Slashdot Mirror


Air Force Jams Garage Doors

SonicSpike points us to a Chicago Tribune article reporting that in Colorado the Air Force is jamming garage doors. In a joint U.S.-Canadian operation, they were testing communications on a frequency that would be used by first responders in the event of a threat to homeland security. From the article: "But the frequency also controls an estimated 50 million garage door openers, and hundreds of residents in the area found that theirs had suddenly stopped working... Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began using nearly three years ago at some bases. Signals have previously interfered with garage doors near bases in Florida, Maryland, and Pennsylvania."

335 comments

  1. Technically??? by falcon5768 · · Score: 0, Troll
    Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began using nearly three years ago at some bases.
    what about all those people who have probably owned garage door openers for much longer than 3 years ago. Oh thats right they are just citizens and have as much right as dogs in the eyes of the government.
    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    1. Re:Technically??? by jonnyelectronic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What that sentence could be trying to say is that the Air Force has the rights to the frequency, but only started using it three years ago.

    2. Re:Technically??? by nurb432 · · Score: 1, Informative

      The government retains 'right of way' access for most everything when its 'for the public good'.

      Be glad they are not taking the entire house to put in a super highway and its just your door that isnt working.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Why do you hate America?

    4. Re:Technically??? by garcia · · Score: 1

      While I agree w/your post, "technically" is the correct word here. We need a +1 Unfortunate mod.

    5. Re:Technically??? by Feyr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      the problem here is that those garage doors openers are unlicensed transmitters using a band they wouldn't be allowed to use if it wasn't for the "low power" exceptions. if they'd put their transmitters on a public band or gotten a license, they wouldn't have this problem

    6. Re:Technically??? by Hunter-Killer · · Score: 5, Informative

      TFA was short on details. This article http://www.krdotv.com/story.cfm?nav=news&storyID=1 613 says disruptions were affecting devices in the 390 MHz spectrum range.

      According to the US Department of Commerce, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf, the 335.4 to 399.9 MHz band is licensed exclusively to the government.

      Sorry for the lack of HTML skills.

    7. Re:Technically??? by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful
      the problem here is that those garage doors openers are unlicensed transmitters using a band they wouldn't be allowed to use if it wasn't for the "low power" exceptions.
      A similar example would be the iPod to FM Radio adapters & similar products.

      The FCC will give you a free pass if you're below some maximum power, which brings us to this tidbit from TFA: Holly Strack, who lives near the entrance to the facility, said friends in the neighborhood all had the same problem. "I never thought my garage door was a threat to national security," she said.

      Don't worry hon, your garage door opener isn't a threat, unless you're somehow violating FCC regulations.

      And this genius: David McGuire, whose Overhead Door Co. received more than 400 calls for help, said ... "The military has the right to use that frequency. It is a sign of the times," he said.

      If by "sign of the times" you mean "the military is getting around to testing systems that should have been up and running years ago".

      Why does this article try to inject so much fear into what is a relatively straight forward issue?
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:Technically??? by LifesABeach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just a casual thought; But could someone on the Air Force staff flip the their garage door switch every time UCLA scores against USC so that the garage doors open up in a nation wide "wave"?

    9. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Its not that at all. When they purchased those devices, they were licences under Part 15. Which states, A. the device must accept harmfull interferance B. the device cannot emmit any harmfull interference. They are a secondary user of those frequencies, and funciton is not garanteed on those frequencies for those devices by the FCC. Its like when my ham radio equipment interfears with the naibors baby monitor. The first problem is i'm not even using the frequency it uses, just one close to it, and the poor design and construction of the device comes into play. Second of all, I fall under part 97 rules, which allows me to generate some levels of interference, so long as it is 120db down from my primart transmitting frequency, i'm legal.

      This has nothing to do with rights, there never were any rights to those frequencies for the public, they were never anything more than a secondary user.

    10. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, gentlemen, we know who here has a garage door opener. :-)

      LOL.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    11. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Normally, I like to assume good faith when commenting. I'll make an exception in your case. Shut the fuck up. Please. Owning a device which uses a certain frequency doesn't necessarily allow you the right to use that frequency.

    12. Re:Technically??? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I certainly wouldn't worry about it. I don't even know what that crank AC was reponding to.

    13. Re:Technically??? by DerekLyons · · Score: 5, Informative
      Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began using nearly three years ago at some bases.

      what about all those people who have probably owned garage door openers for much longer than 3 years ago. Oh thats right they are just citizens and have as much right as dogs in the eyes of the government.

      Ah yes - the immediate assumption that the citizens are in the right, and the goverment in the wrong. Only in this case, that assumption is wrong.
       
      Garage door openers are what are called class 'B' devices - devices that transmit using extremely low power and are unlicensed and unregulated. Because they are extremely low power, they can pretty much use any band they want. In exchange for this freedom from licensing and regulation however, theres a catch - owners of class 'B' devices may not interfere with legal and/or licensed users of the band in question, and must accept any interference from said legal and/or licensed users of the band in question. This is usually spelled out in tiny, tiny print in the users manual.
       
      That being said - you'd be surprised how much class 'B' (sometimes called 'part 15') devices you have in your house. I bet if you check the manuals for your computer (or motherboard), your stereo, your TV, any radios, etc... I bet they all carry the appropriate disclaimers.
    14. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With most (new)door openers you can't do it manually if they're locked(some do have a key operated bypass). What you can do is cut a small hole in the top panel(most doors are paper thin) and pull the manual release cord. Then you're free to liberate any cars in the garage. Robbing people has never been easier :)

    15. Re:Technically??? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

      Am I the only one that thought that trapping your hand inside the top of the door (the first to be eaten into the ceiling) and pulling the MANUAL RELEASE LEVER is an extraordinarily bad idea?

    16. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Well given that essentially 99% of all cars in my neighbourhood are parked on the street (even though they have driveways the lazy bastards) I'd say this isn't really a problem.

      If you're the type that owns a $50,000 sports car of some sort, you can afford to put a KEY LOCK on your garage door and MOVE ON with your life.

      If you're driving the typical rusted out shitbox car that is hardly street legal (e.g. most of Ottawa) then you need not worry about it.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    17. Re:Technically??? by bumptehjambox · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why does this article try to inject so much fear into what is a relatively straight forward issue?

      For real. And judging by the 'omg teh gov't is teh evilz' posts here, it is working quite well.

      I thought it was funny, but apparently it is a political issue to some, obviously the American Government are evil fascists for this human rights outrage.
      For a few hours on one random day I was faced with the decision of whether to shut my garage door manually or wait until the test was completed...that's it, the terrorists have won.

    18. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      How about looking at from a different perspective. Quit being so damned cheap!!!

      Garage door openers, RFID tags, baby monitors, cordless phones, wireless microphones, wireless routers and many other devces are unlicensed devices. They are permitted to operate only when they do not cause interferance to licensed service. They are not garanteed to operate if a licensed service is operating near by.

      Radio spectrum is scarce. The Air Force has had a license to those frequencies since 1934. RTFM that came with the garage door opener. The manufacturer clearly states a garage door opener is an unlicensed device and as such a licensed operator can have the unlicensed device shut down if interference occurs. Further the FCC can fine an operator of an unlicensed device $10,000 if he continue to use it to cause interfere with a licensed service. On the other hand, a licensed user has no responsibility to protect the unlicensed user from interferance.

      If you want garanteed operation, purchase a device with a licensed central dispatch, obtain a license to use that frequency and pay the monthly dispatch fee for the licensed service. Otherwise, don't complain when you get something (like the use of radio spectrum) for free. Especially when someone else owns the rights to that spectrum.

    19. Re:Technically??? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Those garage door openers are operating under Part 15 of the FCC regulations, which permit you to use a frequency normally assigned to someone else as long as you don't interfere with the assigned user. In this case, "someone else" is the Air Force.

      If you have one of those gadgets, read the little booklet that came with it and you'll see this spelled out. If you interfere with the Air Force, you'll have to turn your unit off; if they interfere with you, you get sympathy. That's the deal you signed up for when you bought a low-priced piece of hardware.

      Oh, by the way, your wireless router operates under Part 15 too.

      rj

    20. Re:Technically??? by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to your 86 year old grandma in winter (my grandma still drives, and safely I might add). She may still drive, but she shouldn't open the door even if she might physically be able to. What about handicapped folks?

