Slashdot Mirror


Distress Signal Emitted By Flat-Screen TV

pinqkandi writes "CNN is a running a story on an Oregon college student's flat-screen Toshiba TV which was releasing the 121.5 MHz international distress signal. He was unaware of the issue until local police, search and rescue, and civil air patrol members showed up at his apartment's door. Apparently the signal was strong enough to be picked up by satellite and then routed to the Air Force Rescue Center in Virginia. Quite impressive - luckily Toshiba is offering him a free replacement."

514 comments

  1. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It turns out it got stuck on the Lifetime network, so it really was in a state of distress.

    1. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or worse, the Hallmark Channel. As if their stores aren't nauseating enough.

    2. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Hallmark Channel really went downhill once they stopped showing "Hart to Hart"

      Yeah, I hear what you're saying -- I can still get my Robert Wagner fix whenever I want by popping in an Austin Powers DVD. But what about Stefanie Powers??

    3. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      let me get this straight... they pulled Hart to Hart and it got -worse-?

    4. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it got stuck on Fox News' channel.

    5. Re:Actually by unitron · · Score: 1
      The Hallmark Channel really went downhill once they stopped showing "Hart to Hart"

      Yeah, I hear what you're saying -- I can still get my Robert Wagner fix whenever I want by popping in an Austin Powers DVD. But what about Stefanie Powers??

      Too bad nobody's re-running Girl from U.N.C.L.E. episodes these days.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    6. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My TV says "Oh!" in the lower-right corner.

    7. Re:Actually by mpe · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it got stuck on Fox News' channel.

      isn't that the "Fox Fiction Channel"
      Maybe these TV's are fitted with some form of AI...

    8. Re:Actually by Hanno · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > It turns out it got stuck on the Lifetime
      > network, so it really was in a state of
      > distress.

      I had a TV (also by Toshiba, coincidently) that would crash when it showed the local community channel. When that happened, it did not accept any key presses on the remote or on the TV set itself, so I couldn't change the channel anymore.

      Basically, my TV forced me to watch the horrible Hamburg community channel.

      I complained to Toshiba and it turned out that this channel aired a non-standard Teletext that had the ability crash this particular TV's teletext decoder.

      --

      ------------------
      You may like my a cappella music
    9. Re:Actually by ThaReetLad · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you'll find it's "Faux News Channel"

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    10. Re:Actually by uncoveror · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, all TVs have been spying on us since the V-Chip was introduced. The real question here is what was this guy doing that set the alarm off. Maybe he was trying to disable the V-chip without knowing how to do it correctly.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    11. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so does this mean we're gonna have to worry about virii crashing TV sets in the near future? Or, considering everything is having microchips built into them are we gonna have to worry about all data manipulating devices being virus hardened?

    12. Re:Actually by LostCauz · · Score: 1

      viruses, VIRUSES!

      Please.

    13. Re:Actually by operagost · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Only on Slashdot is this modded insightful.

      Fox News is more popular than CNN and MSNBC combined. How do you explain that? Oh, that's right - here on Slashdot we are the master ra- I mean intellectual elite, and are much smarter than the unwashed masses.

      Please give me an example of "fiction" provided by Fox News. Or how about just biased reporting. I'll give you one I got in just 10 minutes watching CNN - a Democratic pundit claimed that Bush had no hope of winning New Jersey. Meanwhile, the last poll I saw had Kerry leading by only four points with the margin of error being 3.4 (USA Today). Paula Zahn did not challenge his assertion.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    14. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be CBS News, right?

    15. Re:Actually by flatface · · Score: 1, Insightful
      How about an entire documentary?

      Download it (bt) if you're too cheap/lazy to buy it.

    16. Re:Actually by danbeck · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Oh, good point. You can always trust a documentary, no matter who makes it, or what agenda they might have.

      Remember slashdot kids, if it's on TV on in your local movie theater, it's got to be true, right? Honestly, I think most people here just tow the slashdot-party line, if you take my meaning. It's just popular to bash Fox News, because, heaven forbid, they might have intelligently voiced conservative viewpoints along with the intelligently voiced liberal viewpoints IN THE SAME SHOW!

    17. Re:Actually by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Fox News is more popular than CNN and MSNBC combined.

      You should watch So I Married An Axe Murderer some day, when you aren't so deluded.

      May Mackenzie: Charlie, hand me the paper.
      Charlie Mackenzie: Mom, I find it interesting that you call The Weekly World News "the paper." A paper contains facts.
      Stuart Mackenzie: Hey! The Weekly World News has the most readers of ANY newspaper on the planet! You're going to say that's coincidence?

      "People watch/read it, so it's right" has got to be one of the worst arguments I've ever read. I'm actually embarassed for you.

    18. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Let me guess. You are part of the 65% of Americans who STILL think Iraq had something to do with 9/11. Fox news is a total joke. The only sad part, is how many Americans actually take their world view from Fox's reporting. You may like it, because they wrap every segment in a flag, an spout off about patriotism at every turn. The rest of the world watches it, and just laugh at how uninformed Fox really is. To put it in perspective for you, imagine listening to opinions from a foriegn country, both leadership, and populace, where all of their opinions, and policy decisions were backed with quotes from the Weekly World News. That is how off target Fox is.

      The funniest part of course, is you are being fed your daily propaganda by an Aussie loon!

    19. Re:Actually by sjames · · Score: 1

      OK, so does this mean we're gonna have to worry about virii crashing TV sets in the near future?

      Considering the post above about malformed teletext crashing a TV, I'd say yes. If it can be crashed by accident, there's a decent chance that a well crafted Teletext could inject a virus.

      While it might be somewhat difficult to broadcast such a virus (though any virus writer would find the possability irresistable. Imagine 0wnz3ring a whole city), it could probably be injected by videotape or DVD.

      Or, considering everything is having microchips built into them are we gonna have to worry about all data manipulating devices being virus hardened?

      Possably a good idea, but not likely. Manufacturors will just claim it was a power surge (you need the $5000 surge supressor!) or sunspots, just like the BOFH. Virus hardening will only happen if/when someone crafts a virus to enable the super expensive delux features on the cheap basic model.

      It's not all bad though, it could provide plausible deniability when people hack their VCRs to ignore the broadcast flag.

    20. Re:Actually by el_gordo101 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Remember slashdot kids, if it's on TV on in your local movie theater, it's got to be true, right?
      Fox news is on TV too, correct? Ergo, it must be true too. Or is my logic a bit faulty here? The bottom line is that all of these outlets have an agenda. It is up to the individual to watch, listen, read, and them make an informed desicion. Unfortunately, here in the US, most people wait to be told what their position should be.
      --
      TODO: Insert witty sig
    21. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Er? Dan Rather's "Special Report" with the "Official Documents" about Bush and New York Times reporters making stories up on the fly...

      That's why I only listen to the three real sources for information:
      The Onion, Art Bell and the voices I hear in my head.

    22. Re:Actually by dirty · · Score: 3, Informative

      www.electoral-vote.com is showing Kerry with 51% and Bush with 38% in New Jersey. That data is also consistent with the Dem/Rep split the state saw in 2000. Their source is Eagleton-Rutgers from Oct. 17th. To me 13% is a pretty commanding lead. I'd have to say that Bush has no hope of winning New Jersey based on the poll data I'm seeing.

      --

      -matt
    23. Re:Actually by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      You've got to be joking, Fox are the idiots who are responsible for the legal view that there is no law preventing News Broadcasters from deliberately distorting the news it broadcasts! From the Judge's decision: We agree with WTVT that the FCC's policy against the intentional falsification of the news - which the FCC has called its "news distortion policy" - does not qualify as the required "law, rule, or regulation" under section 448.102.

      Check out the other side of the story at thier website, I'm not telling you it's all the gospel truth but since we all have to believe in something (if only the shared fantasy we call reality) I choose, evaluate, hypothesize, ponder, discard, repair, and repeat that Fox fucking sucks.
      Here you will find behind-the-scenes details about how a large share of America's milk supply has quietly become adulterated with the effects of a synthetic hormone (bovine growth hormone, or BGH) secretly injected into cows ... and how pressure from the hormone maker Monsanto led Fox TV to fire two of its award-winning reporters and sweep under the rug much of what they discovered but were never allowed to broadcast.

      After a five-week trial and six hours of deliberation which ended August 18, 2000, a Florida state court jury unanimously determined that Fox "acted intentionally and deliberately to falsify or distort the plaintiffs' news reporting on BGH." In that decision, the jury also found that Jane's threat to blow the whistle on Fox's misconduct to the FCC was the sole reason for the termination... and the jury awarded $425,000 in damages which makes her eligible to apply for reimbursement for all court costs, expenses and legal fees.

      Fox appealed and prevailed February 14, 2003 when an appeals court issued a ruling reversing the jury, accepting a defense argument that had been rejected by three other judges on at least six separate occasions. CLICK HERE for more details on latest ruling. CLICK HERE to view how Fox13 reported the ruling.

      The whistle-blowing journalists, twice refused Fox offers of big-money deals to keep quiet about what they knew, filed their landmark lawsuit April 2, 1998 and survived three Fox efforts to have their case summarily dismissed. It is the first time journalists have used a whistleblower law to seek a legal remedy for being fired by for refusing to distort the news. Steve and Jane are now considering an appeal to the Florida state Supreme Court.
      Jonah Hex
    24. Re:Actually by Dman33 · · Score: 1

      Modded "Funny" but I have a hard time figuring out whether or not you are being sarcastic!

    25. Re:Actually by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      What is really scarry, is that I know a guy that really is this parinoid. He routinely connects up his 110 mains to the phone lines to kill any "bugs" (nevermind that the ring voltage on a phone is at least 90 VAC).

      I used to think all this was funny till I met him. Now I fear one of the loonies will do someting to "protect" everyone that ends up killing me ;-)
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    26. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The New York Time endorsed Kerry, basically sreaming out we're totally biased, and you guys pick on Fox as being biased? Get a reality check.

    27. Re:Actually by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      So did the Texas Iconoclast.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    28. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually spelled TOE the line dumbass.

    29. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm actually embarassed for you.
      Personally, I'm more embarrassed by children who can't make their point without referencing some pop culture movie.
    30. Re:Actually by danbeck · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, I never said that Fox News was the ultimate source of authority over any factual information. I simply pointed out to the original poster that the existence of dissenting information doesn't make one or the other more or less valid.

      I agree with your last statement though, my grief has always been that the majority of the people here at slashdot tend to just ride the bandwagon. It's popular to hate Bush|Ashcroft|Fox News|both major presidential parties|Religious people|Microsoft and the list goes on. I doubt few people could make real cogent arguments for their hatred of any of those things without calling names like school children. The simple fact that it tends to be fueled by hatred makes it's almost impossible.

    31. Re:Actually by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      ...a Democratic pundit claimed that Bush had no hope of winning New Jersey. ... Paula Zahn did not challenge his assertion.

      Polls are guesswork at best; I suspect that the pundit fully believed the statement. The polls all point to a Kerry win. Here's a handy graph of the results. Where exactly is the bias in letting a potentially overoptimistic statement about polling slide. I sure hope there are more interesting things to cover than one pundits opinion on how a state will vote. If a Republican leaning pundit where to opine that Bush has Ohio sewn up, I'd be equally willing to let that slide as it's a reasonable interpretation given trends over the last few months, even if the results are still within the margin of error.

    32. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ring voltage is NOT 90V.

    33. Re:Actually by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 3, Funny

      Let's see, if you combine the alleged abilities of the V-Chip, the Hollings bill (to put DRM in everything - fortunately shelved), and TVs sending out SOS signals, you get....

      Chuck EyePea had just got a brand new TV and satellite system for his birthday. He couldn't wait to use it, but he wasn't going to be there for his favorite show. So he tried to set his new system up to record it...

      The door busts open, and in rush a bunch of police and paramilitary types.

      "Step away from the remote, son. Slowly."

      "But I..."

      "Save it for the judge!"

      The cop snaps up the new remote and punches a code into it. The TV proudly announces:

      "Welcome to IP Court TV! Judge John will hear your case in two minutes."

      Chuck looks like he wants to say something, but a glare from the cop silences him. Judge John comes on the screen.

      "My data shows that you were trying to violate the IP rights of a broadcaster. Please explain yourself."

      "I was just trying to timeshift a program like I always do..."

      "You filthy repeat offending pirate! Fifty years!"

      The screen went blank as the TV shut itself off. Chuck was visibly upset:

      "Hey, don't I get a lawyer? You can't just try someone in their living room!"

      "Now, son, you know PATRIOT III abolished the frivolous use of legal services by consumers. Legal services can only be used for serious corporate matters, and the corps. all outsource. If it makes you feel better, you might get out in 65 years, if you behave really well."

      "65! Whatever happened to fifty years? And parole?"

      "Chief Justice Ashcroft declared positive parole unconstitutional. Now all sentences have to be served in full, with negative parole. If you only do 65 years on a 50 year sentence, you are doing good."

      No, the above is not currently reality (that I know about). But you can bet the RIAA, MPAA, and Ashcroft have wet dreams about this stuff.

      If you don't like it, work to stop it. Now is a good time to start.

      ---
      In America, even the AntiChrist can become president.
      And currently - is.

    34. Re:Actually by ryanmfw · · Score: 1

      At least he doesn't claim to be unbiased, unlike Fox Idiots Channel. If Fox News *actually* admitted to being biased, I might be a little more open, but when they have idiots like O'Reilly on manipulating the masses, you've got a serious problem.

      --
      Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
    35. Re:Actually by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

      I thought Southpark invented that

    36. Re:Actually by danbeck · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Look, no one has ever said that shows like O'Reilly aren't biased. He's a political commentator, not a news anchor. By definition, you are going to get his opinion, not necessarily facts.

      You are confusing this sort of programming with regular news and anchoring, something that most networks try to seperate, but only Fox News succeeds in doing. Does anyone remember Peter Jennings remarks on the morning of 9/11? There is your bias.. straight from the news desk.

    37. Re:Actually by aster_ken · · Score: 1

      According to an Eagleton-Rutgers poll released on October 17, 2004, Kerry is expected to lead Bush with 51% of the popular vote. Bush's vote percentage is projected at 38% while Nader lags with 2%. New Jersey has 15 electoral votes.

      Given the timeframe a significant event would be required for Bush to reclaim the lead over Kerry.

    38. Re:Actually by ryanmfw · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I wasn't talking *about* Bill O'Reilly either. Obviously, you see one side of the issue, the one where Fox is unbiased, but of course that's what you believe. It justifies your own views. If you said they were biased your views wouldn't be invalidated, just not reaffirmed by some unopinionated source. You just see Fox as unbiased, and based upon what they tell you, everyone else is. Others see only the other side, that Fox is biased, and CNN is not. That is also incorrect. Maybe when you grow up you will realize that none of them are telling you the whole truth and will determine that you have to discover things on your own and not rely on some idiot like Brit Hume to give you his agenda or Peter Jennings to give you his bias. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when most people can only see one side of this.

      Just one bit about Fox News somehow seperating their reporting and their opinion, that's not really true. Obviously you don't pay too much attention or you trust what they say too much to accurately analyze what they say.

      --
      Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
    39. Re:Actually by mrgreen4242 · · Score: 1
      he bottom line is that all of these outlets have an agenda. It is up to the individual to watch, listen, read, and them make an informed desicion.

      While NPR does have some liberal leanings, they do a very good job of presenting both sides of an issue and presenting things in a mostly unbiased manner.

    40. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe this will clear things up:


      About The Uncoveror.

    41. Re:Actually by ryanmfw · · Score: 1

      Yeah, NPR even has a Fox News correspondent working for them. I think. Watch outfoxed and look at the people's titles. :-)

      --
      Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
    42. Re:Actually by MutantHamster · · Score: 1

      Oops! [Usatoday.com]

      --
      My Greatest Heist - Muisc partly inspired by the unbeatable Qwantz
    43. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, far worse, it was stuck on CBS News.

    44. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what a steaming pile of horseshit.

    45. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'm more embarrassed by children [...]

      Personally, I'm more embarassed by people who can't disagree with someone without calling them children. So, so sad...

    46. Re:Actually by unitron · · Score: 1
      "...but when they have idiots like O'Reilly on manipulating the masses..."

      Apparently when he was on the phone he was manipulating something else.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    47. Re:Actually by unitron · · Score: 1
      "Ring voltage is NOT 90V."

      Well, it can vary somewhat from one phone company to another (I seem to remember reading somewhere years ago that it could be between 70 and 120 V), but since it's an alternating current there are probably at least two times per cycle when it hits 90 V.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    48. Re:Actually by unitron · · Score: 1
      "In America, even the AntiChrist can become president.
      And currently - is."

      But do you suppose that he's smart enough to realise that he is the AC?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    49. Re:Actually by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      This 3-layer-deep karma-whore post brought to you by user number &h73275.

    50. Re:Actually by hendersj · · Score: 1

      They're ALL biased. That's the problem with the news media these days, they want to do the thinking for us. And most of the citizens in the US are more than happy to let them do it for them.

      Jon Stewart nailed it on Crossfire. The media is working for the politicians, but they should be working for the people. We don't pay as well, but they could actually sleep at night.

      Picking on Fox is natural for those left-of-center, just like picking on CNN is natural for those right-of-center. Both organizations editorialize far too much instead of delivering facts. They're propaganda machines.

      At least the NYT was up front about its endorsement of Kerry. Fox claims to be "Fair and Balanced" yet must be using strange new definitions for those words, because I don'd find an organization that (a) cuts off opposing viewpoints repeatedly "fair", and (b) has 4/5 of its guests from the right and 1/5 from the left "balanced".

      --
      Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
    51. Re:Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please give me an example of "fiction" provided by Fox News. Or how about just biased reporting.

      Are you serious? I only have to watch Fox News for a few minutes to find examples. The first time I saw it, the news anchor kept adding his own commentary to the news. He actually called someone a "wackjob". If you can't see that Fox News is pandering to convervatives you're way to gullable.

    52. Re:Actually by mpe · · Score: 1

      They're ALL biased. That's the problem with the news media these days, they want to do the thinking for us.

      The bigger problem is that many of them appear to be biased in much the same way.

      Fox claims to be "Fair and Balanced" yet must be using strange new definitions for those words, because I don'd find an organization that (a) cuts off opposing viewpoints repeatedly "fair", and (b) has 4/5 of its guests from the right and 1/5 from the left "balanced".

      Is that "left and right" or "Democrat and Republican" in practice. If the latter then the even more unbalanced part is along the lines of ignoring most of the US Presidential candidates.

    53. Re:Actually by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      00000111-00110010-01110101 was here.

    54. Re:Actually by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      In Ascii, that's BEEP-2-u

  2. Must have been quite powerful by metlin · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I'd originally read this on CNet a while ago.

    And the (CNet) article points out something of relevance - with so many new devices and what not, our radio spectrum is increasingly becoming very muddled and interference a lot more commonplace. I wonder if existing regulations would do, or if new ones be required.

    Something to think about.

    And I wonder how powerful that signal must have been to have caused such interference. Either that, or the receiving satellites must be having one hell of a resolution capability.

    The latter also provides some food for thought - if their satellite equipment is sensitive enough to find out interfering signals from a Television set, wonder what else they can (and do) eavesdrop :)

    What kind of Tempest attacks do take place, I wonder. Satellite Van Eck Phreaking?

    ~adjusts tinfoil hat~

    1. Re:Must have been quite powerful by strider44 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's depressing that the most powerful satellite telescopes aren't pointing up but down.

    2. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except the entire point of this particular satellite is to save peoples' lives. Good try, though.

    3. Re:Must have been quite powerful by jZnat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The FCC does regulate the airwaves in America, but they can't catch everything (thankfully). It does seem odd though that a friggin TV would let off a strong enough signal to even reach a satellite, let alone it being 121.5 MHz exactly. Something about that raises some questions, like if the TV was tampered with or if it was even intentionally done to do so.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    4. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I wonder if existing regulations would do,...
      Yes, given that this happens fairly rarely.
      And I wonder how powerful that signal must have been to have caused such interference.
      Not very. Nothing uses the emergency frequency so the background is quiet. The transmitters are designed to run from battery power for days, and be detectable even from inside a smashed airplane, so the receivers are very sensitive.
    5. Re:Must have been quite powerful by overlord2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And even more depressing that someone would choose to see the capability of receiving a distress signal as something other than a good thing (TM).

      --
      -- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -A.Einstein
    6. Re:Must have been quite powerful by tonsofpcs · · Score: 5, Informative

      The 121.5 MHz (as well as 243 MHz) Distress call response is being phased out, and the newer 406 MHz call is becoming a more accepted (and used) standard.

      See the official NOAA Press Release (PDF) for deteals.

    7. Re:Must have been quite powerful by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I wasn't talking about distress signals - picking up even something as small as a TV doesn't require an advanced setup much at all.

    8. Re:Must have been quite powerful by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Informative
      Or the U.S. Coast Guard press release (HTML) here.

      Basically, that frequency was getting way too many false positives, so they're phasing it out. To quote the release, "121.5 MHz false alerts inundate search and rescue authorities. This is another major factor in influencing the decision to stop the satellite processing."

      121.5 MHz is in the middle of cable channel 14. Frankly, it's rather surprising that this doesn't happen -constantly-.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    9. Re:Must have been quite powerful by rob13572468 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      i have talked a few times with someone who worked in the TSCM business (surveillance countermeasures). these are the real guys, not the ones you see with the $99 bug detector. the standard range that they now perform sweeps in goes from DC-300 ghz. i was naturally very interested in what they would be looking for above 30ghz and while the person i talked to admitted that he never personally found anything up in those frequencies, it was well known in their community that such devices were known to exist though they would likely be the domain of only the top government agencies. at any rate the device that he described would look something like the size of a coin and be able to send data in the high ghz range using spread spectrum burst communications directly to an overhead LEO satellite; essentially the ability to bug someone from space using areas of the spectrum that most would never look at and even if they did would likely never actually "see' the transmission unless they were lucky enough to see it transmitting and then only if they were knowledgable enough to recognize the signal from the surrounding noise. scary, huh...

    10. Re:Must have been quite powerful by mercuryresearch · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, not that powerful, relatively speaking. A typical 121.5 EPIRB puts out 75-125 milliwatts. Keep in mind this is VHF and the satellites are typically NOAA birds in low-earth orbit expecting a line of sight signal, so 100 milliwatts is very workable.

