars to detonate bombs. The countermeasure was easy, and obvious...
Story here.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
The cell phones used in the Madrid bobmings were used for their timers. That's why they found one undetonated bomb, the clock read PM instead of AM. None of the bombs were detonated via recieving a call.
I thought Euro-folks used a 24-hour clock, unlike we unfortunate USians.
May we never see th
As I've posted on a similar topic a while back, there are commercial devices available for usage in theatres / cinemas that although don't jam cellphones, do detect them. They basically play a loud noise (typically a really annoying voice saying "Please switch off your cellphone"), until they detect no more signals.
also...
They use them to stop picture cell-phones..
Also, the range is limited, it won't effect anyone's phone execept within a few hundered meters.
Hostile towards who? Us? or US? If you look a little closer, I think you will find that a lot of the funding for stuff like this comes from somewhere closer to home.
Nope buddy.
We fucking gave them Anthrax cultures, and other
info and strains while they were fighting the Iran-Iraq war.
This is just another attempt at a goverment organazation giving a fascade of security. We all know the terrorits can easilly work around this problem. It just allows the people in charge to say, "see! we did something! You can feel safer now." Providing a false sense of security is nothing new. In my old suburban area high school they locked all the doors expect for the main entrance. Each door that was locked was made of glass. There also wasn't a security checkpoint at the main entrance. As if someone couldn't walk through the main entrance with guns blazing or couldn't break the glass on the other doors and open them that way. But hey, the prinicipal can tell all the parents how commited he is to our safety. Yeah, okay pal.
When I taught classes (some of them large), there would be the occasional ring, mostly because people just forget to turn them off. My policy was, if that happens during an exam, you get a 0. At the start of each exam, I would remind the class of this policy and suggest that now would be a good time to check your phone to be sure it's off.
I never had a ring disturb the class.
Aren't cell-phone jammers ilelgal in the US? I remember a movie theater losing a case after implementing a jammer in their theaters - and that was a _good_ and _reasonable_ idea.
-bZj
.sig
I'm not saying that jamming cell phones is a good thing (although I think it can't hurt in high risk situations), but how did you people survive in the days before cell phones? What I gather from this topic is your cell phones are an essential part of your survival. I have a cell phone. I use it to arrange my alcoholic activities. I could easily live without it.
So, basically, I can walk down to Radio Shack and buy a few jammers. Then design a system that will be triggered by such a jammer after a given time delay, then be nowhere nearby when it is set off by the security staff?
Or, am I missing something here?
all those things have one common element, people.
Perhaps we should just ban people from meeting in public? N that would be to inconvienant...I know, lets issue everyone papers that indicate there 'risk' level. Then you can only be allowed to go to places where your risk level is lower then the 'risk' zone.
It doesn't bother me, becasue I'm the same color and religion as the guys in charge, so my risk level will allow me to places where there won't be those pesky foriegnors. Like the library.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
... wouldn't it be easier and a lot simpler to just turn off the cells in question while the 'target' is passing by?
There was an article on /. about a year ago, about a proposed law in Canada to allow jamming in movie and stage theaters, resturants and concert halls. What happened with it and if passed how is it working?
I wish it would get passed here(US). I had one university instructor that ejected students from class for a cell phone ringing, it was one of the best classes on campus because of the discipline and lack of distraction.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Cars can be used to transfer bombs.
It's also a small price to pay for getting silence on a train, bus, or in a movie theatre. Carry around a jammer, and suddenly there are no more pesky phone rings around you.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
The center of the jamming signals were possible the target.
Blocking cell phones will make it more difficult for the overwhelming majority of honest citizens to act to report suspicious activity while doing nothing to prevent terrorists from using some other frequency to remotely triggering bombs, or simply detonating them manually on site -- the Islamist terrorists don't seem to have any shortage of people who want to die in a jihad and collect their complimentary 72 virgins.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
It's raspberry jam.
I HATE raspberry!!!
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
I'm glad no one was seriously hurt, otherwise those 17 rings could have been really bad.
keep those electronic collars away from the social events and get people to actually socialise and keep manners. I'd get one please. At the party i will have a landline for emergencies.
thank you,
zoftie.