      The solution here is that garage doors need to be in a licensed space (and have the government avoid that frequency for this sort of thing) and using some sort of spread spectrum frequency hopping deal that hopefully will find a working window of space.

      There's just too many garage door openers out there for this to happen overnight, but make all new openers have it and eventually you'll get there (10 years or so?).

    21. Re:Technically??? by Riddlefox · · Score: 3, Funny

      I wholeheartedly agree with you.

      BTW, I'm part of the squadron that helped get this system online for the testing.. At our unit's holiday party, they presented the squadron commander a garage door opener as his door prize.

    22. Re:Technically??? by Hunter-Killer · · Score: 1

      FCC Part 15 Class B covers:

      -residential use
      -digital devices (computing devices/"unintentional radiators")

      A wireless door opener is designed for wireless transmission, and is not a computer, therefore it does not enjoy Class B protections.

    23. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Would it be so hard to have a button and a fucking wire? It's not like the radio signals are encrypted or anything, so the only thing it does is make your life a bit simpler... big deal.

      Better yet, put a keypad and a simple 3-4 digit code. That'll keep the stupid neighbourhood kids out AND let you open the door without all the strain of "sliding a door open" [which unless you're ADA you should be able to do if you're a driver...]

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    24. Re:Technically??? by stunt_penguin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe they were just trying to lure foreign airforces to use it in their hangars, so if^H^H when the U.S invades somewhere all the pilots are stuck behind two very, very large doors.

      A cunning plan indeed

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    25. Re:Technically??? by wasted · · Score: 1
      This has nothing to do with rights, there never were any rights to those frequencies for the public, they were never anything more than a secondary user.


      Isn't that a bit backwards? I mean, it's the government serving the people, eh? The people as a whole own the airwaves and we merely allow the government to regulate them for our own good. If the method and allocations they choose are disagreeable to us we have the right to petition them to change it.


      The government was allocated that frequency band, and the USAF is using it to perform their mission, thus serving the needs of the people. Garage door opener manufacturers used part of that frequency band, even though it wasn't allocated to them. If the garage doors have problems with the USAF using part of a frequency that was allocated to the government, it is on the garage door opener manufacturers/owners to change their frequency.

      This seems real similar to the arguments by folks who buy homes near airports and then complain about the jet noise.
    26. Re:Technically??? by myz24 · · Score: 1

      I believe many of those keypads are still wireless so that doesn't necessarily work either.

    27. Re:Technically??? by galenoftheshadows · · Score: 1

      "-residential use"

      Garage door openers are (primarily) residential devices. As well, it's not the "protection" that is the concern here. They are class B devices, and are therefore subject to interference from the primary licensed users of the frequencies they use.

      That aside, a "wireless door opener" is designed for wireless transmission, yes. This does not however preclude it from classifying as a digital device. Computing devices and "unintentional radiators" are merely examples of some class B devices.

      Just because a blender isn't built specifically to shred your hand, doesn't mean it can't.

    28. Re:Technically??? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      Further the FCC can fine an operator of an unlicensed device $10,000 if he continue to use it to cause interfere with a licensed service.
      ---
      and in the case of the Air Force they can just decide to "park" a Sidewinder in your garage (thus removing the problem)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    29. Re:Technically??? by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is what you meant, but I've actually seen a lot of garage doors with those keypads (and most garage doors have a wire installed in the garage rather than a wireless remote)- I suppose if you were expecting these jammings regularly, a keypad wouldn't be a bad investment unless you lived somewhere cold (majority of the US in winter?). I still wouldn't want my grandma getting out in 20 degree weather- but fortunately she lives in sunny california in an area where it seldom gets that cold. Anyway, I guess my point is, people were caught unprepared for the jamming and probably will be again next time. Someone should be suggesting the keypads to the affected folks.

    30. Re:Technically??? by Hunter-Killer · · Score: 2, Informative

      That aside, a "wireless door opener" is designed for wireless transmission, yes. This does not however preclude it from classifying as a digital device. Computing devices and "unintentional radiators" are merely examples of some class B devices. Not quite. The FCC was nice enough to host the Part 15 regulations:

      (i) Class B digital device. A digital device that is marketed for use in a residential environment
      notwithstanding use in commercial, business and industrial environments. What is a digital device?

      (k) Digital device. (Previously defined as a computing device). An unintentional radiator
      (device or system) that generates and uses timing signals or pulses at a rate in excess of 9,000 pulses
      (cycles) per second and uses digital techniques; inclusive of telephone equipment that uses digital
      techniques or any device or system that generates and uses radio frequency energy for the purpose of
      performing data processing functions, such as electronic computations, operations, transformations,
      recording, filing, sorting, storage, retrieval, or transfer. A radio frequency device that is specifically
      subject to an emanation requirement in any other FCC Rule Part or an intentional radiator subject to
      Subpart C of this Part that contains a digital device is not subject to the standards for digital devices,
      provided the digital device is used only to enable operation of the radio frequency device and the digital
      device does not control additional functions or capabilities. Note: Computer terminals and peripherals
      that are intended to be connected to a computer are digital devices. Since a digital device is clearly defined as an "unintentional radiator", wireless door openers are not considered Class B devices.

      If anyone is interested, the Part 15 regulations can be found here: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part15/part15-8- 14-06.pdf
    31. Re:Technically??? by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      Yes, and let's hope they only use it for good... like you described.

    32. Re:Technically??? by Formica · · Score: 1

      The small transmitter in your car isn't an "unintentinal radiator", but the receiver in the garage is, and that's where the inteference is happening.

    33. Re:Technically??? by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      He was responding to a well known troll, obviously.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    34. Re:Technically??? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      FCC Part 15 Class B covers:
      -residential use
      -digital devices (computing devices/"unintentional radiators")
       
      A wireless door opener is designed for wireless transmission, and is not a computer, therefore it does not enjoy Class B protections.

      Here's a clue for you: garage door openers are for residential use and class 'B' protection is not limited to digital devices. In fact, the FCC themselves cite part 15 in this press release about garage door interference.
    35. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The manual release doesn't move the door up(well it might move it up an inch).

    36. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Park in the driveway?

      If you're so fragile that 20F weather is "deadly" then you shouldn't be driving. What if your car dies in the middle of a country road? You're fucked.

      Hint: put a fucking coat on.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    37. Re:Technically??? by smarkham01 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Correct, these are Part 15 devices, wrong on Class B. Class B devices are digital devices that make use of a signal of 9khz (or is that 90khz) that are NOT suppose to radiate RF.

    38. Re:Technically??? by bcat24 · · Score: 1

      Well, I've needed my garage cleaned for a while anyway....

    39. Re:Technically??? by galenoftheshadows · · Score: 1

      "Since a digital device is clearly defined as an "unintentional radiator", wireless door openers are not considered Class B devices."

      Again, you're missing the point. Simply because the device may be an intentional radiator, doesn't preclude it from falling under a Class B device. Class A devices are devices designed and built for commercial or industrial purposes, class B however is no different from class A, except that class B must be "damped wave" to avoid interference with your neighbor's TV. If you read the paperwork that comes with a wireless adapter, there is quite often a section that references section 15, subpart B.

      That being said, I would assume that a wireless card in a laptop classifies as an intentional radiator. How is it that a wireless card, an intentional radiator by it's very nature, is classified by the FCC as a class B device, yet a similarly operating device is not?

      I'd suggest you take a look at the back of your garage door remote, unless of course you've been living under a rock for a while. Mine says, plain as day, "FCC Section 15 Compliant, Class B" If that's not enough logic for you, I don't know what is.

    40. Re:Technically??? by Hunter-Killer · · Score: 1

      I believe the receiver would be considered part of a system, since a receiver is useless without a transmitter, and is usually sold as part of a kit. Also, there is also the requirement of being a "digital device". It is an electrical device (PCB based), but it would be difficult to argue that the equipment is designed for "the purpose of
      performing data processing functions".

      In normal operation, the receiver is wired to a motor that opens a door; that would make the door-side equipment an "incidental radiator", which isn't covered under Class B.

    41. Re:Technically??? by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 4, Interesting

      However, the spectrum is licensed by the FCC as part of the public airwaves. A powerful case could be made that the government should give that spectrum up to garage door owners, because they get more public use out of it.

      After all, the government really doesn't need it, and garage doors are already using it.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    42. Re:Technically??? by Hunter-Killer · · Score: 1

      Class B is a only one subset of Part 15. Check the press release you linked; you won't find Class B mentioned.