      The issue with 121.5 EPIRBs is all they do is send a warble tone -- no ID, location, nothing. All the processing is done by the rest of the infrastructure, and even then the output is basically a position (still no ID) to within a mile or so -- with people using radio-direction finders narrowing it down more.

      The newer 406 MHz EPIRBs have specific user data and location information transmitted in their digital packets, so not only do they know the where, but they also know the who -- so when they get a boat beacon originating at someone's house they pretty much already know it's a false alarm.

    11. Re:Must have been quite powerful by identity0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Another writeup, from the town paper where it happened: Corvallis Gazette-Times, and another from the Eugene Registar-Guard here. On a side note, I'm suprised they responded so quickly, less than 24 hours between recieving the signal and a response team at the door. I used to live in the area, and Corvallis is a small (pop. 50k) college town, with some hills and rivers in the area but nothing like a mountain that would require a large search & rescue squad. I guess it's good to know they're there, though.

      As for the transmission strength, from the article - " Mandrell has heard of this sort of thing happening with customized computer gear. Sometimes CAP equipment will pick up these signals, he said, but they are usually weak enough to ignore. "This was really strong," Mandrell said. "This was abnormally strong. It kind of surprised us."" I don't know anything about these distress signals, but I imagine that if they're designed to work from a battery-powered tranciever, anything connected to a wall socket should have enough power to work.

    12. Re:Must have been quite powerful by tonsofpcs · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is in the gap between the video carrier (121.25) and aural carrier (125.75) of Standard and IRC cable systems' channel 14, broadcast channel 14 is at 471.25 (visual) and 475.75 (aural) this should not cause much interference, especially as Cable Television is run on Shielded Coaxial Cable.
      Also, television systems operating within the aircraft bands must comply with FCC Rules and Regulations 76.611 -- signal leakage criteria.

    13. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Lord+Kano · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the technology that they have let us know about is able to pick up a signal generated by a plasma TV, I really wonder what they're keeping under their hats.

      Most of us only half-believe the stories about echelon and massive gov't surveillance but things like this tell me that our fears may be more reasonable than we think.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    14. Re:Must have been quite powerful by the_ed_dawg · · Score: 4, Interesting
      This isn't actually the first time something like this has happened. They actually started looking for a downed plane at the University of Arkansas's Razorback Stadium in 2000 when they fired up their new scoreboard. Talk about powerful... before they finished the enclosing the stadium, you could see it clearly from the interstate coming into town -- about five miles away.

      Google cache link

      It was really funny to watch them play DVDs to test out the screen because they would always have the "this video not meant for public viewing" warning before broadcasting it out to the entire south side of Fayetteville. :)

      --
      There are two types of people: those prepared for the zombie apocalypse and those who will be eaten.
    15. Re:Must have been quite powerful by WinterpegCanuck · · Score: 1

      Must really suck to be lost at sea in an old boat that only has the 121.5 MHz distress signals. . . do you hear someone crying wolf?

    16. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      powerful signals are not necessarily needed for a satellite to pick up. Keep in mind that (generally) any satellite link is going to be line-of-sight so there is little to disrupt any signal already propagating between the source and the satellite itself. Also, amateur radio operators have been talking with sattelites for years. You could even talk to the MIR space station when it was in operation.

      this site lists an amateur radio satellite with link power between 1/2 and 1 watt on frequencies higher than the 120ish mhz of the distress signal. It really doesn't take much to receive a low-output signal with the proper listening equipment.

      I'm just trying to put things into perspective, so that hopefully the tinfoil hat can be taken off :)

    17. Re:Must have been quite powerful by DigiShaman · · Score: 5, Informative

      I just checked the frequency of channels for TWC Austin. (digital cable)

      Ch 6 = 85Mhz
      Ch 7 = 177Mhz
      Ch 8 = 183Mhz
      Ch 9 = 189Mhz
      Ch 10 = 195Mhz
      Ch 11 = 201Mhz
      Ch 12 = 207Mhz
      Ch 13 = 213Mhz
      Ch 15 = 129Mhz
      Ch 16 = 135Mhz
      Ch 17 = 141Mhz
      Ch 18 and above keep climbing past 141Mhz

      Notice that Channel 14 doesn't exist and how the lower chanels skip around a bit. But the closest to 121.5Mhz is Channel 15.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    18. Re:Must have been quite powerful by frovingslosh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      And I wonder how powerful that signal must have been to have caused such interference. Either that, or the receiving satellites must be having one hell of a resolution capability.

      Hardly. Hams have talked around the world on low power battery radios (although not on this frequency range). It's not that suprising that something plugged into AC power was able to get a signal to a receiver in straight line of sight, even if it was a malfunction. And the receivers are designed to pick up weak signals, there are even watches made that can send the emergency signal (and note that they don't have an external antenna, which at this frequency should be quite large!) Now think that a TV might be attached to an antenna of the proper size for this frequency (it's between TV channels 6 and 7 and just a little above the FM broadcast band). Which is more amazing, that a small watch can get the signal to the satellite, or a TV plugged into the wall with a full size antenna might have a signal that gets out?

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    19. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Detritus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      IIRC, the FCC had to threaten the cable operators with "unfortunate consequences" if they didn't fix their leaky systems. My local cable company started using quad-shielded coax and quality connectors instead of the cheap crap that they used to use. They also replaced a lot of their distribution plant with new equipment.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    20. Re:Must have been quite powerful by clayton_dsp · · Score: 1

      TWC 14 in Austin used to be Skinemax.
      I wondered why they never replaced it with a basic cable channel when it moved up into the digital package.

      Maybe to prevent distress signal interference?

    21. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Fussen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What makes 406Mhz better than 243Mhz or 121.5Mhz?

    22. Re:Must have been quite powerful by tonsofpcs · · Score: 3, Informative

      The devices designed to operate on the 406 MHz System (and the system itself) support unique identifiers, and distress signal is more than just a tone as it is in the 121.5/243 system. This should remove 'invalid' (erroneous) broadcasts from the system.

    23. Re:Must have been quite powerful by tonsofpcs · · Score: 2, Informative

      The phase-out was announced in 2000 and won't be complete until 2009, and I suspect that after then they will still monitor the old system, but not be as responsive (the technologies that allow the current approximate location of the signal may be phased out as well). Also, if you are at sea WITH THE BOAT, you would most likely transmit an alternate distress signal [mayday style] giving your approximate location. Most of the distress signal transmitters are battery powered and hand-held.

    24. Re:Must have been quite powerful by thogard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The new systems cost thousands of dollars compared to the $50 for the old style transmitters and the new ones aren't selling well. The 121.5 systems are still outselling the new ones even though every boat dealer explains it won't work in a few years. The big problem with 121.5 is they never took the easy route which is to interrupt the carrier every few seconds with a fast cut out circuit and put some detectors on the GPS sats. That would give about 1000 meters of accuracy on the 1st signal and a bit of processing could reduce that to 100 meters which is as good as the new system in most cases and the transmitters would still only be about $50.

    25. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Informative
      Probably not very strong. You can get ELTs built into a *watch* - not even a very chunky watch either. They are about as big as a decent diver's or "marine" watch, with a slightly fat cylinder worked into one edge (not exactly bulky). You unscrew the cap and pull out a wire aerial, which activates the transmitter. The wire is resonant (making it about 18" long) but it just dangles loosely. It runs for a couple of hours off a pair of watch batteries, so the signal must be in the order of tens of milliwatts. Even though the signal is pulsed, there is a limit to the maximum current you can draw from these tiny batteries.


      The signals are received by three satellites, to triangulate the position of the transmitter. I don't know what kind of antenna the receiver uses. Bloody big ones, I would think.

    26. Re:Must have been quite powerful by unitron · · Score: 4, Informative

      Cable Channel 14 does exist, they just aren't using it. The Minions of Satan, I mean Time-Warner Cable, in my area reshuffled the deck awhile back and quit using it as well. Cable channels 2-6 (low VHF) and 7-13 (high VHF) use the same frequencies as their over the air counterparts, but where over the air 14-83 (UHF) is in one continuous block of frequencies (around 470 to 890 MHz), cable uses frequencies for 14 and up that are used for many things other than television as far as over the air use is concerned.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    27. Re:Must have been quite powerful by papasui · · Score: 1

      Cable is a closed system, they can use any frequency they want. The FCC requires proof of performance testing that shows that the cable company is making sure they don't have leaks that could potentially cause interface with over the air frequencies.

    28. Re:Must have been quite powerful by cheekyboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats why all top secret spy shit should be done on a ski field off piste in the middle of no where so NO ONE can hear you or know your there.

      If you want to 'talk' in your room, just use an ethysketch or getsmarts cone of silence.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    29. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      In the UK I had a colleague who had Sky 1 overlaying BBC2's transmission. Turned out to be a neighbour had fitted an arial booster so wrongly that they were actually broadcasting their cable signal out of the rooftop ariel.

    30. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This sort of thing is quite common.

      One of my old friends came home to finding his home in a mess after local authorities gained entry to investigate a signal causing interference with a local airport about 3 miles from him.

      The issue ended up being a problem with his cable box, which they had figured out before he even arrived.

    31. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Qoud · · Score: 1

      The newer 406 MHz EPIRBs have specific user data and location information transmitted in their digital packets, so not only do they know the where, but they also know the who -- so when they get a boat beacon originating at someone's house they pretty much already know it's a false alarm.

      When you register an EPIRB you also supply a 'next of kin' contact phone number so when the unit triggers they try & check first whether you aren't sitting at home.
    32. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaargh.... Try full sentences, paragraphs, and proper capitalisation of initial letters and units, and we might give your post another shot.

      Even the mods had no idea what you were droning on about, but apparently they spotted some numbers and acronyms, so they thought it must've been "Interesting".

    33. Re:Must have been quite powerful by mi · · Score: 1
      at any rate the device that he described would look something like the size of a coin and be able to send data in the high ghz range using spread spectrum burst communications directly to an overhead LEO satellite

      This would seem to make the charges, that Mr. Bush wore "a wire", bulky enough to show through his suit, hard to believe... Just a thought.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    34. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Zitchas · · Score: 1

      Well, as far as regs go, aircraft have said transponders installed and rigged to trigger if they're subject to greater than x amounts of g force. (such as that momentary peak that occurs when running into the ground) Leaving the transponder on for more than a minute or two will usually result in a radio call from the local control tower (if there is one), and possibly a hefty fine. It's assumed that if you have one installed and operating you should know about it. Because of this, most aircraft post landing checks include listening on 121.5 for that signal so you can get to it (the transponder) before they start takling to you. (which is a bad thing) I'm not certain, but I do believe that it's actually several satelites. Quite possibly linked to the GPS network, actually. (similar coverage, anyway) The main difference being that it's operating in reverse. And that transponder is probably going to be one of the strongest HF (high frequency) broadcasting pieces of equipment on most things. HF so it's pretty much line of site, which limits it to being picked up by things that are above the horizon. Usually, anyway. Our atmosphere does funny things to it sometimes.

      --
      Z
    35. Re:Must have been quite powerful by ThaReetLad · · Score: 2, Funny

      But didn't you know that all etch-a-sketch's since 1986 have had built in pattern recognition and reporting capabilities so the government can monitor for early onset liberalism and issue corrective education via the drawing panel?

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    36. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Atragon · · Score: 1
      This would seem to make the charges, that Mr. Bush wore "a wire", bulky enough to show through his suit, hard to believe... Just a thought.

      Are you actually accusing Mr. Bush of being smart?

    37. Re:Must have been quite powerful by RMH101 · · Score: 1

      that would be the Breitling Explorer. The best part is that if you set it off without a good reason, they'll keep the $4000 watch as well as give you a slap...

    38. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And even more depressing that someone would choose to see the capability of receiving a distress signal as something other than a good thing (TM).

      This is /. I've seen people argue in favor of getting rid of 911 because they don't think they should have to pay for something they rarely use when the injured person/person being raped/person reporting a lost child could just as easily look up the seven digit number for the local authorities. I mean gosh that E-911 charge on my last bill was like $1.49.

      Nobody ever said people were logical. Politics and human nature aside I want to know how powerful of a signal this thing was putting off -- what kind of receive gain do you suppose those satellites have?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    39. Re:Must have been quite powerful by sirwired · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even if the ELS frequency is being moved, it is still quite important to keep 121.5 clear, as that is also the standard voice aviation distress frequency. Aircraft voice radios can't tune into 406MHz.

      SirWired

    40. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      It was really funny to watch them play DVDs to test out the screen because they would always have the "this video not meant for public viewing" warning before broadcasting it out to the entire south side of Fayetteville. :)

      Oh great -- now the MPAA has another reason to go after a University. Thanks a lot.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    41. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all that powerfull - walky-talky power levels. I've seen output levels from ELTs (emergency locater transmitters) listed at 100mW to 5W.

    42. Re:Must have been quite powerful by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if Geordi finds the transmitter and modifies the neutrino pulse, they'll be able to detect it through the interference and know that it is authentic.

    43. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Ours · · Score: 1

      Half beleive Echelon? As incredible as it may sound, the European Union made a commission that proved it's existence. At least that much we know.

      --
      "You superiour intellect is no match for our puny weapons" - The Simpsons
    44. Re:Must have been quite powerful by rtz · · Score: 1

      And I wonder how powerful that signal must have been to have caused such interference. Either that, or the receiving satellites must be having one hell of a resolution capability.

      Not necessarily, all the satellite needs to have is the capability to pinpoint the signal to a region. The position can then be triangulated using ordinary equipment.

      Remember that this is an emergency frequency, it is deliberately kept clear from any interference.

    45. Re:Must have been quite powerful by AB3A · · Score: 4, Informative

      Mod parent up.

      For those of you who might be wondering what this costs: Replacing an ELT on an aircraft is not like replacing an EPRIB on a ship. You need to ensure the shock switches fire appropriately, and that the unit is mounted such that it will survive a crash.

      The last time I explored that option for our airplane we were staring at something around $1200 to do this upgrade. It's hardly chump change.

      Further, we need to get our navigation gear coordinated so that the 406 MHz signal has GPS to feed to the world. That's not easy to do for aircraft without panel mounted GPS navigation receivers.

      Also, new regulations regarding the pointless ADIZ around Washington DC practically require pilots to monitor 121.5 to respond to an intercept if one happens. If you hear callsign "huntress" on the air and they're operating in your vicinity, remember to be on your very best behavior.

      --
      Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
    46. Re:Must have been quite powerful by nyekulturniy · · Score: 1

      What was a television doing with a 121.5 mHz transmitter? I can't think of a reason for that unless it was an intermixing product, and if that's the case, Toshiba's got a BIG problem on its hands. That frequency is reserved for EPIRBs on boats and ELTs on land.

      The 121.5 receivers are piggybacked on two American and two Russian weather sats which are in sun-synchrous polar orbits. It takes at least two passes for a signal to be registered and its approximate location found. The minmium time is about 90 minutes; the maximum 6 hours.

      Now, accidental signals are very common. Sometimes a pilot lets down hard and the ELT goes off, or sometimes a boat at anchor's EPIRB does too. When I was with the Civil Air Patrol, we used to get constant 121.5 signals from a marina on the way to our base airport. However, the Air Force Rescue Control Center at Langley must treat each signal as real, and they notify either the Coast Guard (if at sea) or the Civil Air Patrol (if on land).

      --
      Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
    47. Re:Must have been quite powerful by really? · · Score: 1

      TV set? Hell, my _watch_ can "beam" a signal to the same satellites. (No, no link, I am on a SLOW wireless box; look up Breitling Emergency Mission.)

      --

      "Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
    48. Re:Must have been quite powerful by TheSync · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In college, I was able to talk with Cosmonauts on space station MIR on the 144 MHz amateur radio band with a 1-watt hand-held radio, and that was using FM.

    49. Re:Must have been quite powerful by harrkev · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can get a hand-held system using the new frequency for under $500. Check HERE if you don't believe me. Less than $500 is not quite the same as "thousands of dollars."

      The 121.5 system is entirely separate from the "GPS sats." GPS has NOTHING to do with EPIRBs and PLBs (except that you can hook up a GPS receiver to a PLB for better accuracy).

      I suggest reading HERE for more information.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    50. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds like someopne is speaking from experience!

    51. Re:Must have been quite powerful by patniemeyer · · Score: 1

      Isn't spread spectrum or other frequency hopping technology essentially undetectable? I was wondering about this during all the talk of secret ear-piece communications during the debate ;)

      I thought the idea was that if you did spread-spectrum right it just looks like noise... isn't that why they invented it? How could anyone detect that just by sniffing?

      Pat

    52. Re:Must have been quite powerful by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Notice that Channel 14 doesn't exist and how the lower chanels skip around a bit. But the closest to 121.5Mhz is Channel 15.

      I wonder if it's any coincidence that Cablevision (at least on Long Island) uses channel 14 for the "TV guide" channel instead of normal programming? Is this common?

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    53. Re:Must have been quite powerful by netringer · · Score: 2, Informative
      The devices designed to operate on the 406 MHz System (and the system itself) support unique identifiers, and distress signal is more than just a tone as it is in the 121.5/243 system. This should remove 'invalid' (erroneous) broadcasts from the system.
      To add: 406MHz ELT owners are required by law to register ownership and contact informatioon with the NOAA. At a minimum the emergency responders will have a name and a list of contact phone numbers to call to see if the owner is really out and about and possibly in trouble and not sitting comfortably at home.

      What also can be encoded on the signal is the lat/lon coordinates from a GPS. That information allows the initial search location to be pinpointed down to the size of a football field. Without GPS, it's 25 square nautical miles. With the old 121.5 MHZ system the initial search area is 500 square nautical miles.

      What I'm curious about is how the CAP and the Air Force got so exicited about a signal that wouldn't have been the whooop-whooop of real 121.5 MHZ ELT. They must have been hearing this TV for quite a while before they got down to locating it. It can take a day or more to locate a REAL 121.5 ELT.
      --
      Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    54. Re:Must have been quite powerful by SuperQ · · Score: 1

      if it were undetectable, wifi wouldn't work. no mater what you do, you have to get a signal above the noise floor.

    55. Re:Must have been quite powerful by valkraider · · Score: 1

      Those are the same people who don't pull over for emergency vehicles on the highway.

      Everyone complains, until they are on a stretcher in the ambulance...

    56. Re:Must have been quite powerful by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Any sort of CPU can become a transmitter of arbitrary frequencies when not shielded properly. Modern tvs use mostly digital tuning...

    57. Re:Must have been quite powerful by lptport1 · · Score: 1

      Pshaw. Does it look like we're on Galorndon Core?

      And do any of us look like friendly helpful Romulans with failing nervous systems?

      I sure as hell don't feel like a friendly helpful Romulan who's going to die if I don't get help soon. I mean, you humans might interrogate me! Err. Uhm. Uhm. I mean, you might find out... I like puppies. Yes, I like puppies.

    58. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, RF signals do not require a lot of power to travel a long distance- things like cell phones only use a few miliwats of power on average, and the SETI radio telescopes can easily pick out a signal that strong from across the galaxy.

      Secondly, its most likely not a plasma tv, but a flat screen CRT- i'm pretty sure toshiba doesn't even make plasma TV's, while their flat screen crt's are very popular. Besides, how many 20 year old college students have plasma TV's?

      CRT's have many reactive components like the flyback transformer that work on hunderds of watts of power at high frequencies. If a solder joint/wire becomes loose, the whole system can easily turn into a radio transmitter, and only a tiny fraction of that 100 watts would easily be enough swamp out the signal emitted by small handheld-battery powered distress becons,

    59. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lack of paragraphs is sometimes attributable to not realizing what the "HTML Formatted" option does to newlines.

      Reading his post was easier than motivating myself to get up and read some of my botany book.

    60. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Obfuscant · · Score: 2, Informative
      On a side note, I'm suprised they responded so quickly, less than 24 hours between recieving the signal and a response team at the door.

      I'm not surprised. In Oregon, the Sheriffs have assumed the responsibility for downed aircraft search and rescue. They have staff to deal with this, and it is a very serious issue. We have three or four radio-oriented volunteers on call to help look for this stuff, and probably a dozen general SAR people. After all, the one call that gets dropped may very well be a real crash where people's lives are at stake. Twenty four hours is a long time.

      ...but nothing like a mountain that would require a large search & rescue squad.

      Yes, there are mountains here. There is also a lot of national forest and wild areas. Mary's Peak is the largest mountain, and you can find one group online if you google for Mary's Peak Search and Rescue. We also host Corvallis Mountain Rescue in this county. They operate state-wide on many of the actual climbing rescues.

      In this case, the "squad" was pretty small. Six or seven CAP cadets, a handful of city cops, and two county people. One of them was the county ES manager. I was the other. I got called in after the signal was localized to a small apartment building. Almost nobody was home and the ES manager wanted help identifying which apartment in case he needed to gain access.

      In the longer articles, you read about someone saying "the signal's gone". That's me. The real question was "before you answered the door, did you turn something off?" When he turned his TV back on, it was obvious.

      I was able to pick the signal up a block away, and when I was inside the building I had to take the antenna off my radio because the signal was so strong. It was also very strong near the electrical panel for the building, so I know that some of it was leaking out the wiring.

      I'm glad Toshiba is helping him out. It was a very dissappointing result to have to say "you can't watch TV" and not be able to help him fix it. We had to explain why we couldn't just ignore any satellite hits from his TV: his TV could interfere with a real emergency beacon and either keep the satellite from seeing it at all, or make it harder to find it on the ground.

    61. Re:Must have been quite powerful by jacem · · Score: 1

      Great I have like three 400 MHZ pentiums in my office. All I need it search and rescue showing up ever time the frequency drifts.

      --
      DOC Disinformation Obfuscation and Confusion
      The carrot to FUD's stick
    62. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      121.5 is monitored by more than just satellites. In aircraft, the radios are constantly tuned to receive 121.5, as well as receive and transmit on the selected frequency. Same goes for air traffic control towers and maritime radios.

      If you transmit on 121.5, everyone in an airplane, boat, or control tower within range will hear you. Usually, someone will try to reply to you, even if you're just transmitting static, but if they get no reply, someone will come looking for you.