One simple question: What is to prevent a terrorist from using some other radiofrequency than that of a cell phone? Here's a paranoid fantasy for you: Take two terrorists. One caiies a bomb controlled by a radio tuned to a local broadcast station and programmed to listen for some specific signal. The other has already infiltrated the radio station and on prearrangement sends out the trigger signal.
So basically, you either have to build a faraday cage to completely enclose the are you want to protect or simply add cellphones and radios to the already long list of things being confiscated.
Yes. This is true. The passangers heroically rescued the White House from blah blah blah. The plane most certainly *was not* shot down.
I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
I'm gonna start using that in conversations. I guess it is better than just saying "Are you stupid?" all the time like I do now.
That's right. All your base.
Second, I work as a volunteer with emergency communications in Seattle. Cell phones are typically worthless near a major emergency. Those who see what has happen call 911. Those near the scene call their spouse to assure them that they're safe. Those driving by call a friend to find out what is happening. And then media descends like locusts with their cell phones already active. As a result all available channels are quickly blocked.
It would be foolish for a community to depend on cell phones for anything important. In Seattle, even our expensive Motorola 800 MHz trunking system for local government agencies overloaded in our most recent earthquake. And no one could get on that system but various government employees, all of whom seemed to have had the urge to call a buddy to say, "Did you feel that?"
That's also why for inter-hospital communication, which is where I volunteer, we rely on amateur radio repeaters with backup frequencies and alternate repeaters. And if all else fails, we can run off batteries and talk direct. Each hospital already has one or two amateur radios set up to run off the hospital's emergency power, and I arrive on scene with two more. We drill constantly, so we know what to do.
In similar fashion, state troopers, who often arrive alone at crime and accident scenes far from metro areas or phone lines, fight being drawn into complex trunking system. They typically use simple VHF repeaters and have high-powered transmitters in their cars, so they can punch through even if the repeater goes down. Their frequencies are just for themselves and they're quite professional at using them. The guys who fix traffic lights or read water meters can't get in the way, much less a twit who wants to use his cell phone to tell his brother-in-law about the big fire he just drove past.
The No. 1 Rule of Emergency Communication is KISS-Keep It Simple Stupid. The more complex the system, the more likely it is to fail in an emergency. When 9/11 hit NYC, the two major emergency hospitals on the south end of Manhattan could not talk to one another. Most of the phone cables, fiber optics, microwave and cell phone links were under or on the Two Towers that came down. In that sense, it was good the system was not swamped with thousands of injured people.
There is a scary use for these easily available cell phone jammers. Quite a few people rely on cell phones to call the police when threatened. A brighter-than-usual criminal could jam all cell phone frequencies before attacking.
Mike Perry, Inkling Blog , Seattle
You have been declared an enemy combatant and convicted of providing detailed bomb construction information to potential terrorists. If you do not report to the nearest detention center for sentencing within the next three hours, an APB will be put out notifying all law enforcement personnel that you are a known terrorist and are considered armed and dangerous.
All of your goods and property are hereby seized by the federal government and will be liquidated to finance the ongoing war on terror. All of your known family and associates will be detained for questioning regarding your activities and their involvement in terrorist activities.
By engaging in the terrorist activity of disseminating bomb construction information, you have forfeited all rights and privileges, including but not limited to free trial, freedom of speech and the right to face your accusers.
Have a Nice Day
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
Seriously, I'd be happy to pay a premium if the movie or restaurant I was thinking of going to advertised itself as using jamming gear
Instead of active jamming and further polluting the electromagnetic spectrum, I'd advocate the concept of
Another service that would be nice in some restaurants is creating acoustic cancellation dead zones so that particularly loud and obnoxious peoples' voices could be subject to noise cancelation outside, say, a 2 meter radius.
Actually, with sufficiently good acoustic cancellation technology, you could place a cone of silence around people in movies theatres that could be free to blab at 85 db on their cell phones!
"Provided by the management for your protection."
will simply switch to X10 modules- I'd like to see them jam a powerline.....
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Wouldn't interfering with those radio transmissions be a FCC violation? The devices that transmit on those frequencies have to not interfere with other devices IIRC. Interesting thought.