    43. Re:Technically??? by Firehed · · Score: 1
      Oh, by the way, your wireless router operates under Part 15 too.

      This is where the baseless FUD comment about a censorship conspiracy theory goes, right?
      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    44. Re:Technically??? by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Am I the only one that thought that trapping your hand inside the top of the door (the first to be eaten into the ceiling) and pulling the MANUAL RELEASE LEVER is an extraordinarily bad idea?

      Well, since gravity pulls things DOWN, not UP... Yes.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    45. Re:Technically??? by Formica · · Score: 1

      Although they would be tested as a system, the rules for each piece would still be different. For example, in my Wayne-Dalton system, the remote transmitter has its own FCC ID: KJ8HHT-3720. You can see from the block diagram on the FCC site that it only includes the transmitter, not the receiver. It would be difficult to argue that the receiver isn't a digital device - anything with pulses over 9000 per second, and "using digital techniques" qualifies - how do you think it decodes the transmitter key codes? Just because it has a motor drive doesn't mean it's not a digital system.

    46. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      yes, yes, your anguish sustains me.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    47. Re:Technically??? by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1

      I think a certain Mr. Crankypants just volunteered to be chauffeur for a certain fucking demographic.

    48. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Bah, I'm an equal player hater.

      I may be a relatively new driver, but the number of driving violations I witness on my drive (of 12 mins) to work could keep any small town well provided for in ticket revenue.

      Old people are particularly bad though as they get into that rut of "I've been driving for 113 years, it's my right!" and then proceed to break every rule there is out there. Younger people are not really any better, but at least they're less entitled.

      And my biggest pass time is driving the speed limit in the right-hand lane. The amount of people that infuriates is amazing. Especially since they proceed to then cut me off. The reason I drive the limit [other than it's the law] is that I'm a new driver and I need more space to drive safely. Them cutting me off doesn't solve the problem :-)

      Anyways, point is if you're too fragile to open a door (hint: springs) or survive -6C weather, chances are you shouldn't be driving a car. You need more muscle than that and frankly if you get stranded you're just wolf food. Sorry if that offends people but it's also common sense. I imagine if I went blind I probably wouldn't feel entitled to drive just because "I had a license at one point." Grow old gracefully and with dignity, not behind the wheel of a car doing 30 under the limit swirving in and out of lanes.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    49. Re:Technically??? by HazE_nMe · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can get a logic board for most newer Chamberlain openers that works on the 420MHz frequency. When I was working there, we had the ability to send one out for free at our discretion if a customer was having interference issues. I live near Davis Monthan AFB, and phantom door operation is a common thing if you live near the base when using the older 390MHz boards. (insurance claim anyone?)

      I don't have any problems with my 420MHz board, in fact I get a better range with my remotes on 420MHz. If you are having problems with an opener made by Chamberlain (LiftMaster, Craftsman, etc) give them a call at (800) 528-5880 and explain the problems you are having and mention that you live near an Air Force Base, and they will likely send out a replacement board free of cost.

      If you do have to pay, it is ~$60USD for a new logic board. They are very easy to replace.

    50. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wire up your transmitter to a big antenna, and keep boosting the output power, until the garage door opens :)

    51. Re:Technically??? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It seems like possibly a one-time event to me. How do you open the garage door when the power goes out?

    52. Re:Technically??? by n0vh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can you say "Part 15 device"? I knew you could.

    53. Re:Technically??? by Nethead · · Score: 1

      "..so long as it is 120db down from my primart transmitting frequency, i'm legal."

      But as a good ham, if notified of RFI you would stop transmitting and look at getting a notch filter. Now you've got me trying to figure out what combo of ham freqs or harmonics would cause interference at the gov 300MHz band.

      If you are hamsexy then you would be monitoring that channel anyway ;)

      73 de W7COM

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    54. Re:Technically??? by Sunburnt · · Score: 1

      "This is where the baseless FUD comment about a censorship conspiracy theory goes, right?"

      Yeah, right, like anyone would believe the government would suddenly ja

      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
    55. Re:Technically??? by brunson · · Score: 1

      I refuse to open my garage door manually! I WON'T DO IT, YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!!!

      I will sit in my car and scream profanities at my house and the air force while pushing the button on my opener over and over and making that odd throwing motion with the transmitter like it's going to add enough energy to the radio waves to make them work better (you've done it too, you know you have).

      Wait, who can I sue? /me goes to find a shyst^H^H^H^H^Hlawer.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      Jesus loves you, I think you suck
    56. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had to spend $60USD to replace something because of the government, you'd bet your ass I'd send the bill to the government or just not pay $60 of the taxes I owe ;).

    57. Re:Technically??? by Da_Weasel · · Score: 1

      Based on the information that has been provided it sounds like you should be sending your bill to the company that manufactured your garage door opener.

      --
      If you must!
    58. Re:Technically??? by Technician · · Score: 1

      That being said - you'd be surprised how much class 'B' (sometimes called 'part 15') devices you have in your house. I bet if you check the manuals for your computer (or motherboard), your stereo, your TV, any radios, etc... I bet they all carry the appropriate disclaimers.


      The biggie that most people haven't noticed is many wireless alarm systems use these frequencies for their sensors. It's possible you may not record the motion sensor or smoke sensor during an Air Force communication. Optex runs on 310 Mhz. Fox wireless is 315 Mhz. Ademco is 315 Mhz.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    59. Re:Technically??? by bogjobber · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Some people will flip out if they get behind someone who is driving within the speed limit. I don't understand why people think it's acceptable to pressure me to break the law. This greatly offends me.

      I, unfortunately, am sometimes that guy. The only times I do that, however, is when people are driving slow in a left-hand lane and there is plenty of room to get over. Although in that situation they may technically be obeying the law, what they are doing is creating a more dangerous situation by forcing people going above the speed limit to make a right-hand pass and generally pissing everybody off. It is very disruptive when someone thinks, "I am doing the speed limit, so it doesn't matter where on the road I'm at."

      I do try and control my frustration and am generally not an asshole when driving, but there are definitely situations where people driving the speed limit are acting discourteous by ignoring those that want to get by. That's probably a small amount compared to the asshole drivers that just want to drive as fast as possible, though. I agree that riding behind someone trying to get them to go faster is extremely rude and dangerous, just wanted to add my 2 cents.

    60. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I believe garage door openers send a code on that frequency. The Air Force would have to break the code for each door it would want to open. Funny idea though!

    61. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or until the USAF triangulates your antenna and shows up to ask why you keep sending the code 11110101 to their control tower, with a louder gain every week...

    62. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh no! so some fat asses have to walk inside before parking their car! the horror!

    63. Re:Technically??? by c_forq · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, but only on expressways. I HATE when I have to make a pass on the right side on expressways. On normal highways I understand people may have a left hand turn coming up, but that is not an issue on any expressway I drive on. That is about the only thing that makes me mad when I drive.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    64. Re:Technically??? by Joebert · · Score: 0
      If you're driving the typical rusted out shitbox car that is hardly street legal (e.g. most of Ottawa) then you need not worry about it.

      Unless that is, you're also the type that would Jerry-rig a garage door opener to work as a keyless entry on that rusted out shitbox.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    65. Re:Technically??? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      If I decide my garage door opener uses a frequency somewhere in the middle of the FM band, should this prevent the FCC from allocating that space to any radio station?

      The garage door openers are at fault for using a military frequency. The fact that they got there first doesn't give them the right to use it. They could have used the 2.4GHz band with no problems from anything.

    66. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Technically... you shouldn't *drive* in the left-lane no matter what speed you're doing. It's for passing and turning only.

      That said, the speed limit guys are not causing the "danger" it's the asshats who speed. It's like saying you're causing a drive-by hazard by standing on a sidewalk in L.A...

      Frankly, most people are just careless drivers who speed because they're not paying attention to what they're doing. If it truly were about saving a few mins they'd just leave a few mins earlier. Most people just "follow" traffic and don't look at their spedometer. Well shame on you. If the dude in front of me is doing 100 in an 80, good for him, I'll do 80 in the 80.

      The first week I was driving to work, I did open up a bit and did 100 on the way home (km/h not mi/h). Took basically the same length of time, got stopped at the same sets of lights, etc. I stick to 80 now because it's safer [and the law...]. Only thing I look at the rear view when I'm driving for is emergency vehicles. The rest of the population can make all the faces and gestures they want.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    67. Re:Technically??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      See that's one of those little things that piss me off.