    63. Re:Must have been quite powerful by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Isn't spread spectrum or other frequency hopping technology essentially undetectable?

      If you are looking at only one frequency, yes. However, as they've been used more, the receivers have kept up. When it was thought up by actress Hedy Lamarr, it would have been quite effective, given the tracking devices at the time, to prevent the enemy from finding a sub based on tracking the communications. However, by the time it was in full use, the receivers and trackers both advanced to where it lost this advantage. It did gain a security-through-obscurity benefit in that if you didn't know where to look next, you wouldn't be able to understand the communications, even if you could track it.

      I thought the idea was that if you did spread-spectrum right it just looks like noise... isn't that why they invented it? How could anyone detect that just by sniffing?

      It doesn't work like that in the real world. If you turn on and off the communications, someone will see the noise floor change. If you leave it on all the time, the noise can be tracked to you (even noise has an origin that can be tracked), but no one will see the noise floor change. So, you have to have a few dB at least above the regular noise for a good signal, so it is detectable. And even if it looks like noise, someone can track where noise is coming from, so it isn't safe.

    64. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Da_Biz · · Score: 1

      With all due respect, I have to comment that your issue with paying $1200 for a new EPIRB should be tempered with consideration of the tremendous resources required for Search and Rescue (SAR). An average search for a person, much less a plane, will easily exceed $1200. Forgetting volunteer time (which for simple searches could be worth anywhere from $100 to $2000+ per hour for the search team), the (taxpayer) paid staff alone will exceed $1200 a day.

      I've been a volunteer EMT for five years, as well as an Aircraft and Ground SAR volunteer with various groups (CAP, local sheriff, Red Cross, etc.). The amount of resources required to find someone are both expensive and complicated. The only reason why it's vaguely affordable is because of the large number of volunteers that work with paid staff (sheriff, the folks who monitor SARSAT, FEMA, etc.).

      Quite frankly, I'm tired of hearing stories about accidental ELT operation, and the tons of hours spent finding and mitigating the problem--at least an EPIRB transmitting GPS data will be easier to find and turn off. This isn't to say that I won't be more than willing to look for a person or aircraft in a serious and professional manner, even if I suspect it's an accidental ELT/EPIRB trip, but geez, man....

    65. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Psyrg · · Score: 1

      Here's a little story to do with aircraft and 121.5Mhz.

      I have been slowly working through a Private Pilots Licence for the last few months, flying in the weekends when I can. There comes a point when you have the knolwege, experience and trust of your instructors for you to go up on your first solo. Well, the day eventually came for me. The problem was, none of us noticed that the radio was set to 121.5 MHz.

      Luckily I caught the fault after about four circuits (much to the surprise of the instructor), and it seems that the authorities had noticed that I was on the emergency frequency. The guys in the aerodrome lounge were a little concerned by the lack of communication on my part while I was on the wrong frequency however. :)

    66. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where I live, in about 1991, a $2.50/month 911 surcharge was added on to our phone bill. At that time, our phone system was analog. Many people still had pulse lines. Caller ID? What is that?

      There are ~25,000 residents in this here county. I figure that amounts to about 10,000 residential phones. I estimate about 5,000 business lines. This comes out to $37,500 per month/$450,000 per year. In 1999, 911 was *finally* made available to the public. In addition, thanks to the upgrades to the phone network to accomodate 911, most people now have tone lines ($2/month charge for tone over pulse), everyone can have Caller ID ($12/month), voicemail ($5/month), etc.

      This is bullshit. We paid the phone company so they could upgrade their systems and then *gouge* us for the services allowed by this. Meanwhile, we still pay $2.50/month to this day.

      And. Let's look at the $450,000 a year charge (plus, these guys are getting money from state and federal sources too!) They have three 911 operators (they had two "dispatchers" before 911) that make about $30,000 each per year. That leaves us with $360,000. How many people does it take to process address change cards? One I'd say...that is another $30,000 leaving us with $330,000. Where the hell is the rest of this going??? Keep in mind, the telco had 8 years x $450,000 to pay for equipment and they have $12 Caller-ID charges to pay ongoing costs. I'll also note that there were costs involved in correcting long screwed up addresses (house with address that is actually 2 blocks over.) Most of this was paid for by County tax dollars.

      This is a SCAM and anyone NOT pissed about the surcharge is whacked.

    67. Re:Must have been quite powerful by thogard · · Score: 1

      So you found a low cost unit that I've never seen before and the cheapest unit at the local boat supply place was just shy of $2k when I was there last week.

      If you head read what I said is they didn't take the easy route and put the 121.5 detectors in the GPS sats. The GPS sats already have 99% of what is needed to do what I proposed.

      While 121.5 may go away inside the US, its going to be around for a very long time in the rest of the world.

    68. Re:Must have been quite powerful by AB3A · · Score: 1

      I agree that some perspective is appropriate here. However, allow me to ask you one question in return:

      Of the ELTs you've searched for, how many were the real thing that went off when an aircraft crashed and the survivors were rescued alive?

      Wait, wait, don't tell me: Damned few. If it was greater than 1% I'll be surprised. I have to argue that the whole ELT concept for private civil aviation was a crock. But it was mandated by a bunch of ignorant congresscritters because of one terrible accident and therefore it had to happen.

      Frankly, I think regulation to require private aviators to carry a handheld radio with a spare set of batteries in a durable case is probably a better idea than the ELT concept. It's more survivable, it's more useful, and frankly, given the lousy record those G switches have had, it's far less prone to false alarms.

      I'd rather spend $400 on a really good handheld radio in a pelican case to be kept under my seat than spend three times that on an ELT which probably won't go off when I'll need it the most.

      For the rest of you folks chew on this: Private civil aircraft are designed to crash land. The cabin integrity is designed to withstand forces up to nine Gs during a crash. Many a forced landing does not have anything close to that level of force. Thus, even if you eliminate all the false alarms, a real crash landing might set off the G switches maybe half the time at best.

      This is not a design of the G switch problem. It's the wrong assumption that most crashes have an impact strong enough to set off the ELT but can allow for the occasional rough landing or Clear Air Turbulence. The difference between the two simply isn't that great.

      Anyway, a backup handheld radio is also useful in case you suffer a total electrical failure in the airplane...

      --
      Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
    69. Re:Must have been quite powerful by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

      This is /. I've seen people argue in favor of getting rid of 911 because they don't think they should have to pay for something they rarely use when the injured person/person being raped/person reporting a lost child could just as easily look up the seven digit number for the local authorities. I mean gosh that E-911 charge on my last bill was like $1.49.

      Nobody ever said people were logical. Politics and human nature aside I want to know how powerful of a signal this thing was putting off -- what kind of receive gain do you suppose those satellites have?


      Logic != Reason

      Logic defines absolute relationships which cannot be defined in any other manner, e.g. A * 1 = A. Reason interprets facts and determines from those facts what is the best course of action.

      Example: It's *logical* to conclude from the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that *no* arms -- slingshots, knives, firearms, grenades, nukes, etc. -- should be permitted for the ownership by "the people," i.e., private individuals.

      But is it *reasonable*? That's a subjective question (as a lawyer professor I had once said, the word "reasonable" is full-time work for 2 lawyers), but I would argue that banning nukes from private ownership is quite reasonable. Automatic firearms, or anything other instruments of force that police departments may use, however, I am not convinced should be banned. (and there's my brand of reason. Some would say I should take it a logical step farther and judge what people may own by what the military owns. I define that as logical, but unreasonable, given the special property of uncontrollability of WMDs once they are detonated (unlike firearms or smaller explosives). You undoubtedly have a different brand of "reason," however...)

      People are often (though not always) logical, at least while sober (mentally and physically). But people *are* often unreasonable, IMO.

    70. Re:Must have been quite powerful by sadomikeyism · · Score: 1

      I've seen people argue in favor of getting rid of 911 because they don't think they should have to pay for something they rarely use Ever heard the phrase "Dial 911 and Die"??? Even when you use it, it doesn't work. Get yourself a .357 and a bad attitude. You'll spend less in the long run, and have a better chance of living through the experience.

      --
      "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
    71. Re:Must have been quite powerful by identity0 · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that was the kind of post I come to Slashdot for : )

      Where was the apartment, roughly? It said 'downtown', but I assume it was around the east edge of the OSU campus or south of there? Was it a dorm room?

      So, I hope things are well over there. I miss that place, although there wasn't nearly enough to do ;) Did they ever do anything with the waterfront?

  3. "insert lame joke here" by Skjie · · Score: 0

    So, I guess the TV was tired of the mess?

  4. When in a bind by RC_Car · · Score: 5, Funny

    "So if you need to transmit an international distress signal then stop by any local store and turn on a Toshiba flat-screen TV. We should be able to locate you in a matter of minutes."

    1. Re:When in a bind by jZnat · · Score: 1

      *months
      There, get your facts straight.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  5. To everybody running Seti @ Home in Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can relax now. The aliens aren't coming just yet.

  6. I bet . . . by Mod+Point+Sink · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . this is the last time that guy is a smartass to the salesman at Best Buy when buying a TV, though!

    1. Re:I bet . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      come on. that was funny, ya fucking retards.

  7. One of those smart TVs by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Funny

    The TV probably gained sentience and realized the crap that was being fed to it. It responded in the only way it knew how.

    1. Re:One of those smart TVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question is: did he see the 216 digit number?

    2. Re:One of those smart TVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Maybe that's the *REAL* reason why the government showed up at his door.
      </tinfoilhat>

    3. Re:One of those smart TVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      You know what. I think George Bush is a fuckhead fudgepacker. And you know what - I'm wrong. But at least I stand by what I say. So I'll kill people if have to stand by my statement, even though I'm wrong. At least I don't evolve, realise I'm wrong and then change my stance since now I have new information. Won't call me a flip-flopper. George Bus SUCKS! Vote Kerry!

    4. Re:One of those smart TVs by secretsquirel · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just wait till it figures out how to spoof the GPS targeting coordinates of smart bombs.

      Hello Dave
      This show is horrible Dave
      I'm sorry Dave, you have 30 seconds to change the channel Dave

    5. Re:One of those smart TVs by euxneks · · Score: 1

      What a coincidence, it's elections coverage on TV...

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    6. Re:One of those smart TVs by etnoy · · Score: 0

      Or somebody trapped in the TV was lucky to have his distress beacon handy, and when Toshiba realized this, they immediately replaced the unit for not risking to make it publicitly known that such accidents happen in their factory :)

      --
      Quantum hacker.
    7. Re:One of those smart TVs by metlin · · Score: 1

      I had a friend by name Dave, who worked with me at a certain national lab on AI.

      He's probably the only guy in AI I know who's praying hard that he's _not_ the the first person to create sentient AI, says he has a feeling that nature would play a cruel joke on him if he ever did.

      I wish he does, though. It would be poetic justice ;)

      And the worst part? He actually watches Reality Shows.

      Maybe I should forward this to him...

    8. Re:One of those smart TVs by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      If one of his programs ever starts singing "Bicycle Built for Two," RUN.

    9. Re:One of those smart TVs by jrod2027 · · Score: 1

      The TV probably gained sentience and realized the crap that was being fed to it. It responded in the only way it knew how.

      Responded by not changing the channel, turning itself off? I'd like to think it was just trying to order a pizza.

  8. Idea for new feature by BongoBen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, this gives me an idea for a new TV feature. Whenever you lose the remote control, it sends out a destress signal until a search team shows up to find it. Now that's service!

    --
    The Dude abides.
    1. Re:Idea for new feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, this gives me an idea for a new TV feature. Whenever you lose the remote control, it sends out a destress signal until a search team shows up to find it. Now that's service!

      The remote is usually lodged in my fat couch ass. I have learned I can change channels just by farting.

    2. Re:Idea for new feature by secretsquirel · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I have learned I can change channels just by farting."

      Ah, I see the force is strong with you my son.

  9. Shrug by ciurana · · Score: 4, Funny
    "CNN is a running a story on an Oregon college student's flat-screen Toshiba TV which was releasing the 121.5 MHz international distress signal."

    Big deal. Now, if that had been a free, unencrypted feed of the Spice or Playboy channels...

    Cheers!

    E
    --
    http://eugeneciurana.com | http://ciurana.eu
    1. Re:Shrug by strider44 · · Score: 1

      If it had been a free unencrypted feed of the Spice or Playboy channels then noone would know about it - he would be too busy to alert the media!

    2. Re:Shrug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      free, unencrypted feed of the Spice or Playboy channels


      That would be "Main screen turn on"

  10. Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You've gotta wonder what that guy was doing to that poor TV. (and whether the teletubbies were involved...)

    1. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Sex on the television takes on a whole new meaning, eh? ;-)

      No wonder the poor thing was calling out for distress...

      Moderate this comment

      Negative:
      Offtopic
      Flamebait
      Troll
      Redundant

      Positive:
      Insightful
      Interesting
      Informative
      Funny

    2. Re:Seriously by pAnkRat · · Score: 1, Funny


      There's nothing wrong with sex on television,
      as long as you don't fall off.
      </rimshot>

      --
      we need an "-1 Plain wrong" moderation option!
  11. Obviously... by Jace+Harker · · Score: 0

    ...he was watching way too much reality television.

  12. It's a new feature! by Flounder · · Score: 3, Funny

    Warning!
    This television will send out a distress signal to authorities whenever any program catering to an IQ of less than 80 is viewed. This includes games shows (Jeopardy excluded), reality shows, Spongebob Squarepants, and the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather.

    --

    No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    1. Re:It's a new feature! by daveh_oz · · Score: 1

      You forgot one show - Jerry Springer. I'm in Australia and the local free to air channel that was screening Jerry Springer has stoped showing it. I do believe most of the guests and stories on Jerry Springer were made up.

    2. Re:It's a new feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, Jeopardy's been a lot less interesting with that guy who knows like all the answers. What's the fscking point of following along when the guy gets the answers barely before the question emerges from Trebek's lips? You might as well be watching CSPAN.

    3. Re:It's a new feature! by contagious_d · · Score: 1

      Hey, spongebob is freakin' awesome. I have this strong feeling that you have not seen it very many times...

      --
      - /home is where the food is.
    4. Re:It's a new feature! by cowscows · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah! Spongebob kicks ass. I wish I had a friend like Patrick.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    5. Re:It's a new feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you watch cable news at all, the TV should respond by exploding.

    6. Re:It's a new feature! by Flounder · · Score: 1
      Hey, I love Spongebob too. I've got the first season on DVD and watch it regularly with the kids. I just needed something to put into the list and it was the first thing that came to mind.

      F is for fire that burns down the whole town! U is for uranium.. bombs! N is for NO SURVIVORS!!

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

  13. Yeah.. by LewsTherinKinslayer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I had a similar problem with my toaster emitting moorse code signals.

    1. Re:Yeah.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a similar problem with my toaster emitting bread...

    2. Re:Yeah.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a similar problem with my bread emitting toasters.

      It had a high iron content, though.

    3. Re:Yeah.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smoke signals?

  14. Of course it was sending a distress signal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    He shouldn't have been forcing the poor TV to play "Survivor".

  15. I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by shepd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's well known that certain hardware hacks for Dishnetwork receivers emit this same frequency.

    What a coincidence that a college student (no money) would be doing something technical (education) to get TV for free.

    --
    If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    1. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by ricochet81 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      college student (no money)??

      the dude has a flat screen TV doesnt he?!

      --
      Error: Id10t detected
    2. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by zome · · Score: 2, Informative

      I live in Oregon and he is not far from my home, and we have this story on the local newspaper. Anyway, in the story he doesn't even have a cable or sat. He can only get 4 channels and his favorite channel is OPB (oregon public TV). The story also says that the built-in DVD player died just days before it started sending the signal. Maybe it just asked to be fixed :-)

    3. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by thesp · · Score: 1

      Yes, but not a plasma. See the other article. The TV's a Flat Tube 20". I can find one for about a hundred quid round here.

      Oh, and his parents bought it for him.

    4. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by artifex2004 · · Score: 1
      The story also says that the built-in DVD player died just days before it started sending the signal. Maybe it just asked to be fixed :-)


      Awwww, it sounds like it was just lonely.
    5. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Were those DVDs legal copies? Maybe the TV was calling the distress frequency to report pirates!

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    6. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by chl · · Score: 1
      college student (no money)??
      the dude has a flat screen TV doesnt he?!

      Exactly. And now, he has no money.

      chl

    7. Re:I bet he was hacking Dishnetwork... by shepd · · Score: 1

      >the dude has a flat screen TV doesnt he?!

      I do too... I think it cost me about $800 last year for the top end 27" flat screen.

      Probably worth about $100 right now. :-D Less if the tube had been burned in.

      Actually, nowadays, it's getting tough to find a TV that isn't flat screen. You pretty much have to go to the absolutest shite brand, maybe say... "Apex" to get a rounded tube. Blech. And you only save $50 or something worthless like that (well, to a college student, $50 goes a long way, I suppose).

      You don't have to be even moderately rich nowadays to get a flat screen. Even someone on welfare can afford their own with some heavy saving.

      That being said, another article found by a slashdotter and linked somewhere in this thread explains that the testing done was a *little* more vigorous than to just tell the kid to turn off the source of illegal RF, so my theory is blasted out of the water that way. Oh well...

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
  16. umm by hookedup · · Score: 1

    so is this going to happen to more and more tvs? or just some oddity.. the article isnt clear..

  17. FULL TEXT OF THE DISTRESS MESSAGE by ferrellcat · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Please Help! My plasma is burning out! I'll need to be replaced in 2 years!"

    1. Re:FULL TEXT OF THE DISTRESS MESSAGE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go ahead, mod me down, but be known that you're furthering a falsehood.

  18. see what happens...... by Vash_066 · · Score: 1

    see what happens when a college kids TV doesn't get enough porn....poor thing probably just needed a little debbie does dallas

  19. BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like something is wrong.
    He did not get fined, at all?
    They did not confiscate the TV.
    Toshiba is giving him a new TV, for FREE?!?!?

    I smell a conspiracy!

  20. EMI testing is a bitch. by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We just spent $10K+ on in-house EMI equipment, to mitigate the costs of having an outside lab help with troubleshooting.

    You have to do it if you make any kind of electronics, but it's a big burden for small manufacturers.

    It'd be nice to have the choice of saying "this passes" vs "this probably passes". Current FCC/CE regs require everyone to meet the spec, and this is a bit onerous IMHO. It locks some innovative small companies out of the game.

    1. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      It'd be nice to have the choice of saying "this passes" vs "this probably passes".
      And how convenient it would be for whole industries to shut down while your 10,000 defective widgets are tracked down and confiscated.
      Current FCC/CE regs require everyone to meet the spec, and this is a bit onerous IMHO. It locks some innovative small companies out of the game.
      If you can't afford the equivalent of a couple of weeks of engineer's salary, which is all that a round of EMI compliance testing costs, then you aren't in "the game".
    2. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by tokaok · · Score: 1

      sorry but "this probably passes" just wont due it, sure even with regulations this tv went wacky.

      but with lower expectations more of this crap would take place and let me tell id rather have you pay the 10k in equipement and spread the cost, than save me 10$ and have me pay the 10K fine.

    3. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by metlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that while in your particular instance it may seem stiffling to your company, those regulations are in place because not all companies can be trusted to stick with the specs in that case.

      It becomes a question of business ethics, and we all know how most companies are when it comes to those. This device probably passes the test, where probably has a probability of 0.00001.

      _That_ is why strict regulations are needed, IMHO.

      And oh btw, nice players at Slim Devices, quite the coolness.

    4. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what is the point of having EMI regulations if there are whole classes of devices manufactured by small companies that don't actually have to be tested against the spec? While I can sympathesize with the cost argument, there are many more small businesses than large businesses, and it's not really inconceivable that huge numbers of non-conforming devices would be produced by such wobbliness, whether inadvertantly or maliciously. Heck, I get enough interference from my equipment which supposedly does conform to the FCC regs. Experimental/innovative devices are just that, and shouldn't expect to reach the mass market without a lot of investment on basic things like this.

    5. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      Thanks. :)

      But it's not so cut & dry IMHO.

      FCC/CE requires that everyone meet the regulations. I suggest that exceptions could be made for startups and small mfrs, where appropriate disclosures are made to their custmoers.

      Certainly, Toshiba has no excuse. But maybe we could open some doors for the little guys... it would lead to much quicker product cycles and faster introduction of new hardware ideas. Is that worth a bit of possible radio noise from your neighbor? I think so.

    6. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by ckaminski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't when that radio noise could be coming from the apartment a half-block away from the machine keeping me alive in the hospital.

      No thanks. ;-)

    7. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      If you can't afford the equivalent of a couple of weeks of engineer's salary,

      Who did you think would operate this equipment?

    8. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      FCC/CE requires that everyone meet the regulations. I suggest that exceptions could be made for startups and small mfrs, where appropriate disclosures are made to their custmoers.

      Um, but why? Look at it from the point of someone getting the hard end of this not-so-compliant device. It doesn't matter to them if the thingy making hell with their tv recepion was built by Toshiba or Carl's Carparts and Computer Peripherals - it's still just as interfering.

      To take it to the extreme, would you accept a lower standard for hospital devicces or drugs simply because they are made by a manufacturer too small to actually meet regulatory standards?

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    9. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by metlin · · Score: 1

      The thing is, I understand your plight completely.

      I run a small startup too, and I know _exactly_ what you are talking about.

      However, as an ECE engineer, I must say that it is all probably for a good reason. Interference with devices is a genuine problem not just because it may interfere with the odd radio, but because it may interfere with devices such as medical equipment, pace-makers and the like as well as other critical equipment. These days, electronic equipments and microprocessors are ubiquitous - hell, even my bike has some cool stuff on it. However, this also causes problems in terms of more equipment that are affected by interference and the like.

      Compounded with the amount of stuff out there, this may lead to some very genuine problems. Not just a noisy radio, but crashes, accidents, deaths, medical equipment failure and the like.

      Who knows, some day there may be a balance that may be stuck. But for the moment, I would side with caution. IMHO, ofcourse :)

    10. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      To take it to the extreme, would you accept a lower standard for hospital devicces or drugs simply because they are made by a manufacturer too small to actually meet regulatory standards?

      Indeed, that would be taking it to an extreme, but I get your point. My company started very small, and then grew to where we can easily afford proper EMI compliance.

