Slashdot Mirror
The Universal Off Button
jcr13 writes "Wired news is running a story about TV-B-Gone, a new weapon in the fight against the pervasiveness of television in our society. With this device, which takes the form of a keychain fob with a single button, you can turn off virtually any TV set. How does it work? By rolling through all known IR power-off codes, one by one, trying codes from the most popular brands first. Personally, I am terribly annoyed by TVs in restaurants and airports: they grab my attention over and over, no matter how hard I try to ignore them, and they distract me from the conversations that I should be having with my human companions. Unfortunately, the TV-B-Gone website seems to have already been swamped by the Wired coverage, so we cannot order these just yet. In the mean time, those of you with DIY proclivities may want to think about wiring one of these up yourself using a PIC chip or other micro-controller." An anonymous reader adds links to mentions at CNET, TV station KESQ and Ananova.
But by earlier Slashdot coverage this week. Repost.
are pacemakers really powered off by infra-red remote controls???
Don't think many pacemakers are IR based.
If you like being able to turn off any TV you'd like, you'll like TV Turn-off Week. It's going to be held from April 25-May 1, 2005. Personally, the Internet's replaced TV for me; even though there is a TV here I don't really watch it now.
US businesses that currently accept chip and PIN/signature
Uh, excuse me... who the hell do you think you are that you can walk into someone's place of business, and switch off a piece of property that isn't yours?
Bottom line: if you're unhappy with the noise levels of TV's where you frequent... ask them nicely to turn it down. You'd be surprised how far a simple 'please' goes these days. A fact that eludes far too many people these days.
And if that doesn't work: go somewhere else. No one's forcing you to visit their place of business. Talk with your money.
It sends a "power" signal. In essence, it is a universal on remote. I've never seen anything with a button that turns a tv off but not on (though I have [and own] a vcr that has an on-only button and a on-off button).
I hate grammar Nazi's.
A small portion of people cannot tune out background noise such as television, but the disruption caused by random outages will disturb the people who DO tune it out. The brain filters out patterns; when patterns change, we notice them. We don't notice the water dripping, but we do when it stops; some of us cannot fall asleep unless there's a stream of white noise such as a fan or waterfall outside. Then there's the issue that people might actually be watching the darned thing in the first place! If I owned a public place, the first time I realized someone was turning off my TVs, I'd just cover the sensors with tape, and make everyone watch whatever I feel like instead, causing more annoyance.
slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
Except for the fact that it's Illegal, I agree with ya. ;)
This is kinda pedantic, but for what it's worth, the article said it takes around a minute for it to transmit all the codes in it's little database, so it's unlikely you'll be able to get the totally desired timing effect to -really- piss everybody off. Also it seems like it'd be pretty hard to use this thing discretely if you have to point it at a TV for half a minute on average.
I wouldn't worry about it too much. This thing's about as easy to defeat as a copy-protected CD.
Just put electrical tape over the IR sensor. Problem solved. Carry on.
Yes, the article indicates that it is a power toggle, not specifically an 'off' button. The device is to be appreciated for the 'off' function rather than the 'on' side of it. If it was intended to be used for turning TVs on, you'd obviously want more buttons to do channels and volume. So even though it toggles, having only the one button it makes more sense that you'd just be using it for switching them off.
(Instructions: Hold the DTV button and TV power button together for 5 seconds, then enter 0999. To search the codes press the channel up button, wait 2 or 3 seconds, and repeat until the TV turns off.)
It's probably not as discreet as this thing, but it is something you could have been doing for quite a while now.
Your iPod or PDA. Slashdot had a story on it a while back here http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/04/07/27/1528218.s html?tid=176&tid=137&tid=159&tid=218.
Sorry, but the garage door has already been shut on this possibility.
Basically, a company called Chamberlain was suing another company called Skylink for building a "universal" door opener that operated with Chamberlain's products. Chamberlain cited the DMCA, but the case was thrown out on appeal.
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
The human visual system is very sensitive to movement. TV screens constantly flicker at 25Hz (or more these days), which triggers our movement sensitivity. It is constantly distracting because we've evolved to be distracted by movement, back in the days when movement might be something trying to kill us.
..errr... less discriminating consumer.
However, I don't have this problem: I don't go to the kind of restaurants or bars that have TV sets. A TV set is a good indicator that the restaurant or bar serves the
I've never seen anything with a button that turns a tv off but not on
Remote controls supplied with RCA and GE televisions and VCRs will often have a separate button for "on", which also selects the device for further button presses, and "off".
I remember when these first came out-- kids in my school were using them to turn on/off the televisions in the classroom at inopportune times.
:) It takes no skill, just point and shoot!
:)
I can only imagine what kind of trouble kids will get into with one of THESE in their hands
Here's one of those watches for your personal enjoyment
...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
My $500 Sony Wega has discrete codes...and it's definitely not high end. My wife's college $75 Daewoo TV had discrete codes, and it's definitely not high end. My satellite receiver has discrete codes...
Holy Moley! Do not make one of these! An 800W Magnetron into a splash-fed positive gain antenna? This may zap a stereo, but it'll harm people, too (especially the eyes). IF you do the math, 800W of 2450MHz RF into a 15 dBi antenna is 'safe' 47 feet from the antenna (in an uncontrolled environment). Even at 0 dBi (like in a sidelobe) the RF exposure exceeds the uncontrolled limit over 8 feet away.
I would think a strong RF field in the audio range (somewhere around 8-15 KHz) would cause the stereo to self-destruct without harming people. An equivalent safe distance at 10KHz and a 0 dBi antenna requires a power level of 1.2 MW (!!!) Good luck getting 0 dBi of gain at 10 KHz.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Actually, a good portion of A/V devices have what's called "discrete" on and off codes. Although not on the stock remote, when I got a Phillips Pronto and wanted to set up Macros for my home theatre, it became quickly apparent that I would need to be able to send an "on only" code, otherwise it would turn off a device that was already on. Same with "off"- If I'm watching the TV using the TV tuner, and the DSS receiver isn't on, I don't want it to turn the DSS on when I hit my "All Off" macro.