      It's ILLEGAL to speed to pass a car. That is, if a dude is doing 95 in a 100, and you have to do 120 to pass him [to avoid say, a head on collision] you've actually broken the law. This is mostly because the law, at least in Ontario, makes no exception for speeding while passing [otherwise you'd be free to do 160km/h while "passing"].

      So the only time you should be passing cars is if they're driving too slow for the conditions (e.g. a moving violation), part of an accident/response, or are exiting the road.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    68. Re:Technically??? by Thalidomide+Pickpock · · Score: 2, Funny

      ... along with a complaint that their hangar doors are opening...

    69. Re:Technically??? by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      This is FUD. First the opener is a receiver. By changing the logic board (and frequency) then it will not work at all as the remotes are transmitting on the old 390 MHz freq. Second it is highly unlikely you get better range from 420 MHz. The lower the freq the better the range. There (execpt in this instance) is also less or no interference in the military band vs. the 420 band.

    70. Re:Technically??? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      With the door I had, the cord allowed you to open the door manually. Wouldn't have done me a lot of good, as there was only one door to the garage.

      However, there was a switch in the basement that shut the power off and you could open it then.

      So when the power was off my garage door was unlocked.

      Don't you love technology?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    71. Re:Technically??? by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't lock your garage to keep people from stealing your car, you lock it to keep them from stealing the lawn mower and other tools.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    72. Re:Technically??? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I "drive the lights", meaning 1-2 mph below the posted limit. If there's no traffic I don't have to stop at all, and save lots of gasoline.

      What really burns me up is the morons who speed past me to the red light, then when I reach it I have to stop for the green light because the dumbass is sitting there at the green light with his (or usually her) head up his ass.

      And they're usually driving an SUV. Why do the people with the most expensive and dangerous (to other people) vehicles drive worse than anybody on the road? I'd much rather see the silver hair barely peeking over the seat of a 1993 VW at half the limit than the 25 year old in the Escalade yakking on his/her phone weaving in and out of traffic at twice the limit.

      If you drive an SUV you're a menace. And why do you "people" think you deserve two parking spaces??? If you want two spaces, break your spine and get a handicapped sticker, asshole.

      Sorry for the outburst, I don't hate SUVs, just the way the rude and dangerous sociopaths who own them drive.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    73. Re:Technically??? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      he only times I do that, however, is when people are driving slow in a left-hand lane and there is plenty of room to get over. Although in that situation they may technically be obeying the law...

      Not in Illinois. You can get a ticket for not getting over and letting someone pass unless there's a cop that's pulled someone over (you have to get in th eleft lane when there's an emergency vehicle on the side of the road with its flashers on).

      What pisses me off about you is I'm driving down the highway at a legal speed (or legal enough not to get pulled over) with my cruise control, and you blast past me in the left lane. Then I get over to pass your grandma who's (legally) doing 55 instead of 65, and you're slamming on your brakes because you saw a cop and now you're matching granny's speed and I have to brake.

      You know, there's this thing called global warming. Your grandkids are going to have to deal. Why don't you care? Every time you touch your brake you waste gas and the CO2 it releases when you burn it.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    74. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where's the line after which you yell at people like a retarded gnome? Point is: if people buy a device to make their own life simpler, they should be allowed to use it or get compensated for not being allowed to use it.

    75. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically... the laws differ from region to region. Jackass.

    76. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe you misunderstand my comment.

    77. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      ... while the aircrafts are just half way through.

    78. Re:Technically??? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Or they should sit down and think about what a bad idea it was to buy a piece of equipment that doesn't come with a guarantee that its RF signal's frequency will not be legally used by anyone for powerful signals.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    79. Re:Technically??? by mrpaco18 · · Score: 1

      Someone should be suggesting the keypads to the affected folks. Except that those keypads typically use the same radio frequency as a remote garage door opener, and really are nothing more than glorified remote openers.

    80. Re:Technically??? by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      The ones I've seen were mounted in the doorjam- I always assumed they were through-hole wired?

    81. Re:Technically??? by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

      Trafic is about cooperation and collaboration. It's not your business if people is breaking the law, because you still have to give them way if you're in the left lane and they want to pass you. If by passing you, they are breaking the law, they have a problem with the authorities, not with you. Faster vehicles have the right for the left lane, that's the spirit of law. If you are not passing someone, stick to a lane more to your right and let the trafic flow.

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    82. Re:Technically??? by mrpaco18 · · Score: 1

      I had to install one on my garage a few summers ago. Some wired ones do exist but are much more expensive than your typical base model, which runs off of RF and you program to match your particular model. I used to think the same thing too, and that was the main reason I dreaded the project so much, but once I realized that most were RF based I breathed a huge sigh of relief.

    83. Re:Technically??? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1
      For people who obey the law and common sense, the right lane is generally the place to be, as most exits are accessible only from the right lane

      So are most entrances. The second-to-right lane is the place to be if you don't want to kill people in horrible merging accidents, or at the very least want to save yourself the trouble of worrying about them.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    84. Re:Technically??? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      And that gets you stuck behind a semi with no visibility and driving 10 below the limit for passenger vehicles.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    85. Re:Technically??? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Actually, this was used as a psychological warfare tactic against Iraq in both wars.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    86. Re:Technically??? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which, as I understand it* garage doors just send a small 8bit signal as the code to open or close. Couldn't this be trivially brute forced in a matter of seconds? We're talking 64 possible codes here.. And if you can brute force it, couldn't you also severely amp up the power with a high gain antenna and start causing serious havoc in some neighborhoods? Bonus points if rigged to a timer and hidden somewhere that can't be traced back to you.

      *: My understanding of this is based entirely on merely seeing the insides of a garage door opener once when I was about 14.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    87. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Now you've got me trying to figure out what combo of ham freqs or harmonics would cause interference at the gov 300MHz band."

      Except that I'm sure you realize we're secondary to the military.

      I believe amateur (ham) radio service is second to the military in nearly every frequency band assigned to us. On many of those bands, there is no tertiary, on others general license-free low-power service is a tertiary user. (If I recall correctly, most of the major "license free" ISM bands such as the 2.4 GHz band WLAN devices operate in have hams one step up the priority ladder. 2.4 is definately this way, I think so are 900 MHz and 5.8 GHz.)

      390 is military/license-free only, no hams in the middle on the priority ladder.

      You know this but many /.ers won't - Hams have priority over unlicensed users in quite a few bands, but unlike the military, tend to be courteous when it comes to causing interference. Usually when informed POLITELY or asked about it, many hams will help solve the problem (installing filters on susceptible devices, etc.) even though they are not required to.

    88. Re:Technically??? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      A powerful case could be made that the government should give that spectrum up to garage door owners, because they get more public use out of it.

      A powerful case could be made that if they don't they'll have fewer diabetes mellitus cases to treat on Medicare's dime in a couple decades.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    89. Re:Technically??? by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a turkey cooked by a high power radio transmitter? The Air Force is far more of a health risk!

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    90. Re:Technically??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a bit late to open the doors when the plane is half way through, isn't it?

    91. Re:Technically??? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a turkey cooked by a high power radio transmitter?

      Heh, no, though that might be the solution for getting a turducken cooked evenly through.

      I have heard about the pigeons on Telegraph Hill in Holmdel, NJ (near where I grew up) that got cooked by similar. Lore has it that inspired the microwave oven.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  2. Homeland Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's always important in an emergency to keep all doors closed.... Hope the emergency doesn't require evacuation.....

    1. Re:Homeland Security? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Evacuation doesn't matter if the Goa'uld or Ori invade us. The Alpha Site won't be able to hold all of humanity.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    2. Re:Homeland Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SG-1 would Never let it get that far.

  3. Maple Street? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Funny

    This happened to me on Maple Street. Caused quite a stir and a few people wound up shot in the action ... course they were commies so no harm done.

    1. Re:Maple Street? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rod Serling is proud.

  4. I'm okay... by jkj5301 · · Score: 4, Funny

    until I go out and find an F16 in the garage.

    1. Re:I'm okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to find an F16 in my garage; beats the hell out of the Cessna I currently fly! ;)

    2. Re:I'm okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The day I find an F-16 in the garage, is the day I start being OK... :-)

    3. Re:I'm okay... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      I hope they aren't gathering intel for an upcoming "war on SUV's".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    4. Re:I'm okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'd get a headache trying to figure out how to get my newly acquired F16 from the garage to a useful strip of hardened surface from which it could take off...