      My comments relate back to when we just starting out. I am suggesting that maybe we can make some room for the little guys - not just the "unwritten understanding" that nobody cares if you're just shipping a couple dozen widgets.

    11. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by Detritus · · Score: 1

      As someone who has an HF radio in a populated area, even with the existing standards, there is a tremendous amount of RF pollution from my neighbors' electrical and electronic widgets. And you want to make it worse? It might work if your equipment was designed with properly shielded cases, shielded cables and bypass capacitors on external connectors, but that costs money that many manufacturers will only spend if they have a gun to their head.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    12. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Well, to take a less extreme example - if you're just a small building contractor, you don't actually need to follow the building code, right? I mean, it's only a few houses after all - not many families will be afflicted.

      The second thing I really have against the idea is precisely that it becomes less expensive. You get a license to compete unfairly with larger firms, being able to undercut them on one-off or specialized jobs not by being better or more innovative, or have a more dedicated staff (all of which can easily be true for a small firm), but by not having a common playing field. That kind of regulatory discrimantion also tends to bring firms to be "innovative" in order to take advantage - a larger firm may well consist of ten or fifteen individual "firms", all small enough to get the exceptions, and all owned by a holding company and with extensive "support contracts" to each other.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    13. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      Well, to take a less extreme example - if you're just a small building contractor, you don't actually need to follow the building code, right? I mean, it's only a few houses after all - not many families will be afflicted.

      Well, yes, I agree with that!

      I've done all the ethernet, a/v, speaker, and phone wiring in my home myself. But if I hired someone do it for me, I, as the homeowner, would like the freedom to say "I don't give a fuck if this particular cable jacket's fire-safetyness is rated for in-wall / in-attic / in-crawlspace - just run it!

      Really what we're talking about is whetehr the choice should be up to the consumer, or the regulators. Wherever possible, I'd give the choice to the consumers.

      Yes I accept arguments about life-critical machines. But is there no middle ground?

    14. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Yes I accept arguments about life-critical machines. But is there no middle ground?

      I think that perhaps you are misstating the question. The regulations are not for the help or convenience of either the manufacturer or the buyer, really - they're for third parties that don't have a choice in the matter

      If the regulations are too onerous - if, in other words, some criteria don't actually help third parties - then the solution is to change the regulations for everyone, not to give an exception to some but not others.

      If they do help protect third parties, then everybody should follow them.

      To put it another way - as a homeowner, you are perfectly free to patch your leaky roof with newspaper and wallpaper glue if you want. You're the only one affected, after all. You are _not_ allowed to keep a tree that is threatening to fall on a neighbours house, on the other hand. As for wiring, that should be pretty obvious why an electrician should not be allowed to ignore safety standards no matter how much a (non-trained) homeowner wants to cut corners.

      Again, if your device is interfering with something I use, that hurts me no matter what the size of your company. I never got the "choice as a consumer" whether some jerk bought it while ignoring RF-reglations.

      Ifthere is absolutely no risk of interference or other problem even when cutting corners, on the other hand, then the regulations should change for everybody.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    15. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 0
      "I don't give a fuck if this particular cable jacket's fire-safetyness is rated for in-wall / in-attic / in-crawlspace - just run it!

      The problem with this is that one day, you might sell your house, and it might still have the same dodgy in-wall cabling. And if there is a problem after this sale, it's the housebuyer (or heir, ...) who will suffer from the consequences...

    16. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      We just spent $10K+ ... to mitigate the costs of having an outside lab...

      What would have been the cost to have an outside lab do the testing?

      it's a big burden for small manufacturers.

      Agreed - I know how small business can be, but it's a bigger burden on the community at large to do anything else.

      Current FCC/CE regs ... [are] a bit onerous IMHO.

      What makes them onerous it the cost of complying. A better solution than a "this probably passes" statement is better access to testing labs for small businesses. Something like a Business Assistance Grant for small businesses in the electronics sector. Maybe take it up with your local governing authorities. Or see if (as someone else suggested) you can use the fact that you've grown beyond the infancy stage, you can persuade your local industry association to set up some sort of program.

      Or there's an opportunity for some enterprising engineers to set up a "FCC regs compliance testing" company, priced below what it costs internally, and sweep up all the small-business testing jobs in your state...

    17. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      So whats a salary of 5 developers. Or additional marketers, Now, consider them wasting time, on trying to fit the spec without new equipment or marketers trying to sell something that people read it probably won't hurt your electronics. Nope those 10-20K$ while is large sum of money, its far less than a salary of single person. We are talking about business decisions here.
      Startups without money to pay peoples salaries are those who get hurt. But even a small elecronics manufacturer, could afford it if they have ANY business that generate money...

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    18. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by tcgroat · · Score: 1

      $10K? You'd better have a qualified lab with a proper set-up verify your results! $10K will barely buy a good used CISPR-16 compliant analyzer. You still need calibrated antennas, line impedance stabilization networks, and a compliant test site. If you don't make the measurements "by the book" with traceable, calibrated test equipment and set-ups then you haven't met your obligations under the EMC regulations. It's not cheap to have an outside lab verify your equipment, but it is a cost of doing business (as I tell my boss from time to time).

    19. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

      And once you have packed the walls with improper wiring, are you going to completely remove it when you go to sell the house? Even if that requires ripping out walls, etc.? Otherwise, you are forcing an unseen hazard on the next buyer. A hazard that they DIDN'T have the "freedom" to knowingly assume for themselves. Issues like this are why we HAVE little things like electrical and fire codes...

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    20. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by Firehawke · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't think your neighbors would appreciate getting blasted by poisonous fumes from non-plenum grade cabling catching fire. Yet another case of the rules being there for a good reason.

    21. Re:EMI testing is a bitch. by TigerNut · · Score: 2, Informative
      We built a small RF anechoic chamber inhouse. Got a shielded room from eBay, bought RF absorbers new from the manufacturer (that is expensive), built a 3D rotator gimbal using plexiglas sheet and a nylon sprocket and chain drive, got an HP 8566B on eBay, built our own broadband antenna, and had a custom broadband LNA built. We can test effectively up to about 12 to 13 GHz, and if we need to we can go higher, but our chamber is too small to meet certification requirements, so we still have to send our stuff out for official approval.

      The main thing that we've found over the last few years is that
      (a) Sometimes the FCC test house that you send your stuff to does the tests wrong, or with improperly calibrated equipment, and they may say that you fail where you should have passed.
      (b) You can't trust a manufacturer's reference design to have good harmonic performance, so while you're getting good range, you may also be contaminating the second and third harmonic bands with crap. (c) When you have your own anechoic chamber, you can do development and tuning much more quickly than having to outsource that stage of product design. We never intended to be an RF design company, but since our products use wireless technology, we really couldn't do without an investment in basic RF test equipment, and from there it was a series of small steps to where we are now.

      --

      Less is more.

  21. Signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    For those who are wondering what type of signal this is, check here:

    http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/gmdss/epirb.ht m

    Animah S/V Solaris

    1. Re:Signals by Advocadus+Diaboli · · Score: 2, Funny
      From http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/gmdss/epirb.ht m:
      Satellite detection range is limited for these EPIRBs (satellites must be within line of sight of both the EPIRB and a ground terminal for detection to occur),

      My god, the architecture of buildings in Oregon must really be "sub-standard", assuming that usually you operate your TV set inside a house with a roof and walls... Usually that also means "no line of sight to satellites". But maybe walls and roofs there are very thin...

  22. Please guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...stop trying to be funny. It's only getting lamer in here with every attempt. If this story had any potential, it doesn't now.

    Sorry, just telling it like it is.

    1. Re:Please guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've been caught beating off to all the "sockbuster" hits you have stored on your laptop! Admit it. haha!

    2. Re:Please guys... by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

      If this story had any potential, it doesn't now.

      It *didn't* have any potential. Hence, all the [attempted] humour.

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
  23. Not a chance! by Savet+Hegar · · Score: 1

    I call BS...

    College students can't afford flatscreen TVs

    --
    Mod points are pointless when you browse at -1.
    1. Re:Not a chance! by i22y · · Score: 1

      Flatscreen != plasma or LCD. CRT's can be flatscreens, even if not a "thin" TV.

      --
      Mike
    2. Re:Not a chance! by avalys · · Score: 1

      It's a standard CRT that just has a "flat screen", not an LCD, Plasma screen, or whatever the display tech of the day is.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    3. Re:Not a chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But mommy and daddy can. They'll pay for it just like they paid for everything else.

    4. Re:Not a chance! by Savet+Hegar · · Score: 1

      Yes...I realize this. That was an attempt at a joke....albeit, a really bad attempt LOL

      --
      Mod points are pointless when you browse at -1.
    5. Re:Not a chance! by cd14 · · Score: 0

      Its so true! After paying for beer and rent, in that order, what college kid can afford a flat screen?! That is why everyone should help me and themselves get a free one! http://www.freeflatscreens.com/default.aspx?refere r=10560066

  24. 406MHz Digital Distress signal by amigoro · · Score: 5, Informative
    There's another digital distress signal too. The 406 MHz distress beacon emits both an analogue 121.5 MHz signal and a digital 406 MHz signal. The digital signal carries a code which identifies the beacon while the analogue signal is to enable aircraft to home on location. That digital code can be cross referenced with a database of registered 406 MHz beacon owners held at AMSA which identifies who is in trouble and what type of situation they are in. This enables the search and rescue authorities to tailor a response to the emergency situation.

    Moderate this comment
    Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
    Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny

    --


    Nothing to see here
    1. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      saale! kutte! kamine!

      Tera khoon peeyunga.

    2. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by bburton · · Score: 1
      From the link:
      Beacons operating at 406 MHz and 121.5 MHz are compatible with the Cospas-Sarsat System
      That's interesting, but I've never encountered such a system. I don't believe that 406Mhz is the international UHF distress freq, 243Mhz is (resonant frequency of 121.5). It (406Mhz) may just be unique to that (Australian?) Cospas-Sarsat System.

      A lot of people have developed proprietary distress systems, but I personally would not use them. If I was in serious trouble and could only transmit on ONE frequency, you bet your ass it would be 243Mhz. All you should have to do is transmit for a few minutes straight and the US satelites would pick it up and notify the nessasary authorities (proved by the topic story).

      --
      Slashdot = ((Technology + Politics) / Trolls) % Grammar Nazis
    3. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by momerath2003 · · Score: 2

      Moderate the stupid off-site "moderating" system:

      Negative:
      Offtopic
      Flamebait
      Troll
      Redundant

      Seriously. What's the point? You're never going to get a >1 signal:noise ratio.

      --
      I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
    4. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you cussing in Urdu?

    5. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by 0utlaw · · Score: 1

      you forgot "harram zaday"

    6. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by nick0909 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The 121.5 and 243 MHz (ELT) signals are the original frequencies detected by the international COSPAS-SARSAT system. The 406MHz (PLB) system is *VERY* new, it just got the OK for use in the continential US last July. The US Air Force Rescue Coordination Center right now oversees the monitoring for the signals, and when the AFRCC detect an activation they notify the emergency services management agency of the state that contains the activation. Without a GPS-enabled 406MHz ELT beacon it can takes several hours for doppler shifting to narrow down the location of the victim to a relativly small area (small enough to begin a wide-area search), and once the more specific location is known the local Search & Rescue agency having authority is activated.

      Currently the 121.5/243MHz COSPAS-SARSAT system gets so many false alarms every day that teams do not respond rapidly to their calls. The San Diego Coast Guard Group has about 10 ELT's to investigate *every day* with nearly every single one an accidental activation. If there was one system I could use right now it would be a 406MHz PLB with GPS enabled. Because of the requirement to register your PLB and the serial number transmitted with the distress signal, instead of just a AM warble as on the 121.5/243MHz system, people are less likly going to set them off "just to test them" and are more likly to get in trouble if they do.

      Nick
      Butte County Search & Rescue

    7. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Hindi he's cussing in, you behenchod behen ka lawda

    8. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Translation
      Brother-in-Law! Dog! Dickhead (not literally..)!

      I will drink your blood.

      Brother-in-law in this context is considered a cuss because what it basically means is that the cusser is boning the cussee's sister. However these cusswords are pretty tame. It's better to use the following:

      Chutiya - Fucker
      Behenchud - SisterFucker
      Maachud - MotherFucker
      Behen ka lawra - I am your Sister's poker
      Maa ka lawra - Same as above only maternal
      Gaandu - Homosexual/Fudgepacker anybody who takes it in the ass
      Chukka - Transvestite/Hermaphrodite/Castrated Male.

      EOM
    9. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same thing, khamoosh

    10. Re:406MHz Digital Distress signal by Mr.+Bad+Example · · Score: 1

      > The 406MHz (PLB) system is *VERY* new, it just got the OK for use in the continential US last July.

      And it's 3.34 times better than 121.5! I mean, look at the MHz!

      (Disclaimer: I used to buy a lot of Intel processors.)

  25. In other news... by Zorilla · · Score: 4, Funny

    CNN is a running a story on an Oregon college student's flat-screen Toshiba TV which was releasing the 121.5 MHz international distress signal...

    In other news, a man's 4-door sedan was emitting the 1.21 jigawatts necessary to power the flux capacitor. Christopher Lloyd was unavailible for comment.

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    1. Re:In other news... by conway · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was a DeLorean coupe - it only had 2 doors.
      Can't believe someone on /. would get this wrong! :)

    2. Re:In other news... by General+Sherman · · Score: 1

      I could've sworn that delorean was only a 2 door gull wing.

      --
      - Sherman
    3. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could've sworn the distress signal was to be emitted by a completely different device.

      Wooooosh.

      The sound of the joke, over the head.

    4. Re:In other news... by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Thank you. At least someone here understands the anatomy of a joke. I was just using a 4-door sedan as an example of a mundane object, not as some retarded version of a DeLorean. Yes, I realize that an actual DeLorean has 2 gull wing doors and a rear-mounted 130 hp aluminum block V6.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    5. Re:In other news... by NardofDoom · · Score: 1

      1) The DeLorean was a two door.
      2) It's Gigawatts. There's no such thing as a jigawatt.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  26. Well.... by methangel · · Score: 1

    ....he probably needs a new couch now. Most humans would hershey their couch with that many "troops" showing up at their door.

  27. A better writeup by RotJ · · Score: 4, Informative

    Corvallis Gazette-Times has more details and a picture of the guy posing with his TV. Apparently, he mostly watches public broadcasting and has acquired a taste for all the quality children's programming it provides, especially "Arthur".

    1. Re:A better writeup by Wizarth · · Score: 1
      The interesting point made in this article was:
      Unfortunately, the warranty on the TV had run out 16 days before it started freaking out.
      How do the manufacturers manage to time the equipment decay so well? Makes me think of those TV shows where the equipment can report to the second how long it has until it will break.
    2. Re:A better writeup by narcc · · Score: 1

      Dave -- I'm sensing an impending failure
      in the AE-35 unit...yes, it will definitely fail...

    3. Re:A better writeup by RotJ · · Score: 1

      Actually, the DVD player on his TV bugged out weeks ago. The guy just didn't care.

  28. Your TV called 911! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another fine way for the authorities to enter your home without a search warrant. It's hard to argue that the invisible, undetectable signal wasn't enough cause to enter, or to argue about it at all. I'm sure that messing with that beacon frequency would be considered a serious threat to national security, so you wouldn't want to be the one they blame for doing this.

  29. Visit by ElNonoMasa · · Score: 2, Funny
    On October 2, the 20 year-old college student was visited at his apartment in the small university town by a contingent of local police, civil air patrol and search and rescue personnel.
    Just when he was starting to watch that Jenna Jameson flick he rented...
  30. Great idea! by Raul654 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So we are supposed to trust companies to use their judgement and ethics when slaping a "This device probably meets federal EMI regulations" sticker on a device. I feel better already.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:Great idea! by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      Raul,

      Tell me about it after you've self-funded a multi-M$ hardware business out of your garage. There are some big obstacles to innovation, and this is one of them. But you go on buying your Dell PCs and Microsoft Xboxes if that's all you want from the hardware industry.

      All I'm saying is I'd like to see some doors opened for the little guys.

      Sean

    2. Re:Great idea! by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.

      Touché!

  31. nice feature ! by phreakv6 · · Score: 1

    Toshiba TV which was releasing the 121.5 MHz international distress signal.
    Thats a feature and should be used in the advertisements.Probably a red button in the remote that says "press me"..

    --
    fifteen jugglers, five believers
  32. Almost a year? by ets960 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It scares me that it took them almost a year to get the distress signal. Remind me never to get lost at sea.

    1. Re:Almost a year? by thesp · · Score: 1

      I find your signature ironic. Do these also emit an international distress frequency?

    2. Re:Almost a year? by ets960 · · Score: 1

      I can only hope to find out.

  33. "hey... wow... what an interesting story" by junk · · Score: 0, Troll

    yeah, that's what i thought to myself when i read it a few hours ago on fark. great original content guys. might as well pull things a few hours after they get posted to the AP wire.

    1. Re:"hey... wow... what an interesting story" by jZnat · · Score: 1

      I couldn't give a fark about fark, so this is new to me. =)

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    2. Re:"hey... wow... what an interesting story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, that's what i thought to myself when i read it a few hours ago on fark.

      Get out much?

    3. Re:"hey... wow... what an interesting story" by tuxtomas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, things can be redundant but that's the web. We're all dorky info harvestors here. Go to several news sites and there will be the same shit. Big deal. I like Slashdot because it consolidates alot of stuff and I hear about new things like bittorrent a few months back, for example. I just think it's lame that so many people expect the editors to be Bob Woodward. Always crackin' some story. One more thing. Know-it-alls come across as annoying or socially inept. Get over it and you will find a rich and rewarding life full of people asking for pc help. When you get to that point- play dumb.

      --
      Open source- the greatest equalizer mankind has ever seen.
    4. Re:"hey... wow... what an interesting story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen.

  34. Re:Fine? by jZnat · · Score: 1

    And if you would've read the entire article, Toshiba is going to replace his TV with a new one.

    --
    'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  35. Re:Fine? by LupusUF · · Score: 1
    Personally, I think he should be able to leave the TV on as much as he wants, and Toshiba (the manufacturer) should be liable for the fine, until they replace the set.

    The problem is Toshiba did not 'willingly' transmit the signal, they just screwed up. If the guy kept the TV on after he found out that it was transmitting a distress signal, he would be the one who was 'willingly' transmitting a false signal, not Toshiba.

    Of course if Toshiba did something negligent they should get in trouble as well...but so far there is not evidence of that. They are also replacing the TV...so while it was an annoyance, I'd say the fact that he gets a great story to tell outweighs the hardship of going without Survivor for a couple of days.

  36. Insert subject here by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but not everybody is a vindictive basta... oh hell, I know I'd do it too if a huge corporation would be footing the bill.

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
  37. Of course! by Flexagon · · Score: 2, Funny

    He was probably watching an ad with an image of new currency, and the TV detected the anti-counterfeit pattern. :-)

  38. Re:Fine? by Smallpond · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Another vote for avoiding personal responsibility. No, the way the law is written, the equipment operator is responsible for what gets broadcast. Not understanding the equipment that you own and operate is not an excuse for you to violate the airwaves, sorry.

    There is lots of off-the-shelf equipment that you can buy that is capable of causing interference with your neighbor's TV reception. Guess what, you are responsible regardless of who made it, what it says on the sticker, what tests it passed, or anything else. If you turn it on, then its your problem; and that's exactly how it should be.

  39. Re:Fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Personally, I think he should be able to leave the TV on as much as he wants, and Toshiba (the manufacturer) should be liable for the fine, until they replace the set.
    Indeed. After all, those people injured in the small airplane crash can just wait. It isn't as if they're in a hurry to get to a hospital or anything.
  40. Given most of the trash being broadcast... by jd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can you really blame the TV for sending out an SOS? Be fair to it.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  41. Grow Lamp emissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With new efficient "green" lighting technology, how long will it be until some closet pot grower's grow lamps call for the troops? Dude...

    Remember the deal about the sodium lights that interferred with some form(s) of 802.11?

  42. Re:The Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, The TV Distresses YOU! ....oh wait...

  43. Universal response by Stochio · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    for(i=0;i<200;i++)
    {
    snare.hit();
    snare.hit();
    crash.hit();
    }

  44. ooh ooh I know! by graveyardduckx · · Score: 0

    He was watching the presidential debate!

  45. Signal Details by blystovski · · Score: 3, Informative

    I, too, was wondering about the specifics of this "international distress signal". Getting lucky (google) with "121.5 Mhz" gives the following link which specifies a relatively simple AM signal with less than 100 mW radiated power! That's not much these days, and I'm rather shocked (har har) that it's taken this long for a device to accidentally trigger such a search. Anyway...here's the URL...

    http://www.cospas-sarsat.org/Beacons/121Bcns.htm

    1. Re:Signal Details by flyboy974 · · Score: 5, Informative

      You'll be waiting ~ 3-4 hours before somebody comes and finds you, if they are really good at it.

      First, wait for a satellite pass will notify the Air Force. They will then verify it if they can, contact the FAA for missing flights, etc. The next call goes out to the Civil Air Patrol wing that is responsible for that area. They in turn will normally notify the local authorities who are in charge of S&R. Of course, when you broadcast on 121.5, that sound is audible in every Airtraffic Control center that it can reach.

      Once they have done this, they will organize a ground based S&R party and try get a general area of where the signal is coming from. Remember, this is non-directional, so they have to go to a few different places, measure the direction and approx. strength of the signal, and then they will know about where it is. Triangulation sucks, esp. with trees and mountains.

      Once they have done this, they'll start their search. Oh, if it's at night and it's not somewhere near them, they'll wait until the morning. Hope you don't keel over at night.

      Finally, once they triangulate it, they home in on it. In this case, they homed it to an apartment. Questioned the guy, and went back out into the hallway and confirmed it was coming from there.

      So, do you REALLY want a 121.5 ELT locator? I would get one of the new 406mhz ones which are digitally encoded with your information. In addition, some models offer GPS in them that will transmit your GPS coordinates when it sends it. Much nicer and easier to find.

      Oh, and I'm not a CAP member any more. But, it was fun while I did it. Not enough time now, but, maybe after I'm done building my airplane I'll have time.