Thankfully, it turns out that all my components bar one have discrete codes. It makes programming the remote for ease of use by non-geeks much easier. I just tell the wife and kid that if they hit "All Off" and the stereo is still on, hit it again.
The article is vague in this respect, but in the closing paragraph it seems to indicate that the remote uses "Power" codes, not discrete "Off" codes.
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
I think this should have been modded as +1 Evil
Oops, how did this get here?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Virtually all TVs (and other popular devices like VCRs, DVD players, etc.) have discrete on/off codes. The original remote sure doesn't have the corresponding buttons, but that does not prevent the device from responding to the code if it receives it. The only device that I own that doesn't have the capability to use discrete on/off is my Panasonic VCR.
I know some waitresses and bartenders and *NOT ONE* of them has ever complained about smoke in bars.
Here's one in my own city. Heather Cross, a waitress in Ottawa for 40 years, never smoked a day in her life, was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer due to second-hand smoke from her workplace.
It's 2004, for crying out loud! We know tobacco smoke causes cancer. Why are we still making excuses for it? Why are we still permitting it to be forced on people just trying to do their job? In 1000 years, society will look back on this point in history and ask, "What in the hell were they thinking? They knew it was bad, why did everyone still tolerate it? Why did people still smoke?"
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
[Aside: I ma not a car kid, and don't advocate "thump thump thump" but...]
A rear spoiler on a front wheel drive car still makes sense, it possibley makse *more* sense. It *is* classically (mis)understood that the down-force provided by a spoiler is to improve traction of "the drive wheels" to improve power delivery and prevent high-speed power skids.
In point of fact, the typical modern car, is effectively a marginal lifting body (look it up, the air passing over the car goes further/faster and so the air passing under the car generates some lift). The name "spoiler" come from the fact that the airfoil "spoils" that lift.
In all front-engine cars the front doesn't need a spoiler because the engine weight is sufficent to the task of maintainting contact. The back end is left to kite around.
In a front wheel drive car, that lift is still present, and even if those rear wheels are not doing anything to make the car go faster, they *are* important to keeping the car under control. If you don't beleive you need the back end to control your movements, I recommend having a rear tire seize-up on you some time. It can be _very_ enlightening... 8-)
In fact, in a front wheel drive car, there is so _little_ weight in the back that the tendency to "lose the back end" while cornering at speed is rather increased. A rear spoiler combats that lack of weight and improves the manuverability of the speeding car.
So don't laugh. The rear spoiler is actually slightly *more* important on a front wheel drive car.
With a rear-wheel drive car it helps you accelerate when you are already going fast. With a front wheel drive car, it keeps you from experiencing a catstrophic loss of control at high speed.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
Another alternate URL: http://cornfieldelectronics.com/
The plans on that site are obviously garbage. I agree it'd be really dumb to take apart a microwave oven, and point the Magnetron into a parabolic dish and spray stuff.
These things can be built to avoid frequencies that living tissue absorbs. Hence, they can be 'relatively harmless' to innocent bystanders. They are extremely efficient at knocking out electronics though.
Lots of places sell kits and plans. Not that I'd trust them, or build them, without fear of being shocked to death, beaten on by all the people who realize I have destroyed their property, and lighting whatever I plug it into on fire (impedence matching anyone?).
Such as http://www.plans-kits.com/plans/plans.html
There are some airports where there is no place to escape. The whole reason the TVs are there is because some marketing genius thought they had a "captive audience" and sold it to someone with more money than sense. Every single gate has two or three with the volume cranked so high that you can't hear actual airport announcements.
It could be my problem, but now there's a way to remove the root cause, I could care less. I have no fear that those who really want to watch TV will not be disturbed when I wander across the way to an unused gate and kill the TV there. Chances are that they won't notice. TV is designed intentionally to disturb and grab your attention, it's obnoxious by design. This little button will get rid of one or two and make my life and that of others much better.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
My TV has an off button which isn't a toggle. To turn it back on, you simply press a channel number.
Especially in street racing (which I don't do) any number of factors [porly crowned roads, inclined roads, surface irregularities, cross wind, moisture, botts-dots (the bumps installed in lane markers)] [and weight transfer for a down-shift can do as much to your composit vector as breaking] "threaten" traction. In a front wheel drive car there is nothing in the back end to mitigate any mistakes or environmental influences.
If someone is stupid enough to drive their car near the limits on a public street, we _ALL_ need any edge they can manufacture. It goes without saying that these people need driving lessons, elsewise they wouldn't think to drive so fast and irresponsible. That is just as true for the people who _don't_ think they will break traction on... (hint hint hint...)
I think *most* street mods are pretty dumb. Putting a spoiler on the back of a front-wheel drive car is far-and-away more useful than, say, putting spoked-rim low-profile tires on a Land Rover (there is one of these around here, looks like the thing is on bycicle tires... surreal... 8-); or "lowering" a four-by so that it will high-center on a speed bump or bottom-out on a driveway.
The physics are simple, down-force equals stability. Flat undercarrage plus sloped roof equals lift. Spoiler useful at speed. Any car. Any design. Any powerplant. Heck, one of the reasons to "lift" the back end (the "it's faster because it's always going down hill" look) is to increase down-force and disrupt lift by creating a small low-pressure area under the chassis.
This is physics, not technique. You know, "wind-tunnel 101". Good technique mitigates physics by understanding the limits and probable outcomes. But hedging the physics when possible isn't contraindicated by improved technique.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press