    5. Re:I'm okay... by TheGrinningFool · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hope they aren't gathering intel for an upcoming "war on SUV's". What are you talking about? I hope they are.
    6. Re:I'm okay... by Ucklak · · Score: 1
      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    7. Re:I'm okay... by zCyl · · Score: 1
      until I go out and find an F16 in the garage.

      Do you have any idea how much that would go for on ebay?
    8. Re:I'm okay... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      To be serious I don't belive in banning SUV's, I belive by pumping out GHG we are using up finite "environmental services". This problem and this one are intertwined, both need unprecedented international cooperation and long range planning, sadly mankind seem to be distracted by bombs and bullets.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    9. Re:I'm okay... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      It's not the greenhouse gasses, it's the way the assholes who "drive" them drive and park. Do they really think that because they're stupid enough to shell out 50-100k on a car they have a right to...

      Oh, now I get it. Key words would be "stupid" and "assholes". My bad.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    10. Re:I'm okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do they really think that because they're stupid enough to shell out 50-100k on a car they have a right to...

      I think we're heading towards a world of "conspicuous pollution". It seems people with money can afford to pollute a lot more than those without.

    11. Re:I'm okay... by TheGrinningFool · · Score: 1

      It's really nothing to do with GHG. It has to do with the number of people who -- to all appearances -- can't look past the end of their bumper when driving. It's bad enough when they do that in their cars; it's downright dangerous in their SUVs.

    12. Re:I'm okay... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "can't look past the end of their bumper when driving"

      I regularly can't see past my bumper, all I see is the spare tyre on the SUV in front of me.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    13. Re:I'm okay... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Actually, if we implement pollution taxes and require tradeable permits to generate greenhouse gases, the ability to pollute will be a luxury, instead of the mass-market item it is now. If people with money were the only ones who could pollute, the world would be a lot better.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    14. Re:I'm okay... by TheGrinningFool · · Score: 1

      "can't look past the end of their bumper when driving"

      I regularly can't see past my bumper, all I see is the spare tyre on the SUV in front of me. We're agreed on that count. However, I have found that not driving so close to them helps to a significant degree ;)
    15. Re:I'm okay... by Psyjack · · Score: 1

      So, I shouldn't be allowed to drive my SUV around? I can afford the gas, I can afford the taxes, I can afford the tires...and I keep it in proper working condition. A honda with a minimaly operating emissions control system polutes more than my Blazer any day. Is anyone aware that there is a federal requirement that makes auto manufacturers make their SUVs no more harmful for the environment than a car? The stories about SUV poluting the air are all started by the same people that fly those huge, nifty, massive polluting air liners all over the globe to tell people how bad their cars polute.

    16. Re:I'm okay... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1
      So, I shouldn't be allowed to drive my SUV around?

      I never said that. It was a digression, you illiterate prick.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    17. Re:I'm okay... by JCota · · Score: 1

      I think I'd have to agree the people who drive SUVs rarely know how to drive them or what they were originally designed to do... Rollover and play dead... just like the huge dinosaurs they were cloned from. my only hope is that they become extinct soon just like their predecessors.

  5. Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by Slithe · · Score: 1

    You can do many nifty things with a $10,000 screwdriver.

    --
    ---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
    1. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by ForestGrump · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nah, its not $10,000, just 250 for each garage door affected.

      David McGuire, whose Overhead Door Co. received more than 400 calls for help, said the Air Force may be able to slightly adjust the transmission frequency to solve the problem. If not, it will cost homeowners about $250 to have new units installed.

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    2. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I think the $10,000 referred to reports a while back that the Army was paying $10,000 for screwdrivers (and toilet seats, and...)

    3. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by topham · · Score: 1

      $250 for $5 in parts. Sounds pretty good for business.

    4. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that's not the USAF's, that's the Doctor's. Although, then again, who knows what we picked up from the Goa'uld? Besides Samantha Carter, I mean.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    5. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by mkiwi · · Score: 1
      David McGuire, whose Overhead Door Co. received more than 400 calls for help, said the Air Force may be able to slightly adjust the transmission frequency to solve the problem. If not, it will cost homeowners about $250 to have new units installed.

      How do I buy stock in Overhead Door Co.? That guy stands to make a lot of money.

    6. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by toddhisattva · · Score: 1

      Why should the AF pay?

      The consumers bought devices that work exactly the way they're supposed to. If the consumers don't know the limits, it's their own stupid damn faults.

      No way, no how, do these technological illiterates get one fracking dime of my tax money.

    7. Re:Maybe the A.F. should replace the door openers? by Bad_Feeling · · Score: 1

      Not far fetched. Where I work, we have these special green boxes that are used as memory modules. I took one apart one day and its just 1 gig CF card in a reader with a usb cable going out the back. It secured to the plastic casing using zip ties. Each one cost $1000. Thats not a bad deal. I have seen some Pentium 120's with 64MB ram etc in green cases, heavy as hell, $110K - $150K each depending on the configuration. For example, 128MB RAM with a 40gb (the high end version) hard drive was around $150,000. Pentium 500 systems, in a green army case, running solaris, with 21" LCD screens and the crappiest keyboard you will ever see in your life go for about $500,000 a pop. This is just the tip of the ice berg. Plus, the equipment is completely unreliable.

      --
      Disclaimer: On the other hand, I am kind of a psycho...
  6. Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So the test was a total success. Because it proved, in undeniable public, that in the event of an emergency, the first responders around essential Air Force bases would be getting jammed by people opening their garage doors.

    These tests are important. That's why I was stunned when I realized (3 years later) that on September 11, 2001, I didn't hear a single transmission of the Emergency Broadcast System. If ever there were an emergency during my lifetime that the public needed broadcasts to know what what was happening and what to do, it was multiple aerial bombings of NYC and the Pentagon. But there was nothing.

    Though we'd all been taught since childhood to be always at least a little bit subconsciously afraid, but trusting the government had a system to handle even the ultimate emergency: nuclear war. And endured countless nerve-rattling drills, usually interrupting the most otherwise "relaxing" TV and radio (PBS, mostly).

    I guess those weren't "tests" at all. They were the real thing: steady fear/trust propaganda. Never really expected to do anything in any kind of emergency, even survivable ones like 9/11/2001. Because they all delivered the desired result.

    So maybe these Air Force tests are really failures. Because instead of keeping people irrationally afraid, yet trusting the government, they've actually woken people up.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....this is absolutely the most disjointed thing I have ever heard. You sound like a cold war relic.

    2. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0

      "You sound like a cold war relic."

      You mean like a useless Emergency Broadcast System that never worked right, but we've been paying for (and believing in) for over a dozen years since we "won" the Cold War?

      Anonymous denial Coward, get underneath your desk and kick your ass goodbye.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Mission Accomplished by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Informative
      So the test was a total success. Because it proved, in undeniable public, that in the event of an emergency, the first responders around essential Air Force bases would be getting jammed by people opening their garage doors.

      Nope. Garage door openers are Class B (or Part 15) devices - which mean they are extremely low power. The first responders would only be jammed if someone pointed a garage door opener right at them from less than 30-40 feet away.
       
       
      These tests are important. That's why I was stunned when I realized (3 years later) that on September 11, 2001, I didn't hear a single transmission of the Emergency Broadcast System. If ever there were an emergency during my lifetime that the public needed broadcasts to know what what was happening and what to do, it was multiple aerial bombings of NYC and the Pentagon. But there was nothing.

      Unless you lived in NYC or DC - I'm hardly surpised you didn't hear EPS broadcasts. The EPS is for local use - and thus would not have been activated unless the attacks were local to you.
    4. Re:Mission Accomplished by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      You do have a point, but I really don't see what the EBS could have done on 9/11. What message could there have been? The message would have only been relevant if you were close enough to hear the collisions/explosions, and if you could hear them, were you going to run to the closest radio/TV? By the time the incident happened, isn't it too late to send a message anyway? There was no precedent for the events, they were the first hijackings of that type before, so no warning would have really been expected.

    5. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i thought it was profoundly illuminating and very well written

    6. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...we've been believing in the EBS? What planet do you live on?

    7. Re:Mission Accomplished by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Informative

      So the test was a total success. Because it proved, in undeniable public, that in the event of an emergency, the first responders around essential Air Force bases would be getting jammed by people opening their garage doors.