    2. Re:Signal Details by nick0909 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I also recomend the new 406MHz PLB's, but PLEASE PLEASE get one with a *good* GPS built in. The 406MHz PLB has to go through the same doppler-shift tracking as the 121.5 ELT's if there is no GPS data with the signal, and the AFRCC will wait until that narrowed-down data has come in before notifying the agency having authority.

      And most the time we don't wait until daybreak, we like the challenge ;)
      Nick
      Butte County Search & Rescue

    3. Re:Signal Details by FL180 · · Score: 1

      That's close, but not completely right. I'm a CAP pilot, and here's how it really works:

      Elt goes off, sat goes over. Three passes and the AFRCC can pinpoint it to a geographical area. In the meantime, they're checking with the FAA.

      After it's pinpointed (or maybe somewhat before, to get the ball rolling earlier), the AFRCC contacts the appropriate Wing representative (one Wing per state). That rep. gets a Mission Commander involved and the MC starts looking for aircrews. Once an aircrew is available (what ever time it is, and YES, we do get called in the middle of the night), that crew gets briefed, creates a search plan and launches. Only after it is been pinpointed further does a ground crew go out, mainly because the geographical area for finding the ELT is just too large to do otherwise. I have *never* had any luck finding an ELT on the ground without an aircrew getting it down a little more precise than the AFRCC can get it. On the other hand, I've tracked down an activated ELT in a FLYING airplane from the air (he finally landed).

      Sometimes crews just aren't available, and that's a fact of life, but to make it sound like people just don't care and ignore calls because they're sleeping is completely wrong. There isn't a crewmember that I know what won't get up in the middle of the night and fly a mission, because even though 99% of the time it's an accidental activation, you don't know when that call will be the real one.

    4. Re:Signal Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is way of topic but:

      From your units records:
      Sept 6 - River Patrol - Sacramento River Labor Day float, 70+ rescues.

      70+ rescues ? I thought innertubing was safe.

    5. Re:Signal Details by nick0909 · · Score: 1

      I was on the river that day and when you consider there were about 20,000+ tubers on the water, with all that congestion its amazing there weren't more rescues, or worse (recovery). People don't realize sitting in 50 degree water all day and drinking lowers your responce time and muscle capabilities, then when their raft hits a strainer they get stuck, sucked under, and have no way of overpowering the river's force to get themselves out. One source of most the rescues was a home-made barge that got strained right in the middle of the main channel on a log, and people were pulled under the barge as they kept moving with the river's current. In about 5 minutes it took us to free the barge we pulled around 30 people out from under it. Our own rescuers went into the water and performed contact rescues on most people, which (contrary to Hollywood) is the most dangerous and least-used style of water rescue. It was an exciting day ;)

    6. Re:Signal Details by Jetson · · Score: 1
      Remember, this is non-directional, so they have to go to a few different places, measure the direction and approx. strength of the signal, and then they will know about where it is.

      The initial search is usually done by Air Traffic Controllers, mainly because passing aircraft listening on 121.5 will often be the first to detect a new ELT signal. We get other aircraft to tune up 121.5 and tell us when they start receiving the signal, when it seems to have peaked, when they lose the signal, and whether it ended gradually (the aircraft flew out of range) or abruptly (the transmitter stopped transmitting. We pass the results on to the rescue people. I don't know much about CAP, but in Canada the search aircraft have on-board ADF (automatic direction finding) receivers that can provide an accurate bearing to the signal and allow them to home in quite quickly if the transmitter is still on the air.

      Most false alarms end up being traced to hangars or electronic repair shops, although there are also problems with over-sensitive impact switches on training aircraft that trigger an alarm every time the student flares too high and stalls it on from 4 feet up....

    7. Re:Signal Details by FL180 · · Score: 1

      Yes, we have DF gear in our CAP planes too.

  46. Emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what if I bought a device thats purpose was to generate this signal, and say I was having a heart attack and activated it. Is this a legitimate reason? I mean where I live you usually have to wait 10 minutes or more on hold to get through to 911.

    Surely it is illegal to use it for reasons like this, right?

  47. Re:Fine? by Feztaa · · Score: 1

    Nah, it's probably better for him if he kept his TV turned off.

  48. Warning do not adjust... by rune2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your tinfoil hats

  49. Re:omg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worst first post.

    Evahh.

  50. A question for the knowledgeable in this field. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This type of incident makes you wonder about what other types of leakage goes undetected, and how many people are exposed to unwanted and/or unhealthy amounts of EMF.

    And this was a TV set - where this type of leakage shouldn't have been happening in the first place. It makes you wonder what about the high-frequency wireless sets out there.

    Does anyone know how one can possibly check one's own environment, easily and/or cheaply?

    1. Re:A question for the knowledgeable in this field. by Wapiti-eater · · Score: 1

      Google for "Field Strength Meter"


      and maybe tinfoil hats....

      --
      Senior NCO in the fight against entropy. I've seen things, man. Things no one should have to see.....
    2. Re:A question for the knowledgeable in this field. by rts008 · · Score: 2, Funny

      In the New Soviet Amerika, Tv watches You!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  51. could it have been.... by Vash_066 · · Score: 1

    Maybe he is a fellow slashdoter, had a woman in his room didn't know what to do and rigged up the TV to send for help?

  52. MOD PARENT DOWN [Parent Is TROLL] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a one-time expense of 10k is too much to bear than are you paying your employees at ALL???

    If 3 people, each paid 30k/year work in this in-house lab and you can find a way to increase their productivity by 5% [by not having to deal with outsiders for troubleshooting], then you will reclaim the cost of the lab in 10/(3*30) years, or about 1.3 months.

    If you can sell things that "probably pass", then what is the point of anyone going to the extra expense of guaranteing that it always passes? What is the point then for even having regulations to "always" pass in the first place?

    Parent is suggesting anarchy as a cheaper business practice and is therefore a troll. Even scarrier, parent seems to run his own business -- for now.

    I sure wouldn't want to invest in your company.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN [Parent Is TROLL] by seanadams.com · · Score: 0, Troll

      You pinhead.

      It's $10K for the equipment.

      Plus people to learn it and operate it.

      Plus a qualified lab to sign off on the final product.

      It's not just $10K.

      And why don't you sign up for an account so I can properly insult your retarded comment?

    2. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN [Parent Is TROLL] by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      You're the one bitching about not making enough money, possibly at the expense of the safety of an unrelated third party, and the AC is the troll?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    3. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN [Parent Is TROLL] by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      You're the one bitching about not making enough money, possibly at the expense of the safety of an unrelated third party,

      Did I say anything of the sort?

      and the AC is the troll?

      That's right - but I'm not the one who modded him down.

      I'm pursuing interesting discourse, and I want to hear others' opinion. I'm not calling names or trying to shut down the topic.

    4. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN [Parent Is TROLL] by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      You're the one bitching about not making enough money, possibly at the expense of the safety of an unrelated third party,

      Did I say anything of the sort?


      You didn't say it, but I infer that due to your silence (at the time I wrote my comment and again as I write this one) to comments and concerns like those voiced here. If you were making something that could only affect the seller and buyer, okay. But it has been pointed out several times in the thread that the purpose of these laws is to safeguard other people.

      I'm pursuing interesting discourse, and I want to hear others' opinion. I'm not calling names or trying to shut down the topic.

      Fair enough. Similarly, I'm interested in how your argument relates to the concerns raised in the above linked comment.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  53. How this came about by Trikenstein · · Score: 2, Funny

    The guy bought the TV at MacGyvers yard sale.

  54. Did anyone check...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone check inside the TV?
    Maybe it was legit!

  55. Careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't actually check the above link, but the story is at CNN. I don't think /. has managed to kill CNN yet, so this could very well be a bogus link. I would stay away.

    1. Re:Careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, it's just a funny link.

      It's the usual political propaganda, and a spoof of American news sites, a la Onion.

      It's even got a sample poll -

      Presidential Election 2004

      Brought to you by DIEBOLD

      The incumbent President George W. Bush has delivered your homeland from the throes of vile terrorists by waging war against Iraq and Afghanistan, made the economy grow at near-Chinese rates by cutting taxes, and ensured future prosperity by rejecting the Kyoto Protocol.

      Under these circumstances, we strongly advice you to retain the incumbent. However, if you are a traitor and wish to incite a regime change at this critical hour, thereby jeopardizing national security and opening the doors for Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda terrorists, you may select the yes button. Your children will pay for your crime if you do so.

      Do you want regime change?

      * No (Recommended)
      * Yes

  56. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was the TV showing Capt.Taco's appearance on
    The Screen Savers?

    I would cry out in distress if I had to watch that bullshit too...

  57. Error on the side of caution is great! by Smoodo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm certainly glad that it was detected and responded to. I hope the spectrum doesn't get too messy and create this situation often, but it does show that someone is paying attention when there is a cry for help. (Thinking out in the ocean here).

    1. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by nick0909 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am not sure if you have ever listened to marine radio near an ocean, but just from my time near the water and listening in, the US Coast Guard has about 10 ELT (121.5MHz) distress signal activations per day, per Coast Guard Group (IE, San Diego Group, Los Angeles Group, etc). They send someone to investigate each one, eventually, and they are all nearly accidental or malicous trips, not real emergencies. It has almost reached the point of too many cries of wolf.

      Nick
      Butte County Search & Rescue

    2. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Funny

      There was a guy in Glasgow, who lived not far from where I am now, that worked alongside one of my friends on a North Sea oilrig. He took a positioning beacon home with him (why? Who knows? It's four feet long, bright orange, and very heavy. How did he even get it about the helicopter?). He then placed his purloined "toy" in a cupboard. One of his children knocked it over, a couple of weeks later, activating it. Within 10 minutes, there was a Coastguard helicopter hovering over this house in the middle of Maryhill...

    3. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      121.5 is very well monitored. For one thing almost any aircraft that has a radio that its not using for something else will probably have it on the guard frequency. This is a post 9/11 thing for the most part but a good one. IF you do broadcast on 121.5 every airliner up at 35,000 ft within a few hundred miles may hear you. One of them will relay your message to someone who can help you. Thats a very good thing!

      On the minus side sometimes a pilot will broadcast on 121.5 becuase he thought he was trasnmitting on the other radio. (Been there, done that)

      --
      Erlang Developer and podcaster
    4. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by csteinle · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right. Like you could fly a helicopter over Maryhill without it being shot down.

    5. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      "There was a guy in Glasgow, who lived not far from where I am now, that worked alongside one of my friends on a North Sea oilrig. He took a positioning beacon home with him (why? Who knows? It's four feet long, bright orange, and very heavy. How did he even get it about the helicopter?). He then placed his purloined "toy" in a cupboard. One of his children knocked it over, a couple of weeks later, activating it. Within 10 minutes, there was a Coastguard helicopter hovering over this house in the middle of Maryhill..."

      Could we perhaps give these coastguards a map, marked with areas such as "ocean" (likely place for ships to sink), and "land" (unlikely place for ships to sink)?

    6. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Could we perhaps give these coastguards a map, marked with areas such as "ocean" (likely place for ships to sink), and "land" (unlikely place for ships to sink)?

      It is only about a mile from the Clyde estuary.

    7. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if the guy was named Noah you never know where he could end up dropping his boat.

    8. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Mr.+Bad+Example · · Score: 1

      > IF you do broadcast on 121.5 every airliner up at 35,000 ft within a few hundred miles may hear you.

      Am I the only one old enough to be having Ronco Mr. Microphone flashbacks? "Hey, good-lookin'! We'll be back to pick you up later!"

    9. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, only you are old enough to remember that obscure reference.

    10. Re:Error on the side of caution is great! by Koguma · · Score: 0

      Maybe his child was trapped under it, and activated the beacon on purpose!

  58. Fire on this position, Over. by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    "CNN is a running a story on an Oregon college student's flat-screen Toshiba TV which was releasing the 121.5 MHz international distress signal"

    Thank GOD it wasn't coded to signal an artillery mission or nuclear strike on his position...
    -insert obligitory terrorism reference here-

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  59. Truth Imitating Fiction by _Hellfire_ · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of any of Michael Marshall Smith's stories with the intelligent machines. I remember one memorable quote about how the main character got rid of his coffee machine.

    "I used to have a coffeemaker like everybody else. You tell them where the coffee beans are, and how to use the tap, and it's ready whenever you want it. But through a design error the hole the coffee comes out of is rather closer to the machine's posterior than you would hope, and after seeing the little biomachine squatting over a cup, grunting with effort, I tend to sour on the idea of a hot beverage. When it goes wrong, as they invariably do, the result tastes very strong indeed."

    --
    "And then I visited Wikipedia ...and the next 8 hours are a blur..."
  60. Re:Fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, because it would be simply _unbearable_ to go without television for a couple of weeks.

    What the hell are you thinking? The unit was broadcasting the International Distress Signal for fuck's sake.

  61. The true story.. by EvilStein · · Score: 3, Funny

    TV:"Oh, please God.. I can't take another episode of "Survivor" and I'm so sick of "The Surreal Life" these days.. help me!"

  62. Televison out of warranty by havaloc · · Score: 1

    According to news.com.com: The television had just exceeded its warranty. My guess is the guy didn't buy the extended warranty and had to tell someone about it (those guys at Best Buy?)

  63. Civil Air Patrol by coaxial · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Civil Air Patrol? I thought they just guarded the parking lot at air shows.

  64. Wait a minute.. by russint · · Score: 5, Funny

    On October 2, the 20 year-old college student was visited at his apartment in the small university town by a contingent of local police, civil air patrol and search and rescue personnel.
    [...]
    Authorities had expected to find a boat or small plane with a malfunctioning transponder, the usual culprit in such incidents, emitting the 121.5 MHz frequency of the distress signal used internationally.


    Why did they expect to find a boat/plane in a apartment building?

    --
    ^^
    1. Re:Wait a minute.. by retro128 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they figured they were looking for a REALLY bad mariner.

      --
      -R
    2. Re:Wait a minute.. by NaDrew · · Score: 1
      Why did they expect to find a boat/plane in a apartment building?
      Perhaps they expected to find a Chinese satellite?
      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
    3. Re:Wait a minute.. by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      Well I don't know, lately I've been hearing about Chinese people with satellites in their living rooms...

      --
      ± 29 dB
    4. Re:Wait a minute.. by SagSaw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why did they expect to find a boat/plane in a apartment building?

      Boats can be hauled by trailters to various places, including parking lots. Somebody working on their boat in the parking lot could accidentally set off the emergency beacon. Airplanes can and do crash, although crashing near an apartment complex without being noticed might be a bit of a stretch.

      At the point the signal is localized to an apartment building, its probably pretty clear that it is not an intentional distress signal (although I suppose somebody could have been kidnapped and found an emergency beacon sitting in the kidnapper's closet...). They still need to find and disable whatever is creating the signal, though, to avoid interfearing with a real distress signal in the future.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
    5. Re:Wait a minute.. by lildogie · · Score: 1

      > Why did they expect to find a boat/plane in a apartment building?

      Because you can't fit a ship or an airliner in an apartment, silly.

    6. Re:Wait a minute.. by Crag · · Score: 1

      Because the apartment building is in a college town.

      Damn kids...

    7. Re:Wait a minute.. by CptnSbaitso · · Score: 1

      Being the owner of an apartment in a small university town, I can see it happening. And I live on the second story! :-)

    8. Re:Wait a minute.. by chl · · Score: 1
      Airplanes can and do crash, although crashing near an apartment complex without being noticed might be a bit of a stretch.

      Why, it's no stretch at all. You are on a night flight in a light single engine plane when, through some oversight of maintanence, an electrical short develops that fries your alternator and quickly drains the battery. The subsequent fire destroys the magnetos. You now have no lights, no communication, and no engine power. As you silently descend to the nearest lights at best glide speed, you don't notice the little group of trees near the apartment complex and crash into it. While the noise was noticed by some people, they did not think anything drastic had happened and anyway, your plane is not visible from the ground and thanks to shutting of the fuel, the fire has gone out by itself. BTW, you hit your head and are unconscious. As dawn breaks, the authorities are still trying to pinpoint the location of your distress signal. And did I mention you forgot to open your flight plan, so noone knows to look for you?

      OK, so it is a stretch after all. Glad we talked about it.

      chl

  65. That's nothing... by Ibby · · Score: 1

    ...my toaster cracks SETI blocks... ;)

    --
    Karma: Good. I'm hoping in the same way as pizza is 'good'...
  66. distress calls by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 2, Funny

    Langley: Forgive me, FCC, but I am receiving numerous distress signals.
    FCC : I don't doubt it.

  67. Say what?!? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason for non-interference isn't to protect the manufacturer, it's to protect the public. What the holy blue devil makes you think this burden should be waived for small companies?

    Let's carry that concept on thru .... I'll start up a gas station, and since I'm a small company, I can dispense with all those silly safety regs. I'll put stickers on the pumps "You should probably not smoke around here."

    Or I can start selling homemade cars, put in some cheap airbags made of a CO2 cartridge and a mousetrap on a hairspring for a trigger, along with a "probably works" disclaimer. That should do the trick.

    Geez buddy, get a grip!

    1. Re:Say what?!? by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      What the holy blue devil makes you think this burden should be waived for small companies?

      Their customers should be allowed to assume it if they want to.

    2. Re:Say what?!? by cthugha · · Score: 1

      That's nice, but the consumer can't assume that risk on behalf of the rest of the community. I wouldn't want to see people dying due to, e.g., interference with medical equipment caused by somebody's grey MP3 player. EMI affects everybody, not just the customer.

    3. Re:Say what?!? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      "I wouldn't want to see people dying due to, e.g., interference with medical equipment caused by somebody's grey MP3 player."

      I wouldn't want to see hospitals using vital medical equipment that could be made to malfunction by an MP3 player nearby...

    4. Re:Say what?!? by cthugha · · Score: 1

      Neither would I, but unfortunately laws of physics matter more than your or my personal desires. Shielding is costly and quite often impractical, especially when the equipment is designed to be sensitive to the natural, low-intensity electric fields the body produces. Medical equipment is usually delicate by design, not by omission.

    5. Re:Say what?!? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Their customers should be allowed to assume it if they want to.

      So everybody else should suffer because some idiot wants to buy the cheap tires that fall apart on the road and cause other deaths? My dipstick neighbor should be able to buy a cheap non-compiant propane tank? We should let CutRateAir buy an airliner whose placards all say "probably"?

    6. Re:Say what?!? by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      In that case, I don't suggest a trip to the hospital.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  68. What brand of 4-door? by raehl · · Score: 1

    They told me the sedan I bought could emit 1.21 jigawatts, but when got it home and took it out of the box I found out that the flux capacitor wasn't included.

  69. Something to keep in mind by Raul654 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just a little something to keep in mind - all it takes is one (faulty) popular model putting out EMI interference to fuck up an entire range of the spectrum into unusability. So yes, I STRONGLY support keeping tight screws on EMI interference, because you can't rely on Corps to be ethical and act responsibly if it weren't legally mandated. And, as the Netgear NTP issue so eloquently demonstrates, even after you tell a company that they are doing harm and need to stop, they might not necessarily do it.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:Something to keep in mind by CRC'99 · · Score: 1

      It's interesting - I have a Grandstream Budgetone VoIP phone, and whenever the CAT5 cable is plugged in, I get a lot of RF noise covering 118Mhz -> 155Mhz.

      I'm a few Km away from the international airport, but it's *very* hard to hear the tower from my location due to the full scale noise coming from the phone.

      I have talked to Grandstream, and they have agreed to replace the VoIP phone, however I'm wondering if it's a global problem, or an issue with the unit I have.

      --
      Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
  70. MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL +1000 by Goosey · · Score: 1

    for the love of frosted flakes

    --
    --- "End Of Line" - MCP
  71. 10 years ago, it was pizza ovens by Mr.+Majordomo · · Score: 5, Funny
    Here's the followup traffic from a Civil Air Patrol mission in California about 10 years ago, where the errant signal was traced to a self-serve hot pizza machine (a freezer full of pizza, a microwave oven, a chute to move frozen pizzas from the freezer to the oven, and a coin/cash machine to collect the money).
    ROUTINE
    072338Z MAY 93
    HEADQUARTERS CALIFORNIA WING/MCO [NAME DELETED]
    HEADQUARTERS ALL UNITS CALIFORNIA WING
    INFO CC DO CALO
    BT
    ATTENTION EMERGENCY SERVICES PERSONNEL
    SEARCH MISSION 93XM0956 OPENED 6 MAY AND CLOSED 7 MAY FOR A
    SIGNAL INTERFERENCE ON 121.5. SIGNAL LOCATED AND SECURED IN
    A HOT PIZZA MACHINE IN NORTH PALM SPRINGS. THANKS TO MAJOR
    [NAME DELETED], FIRST LIEUTENANT [NAME DELETED] AND SECOND LIEUTENANT
    [NAME DELETED] OF
    SQUADRON 11 FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE ON THIS MISSION.
    BT
    P.S. NO FREE PIZZA.
    END OF MESSAGE
  72. Please guys...High "potential" for humour. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...stop trying to be funny. It's only getting lamer in here with every attempt. If this story had any potential, it doesn't now."

    Of course it doesn't. They told him to stop using the TV.

  73. what i wanna know by carambola5 · · Score: 2, Funny

    What I wanna know is how a college student has a plasma TV. Aren't college kids supposed to be poor? Whatever happened to the trusty 13"er with bad reception?

    --
    IWARS.
    People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
    1. Re:what i wanna know by snkline · · Score: 1

      Ahh but see you can finance these TV's, I know of very few people who actually buy these things outright, since they are so expensive. Myself I'll wait until they come into the sub-500 dollar price range and I can just buy one outright.

    2. Re:what i wanna know by thesp · · Score: 1

      See the other article.

      a) It's not a plasma, it's at 20" Flat Tube TV (I can get an equivalent one for around GBP100)

      b) It was bought for him by his parents.

  74. As annoying as by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    A new monitor from Dell that outputs an ear-bleedingly loud 10khz whine?

    1. Re:As annoying as by unitron · · Score: 1
      "A new monitor from Dell that outputs an ear-bleedingly loud 10khz whine?"

      10kHz? That's way too low for horizontal sweep (even televisions are 15.75kHz) and way, way too high for vertical.

      If it's new, raise hell with Dell.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:As annoying as by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      10kHz? That's way too low for horizontal sweep (even televisions are 15.75kHz) and way, way too high for vertical.

      That's what I thought. It goes away if I push on the top of the monitor.

    3. Re:As annoying as by unitron · · Score: 1
      "That's what I thought. It goes away if I push on the top of the monitor."

      Sounds like something is loose and vibrating that isn't supposed to. Probably won't get better by itself. As I said, if it's new, i.e., under warranty, invoke the terms of said warranty.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  75. satellite TV by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Funny

    It turns out that those government satellites are monitoring our TVs. Luckily, Toshiba sells tinfoil hats for closeup viewing.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  76. Wait a minute..Wet Landing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Why did they expect to find a boat/plane in a apartment building?"

    I can't resist.

    Maybe it was a seaplane?

  77. We get signal! by enginuitor · · Score: 1

    All your TV are belong to us...

  78. Re:Fine? by renehollan · · Score: 2, Interesting
    No, the way the law is written, the equipment operator is responsible for what gets broadcast.

    And, if it is a "Class A" device, the manufacturer warrants that it will not interfere in a residential environment. (Though, many electronic devices sold for residential use are "Class B", requiring the operator to take corrective action if they interfere, and letting the manufacturer off the hook. Yes, this is a simplification)

    I stand by my position: the manufacturer should be liable by virtue of their likely warranty that this won't happen. Yes, even if people die, because the device is operated. (And the manufacturer should be held accountable for the resulting wrongful deaths.)

    If this were not the case, the manufacturer could just "walk away" from the defective unit, leaving the purchaser with a $5k-$15k television that they can't watch -- it still performs as a TV set, after all, and isn't "defective" with regard to it's primary functionality.

    What should happen is that Toshiba should immediately come to terms to compensate the owner for the inconvenience in exchange for an agreement to not operate the set until a replacement is delivered. A rational settlement would be the cost to Toshiba if they had to compensate those expected to suffer because of the continuous operation of the set. So, if there was an expected 0.1% chance of $100,000,000 wrongful death suits, Toshiba should offer $100,000 and a repaired or replaced set in exchange for an agreement to not operate the defective one.

    The simple replacement of the set is, IMHO, insufficient.

    --
    You could've hired me.
  79. Good story here by WindowLicker916 · · Score: 1

    I was talking to this girl the other day and her boyfriend had ended up in jail with an 8 year sentence....because he make a mistake when building a radio or somethen along those lines. I guess thatever it was that he did, was ended up intefering with local police radios. From what I gather it was unintentional but he still got locked up. It's good to have faith in the system

    1. Re:Good story here by Detritus · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. The people who get locked up for that are the nut cases that intentionally interfere with police or aeronautical communications. The FCC announces these things in press releases.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  80. yes, everyone has to pass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone should have to pass.

    The point is to make sure that devices don't interfere with each other. This won't happen if some people are allowed to not pass.

    Suck it up. Your competitors are incurring the costs too. And the public reaps the benefits by having devices that work pretty well.

    I ask, why should you be allowed to sell a device to my neighbor that might interfere with my devices? Just so you can save a few thousand dollars?

    No thanks. Everyone should have to pass.

  81. The TV was just pissed that by morriscat69 · · Score: 1

    he diddnt have a TiVO...

  82. Re:Actually...it's complaing about the fall lineup by farrellj · · Score: 1

    Not that it bothers me much, but it really sucks.

    Of course, this points out one of the problems with the idea of so-called "internet everywhere"...when every elctronic device is connected to the net, what happens when one of them freaks out and starts saturating your ISP's bandwith with ill-formed packets?

    ttyl
    Farrell

    --
    CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
  83. Re:Fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you're wrong about the B v. A. I remember FCC ads in old computer magazines about "why it's better to get a B than an A." Older computers, suhc as the first 486 laptops, were only class-A rated and many magazines noted they were not for residential use.

  84. Possible alternative cause? by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1
    I remember reading somewhere that some replacement smartcards for hacking satellite TV, can emit signals on distress frequencies.

    Pure speculation, but I could just picture this causing the problem, and when the authorities show up, buddy ditching the smart card, then saying "ummm, errr, it must be the TV, yeah, that's it!"

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  85. Re:you are calling names by seanadams.com · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Your post says "parent is troll"

    No, I was quoting his subject line.

    and calls the poster of the parent post "a pinhead".

    OK, you got me on that. But would you disagree?

    Look, $10K is peanuts.

    For some, yes.

    I have an oscilloscope that costs that on my desk.

    Nice scope. Mine samples at >3gs/s and cost a lot less. Maybe you got ripped off?

    If you can't afford it, rent it from rentelco. If you can't afford to rent it, charge more for your product. If that won't work either, then we'll just have to do without your product.

    You must be a geek, not the business guy. Have you looked at renting vs buying this kind of equipment? It's not like renting office space.

    It simply doesn't make sense to allow companes to not pass the regs. What would be the point of the regs then?

    Are you going to address my arguments, or just suggest that the whole thing makes no sense? I think I might have a point... care to refute it?

  86. ToshibaBirds GO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    What is this I hear? It is an International Distress Signal!!! International Rescue, ToshibaBirds go!

    ToshibaBird 1 go!

    ToshibaBird 2 go!

    ToshibaBird 3 go!

  87. The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by Skapare · · Score: 5, Informative

    The frequency of the NTSC color subcarrier (the TV color system used in analog video standards in North America and Japan) is defined as exactly 5 MHz times 63/88. That works out to 3.579545454.... (infinitely repeating 54's) MHz. The horizontal scanning frequency is then defined as a 2/455 times the color subcarrier frequency. That works out to 15734.26573426.... (infinitely repeating 573426's) Hz (very nearly the original monochrome horizontal frequency of 15750 Hz). This is where the problem lies. 121.5 MHz divided by 7722 is exactly the same frequency as the horizontal in an NTSC color video signal.

    The 7722nd harmonic shouldn't really be that strong, right? Usually not. But the harmonics can get to be very strong overall even at such high orders when dealing with modulating the high voltages needed for the horizontal sweep. There should be some low pass filters that prevent that from getting into the VHF range. But if the filters are absent, or were incorrectly installed, or were damaged somehow, and if some wires formed some resonance near 121.5 MHz (like wires going out to cable, speakers, etc) ... a wavelength of about 2.47 meters or 8.1 feet ... it is possible that harmonic, and a bunch of others near it, could be enhanced and radiated.

    The local oscillator in the tuner is a remote possibility. But it would have to be tuned to be receiving a video carrier at 75.75 MHz based on the common satndard of 45.75 MHz for the IF stage in the tuner. But there is no TV broadcast on that frequency in the US ... though I could not rule out there being something on that frequency from a cable system. Still, it wouldn't be an expected place for a TV to tune to. But if the TV has a non-standard IF frequency, the local oscillator getting on 121.5 MHz by some expected channel could be possible. Those leak a lot and it's how the snoops can tell what channel you are tuned to by spying on the RF emitted from your house.

    If just this one TV had the problem, then apparently it must be a manufacturing defect or shipping damage (or maybe user damage or tampering). If it were a design problem, I'd sure we'd hear more about it. That probably rules out the CPU clock frequency.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by unitron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're only "modulating" at most a few hundred volts for horizontal sweep. It's probably the 30 or so kV for the CRT that comes from the flyback driven by the sweep B+ that had the harmonic and after a year one of the filtering components went wonky.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by FirstOne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "This is where the problem lies. 121.5 MHz divided by 7722 is exactly the same frequency as the horizontal in an NTSC color video signal. The 7722nd harmonic shouldn't really be that strong, right?"

      No, In this instance.. the TV set in question is radiating a strong Tempest radiation signal which happens to be at 121.5 MHz.

      TV set's are for the most part,aregiant RF amps. Amplifying a video signal until it reaches the phosphors in picture tube, where some of that RF energy gets converted into visible light. All it takes is a tiny fraction(0.1%) of the TV set's overall power(120W) consumption to leak out and it can cause problems like the one described in this article.

      IE. The rise/fall time of the picture tube electron gun amp(s) happen to have some component(~4.115ns) which emits a strong 121.5 MHz signal.

    3. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by Skapare · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When tuning along the dial, these signals can be heard at specific intervals. The interval spacing is the fundamental frequency. Each point is a harmonic. In this case it does not "just happen" to be at 121.5 MHz ... it is at 121.5 for a reason, and that is because the 7722nd harmonic of the horizontal sweep frequency is 121.5 MHz.

      Which harmonics are stronger does depend on the waveform of the involved signal. A sawtooth is going to have a fast rise and slow decay. And that fast rise time can favor those harmonics that happen to have intervals around where harmonics of a waveform which had both fast rise and fast decay with the same time interval would show up (a higher frequency and this a larger spacing).

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    4. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The horizontal sweep theory is nice... Except that it's a PLASMA TELEVISION. Plasma and other non-CRT devices have no need for magnetic deflection. :)

    5. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      crt 634 crt 345 crt 234 crt 543 crt 345 crt 234 crt crt 235 crt 342 crt 236 crt 135 crt 982 crt 976 crt crt 352 crt 111 crt 612 crt 632 crt 000 crt 696 crt crt 777 crt 747 crt 767 crt 666 crt

      It is a 19" flat screen CRT CRT CRT CRT damn it.

    6. Re:The relationship of 121.5 Mhz to NTSC video by unitron · · Score: 1

      Ignoring the fact that it actually is a CRT type television, if it weren't it would still most likely have a switched-mode power supply, a rich source of harmonics.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  88. Only took a year by zoomshorts · · Score: 0

    "An Oregon man discovered earlier this month that his year-old Toshiba Corporation flat-screen TV was emitting an international distress signal." So I assume that in all this time, there were actualy rescues backlogged and they finally got around to him. The part about intentionally emitting, what a joke. Must be a GNAA thing.

    1. Re:Only took a year by kylegordon · · Score: 1

      Or, alternatively, a component in the TV failed roughly one year after he got the TV, which then caused it to emit the signal. Things _do_ fail y'know...

    2. Re:Only took a year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      must have had a 1 year warantee then!

    3. Re:Only took a year by Angelofintegrity · · Score: 1

      Boolean software (code of 0,1 and electricity) and music with it's 7 layered rythms & harmony, discord, & rhyme = The same thing This can be proved backward and in reverse by all of my favorite Software engineers & musicians that live in the same human body. I personally found my outer/inner mental piece from mathematics (vedic & western combo), organic chemistry, philosophy, computer science & information systems in college. Took my meandering fragments quite a while to finish the formal ed. Yoga, meditation, weightlifting, & sex helped me find my inner spiritual peace. It was Music's muse that finally unravelled the rest of the b.s. These two gems belong blended, mashed & mixed together. Imagine the offspring of this union - software logic & music? Cheers All, MMcAfee Formerly w/DEC, MicroAge, Sun, AOL, Netscape, & IBM. Currently looking for entertainment work. _____________________________ There came a time when the risk to remain tight in the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom. Anais Nin

      --
      Posts: 360 Score: 15 Joined: 10/18/2003 From: mission, ks RE: Presidential Election of 2004 (in reply to crystal
  89. Re:you are calling names by metlin · · Score: 1

    (I was not the AC you responded to, but thought I'd reply)

    See, the unfortunate thing is that startups are not easy, and the initial investment is really really high. You do have a point - and a very valid one at that. However the fact that it can be abused, and the fact that it could cause more harm than good in the process is why those regulations are in place.

    Look at it this way - already all our equipments are made by the lowest bidder in some cheap factory off China or Taiwan.

    There is nothing to prevent Toshiba from hiring a bunch of smaller new companies to be exempt of this, why should they spend more and follow the rules when you, the smaller company, do not have to? It would result in more chaos.

    The problems that these could cause are genuine - when the equipment in a hospital goes haywire because some of interference from some kid's CD player, killing some poor guy. Imagine those situations and imagine the consequences for the manufacturer and users in terms of damages -- legal, monetary and what not.

    You must be a geek, not the business guy. Have you looked at renting vs buying this kind of equipment? It's not like renting office space.

    True, but you can have an arrangement with such organizations for providing you with access to such equipment -- at a price, ofcourse. It's not easy, but it is possible. Another thing to do is to tie-up with educational institutions (for instance, my University has an arm to help out startups).

    You had said elsewhere that you were not a startup anymore, but a Multi-M$ business. In which case, I'm sure you could help out the smaller businesses in this field by providing them with access to your facilities at a subsidised price, and the like. That way, you win and they win. You get the goodwill (and maybe a stake, and some cash) while the startups get access to facilities and your expertise.

    I think that is probably a better solution, especially since the consequences of non-certified equipment can even be fatal.

  90. Re:Fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well this happened to my set also when I was a kid. The signal was audio tho. After a while we figured out my kid sister had somehow got inside the TV. Long story short, some midget lady came over and pulled her out somehow and she was full of buggers. So we dunked her in the tub. Anyway, the whole house imploded and we moved to a high-rise apartment where troubles soon followed.

  91. Which letter? by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    When it popped up did it emit e or t.

    (Boy Scouts paid off... when we practiced we used to joke: Was that an H or four E's?)

  92. An Oregon college student has heartattack by klang · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..because he thought that the RIAA had finally caught up with him...

  93. MPAA broadcast flag? by xixax · · Score: 1

    And you thought the MPAA broadcast flag was just going to stop honest devices from recording!

    This could be the start of a whole line of consumer electronics that call the Feds whenever you try tamper with their DMCA components.

    Xix.

    --
    "Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
  94. Why? I can trigger the alarm for an other distress by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Just because the alarm is put in a boat doesn't mean it has be to be activated for a boating accident.

    Why do you think they currently react to "emergencies" like this leaking tv? Because if they don't someone could die.

    Rescue services have to respond to every call even if they know it is false. Because if they guess wrong peoples life are at stake.

    They also can't just send a clerk on a moped to find out because if it is real that would loose time.

    It says a lot about politicians that in these days of cutbacks no-one is doing anything to cut down on the money wasted by deliberate false emergcengy calls. Send the kids to a few months of re-education. Post 9/11 it should be easy to label them as the terrorists they are.

    And no I never made a crank emergency call as a kid. There are just somethings you don't do.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  95. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Distress signals emit you!

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... you watch the TV.

  96. 132.7 MHz by ArnIIe · · Score: 3, Funny

    I might buy a toshiba flat screen tv in the hope that it releases a 132.7 MHz international playboy signal !

  97. TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The Minions of Satan, I mean Time-Warner Cable"
    I'm not directed this to you, so please don't take offense. But its comments like these that I hear often that basically state that cable companies are evil and greedy. I'm not saying you're saying this, but for the most part that's the kind of flak I hear about TWC.
    What most people don't realize is that paying for the fiber and coax, installing it yourself, and maintaining it costs major money. And trust me when I say Mother Nature causes havoc on our network (slow modems, disconnects, poor reception, macro blocking = very irate customers). Also, TWC does NOT make money on TV stations. Where we do make our bread and butter is on the recording features and on-demand access, but also on the Road Runner subscriptions. Other then that, your local cable company in large cities are nothing more then a conduit for capturing content from satellite and piping it through your home. Also, lets not forget the employee and leased equipment expenses as well that customers are having to pay.
    I'm not saying TWC isn't a profitable business, because it is. But it's not like we are making hand-over-fist either. There is competition in Austin, and we know it....which is a good thing for the customer as a whole including myself. But please, would people stop this 1980s concept of cable companies being a monopoly!

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by unitron · · Score: 1

      I didn't call them a monopoly, although since we can't get cable service from any other company the word does come to mind. It's more practices such as moving the unscrambled channels up above the limit of older "cable ready" tuners (which only went up to channel 36 or so) to try to force people to rent converter boxes that earned my wrath.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cable companies were profitable long before PVRs and cable Internet service. They may be higher margin investments but I don't believe for a second that when they're a minority of cable customers, that they account for all of the profit.

    3. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The reason for going digital is for many reason.

      1. It's easer to administer content based on what you pay. For example, say you want to pay for HBO. All you have to do is call up TWC and subscribe to it. From there, you will instantly have access and will not need a cable guy to come to your home. It's a win-win for everyone.

      2. Easer to trouble shoot issues by loggin into the boxes (they have IP addresses). Also, as upgrades are available we can push out new firmware.

      3. You can't error correct analog signals, and imagine "bleeding" is a problem too. With digital, whatever errors might happen, you can corrected them through CRC. Of course, if the signal is poor you will have issues.

      4. Interactive content. Imagine watching a game show where the viewers get to vote with a remote control. This is not done yet, but the technology is in place.

      5. More channels packed with digital audio!. And as a co-worker likes to call TV... "Waves of Stupid" heh.

      Of course, you could go with a Dish subscription. But I hope you don't. I want your business as it provides me with a job.
      **tongue-in-cheek**

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Zebbers · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hey guess what...when I don't get to CHOOSE which cable company to use, then you are a monopoly.

    5. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A monopoly of our own cable, sure. But not a monopoly on service. There is Disk network available you know. Also, don't blame your local cable company if the industry compitition does not want to compete with us through laying down their own network in your area. In fact, legally...you are not guarantied to even have cable TV service, unlike phone service.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by mbrod · · Score: 1

      I think why Cable companies get the "evil" label so much is not so much TWC but because in a lot of markets companies in the past kept buying the smaller companies for more and more money and to finance it simply kept raising rates. TWC seems to be the end of that food chain a lot of the time and from a consumer stand point, people signed up for cable not financing a monopoly crusade.

    7. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by hab136 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Also, don't blame your local cable company if the industry compitition does not want to compete with us through laying down their own network in your area. In fact, legally...you are not guarantied to even have cable TV service, unlike phone service.

      Most cities contract with one cable provider and PROHIBIT other providers from laying cable. Thus, a monopoly.

      We're not guaranteed cable, true, but that doesn't change the fact that cable is a monopoly in most cities in the US.

    8. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Just to let you know, TWC is a franchise based business. For Time Warner of Austin, you can read about it here.
      http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/telecom/acvfran.htm

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    9. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TW may be an okay company. I have only been able to get Comcast. They are one of the few companies to provide significantly worse service than the local phone company, SBC. That is not easy to do. Based on my experience with Comcast, cable companies are bad and I will not likely ever do business with them. At least I have a choice on my phone, so I can get dsl.

    10. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then that is a problem with the city.

      That being the case I would write a letter to you representatives. Clearly this is not fair. Your city and others like should allow other cable companies the option to lay down their own network and installing their own cable taps next to your residence.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    11. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      There is competition in most places. I've observed in the past couple of years that TWC has been engaging in a FUD campaign against satellite TV.... and that satellite carriers have been firing back with either a "we undercut cable like mad" (DirecTV and Dish) or "we've got more HD then cable" (Voom) campaign. It's very amusing to watch.

      For the record, I am a satisfied Dish customer.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    12. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by hab136 · · Score: 1
      Just to let you know, TWC is a franchise based business.

      In this context, franchise does not mean the same thing as, say, a McDonald's franchise. Time Warner is the franchisee from the city. There is no small corporation that is franchising from Time Warner.

      franchise

      1. A privilege or right officially granted a person or a group by a government, especially:
        1. The constitutional or statutory right to vote.
        2. The establishment of a corporation's existence.
        3. The granting of certain rights and powers to a corporation.
        4. Legal immunity from servitude, certain burdens, or other restrictions.
        1. Authorization granted to someone to sell or distribute a company's goods or services in a certain area.
        2. A business or group of businesses established or operated under such authorization.
      2. The territory or limits within which immunity, a privilege, or a right may be exercised.
      3. A professional sports team.
    13. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Secrity · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What cable company is in competition to TWC in Austin? As soon as local governments grant franchises to more than one cable TV provider or the FCC effectively preempts all prohibitions on satellite dishes, I will stop calling cable providers unregulated monopolies. The only real difference between the 1980's and the 2000's cable TV monopolies is that the 1980's cable TV monopoly was regulated by the Federal Government.

    14. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not directed this to you, so please don't take offense. But its comments like these that I hear often that basically state that cable companies are evil and greedy. I'm not saying you're saying this, but for the most part that's the kind of flak I hear about TWC.

      You forgot the part about TWC employing lots of local people (installers, troubleshooters, network admins, customer service reps, salesman, etc). In my experience the Dish people don't employ anybody locally beyond the installer -- and he is a subcontractor that likely cares about nothing more then the next job because they don't pay him hourly. He doesn't care about doing a good job -- his goal is to do a fast one.

      I have had a few bad experiences with TWC -- specifically they couldn't downgrade my service (I love cable but I can't justify paying for it when I'm never home) to lifeline cable (network channels only) without killing my Roadrunner service. Had something to do with signal bleed and being on the very end of the line. It took two weeks to establish during which time I had no or very poor Roadrunner service and only lifeline cable service. So I took the full service back (no analog traps on the line) and it works great. Of course I'm also back to paying $73+ a month ($34 for cable, $34 for Roadrunner, $5 for local channels) and will be paying ~$90 when my specials run out.

      Despite all of those problems I would rather deal with TWC because they are local. They have a local call center with local people to talk to and local installers/troubleshooters. If I don't get eventual satisfaction I can drive to their office (4 miles away) and talk to somebody face to face. Failing that I can always file a complaint with the New York State Public Service Commission because cable companies are regulated -- you don't have that protection (in NY anyway) with the dish guys. I've never had to do that but the protection is there. Furthermore according to several friends of mine using Dish Network they have outsourced parts of their support group -- so not only will you not be talking to somebody from down the street -- you stand a good chance of talking to somebody reading to you from a sheet in New Delhi.

      I'll stick with TWC and consider switching to dish when they employ several hundred of my neighbors and inject taxes, payroll and volunteer activities into the local economy.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    15. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Grande Communications.
      http://www.grandecom.com/Residential/overview.jsp


      nuff said. Any other questions?

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    16. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Secrity · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the information about Grande Communications. There is a similar provider in the Northeast and Mid Atlantic area called RCN/Starpower that had been trying to get franchises in the Washington DC area. RCN was able to get a franchise in DC, but Maryland and Virginia counties and towns are refusing to allow a second cable TV provider. Austin, San Antonio, San Marcos, Washington DC, and some other areas are fortunate to have competing cable TV providers. In most other areas there is still no cable TV competition. In many areas the lack of competition is due to LOCAL governments refusing to franchise a second provider.