      Yeah, a system operating out of Cheyenne mountain with an antenna on the peak and a range of miles is going to be affected by a bunch of milliwatt transmitters with an effective range of about 100 feet. Time for you to go back to Radio Theory 101.

      These tests are important. That's why I was stunned when I realized (3 years later) that on September 11, 2001, I didn't hear a single transmission of the Emergency Broadcast System. If ever there were an emergency during my lifetime that the public needed broadcasts to know what what was happening and what to do, it was multiple aerial bombings of NYC and the Pentagon. But there was nothing.

      Though we'd all been taught since childhood to be always at least a little bit subconsciously afraid, but trusting the government had a system to handle even the ultimate emergency: nuclear war. And endured countless nerve-rattling drills, usually interrupting the most otherwise "relaxing" TV and radio (PBS, mostly).

      The Emergency Broadcast System was retired in 1994. The current system is teh Emergency Alert System. This name more accurately describes its purpose. It's not meant to be a news channel. On 9-11 we had plenty of those already. The purpose of the EBS is to inform people that they may need to take action, and take it quickly. Things like wildfires, flash floods, or tsunamis--- those are what you use the EBS for. Since the appropriate action in the aftermath of a plane hitting a building is to essentially stay calm, stay put, and let emergency crews do their job, the EBS was not needed. I've heard the EBS used for real locally. The message is usually terse, prerecorded, and informative only in a very limited way, briefly outlining the danger, its location, and what to do. You know, something along the lines of "Flash flood warning for the eastern county, stay out of the lower canyons area, highways A, B, and C are closed". This weird fantasy you have in your head where Walter Cronkite is supposed to come on the air over EBS and give us the low-down on what's up is laughable in the extreme.

      I guess those weren't "tests" at all. They were the real thing: steady fear/trust propaganda.

      Yeah, OK. I don't trust the government either, but I haven't let paranoia turn me into a freak about it. The EAS works fine. You just don't know what it's for. You've apparently formulated an expectation based not upon the stated purpose of the system, but upon armchair speculation after having the EAS/EBS tone interrupt your viewing of National Geographic Explorer a few too many times.

      Never really expected to do anything in any kind of emergency, even survivable ones like 9/11/2001. Because they all delivered the desired result.

      I'd still love to hear what you think the EAS should have broadcast on 9-11.

      So maybe these Air Force tests are really failures. Because instead of keeping people irrationally afraid, yet trusting the government, they've actually woken people up.

      Yeah.... sure. You know conspiracy nuts like you are all the same. You're all secretly (or not secretly!) obsessive/compulsive control freaks. You all believe there's some sort of sinister puppet master behind the scenes, twisting the government to their will. You can't bear to consider the real truth, that for the most part the bad things that happen are completely unpredictable and mostly unavoidable. Stupid things the government does or fails to do are not part of some grand plan by a criminal mastermind, but simply a byproduct of the sheer size of government. Its very size creates an incredible amount of inertia, and when it does manage to move, it's either too much or too little, and often in the wrong direction. In short nobody is in contr

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    8. Re:Mission Accomplished by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Uh... when I was growing up in Florida we heard the Emergency Alert System being used all the time, typically to warn us of severe thunderstorms, tornados, and such. I assure you that it isn't "fear propaganda," but actually something which is pretty useful.

    9. Re:Mission Accomplished by FunkeyMonk · · Score: 0

      While I don't really want to pull these comments off-topic, I will say how impressed I've been with the Amber Alert system here in Indiana. Highway billboards, tv channels, and radio stations all work together -- and have had several successes in recent years. But other than weather alerts and whitehouse rose garden press conferences, I've never seen any sort of real interruption of broadcasts for "important" messages.

    10. Re:Mission Accomplished by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      Garage doors can't jam the emergency frequencies. But, every fire department I've ever seen has a garage door. I don't think those doors are using some special government issue door opener. Nope, they went to Home Depot and bought a Genie, just like everybody else. The fire trucks are just going to have to crash through the doors in an emergency.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    11. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put down the crackpipe dude.. I've heard the EBS and EAS go off AT LEAST 50 times since the cold ware has been over. It plays the alert tone and is all like "there's a tornado, get your ass into a basement".

    12. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that only applies if they're trying to get back in... if they're inside, they'll push the hardwired button like everyone else :-)

    13. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Class B is irrelevant here. Class B regulates the maximum emissions an unintentional radiator can produce. An unintentional radiator is a device that produces incidental radio waves as a normal part of operation. A transmitter, like a garage door opener system, intentionally radiates a signal to control the operation of something.

    14. Re:Mission Accomplished by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      The fire trucks are just going to have to crash through the doors in an emergency.

      or (gasp!) someone will actually have to go and manually open the door!

      Oh, the humanity!

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    15. Re:Mission Accomplished by Dausha · · Score: 1

      "Unless you lived in NYC or DC - I'm hardly surpised you didn't hear EPS broadcasts. The EPS is for local use - and thus would not have been activated unless the attacks were local to you."

      I was in D.C. on 9/11. My apartment was within a couple miles of the Pentagon. I never heard EPS. I never heard the EBS (Emergency Broadcast System) either.

      --
      What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    16. Re:Mission Accomplished by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Now now, if by "manually" you mean like actually lift it, the situation isn't quite that dire yet. There's still probably the option of pushing a little button inside the fire hall.

      (Seriously, what did the GP think fire dept's did before wireless garage door openers were invented? Or for that matter when the power goes out? Do you think they have a backup generator running to open the doors?)

    17. Re:Mission Accomplished by sjs132 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ha... Actually, around here (Midwest Burbs, nowheresville...) when the power went out a few months ago from storms, I was surprised the number of cars that were just PARKED outside of the houses overnight in the neighborhood because the Automatic doors weren't working... I had to show the neighbor lady how to unlatch it from the chain ("yep, that red pull hickymabob thingydoodle...") and raised it by hand for her. She had never had to do that and didn't know how and her car was "STUCK" inside. Of course my other neighbor has a generator, so he's usually pretty good. Nice to have a TV arouind for severe storms warnings, etc... I think I'm the only one of the 3 that has GAS Stove, so I can still cook, just have to light things manually. Lots of fun. Make you realize how much you depend on those pesky electrons when the hum of the always-on computer disapears. (and you habitually turn lights on/off as you enter rooms with your flashlight even though it does absolutely no good... Always thought that was funny too... )

      --
      --- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
    18. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short nobody is in control.

      What a wonderful excuse you've concocted for George Bush's incompetence. A perfect excuse, really.

    19. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I am from NYC. They did not broadcast the EBS.

      Besides, when there are simultaneous attacks on NYC and DC, without anyone knowing when they will end, that's a "local" emergency everywhere in the country.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    20. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The city for a half-dozen miles around the WTC, including NJ and Brooklyn, were engulfed in a white cloud. The pair of fifth-mile tall buildings that dominated the skyline for 50 miles, burned for hours after being hit by a pair of jumbo jets.

      Something like 10-20 million people in the area were subjected to terror, the entire point of the attacks, and wild rumors, without the slightest hint that the authorities had anything under control. Even after the military jets were scrambled, and all planes were grounded.

      Of course everyone in the city - and around the country/world - jumped to their nearest TV to find out what had actually happened, and what might happen next, and what to do to help/survive. Where were you that day, that you don't remember that happening?

      That attack was most certainly the exact kind of scenario in which to broadcast the EBS. I might add that the nuclear attack scenario that was explicitly warned for generations was even more like the scenario you describe. So what would you say the point of the EBS could be?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    21. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The purpose of the 9/11/2001 attacks was to create terror. It worked. A broadcast over the EBS, or EAS, or whatever it's currently called, would have worked against the total terror. Instead, New Yorkers saw authority only in the form of firefighters racing downtown, and later tanks driving through the streets of Manhattan. An emergency alert, amid the familiar klaxon we were all trained to recognize as the voice of authority continuing through an emergency to protect and organize us, would have helped calm the fear.

      Regardless of whatever obscure technical mission statement might lie in some file cabinet somewhere, Americans expect that the broadcasts will kick in to tell us what to do, where to go, what's happening, or at least that the people whose job is emergencies are on the job. People like you who think the system will not kick in are in the extreme minority. The limited scope of the system combined with its much broader expected service is yet another obvious flaw in the system.

      What really bothers me about coincidence theorists like you insane denial propagandists is that you're anarchists. We pay over a million people over $3 TRILLION a year to "drive the bus". They're supposed to protect us on days like 9/11/2001, but they did not. That does not mean my expectations are too high, but that yours are too low. I hope you're satisfied.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    22. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      If you heard the EBS in NYC or DC on 9/11/2001 you need to keep away from the crack.

      But I'm not surprised that we in the Blue States subsidize your dangerous regions with free alert systems that fail us when we need them here.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    23. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Except when DC and NYC get planebombed.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    24. Re:Mission Accomplished by CHESTER+COPPERPOT · · Score: 1
      "Yeah.... sure. You know conspiracy nuts like you are all the same. You're all secretly (or not secretly!) obsessive/compulsive control freaks. You all believe there's some sort of sinister puppet master behind the scenes, yada yada yada"

      The truth lays in the middle ground between your argument and conspiracy argument. Conspiracy theorists are as much wacko absolutists as you guys who believe there is only total disorder in government.

      There are actors in government, business or any private endeavour, who have interests and use their influence to make sure events happen. Read the pulitizer winning book "The power broker" By Robert A. Caro for over a thousand pages of well documented research on examples of a individual who had control over governmental systems. Sometimes the actors influence works and the events pan out.

      Othertimes it doesn't work because of greater systemic issues and unforeseen events. Take international politics for example. The greatest single predictive analysis for international events has been the realist approach (the liberal and constructivist approaches have also been useful). It posits that actors will use force (usually military, to a lesser degree economic) to get what they want. This happens all the time in international affairs. Sometimes it works (bombing of Hiroshima), sometimes it doesn't (Current Iraq). Not only does this theory allow control over how affairs might pan out for the press and general public, it also gives governments an idea how it might turn out. So your idea that there is no control is as ludicrous as some sinister hand in control.

    25. Re:Mission Accomplished by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      I am from NYC. They did not broadcast the EBS.

      There was nothing to warn the populace at large about - and no actions you needed to take immediately.
       
      Besides, when there are simultaneous attacks on NYC and DC, without anyone knowing when they will end, that's a "local" emergency everywhere in the country.

      Within an hour or two, the FAA had all aircraft accounted for and the ongoing ground stop followed by the mass grounding - it was pretty clear the attacks were almost certainly over. Secondly, only in some paranoid fantasy did these attacks constitute some kind of 'emergency' across the entire country.
    26. Re:Mission Accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There was nothing to warn the populace at large about - and no actions you needed to take immediately.

      There definitely was after the buildings collapsed. That air was toxic, filled with asbestos, all over Manhattan. It wasn't really even safe to breathe when the EPA said it was safe to return, and reopen Wall Street. First responders were harder hit by that though, and there would better ways to equip them than with an EBS broadcast.

      Secondly, only in some paranoid fantasy did these attacks constitute some kind of 'emergency' across the entire country.

      Are you seriously telling me you weren't concerned with what was going to happen next? You weren't looking up in the sky for any more planes? Do you live in the boondocks or something? Every city was on alert, EBS or not.
    27. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Just the announcement that the government was dealing with the emergency would have helped keep calm and order. After watching Katrina so safely from your same TV, you probably noticed that it's far from a given that Bush or his keystone kops would even know that thousands of refugees would be trapped in a Superdome days after their city flooded. And comfortably watching Bush's 7 minutes pretending to read _My Pet Goat_ while planes trashed the WTC and Pentagon should tell you that in fact the government didn't really know what was happening. Though even a bogus, prerecorded "we're still in control, everything's going to be OK" message would have helped keep the huge NYC crowds more safely calm.

      An actual instructional message would have been "please walk northwards to Central Park", or just the standard "please return to your homes and offices". Instead, millions breathed toxic smoke. Which, as long as we're talking about Bush's criminal failure to protect Americans with info, I'll point out his EPA chief, Whitman (R-NJ), lied about the test results she announced the following day, saying there were no toxics exceeding unhealthy levels, though she had ample reports that people were being poisoned.

      It was far from clear the attacks were almost certainly over. The WTC had been attacked 8 years earlier with a truck bomb that failed. There was absolutely no reason to believe the planebombs wouldn't be followed by truck bombs.

      And in your insane denial fantasy, grounding all the planes around the country doesn't reflect a nationwide emergency. Have you noticed the past 5 years that the same government that didn't broadcast any instructions where the attacks were perpetrated has used the attacks to justify a nationwide emergency the past 5 years?

      Ohio. It must be pretty comfortable being out of range.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    28. Re:Mission Accomplished by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      The firehouse near me has a auto starting gas backup generator.

    29. Re:Mission Accomplished by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      So the test was a total success. Because it proved, in undeniable public, that in the event of an emergency, the first responders around essential Air Force bases would be getting jammed by people opening their garage doors.

      No, it proved that emergency responders won't be able to get to work to respond to the emergency because their cars are locked in the garages that won't open.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    30. Re:Mission Accomplished by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      The weather service can usually tell when a tornado is on its way. Nobody knew planebombers were on their way.

      Once the tornado flattens your house there's little use for the EAS to kick in. Same thing for 9-11; if they'd known WTC was going to go down they'd have evacuated it AND issued an EAS.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    31. Re:Mission Accomplished by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Move to Illinois (or Oklahoma!) and you'll change your mind. Two F-2 tornados flattened large chunks of Springfield March 12 this year, and the EAS worked great.

      There was another tornado warning 4 hours after the first 2 hit; false alarm (radar's not perfect) but the tornado sirens didn't work because the city had no power. The EAS did, however, work, and it worked well.

      The new sirens they're installing have battery backup.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    32. Re:Mission Accomplished by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I wrote an article a couple years ago called Useful Dead Technologies. One was the "gravity furnace", 1930s tech. I had one in an old house I rented. There is no blower, and the thermostat works from power the furnace generates itself. It needs no electricity and isn't hooked to the power grid.

      I was wishing I had one Friday after the ice storm took out Springfield's power. Thank God for my gas stove; an old one with the old fashioned pilot lights.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    33. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The emergency wasn't over just because the planes hit.

      Evacuating the WTC wasn't the only possible function for the EBS after the attacks had (apparently) subsided. It's not just the "Emergency Warning System".

      Just alerting the panicked people would have helped a lot.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    34. Re:Mission Accomplished by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      As I said - you live in some ignorant paranoid fantasy land utterly unconnected with reality.

    35. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that unreality of New York City. Not the reality of your TV set. How lonely you must be, the only sane one left.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    36. Re:Mission Accomplished by Forbman · · Score: 1

      sorry, I think that MOST people had either heard about it online or from people trickling into work who had been listening to it on the radio, or the TVs in the bagel shop. No need to restate the obvious after the fact.

      when have I heard EAS in effect? "a tornado warning is in effect for Lake Co. illinois from..." never after "two feet of ice have been dropped on portland, or. do not drive".

      get treatment for your NYC narcissism soon.

    37. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      OK, I'll come out to your godforsaken neck of the woods. Where are you exactly, so I can explain narcissism to you in person, since you're too much the coward to come here?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    38. Re:Mission Accomplished by kb0hae · · Score: 1

      Actually we will see and hear the following headline on CNN:

      " and hundreds of first responders were unable to respond to todays emergency because they couldn't get their vehicles out of their garages. It seems that the Air Force emergency transmissions were jamming there garage doors."

      Seems to me that either the air force or the garage door companies need to change frequencies.

    39. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Moderation -1
          100% Flamebait

      TrollMod calls my offer to explain reality to some hick "Flamebait", but apparently loves the hick's insistence that the 9/11/2001 planebombings were no big deal in NYC and DC.

      Why do they hate America?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    40. Re:Mission Accomplished by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      Why do they hate America?

      Project much? If you want to find an America-hater, I suggest you look in the mirror.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    41. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The mirror is you. Fascist America hater.

      But since you're asking to get kicked while you're down, I suggest you get over "November 7, 2006". You disgusting nerd traitor. Republican pedophile.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    42. Re:Mission Accomplished by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1

      Why do they hate America? I suspect we will both get modded down as trolling flamebaiters but here are my .0002 cents:

      First, many people hate the USA, not America. America is a continent. I am perfectly aware that people from the USA call their own country that, but if you are going to inquire about the rest of the world's opinions, this is the first indicative of the different points of view. Most of the rest of the people in America the continent dislike the fact that people from USA have appropriated the name. I don't say either of them are wrong, that's just the way it is.