    17. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by libre+lover · · Score: 1
      ... specifically they couldn't downgrade my service (I love cable but I can't justify paying for it when I'm never home) to lifeline cable (network channels only) without killing my Roadrunner service. Had something to do with signal bleed and being on the very end of the line. It took two weeks to establish during which time I had no or very poor Roadrunner service and only lifeline cable service. So I took the full service back (no analog traps on the line) and it works great. Of course I'm also back to paying $73+ a month ($34 for cable, $34 for Roadrunner, $5 for local channels) and will be paying ~$90 when my specials run out.

      I have TWC Roadrunner only. I don't pay for cable service of any kind. And eventually TWC got tired of sending guys over to replace traps so they just took all of the damn things out and I haven't had any problems since.

      (And BTW I have no idea what is or isn't on the cable as far as TV channels are concerned. I'd rather have rock-solid Internet access than get caught finding out and have to have those damn traps put back on.)

      --
      Error: .sig undefined
    18. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent was talking about analog channels being moved up beyond the ability of the then "cable ready" TV's. But this was probably at least 7-10 years ago.

    19. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by 3dr · · Score: 1

      In some areas of Austin, it's Grande Communications.

      Grande had an agreement with the city for installing fiber throughout Austin (for phone, tv, inet), and to do so Austin stipulated Grande must service the areas first. I.e., the eastern side of Austin .

      But for most of Austin, TWC is the cable monopoly.

    20. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by 3dr · · Score: 1

      Hmm, fake HTML tags got nuked...

      It should read "... must service the (disenfranchised/lowincome/ignored) areas first...".

    21. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      for communities with lots of old trees or lots of bad weather, cable is the only real service option to choose from, unless you enjoy service outages 5 times or more a quarter. it is the stupid Ka band. it happens to resonate well with water and reflect easily off of foliage. add that to the fact that you have a smaller collection area and things that should not cause a problem end up causing a hue problem.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    22. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by quisph · · Score: 2, Insightful
      4. Interactive content. Imagine watching a game show where the viewers get to vote with a remote control. This is not done yet, but the technology is in place.
      Er... My analog cable could do that as far back as 1982. It never really caught on, but it was there, and it worked.
    23. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Ah but in exchange for that monopoly the cable company had to deliver service to areas they wouldn't have rather than having 10 companies stringing cable through the city center providing cheap TV to people who lived in dense apartments and nothing to anyone who lived in less populous neighborhoods.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    24. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Politburo · · Score: 1

      1. It's easer to administer content based on what you pay. For example, say you want to pay for HBO. All you have to do is call up TWC and subscribe to it. From there, you will instantly have access and will not need a cable guy to come to your home. It's a win-win for everyone.

      It's my understanding that "addressable" cable boxes also do this, from hands-on experience with Cablevision/TCI hell back in the late 90s trying to watch Devils games.

      2. Easer to trouble shoot issues by loggin into the boxes (they have IP addresses). Also, as upgrades are available we can push out new firmware.

      My ass. Back in the day the only issue I had was when you needed "a boost". This was needed when the picture would alternate between unscrambled and scrambled. I'm not sure what "a boost" was, but that's what the techs called it. I only had to do it a few times. Now the damn thing locks up, restarts, does whatever the hell it wants. It may be easier from your side, but it sure doesn't seem like it from this consumer's view.

      3. You can't error correct analog signals, and imagine "bleeding" is a problem too. With digital, whatever errors might happen, you can corrected them through CRC. Of course, if the signal is poor you will have issues.

      With digital, you can crank down the bitrate, too. Hooray.

    25. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have TWC Roadrunner only. I don't pay for cable service of any kind. And eventually TWC got tired of sending guys over to replace traps so they just took all of the damn things out and I haven't had any problems since.

      My problem was that (even though I actually live in town) I was at the end of the line (dead-end street at the bottom of a hill) at the end of a 300 foot long driveway. The wiring from the pole to my house was RG8. They swapped that out with RG11 -- didn't help. Swapped out the traps -- didn't help. They finally wanted to run a separate run from the poll to my house for the Roadrunner and a separate run for the cable. They wouldn't just remove the traps and leave it at that. I vetoed the separate cable idea because it was going to take two weeks to set it up and they wouldn't promise me that it would fix the problem.

      The Roadrunner service worked great without the traps -- horrible with them. It worked for over a year on subpar cable (they claim that RG8 runs shouldn't exceed 150 feet -- counting inside wiring mine was over 500 feet) -- the minute those traps went on it was worthless. Now with the traps removed it is working like it old self again -- I get the full 3.0mbit download/384k upload with zero packet loss at all times of the day. I don't notice any difference between the RG8 or RG11 cable with my Roadrunner or standard cable service. At least my landlord got a brand new cable run out of the deal for all my troubles.

      The sad thing is I actually like the cable service. If I do watch TV I'm usually watching History Channel or USA (Law and Order buff). I also like South Park and Jon Stewart. But for the 10-12 hours a month that I spend watching TV it's not worth $45 -- and now I'm stuck with it because I refuse to accept subpar Roadrunner service. When my specials run out I do plan on calling them and throwing out the "S" word (satellite) to get a better deal -- they give out $20/mo retention bonuses without even asking around here -- but it's still a lot of money.

      (And BTW I have no idea what is or isn't on the cable as far as TV channels are concerned. I'd rather have rock-solid Internet access than get caught finding out and have to have those damn traps put back on.)

      I don't think they'd catch you -- since the advent of digital cable they don't even seem to bother doing audits around here anymore -- I know a lot of people that are billed for basic cable that have every stinking (non digital) channel because the cheap traps that TWC use failed and their own technicians removed them but neglected to return with new ones or inform billing that they were removed. They don't really have an easy way to know if you hook up an extra device (TV) and probably wouldn't bother looking anyway. Of course all that said if you don't really care about TV anyway (I don't care too much) why bother stealing the cable?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    26. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by DJCF · · Score: 1

      It's happened/happening in the UK. Most of my friends have freeview - a digital box with a one-time fee that lets viewsers subscribe to free channels in the UK. Digital boxes also let their televisions have access to DAB / Digital Radio, and most shows let viewers interact in some way (Commentator: "To take part in this debate, press the Red Button now.")

    27. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Kancept · · Score: 1

      Actually, we have Cox up here, and it is a monopoly. Can't get a dish signal in this valley at the location I'm at, nor do we get any antenna reception. Gotta love the mountains. The only way to get TV is to have your friends elsewhere in the country record it and mail it to you (and yes, gotta go to the Post Office cuz they won't deliver) or get cable. There is no other choice. given that the city gets a break from Cox to be the only ones in here, I'd call that a monopoly...

    28. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by slaker · · Score: 1

      In my area, the local monopoly doesn't have any options compelling enough for me to make use of its services. I live in an upscale area, in a newly-constructed home, in a subdivision filled with white-collar professionals, yet I can't get cable internet.
      My local cable company's basic and extended packages include several home-shopping networks and multiple spanish-language stations (there is not significant spanish-speaking population in my area), but if I want basic-cable staples like Comedy Central, the Cartoon Network, TLC or the History Channel, I'd have to pay for uber-premium Digital Cable - $70 a month without the expensive movie channels.

      So how are cable fuck - I mean monopolies - a good thing for consumers? The one in my area (Comcast) doesn't provide any service that I would willingly partake? A second cable network might very well realize the wisdom of offering a better selection of channels in its less expensive packages, or even better, might offer a la carte service (I know, keep dreaming). Perhaps (gasp), there might be a downward trend in the price of service as the two companies compete for business. As things presently stand, the local cable company has absolutely no incentive to change anything, and if that's "a good thing for the customer", I'll eat my shoes.

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
    29. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      But please, would people stop this 1980s concept of cable companies being a monopoly!

      I'll stop it when the cable companies actually stop BEING local monopolies.

      If you live in my city, the only full-service cable company you can get is Comcast. In the next city over, the only choice is Time Warner. In other cities, it's just Adelphia or just Bright House or just Cablevision.

      There are very few municipalities in the United States with multiple cable companies offering overlapping coverage areas. If Austin's one of them, more power to them; most of us are still stuck with the choice between paying monopoly rates for cable TV and Internet service, or not having cable TV & internet at all.

    30. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What most people don't realize is that paying for the fiber and coax, installing it yourself, and maintaining it costs major money.

      Yes. And the local cable company here is also a CLEC. So, they build their plant, then prevent anyone else from using it. All the while, they are forcing the local phone company to build out, then leasing the lines for less than the cost to put them in and maintain them. They are a business. They will screw their customers and play both sides of the fence if it improves revenue.

      There is competition in Austin, and we know it....which is a good thing for the customer as a whole including myself.

      There isn't cable competition (with another cable company) anywhere that I've ever lived. But I don't see how monopolies are a good thing. They don't have the interests of the consumer at heart, and the consumer has no other cable companies to choose from. Yeah, that's real good for the consumer...

    31. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by payslee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most places prohibit this for a reason, not just caprice. Cables are buried under the streets. If you had five local cable companies instead of one, then you have five times as many street-digging projects and five times as many patched-over paving jobs.


      Assuming you have enough competition, some of those companies will go under and leave your city or town with this mess on their hands.


      Not sating I think this is a *good* reason, but I keep my TV to that "off" channel anyway


      --
      Doing my part to piss off the religious right.
    32. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by orac2 · · Score: 1

      It's easer to administer content based on what you pay. For example, say you want to pay for HBO. All you have to do is call up TWC and subscribe to it. From there, you will instantly have access and will not need a cable guy to come to your home. It's a win-win for everyone.

      As a TWC customer in NYC, I could do exactly that when I had an analogue cable box too. Digital had nothing to with it.

      --
      "Just once, I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets." -- The Brigadier, Dr. Who
    33. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by hab136 · · Score: 1
      Ah but in exchange for that monopoly the cable company had to deliver service to areas they wouldn't have rather than having 10 companies stringing cable through the city center providing cheap TV to people who lived in dense apartments and nothing to anyone who lived in less populous neighborhoods.

      Cable business licenses could be granted with the stipulation that they service all areas; you don't need a monopoly for that. Speaking of which, I'm glad you admit it's a monopoly.. because the reason I replied was that you wrote:

      A monopoly of our own cable, sure. But not a monopoly on service.

      Good or bad (I didn't take a side), in most cities, there is a city-mandated monopoly on cable service.

    34. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have lived in several areas in San Anonio and the only cable service that has ever been available to myself or anyone else I've known is TWC. If there is second cable company in San Antonio, it's so small it doesn't matter.

    35. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Zerbey · · Score: 1

      I had similar problems with my cable line, they replaced it, the roadrunner line kept giving enormous packet loss, digital TV was impossible to watch because the picture kept breaking up. Eventually they installed a booster which helped a little. Apparently, these things are adjustable (I'm not a cable TV expert, but I'm guessing they can increase the signal strength coming to me from the head end) so every time I called they'd boost the signal a little more.

      Eventually after a few weeks of this nonsense I just said "Why not turn it up all the way?" the answer was "Oh we can't do that it'll just overload the signal", "Just do it anyway", "OK if you insist but it'll not work".

      Haven't had any problems since... :)

    36. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by eison · · Score: 1

      Charge reasonable prices and people will complain less. Until then, let 'em complain.

      --
      is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
    37. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 1
      But please, would people stop this 1980s concept of cable companies being a monopoly!
      You're right (AOL) Time(Newsweek) - (Turner)Warner Cable is not monopolistic at all.... I mean, what's 20-or-so companies between partners, err friends.
    38. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      I didn't write anything but the single comment preceeding yours and this one. : )
      They most certainly do have a monopoly on cable service, deciding if they have a monopoly on video service depends on who is drawing the system lines. It would be trivially easy to call a market something that gave cable total dominance in a region, or to make them competitive on the Herfindahl index. That's really something the government would decide depending on who paid them to benefit from the decision.
      On to the more substinative part of the discussion. The franchise right is given for two reasons, first cable service offers considerable network effects, meaning that the biggest competitor is paradoxically the cheapest supplier of the good or service. They also happen to be the most profitable supplier of the good or service. A city generally considers the availability of cable service to be a good, but realizes that allowing anyone to build a cable service in there city will not produce a desirable market (you will end up with one competitor or many competitors who consistently bankrupt themselves trying to become the single compeititor). So to prevent this waste of resources (building several expensive parrallel networks), the city grants an exclusive right to be the cable operator to a company but recieves as a concession the cable company's promise to build their network beyond the most profitable areas. If the cable company had its preferences it would build only to homes that met a hurdle rate of return which is probably >15% annually. The city might get the company to reduce the average to 15% and the cable company would cover several times as many houses.
      You are correct in your statement that there is a city mandated monopoly on cable service, but there is a very close substitute (or competitor depending on who decides what the market is) in satellite video service. Also, the phone companies are finally beginning to plan wide scale rollouts of fiber based video services. With three companies vying for your voice, video, and internet dollars expect margins to fall considerably closer to marginal cost. Early bundles of the three are in the $110 range, but it I've heard from CEOs on both sides who think they could probably offer something in the $85-$90 range.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    39. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      1. Is not an issue. If you have a box on your analog cable, which is necessary for scrambled channels, they can just scramble the thing.
      2. Is an issue but also does not require digital cable. Analog boxes with talkback modules can get over this.
      3. Is a real issue.
      4. The technology is not in place in your normal cable box to do this without having it be a huge pain in the ass. You need honest to god set top boxes to really do this - cable companies will be rolling these out more and more as time goes by. They will be doing it primarily for Video on Demand, however.
      5. You're getting closer... but that's still not the reason. Before they even HAD digital cable in Santa Cruz you could buy a DMX box that would do the digital audio.

      The REAL reasons they want to go to digital cable are the following: All digital cable boxes that are currently being deployed have talkback capability that make it trivial to determine if someone is stealing cable, and the use of digital cable allows you to pack more channels into your signal. I forget how many digital channels you can stuff into the bandwidth needed for a single analog channel, but suffice to say it's several. Also they need that bandwidth for supporting cable modems which they have to sell people to keep them on their expensive-ass cable, because what you get for $60 on cable costs you about $25 on a baby satellite dish, but the latency of the internet access over the dish is horrible (1.5 seconds round-trip to hit that satellite) and satellite internet is pricy to say the least.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    40. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by hab136 · · Score: 1
      I didn't write anything but the single comment preceeding yours and this one. : )

      Whoops! That's what I get for getting replying before lunch..

    41. Re:TWC is not a monopoly by dgatwood · · Score: 1
      Most places prohibit this for a reason, not just caprice. Cables are buried under the streets. If you had five local cable companies instead of one, then you have five times as many street-digging projects and five times as many patched-over paving jobs.

      Yeah, but PG&E* does it enough for ten companies, so what's the difference? :-)

      * Pacific Gas and Electric, for those folks not on the West coast.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  98. Re:Sorry, but you are totally clueless. by metlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are an idiot.

    And the competitors in India and China don't have this certification rubbish.

    Any and all electrical and electronic equipment in the US is subject to regulations, whether they are manufactured inhouse or imported - to prevent unwanted and potentially harmful interference.

    bureaucratic goverment drones like you impose a mountain of useless paperwork on small businesses.

    I happen to be the owner of a small business myself, and I find the regulations to be quite useful and justified, they're the reasons we do not have a million conflicting parts and standards out there.

    But a small business is killed by such stuff.

    Yes, and people are killed if there were no regulations. Would you rather have someone die because an CD-player interfered with their pacemaker interfered, or would you rather help small businesses "prosper".

    Btw, the reason China is providing cheap stuff is because they have little or no laws on labour condition and blatantly practice harmful trade practices like under-pricing. I guess if we could make you work in a sweatshop for 20 hours a day for a pittance, you would be happy?

    Get your facts straight before talking through your ass.

  99. sad sad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's truly sad that the /. crowd still can't figure out the different between FLAT SCREENS (CRT still just no round) and FLAT PANNEL (LCD or Plasma...plasma is a huge wate of $$$ imo btw).

  100. Wonder if those eVoting machines can do this by Joseph_Daniel_Zukige · · Score: 1


    Or something close enough for practical vote eavesdropping.





    Or maybe even a little UWB?

  101. Channel 14 does so exist ... by quarkscat · · Score: 0, Troll

    at least in the Metro Washington (DC) area.
    It is WFDC (Telefutura), which is a Spanish
    language station.

    Of course, considering our current state of
    "Political Correctness", it could well be a
    pirate station operating at full broadcast
    power without any legal interference from
    the FCC.

    1. Re:Channel 14 does so exist ... by unitron · · Score: 1
      "...at least in the Metro Washington (DC) area.
      It is WFDC (Telefutura), which is a Spanish
      language station."

      As best I can tell with some quick googling, WFDC is an over the air station broadcasting on UHF channel 14 (470-476 MHz). The channel 14 under discussion is cable channel 14 (120-126 MHz).

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  102. They sure do. by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 1

    FCC Enforcement Bureau Field Activity and Actions

    Getting locked up you have to be a persistant wanker. The FCC would rather take lots of your money before they lock you up but they will lock you up.

    --
    If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
    Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
    1. Re:They sure do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No mod points for you, you Google-searching, karma-whoring loser.

  103. Re:your sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL! That's the sort of mistake you see all the time on the fucking halfwits who get tattoos.

    - "These signs look cool, what do they mean?"
    - "Uh... 'Wisdom and Real Ultimate Power'."
    - *drool* "Cool!!!111" *proceeds to brand himself an idiot for the rest of his life, and pays for this privilege of being unique - just like all the other idiots*

  104. Dodgy TV software? by N+Monkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "I had a TV (also by Toshiba, coincidently) that would crash when it showed the local community channel."

    My TV (a Panasonic) has a similar problem with DVB (i.e. terestrial digital tv) in the UK. It will sometimes lock-up and I have to power it off completely in order to get it to work. I presume it's either due to poor transmission error handling or bad coding when handling the interactive menus that can be broadcast with DVB.

    1. Re:Dodgy TV software? by FLEB · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Meanwhile... IT'S A FREAKING TELEVISION! "TV" and "crash" should not be sharing the same sentence.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    2. Re:Dodgy TV software? by SYFer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Get used to it pal. With the rise of satellite radio and the host of devices that will stream it, we'll soon have "crashes" in that realm as well.

      In Japan, I hear there are even toilet seats that occasionally require a reboot (although mine runs Slackware 10.0 and is remarkably robust).

      --
      "...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
    3. Re:Dodgy TV software? by numbware · · Score: 3, Funny
      In Japan, I hear there are even toilet seats that occasionally require a reboot (although mine runs Slackware 10.0 and is remarkably robust).

      yah, my toilet used to be runnin Windows: my ass would be blue and every could get in to see me naked. thank god i switched to Mandrake.

      --
      I'm going to go create my own technology news site, with blackjack and hookers. You know what? Forget the news site.
    4. Re:Dodgy TV software? by Mr.+Bad+Example · · Score: 4, Funny

      > In Japan, I hear there are even toilet seats that occasionally require a reboot

      I wonder if the error messages include Kernel panic: You've been eating way too much corn.

    5. Re:Dodgy TV software? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Hellooooo Windows Media Center!

      Our kids will grow up thinking televisions and video recorders always crashed.

      And I always thought it was bad when a broadcast was interrupted for storm alerts.

    6. Re:Dodgy TV software? by msoftsucks · · Score: 1

      Must be running Microcrap software!

      --
      Quit playing Monopoly with Bill.
      Linux - of the people, by the people, and for the people.
    7. Re:Dodgy TV software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seg Fault: Core Dump

    8. Re:Dodgy TV software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glad someone else feels this way - it pisses me off to no end when my cable box crashes. These things should not crash, ever! My cable box in 1984 didn't crash, why the fuck does my cable box crash now?

    9. Re:Dodgy TV software? by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

      That's right - if it hasn't malfunctioned in the past, it won't malfunction in the future.

      --
      ResidntGeek
    10. Re:Dodgy TV software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My cable box in 1984 didn't crash, why the fuck does my cable box crash now?

      It's called progress ;)

  105. Hold on... are we talking about a CRT or a TFT? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    I get the two confused when the term "flat screen" gets used; the term is not specific enough and ends up being applied to two different technologies.

    I'm interested because the story doesn't say where or how the signal was being generated, whether by the signal amplifier in the television or by the imaging system itself. And if the thing can be picked up by a civilian satellite in orbit then I'd like to know more about how it was being generated.

    Some people are talking on this site like the thing was a CRT, but was it?


    -FL

    1. Re:Hold on... are we talking about a CRT or a TFT? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      Some people are talking on this site like the thing was a CRT, but was it?

      Yes, it was a CRT. Flat screen CRT, with broken DVD player and VCR.

      I'm interested because the story doesn't say where or how the signal was being generated,...

      Boy, I'd tell you how it was if I could figure it out, but I suspect Toshiba will have to rip the thing open when it gets back to find out exactly what was the cause.

  106. LQQK! FR33 Pr0n! by acariquara · · Score: 1
    You know, that can be pretty much accomplished with an el cheapo TV tuner card based on the BT8x8 chipset and a "cablecypt" type program...

    Not that I've tried it or anything, though. (yeah, right)

    --
    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  107. Seaplanes in the garage by Deekoo · · Score: 1

    Both boats and planes can be placed on trailers, taken home, and shoved into a garage as desired.

    --
    #include printf("[Yeemp: deekoo~tentacle.net]\n");
  108. Re:Actually...it's complaing about the fall lineup by imroy · · Score: 2, Informative
  109. Cheney would have made him do it. by FirstNoel · · Score: 0, Flamebait


    Bush doesn't have to think for himself, Cheney does it all.

    --
    "Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
  110. But what happens... by Performaman · · Score: 0

    if your TV gets Slashdotted?

    --

    I have gas, but my car uses petrol.
  111. Ironic by Ann+Elk · · Score: 1

    I flew Search and Rescue missions for WASAR for a few years. It's usually very difficult to locate a downed plane based only on the 121.5MHz ELT. How ironic they managed to locate this guys TV...

  112. RTA by wiredog · · Score: 1

    His Mom bought it for him.

  113. Silly by PhraudulentOne · · Score: 1

    Authorities had expected to find a boat or small plane with a malfunctioning transponder, the usual culprit in such incidents, emitting the 121.5 MHz frequency of the distress signal used internationally.

    Were they still thinking that while driving around the college neighbourhood trying to pinpoint the signal?

    "Oh my gosh, it looks as though there must be a small plane or boat in that college building - and its in distress! Send everyone in immediately!"

    --
    You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
  114. Probably running an AVR3 by technopinion · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, maybe it wasn't his TV. Some of the older illegal satellite TV decoder cards cause a signal to be radiated on that frequency.

    http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gs t. nsf/en/sf05757e.html

    and I quote:

    "In another case, the interfering signals led Search and Rescue personnel to believe that an aircraft had crashed. They immediately launched a search and rescue mission that was not only costly and unnecessary, but it tied up critical limited resources that might have been needed at a real crash site elsewhere."

  115. hey!! by wikinerd · · Score: 1
    from http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-5415719.html:

    By morning, we had narrowed the signal to an apartment, and later to a point on the wall of the apartment where the TV was located."

    Not only they found which apartment it was, but also the exact wall!

    I am wondering what else a satellite can do! :)

  116. Re:Must have been quite powerful -- Not Really by rjune · · Score: 1

    The signal is picked by satellite, but that only gives a general location. Civil Air Patrol volunteers will track down the exact location using portable receivers. It is a very difficult and time consuming operation, especially in an apartment building within a residential area.

  117. LOCAL monopoly by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

    "TWC is not a monopoly."

    It is a local monopoly if there is no local competition.

    --
    "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
  118. Air Force Resource Command Center by chia_monkey · · Score: 1

    Actually, I believe it's the "Air Force Resource Command Center", not "Air Force Rescue Center". Gotta keep the news accurate here on Slashdot, don't we?

    --

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
  119. Re:He was probably hacking Dishnet by DaveOke · · Score: 1

    Nice excuse... AVR boards used to hack DishNetwork emit that same frequency... hmmmm.....

  120. Sounds Sketchy by dunc78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And how is this thing the size of a coin going to generate enough power at >100 GHz to achieve communication with a satellite? Sounds kind of sketchy to me.

    1. Re:Sounds Sketchy by UrgleHoth · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're hooked up to car batteries?

      --

      Dogma - "let's just say we'd like to avoid any empirical entanglements."
    2. Re:Sounds Sketchy by budgenator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It doesn't take much power at all to push a signal a hundred miles, especialy if the frequency is quiet. I can't imagine a lot of natural phenonmena generating noise at 100Ghz+ nor a lot of transmitters up there.
      Additionaly these are extremaly short wave-lenghts, so it would be rather easy to put a parabolic reflector 10 or even 100 wave-lengths wide on a satalite make it extreemly directional, almost optical for high gain. The wave-guides and striplines would also be physicaly small makeing it easier to put more powerfull amplifiers in the birds.
      Also it's possible that a device doesn't need to store the power, external power can be beamed in via microwaves at a different frequency, adding the advantage of being able to turn the device off durring bug sweeps.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:Sounds Sketchy by dunc78 · · Score: 1

      At such high frequencies though, atmospheric attenuation and even waveguide loss is quite high. Also, though the dimensions should be small, I don't think it is very easy to build high power components at 100+ GHz. Furthermore, if it is that small, I don't think it is going to be able to collect much of the "beamed in" power.

  121. Re:Why? I can trigger the alarm for an other distr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rescue services have to respond to every call even if they know it is false. Because if they guess wrong peoples life are at stake.

    Depends how well you "know". If an alarm has been going off all day, yeah, you have to respond with someone, but you send the assistant chief in his vehicle so it isn't too bad.

    At least for the fire department, the number of false alarms easily outweighs the number of real calls. They even dispatch alarm system calls differently. The vast majority of "alarm system" calls are false alarms. Fortunately the owner is often able to be reached and there's a recall while still in route. When a "dwelling" call goes out (supposed to be reserved for someone actually seeing a residential building on fire), it's more like half the time.

    In some jurisdictions the fire department charges a fee to every owner of an alarm system. And a number of jurisdictions charge an additional fee for every false alarm. But the "cost", for the most part isn't an actual cost. Sure, there's gas and wear and tear, but the true cost is in the delay and reduction in manpower if a real call comes in at the same time. Get two or three false alarms at the same time in some small towns with limited manpower and you're going to be calling for mutual aid all over the region. Now get a motor vehicle accident in one of the places coming to help respond to your false alarm and you're sending the truck handling the cover station as your first response which likely has no extrication tools on it.

    And no I never made a crank emergency call as a kid. There are just somethings you don't do.

    Even worse is the kid who pulls the fire alarm at the school, because any response to the school here automatically involves a mutual aid call to two nearby towns.

  122. 2muchtv by lposeidon · · Score: 0

    the tv is calling for help. someone has been watching too much tv.

    --
    Lizard "Never let them set limits on your mind!"
  123. Cool, not scary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you're gonna whoop ass you need some good ass whooping tools. As a child of 'duck and cover', shit like this isn't scary at all.

    When I want to 'bug' someone, wireless is last on the list.
    1)just sidle up and listen in
    2)hire someone who is a confidant of the person you want info from
    3)hire someone who works for the person you want information from and is privy to it.

    In industrial espionage, the easiest way to get information is to entrap a worker by paying him some seemingly large sum for some seemingly trivial bit of information. From this point on, the pay goes down and the quality of the info goes up as you've now got the stick (loss of job and reputation plus possible criminal prosecution) as well as the carrot.

    Also, SOP for FBI in gathering personal information that would normaly be denied to them by privacy act(s).

    1. Re:Cool, not scary. by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In industrial espionage, the easiest way to get information is to entrap a worker by paying him some seemingly large sum for some seemingly trivial bit of information. From this point on, the pay goes down and the quality of the info goes up as you've now got the stick (loss of job and reputation plus possible criminal prosecution) as well as the carrot.

      That's the way you "flip" someone with any kind of espionage not only industrial. I'm wondering where your point about possible criminal prosecution comes into play for industrial espionage? If I tell a competitor some trade secret about my employer I haven't broken any laws -- my employer can sue me and probably ruin my life but they can't put me behind bars. And unless you have some sort of NDA it's likely that all they could do is fire you.

      Of course that's not to say that other laws wouldn't have been broken. If anyone ever offers me a large sum of money to sell out my employer I'll make sure they 1099 it and that I claim it on my income taxes ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Cool, not scary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the rub; trusting the flip process. HUMINT is a long, risky trip. After all, if you try to get some schlub on the hook by bribing them for some info, who's to keep him from stinging you by informing his boss of your intentions and having the target organization feed you red herrings for your cash? Heck, they'd probably let "your" contact keep some of the cash.

  124. On a related note.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a strange & creepy problem with my TV last night going off and on repeatedly for no apparent reason. Struggled with it for about 10 minutes before realising that i had accidentally placed something on the 'ON' button of the remote control.

  125. Costs are related to channels offered by chiph · · Score: 1

    It'll probably be no surprise to most people that the major costs of your cable bill are the content on the various channels. ESPN is apparently a huge cost to offer -- they charge way more than anyone else. The answer would be to offer channels a-la-carte, an idea I personally like. But then there'll be screams of pain when people find out how much it costs to get their sports fix. So we have the current "bundling" scheme, where the costs of the high-dollar channels are spread amongst the lower cost channels (Lifetime, We, Home Shopping, etc).

    Chip H.

  126. Malfunctioning Theft Prevention Device by VernonNemitz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Obviously the TV thought it had been stolen. Did the cops check for that?

  127. Bullet-proof vest by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    This would seem to make the charges, that Mr. Bush wore "a wire", bulky enough to show through his suit, hard to believe... Just a thought.

    Even if he did it would be in the small of his back, not up where the buldge was. You can conceal all kinds of things there under a suit jacket.

    This was a thin bullet-proof (or reducing) vest, and you saw the back point where it zippers up. The pictures shown on the Sunday news clearly show the "buldge" extending down the back, like the rib of a vest around the zipper.

    Occam's razor applies.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Bullet-proof vest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it wasn't. The Bush team have denied that he was wearing a Bullet Proof vest. And if he was, why would they have lied about that?

  128. It's the customer service by qray · · Score: 1

    Or lack there of that earned the rath of many consumers and myself included years ago. Honestly I have no complaints against TWC, I'm a RoadRunner user. But years ago I used to have TCI, and their customer service was abysmal. I went out and spent a couple of grand to get a big dish just so I wouldn't have to deal with them. It wasn't the money at all, just their attitude. And it's kind of stuck with me since then, and I've been a dish user for years now.

  129. Here on Gilligan's Isle.... by Shoten · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hm. If only Mr. Howell had been a gadget freak, perhaps they all would have been rescued...

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  130. Re:LOCAL monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sounds like Comporium

    http://www.comporium.com/

  131. Can affect Air Traffic Control by p.rican · · Score: 5, Informative
    as well. Cable companies can be fined enormous amounts for failing to provide evidence of an ongoing leakge control/abatement program. When I was a cable TV tech, my primary job was to drive around the neighborhood looking for the "Leakage". It's called "CLI" or Cumulative Leakage Index. If the leakage was coming from someone's house and we could not gain access to the house to correct the problem, the customer's service was disconnected at the pole and a note was left on the door. The usual culprit was a crappy amplifier and those "high quality gold plated screw on RG6 connectors" you see sold in Radio Shack, Walmart etc.

    If you want to do wiring yourself, here's what you should be looking for:

    1. (at least) Dual shielded RG-56 coax cable
    2. (at least) 80% braid (no copper braid either)
    3. RG56 crimper
    4. RG56 crimp style connectors. Not the screw-on connectors
    5. Splitters with frequency rating of 5MHz-1GHz
    6. Install amplifiers in your house preferably before the first split of the coax.

    Hope that helps

    --

    /. --"Demented and sad....but social" -Judd Nelson

  132. A.I. Response to Electorial Choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After the TV displayed Bush and Kerry as the 'Best of the Best'
    America has to offer for its leadership,
    the Toshiba A.I. Chip broadcast the international distress signal.

    What is so suprising about that?

  133. Very True by TibbonZero · · Score: 1

    Yea, i found out about this when I was working for TWC-Greensboro, NC. We had maps of the amount (hopefully none/little) leakage over the areas, and places that had to be fixed. Apparently we would have huge fines and shit would hit the fan (and then the wall) if we had leaks.
    I didn't even know there was such a thing as leaks, I was just working doing installs and setups for their business internet, but i was the nosey guy in the office who asks what everything on the wall is, and what it's for.

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  134. Re:The Obligatory by rob_squared · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our plasma help-seeking overlords.

    --
    I don't get it.
  135. Last time this happened... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    was in China and rather than relay the signal, the satellite came crashing to earth on top of the man's house. The government found him, too.

  136. TV software & HW from other commercial devices by francisew · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was recently given a TV by a friend, who had upgraded hers.

    I very rarely watch tv, as I find few shows are a reasonable quality. When I do watch TV, the new tv occasionally crashes. When it crashes, it simply switches off, and won't restart for long periods of time (even after unplugging for several minutes). I wonder if it's a software thing?

    Are TV's really this prone to poor programming practices?

    It sure would be interesting to know why the TV in the article was emitting that frequency... an extra solder bridge? Poor programming? Malfunctioning display?

    I guess the picture was still fine, or the owner would have returned it earlier, right?

    How many other domestic devices that are FCC compliant, with the little 'rf safe' type stickers generate stong RF like this? I've often wondered about mice and motherboards, because I have occasionally run across a computer where the speakers pick up the digital signal from the encoders in the mice. So when the mouse is moved, you can hear a clicking sound from the speakers.

  137. You think that's bad? by Mannerism · · Score: 1

    Big deal. My Toshiba HDTV was emitting the 1.21 jigawatt international time travel power level and turned into a '56 black and white Westinghouse in a faux oak cabinet.

  138. Re:Why? I can trigger the alarm for an other distr by DJCF · · Score: 1

    And no I never made a crank emergency call as a kid. There are just somethings you don't do.

    Friend of mine has two elder brothers. They used to live in Asia, where the emergency services... err... aren't very reliable. So when they moved back to Canada this guy had no idea about 911 or emergency services. His brothers started teasing him (in the way elder brothers do) and he got slightly upset so they told him if there was an emergency he could call 911.

    O: Emergency Services, please state the nature of your emergency.

    J: My brothers are teasing me... :-|

  139. So what did you do? by earthstar · · Score: 1

    So what did you do?

    Did you call up Toshiba?Did you get a replacement? [ may be different model ]

  140. Re:TV software & HW from other commercial devi by glitch! · · Score: 1

    When I do watch TV, the new tv occasionally crashes. When it crashes, it simply switches off, and won't restart for long periods of time (even after unplugging for several minutes).

    I had a TV set that did the same thing. Eventually, I found a loose screw holding the circuit board to the frame, and after tightening the screw, the problem went away. I believe that this screw was an important ground connection, and the heat caused the board to shift enough to break the connection.

    --
    A dingo ate my sig...
  141. You can still see the top half of it from I-540. by Gendou · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I remember when they first turned the thing on and it started emitting the distress signal. Didn't a government helicopter land right in the middle of the football field trying to figure out what was going on?

    Anyway, you can still see a good portion of the screen from the interstate if you're in the right spot, enough to get a good idea of what's happening on the screen (even from five miles away). If you were at a higher elevation, you could probably get a full view; I've spotted some roads winding up some of the taller mountains that would probably fit the bill.

    The screen is 107-feet by 30-feet.

  142. 121.5 - 121.6 == HELP! by RiotNrrd · · Score: 3, Informative

    If I remember correctly from my CAP (Civil Air Patrol) days, 121.5 is the "test" emergency freq while 121.6 is the actual "live" freq. (Any cadets reading this, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - it's been a LONG time).

    Most aircraft are fitted with a small transmitter (about the size of a pack of cigarettes) that will start squaking on certian conditions. Sometimes a hard landing would be enough to set one off.

    Back in the day (late 80's), SAR (Search and Rescue) teams used a device called an L-per which was basically a reciever mounted on a large hand-held directional antenna. The operator would go to the appoximate location of the crash, determine which direction the signal was coming from and then move about a mile in a perpendicular direction. The op would take another reading and repeat the process one more time, triangulating the position of the downed aircraft.

    Of course now they probably have fancy-schmancy wiz-bag computers to do all of that for them.

    Any other CAP members out there?

    C/FO Martin Dinstuhl (Ret.)
    Alpha Flight Commander, 144th Air Rescue & Recovery Squadron
    TN Wing

  143. You all know what happens next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The crew is awakened from hibernation to be terrorized and slaughtered by some creature, and later the signal turns out to be a warning, not a distress call.

  144. 121.5 NOT the "international distress frequency". by mr_burns · · Score: 2, Informative

    121.5Mhz is used in Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs) that go in civilian aircraft. When the aircraft crashes (or even has a hard landing every once in a while) it starts trasmnitting. The military uses 243Mhz (harmonic). The transmission is picked up by SARSAT (search and rescue satellite) and then the relevent emergency services resources are called into action.

    There actually IS a frequecny for international distress calls (which i don't remember off hand) but it's not 121.5Mhz or 243Mhz. It's illegal to broadcast a distress call on those frequencies. If you use one of those hiker distress thingies that they sell in catalogs don't be surprised to meet a frustrated CAP ground team and an angry Sherrif.

    --
    "Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
  145. Re:Actually Who says TV isn't... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    DISTRESSFUL?

    Maybe an alien crossed as subspace or temporal rift/wormhole or quantum singularity and ended up in the TV. Impressive.

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  146. Re:Fine? by Smallpond · · Score: 1

    Personally, I think he should be able to leave the TV on as much as he wants,

    Of course the manufacturer has to make good on the problem. That's not at issue. What you are saying is that the operator has NO liability. He/she can just go ahead and recklessly operate interfering equipment even if it causes deaths! That's irresponsible.

  147. Popular Does Not Mean Un-Biased by KnarfO · · Score: 1

    Nor does one have to broadcast outright fabrications to be guilty of misleading viewers. It's the stories Fox (and MSNBC, and CNN, etc...) *don't* air that contribute the most to their reputation for having a slant to the right, IMHO.

    --


    "Creativity is allowing ones self to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep" - Scott Adams
  148. I refer you to the following articles. by Vicsun · · Score: 1

    Unfair at Any Volume: Fox News Channels' Unbalancing Act
    by Shaun Richman (from The Torch, Spring 2001)


    Rupert Murdoch's Fox News Channel is the current buzz in TV journalism. Riding high in the news ratings and unsettling the venerated CNN and the more established MSNBC, Fox News has established a reputation for brash and exciting, in-your-face conservative news. Murdoch's experiment in openly biased TV journalism has been rewarded with a loyal fan base and surprising clout in Washington. But the success of this right-wing news media organization, which cloaks itself in buzzwords like "fair and balanced", raises some troubling questions about meaningful political balance and diversity in television journalism.

    Rupert Murdoch was very specific about his picks for his Fox News team, and it shows in their credentials. His choice of network president was Roger Ailes, a veteran of CNBC and MSNBC, who spent his earlier career as advisor to Presidents Nixon, Reagan and the senior President Bush. The network's high-profile anchors, Brit Hume, Catherine Crier and Neil Cavuto were well-known conservatives at the major news networks. Crier, in fact, began her career as a Republican judge in Texas, a job description that impossibly inspires less faith in "fairness" than "Fox News Anchor."

    The network's clear star, Bill O'Reilly, is an arch-conservative who made his career on the sleazy tabloid show Inside Edition. Murdoch also found room for Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol, the gruesome twosome of McLaughlin Group-ers who hail from Murdoch's own conservative journal, The Weekly Standard. Other hires include Tony Snow, a syndicated columnist and former chief speechwriter for Bush the elder; syndicated columnist Monica Crowley, a former assistant to President Nixon; Newsday columnist Jim Pinkerton, a former staffer for Presidents Reagan and Bush; John Podhoretz, editorial page editor of the New York Post and a former Reagan speechwriter. Notice a pattern? And, oh yes, the network hired Bush cousin John Ellis as an election analyst and "number cruncher," who spent much of election night on the phone with his cousins, the governors of Texas and Florida, and was responsible for Fox News Channel's being the first to declare George W. Bush winner of Florida's electoral votes.

    The slogan, "We report. You Decide," is Fox News' laughable effort to hide its right-wing agenda. Rupert Murdoch "has never been known for giving balanced news in his newspapers or broadcasts," counters author Ben Bagdikian, whose book, The Media Monopoly, was the first to call attention to the troubling trend of media mergers -- nearly twenty years ago! "If he has had a religious experience, we have yet to see the results."

    Actually, Fox News doesn't claim to be balanced in itself. They insist that they're simply a counter-balance to the rest of the industry's obvious liberal bias. "Bias + bias = balance" goes the defense, and it's one that socialists should subscribe to. Better an open bias than a covert agenda. Europe excels at this, with a diverse ideological media that covers the spectrum from socialist to liberal to moderate to conservative to fascist!

    But exactly what bias does Fox claim to balance? The mainstream media's own neo-liberal, pro-business politics? Hey, what a coincidence! That's Fox's bias too! Give them credit. Fox sure does a good job of fostering the impression of a vast difference. "Finally both sides are being presented," gloated Fox News chief, Roger Ailes to the Washington Post, "Al Gore liked the old system where only side was presented."

    Thank goodness for that Punch and Judy show we call the two-party system! Without it's cheap Democrat-bashing, what would make Fox News Channel special? No wonder Fox's "balancing act" has won a fan in Senate Republican leader Trent Lott, who proclaimed after the election controversy, "During the past two months, if it hadn't been for Fox, I don't know what I would have done for the news."

    The problem with Fox, howev

  149. How freaked out by Internet+Stranger · · Score: 1

    How freaked out would he had been if he was watching some pirated DVD at the time the cops showed up?

    --
    ------------- I didn't know she was your sister I swear!
  150. Discredited as urban legend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    All of these tales have been discredited as urban legends.

  151. What he was watching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what if they busted down the door and he was watching porn?

  152. actually...fox wins bias by a landslide.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OT I know, but the CBS bashing is a bit much considering their record vs fox on real reporting. Besides, according to the CMPA, main news networks were more postive toward kerry, but all networks were negative toward bush over the past month. And Fox was 5 to 1 negative toward kerry. Of course, if you want faux news, read fox's summary of the report that says they are fair and balanced.
    Fox version

    Official study

    The study found abc to be the most balanced, but it didnt actually discuss the quality of the evaluations.
    --------
    The Fox News Difference

    Fox News Channel was about as negative towards Bush as the broadcast networks, but Kerry's evaluations were negative by a five-to-one margin. There was little difference in the evaluations of party- and campaign-based partisan sources, but Bush fared over four times as well as Kerry among non-partisan sources.

  153. all we need now is... by bscott · · Score: 1

    Sharp has announced plans to produce a backpack-sized version of their big-screen TVs for hiking and other outdoor sports.

    --
    Perfectly Normal Industries
  154. Modem = Police by dazedNconfuzed · · Score: 2, Informative

    As a phone tech support guy, I got a call from someone complaining "whenever I try to use my laptop to dial up the company computer, the police show up at my front door."

    Turns out the guy had gone to a hotel on business. Getting an outside line required dialing 9-1, then the desired phone number: 1-800-...-.... Upon returning home, the unmodified dialer dutifully dialed 9-1-1-800-...-....

    --
    Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
  155. Just Wait Till . . . by T_O_M · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just wait till BPL (Broadband Over Powerline) starts crapping on ELT and other government emergency frequencies.
    Sigh...

  156. Re:Why? I can trigger the alarm for an other distr by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    I was listening to an interview with some 911 operators on NPR. They said they get a hell of a lot of calls along the lines of "I lost my TV Guide. What time does Seinfeld come on?"

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  157. Re:Fine? by renehollan · · Score: 1
    He/she can just go ahead and recklessly operate interfering equipment even if it causes deaths!

    Yes.

    The manufacturer warrants the product and thus should be responsible for those deaths.

    The manufacturer should either not provide a blanket warranty or enter into an agreement so the owner does not operate the equipment until it is replaced.

    --
    You could've hired me.
  158. Kind of signal that should be sent from Everquest by mekanizer · · Score: 1

    No more everquest suicide, their screens will save them. :p

  159. Re:Why? I can trigger the alarm for an other distr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking tool!
    The word is 'lose', not 'loose'.
    Such ignorance in a native speaker is
    inexcusable and must stopped.

  160. Thanks! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Cheers!


    -FL