      But that is just a minor nitpick. I personally know several people from the States, and they are quite nice people. Most individuals are if you take the time to know them. The problem is that people as a herd are a bunch of irrational and evil animals, and it just so happens that the evil animals from the USA have more power both economic and military to force their brand of irrationality upon the rest of us evil animals. Again in America, most people hate the USA because their tendency to intervene in other countries' domestic affairs, sometimes even deposing democratically elected officials and substituting them with dictators (Google is your friend).

      Of course the USA is no worse than any other country, really, like I said they just have more power to do things their way, and because they exercise that power they end up pissing off a lot of people that then take some small comfort and vindication seeing them suffer. Why? Again, because we are an irrational lot even if we are quite nice as individual persons.

      At the time of the attacks I was in a country where the main reaction was something like "serves them right!" because they were still resented at them. Only after I talked with them one on one or small groups of no more than three people they were willing to view the victims as mere human beings and not as 'Americans' (in your sense). Only then they agreed that what happened was sad and wrong, but even if it really is a big deal, there have been a lot worse man-made tragedies in the world. Many of them in Africa, for instance. I am now in a different country where the local government is one of Bush's closest allies, but the people I know dislike the USA almost as much as where I was before, albeit for different reasons.

      People may have been biologically "created equal" (by their parents, God, the cosmic rays) but their culture makes them grow apart and be different, see things in a different way, assign value differently to the same things. Otherwise perhaps we would be living in a society that resembled more that of an Anthill, uniform, with individuals indistinguishable from one another.

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
    43. Re:Mission Accomplished by bwy · · Score: 1

      I've heard an emergency broadcast once or twice recently when earthquakes hit one part of my state (just offshore from the Big Island of Hawaii.)

    44. Re:Mission Accomplished by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I too have traveled widely in the world (though I'm just getting started). I'm from New York, though I've lived in some of the most international places, like New Orleans, Northern California, and even outside the US, in Canada. I never get any anti-"American"-ism directed at me, because I'm a real person, not an instance of the country in which I was lucky to be born. And because the people I've met all seemed to have good expectations of NYC as someplace they'd like to have a friend, and someplace that's not quite "the USA".

      BTW, I've noticed that many still existing tribal peoples use their word for "the people" as the name for their own people, which is an even more self-absorbed perspective than Americans like me, yet I've never heard anyone begrudging their exclusive claim to be "the people". I suppose that these differential semantics reflect the asymmetric power relationships, like the difference many Black people hear depending on the color and status of a person calling them "nigger".

      I haven't compared the planebombings to any other. All I've said, in response to people saying it was a negligible event, not worth broadcasting to the public on the EBS, is that it was a terrible event, and a national emergency all day long (and for longer in less stark ways). It's not a competition between those planebombings and, say, a given day in a Nazi deathcamp, or a Soviet deathcamp, or a Maoist deathcamp, or a US deathcamp for Apaches/etc, or in Rwanda. Or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed by Americans in the past couple of decades, or Israelis or Palestinians killed by each other.

      None of those "inhuman" events are acceptable. And I have strong feelings about them all, which I'm ready to bring to anyone who would accept them. But I am an American (for want of a better word), among my other identities of North American, Westerner, Northerner, English speaker, my ethnic/gender/species identities. As an American, it is my personal and formal obligation to actively defend my country from abuse. From enemies both foreign and domestic. For my conscience, and for my own self interest in collective survival.

      Which is why I asked "Why do they hate America?" when trollMods and "hicks" try to suppress the importance of the attacks on my city, our city. I know why many people hate "America" around the world. I even have some idea why some Americans hate the America that NYC represents. But I still want to ask them why. Because I'm interested in hearing what they might say. I'm interested in making sure someone asks these people that question, when their fellow travelers have been asking that insinuating question without any cause, whenever they've heard Americans with a conscience either oppose or merely question the catastrophe in justice and freedom masquerading as patriotism the past 5 years.

      Margaret Mead traveled more widely in deeper terms than mere geography than probably anyone else I know of - a real "people person". She famously replied to the question "can a small group of determined people change the world?" with the inspiring truth: "they're the only ones who ever have". I am a determined person with no specific agenda except freeing minds of anyone I can without too much pain, depending on how close to me they might be. So I am enthusiastic about continuing to move through our world dealing with these people. They're often disappointing, but they're all we've got.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  7. aww hell no! by ILuvRamen · · Score: 2, Funny

    oh noooooooooo, now they'll have to get their fat asses out of their car and do the keypad instead! NOOOOO!!!! What is this, the middle ages?! Maybe some ppl will hire illegal immigrants to open their garages for them :P Then again, there's always the wireless, computer controller option :D Anyone got a driver for a USB 2.4 GHz garage door?

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    1. Re:aww hell no! by Stormwatch · · Score: 3, Funny
      Anyone got a driver for a USB 2.4 GHz garage door?
      Get the source code and compile it yourself!
    2. Re:aww hell no! by DoctorDeath · · Score: 1

      OLD news! I know its a slow news day, but stories about this have been around for years. Come on guys at least don't put it on the front page, please.

      --
      Sig temporarily out of service.
    3. Re:aww hell no! by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Most of those keypads are RF linked, so they'd be jammed as well MUHAHAHA.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    4. Re:aww hell no! by Toveling · · Score: 1

      Most of the keypads (at least, the ones I've seen) are powered by a nine-volt and use the wireless. So, you're out of luck there.

    5. Re:aww hell no! by ILuvRamen · · Score: 0

      OH.....MY.......GOD!!!! Now they'll have to get out of their car, open their front door, walk through their house and into the garage, hit the wired switch to open it, get back in their car, and drive it in! I specifically know people who will not leave their house because that's just too much of a hassle for them. But really, who needs to when everything's on Ebay :P

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    6. Re:aww hell no! by Randseed · · Score: 1

      Of course, most of those keypads are merely battery-operated radio transmitters that transmit the signal to the garage door in response to entry of the appropriate (i.e., programmed into the keypad) code, so "getting their fat asses out of their car and do[ing] the keypad instead" won't help.

  8. It was snowing that day too... by Sloan47 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yeah, I live in Colorado Springs and they started to test the system as it was snowing. What really was awful was that the lock on our screen door jammed the day previous so I was locked out of my house!

    1. Re:It was snowing that day too... by John3 · · Score: 1

      You have an automatic storm door opener?

      --
      "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
    2. Re:It was snowing that day too... by Saikik · · Score: 1

      The real question is why was gp modded "informative".

  9. Fault lies with door manufacturers by yourpusher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They shouldn't have made their openers to operate on this frequency, in the first place. It's no secret which frequencies are allocated to the US gov't. It's laziness on the part of the company.

    1. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      I would suspect that making a device which intereferes with first responders (or any gov't) frequency would count as harmful interference and be illegal under most coutnries laws.

      The questions is *when* did the US gov't acquire this frequency? If it was well after these things were sold, what on earth were they thinking, and if it was before, who let garage door manufacturers keep making these things?

      Has there been a recall?

      This might be a lead up to what happens with the change over to digital televions. As far as I know they've auctioned off the old frequencies but what if the old sets and equipment are still around causing intereference? Probably nothing good.

    2. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The radio spectrum is pretty well divvied up and has been for a long time, there is some changes of course but it's usual allocated from the government's use back to the private usage. There are areas where there are some known overlap such as the military VHF FM band starts at 54.00Mhz and upwards as does civilian Television and FM radio frequencies. In such cases because the frequencies have been licensed to commercial stations, the military only uses non-interfering frequencies, however these openers are opperating on unlicensed frequencies so they would have to yield to military use if they caused any interference with the legally licensed operators of those frequencies.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't really see why everyone seems to assume that the door openers can interfere with the emergency system. The door openers are broadcasting with a tiny amount of power. They are being jammed by the emergency system, not the other way around. For all practical intents and purposes, attempting to jam the emergency system with a door opener is like trying to piss at a tsunami to stop it washing away your house.

    4. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      The questions is *when* did the US gov't acquire this frequency? If it was well after these things were sold, what on earth were they thinking, and if it was before, who let garage door manufacturers keep making these things?

      The DOD has had these frequencies for far longer than the garage door manufactureres have been in business. The devices are specifically allowed under an FCC exemption that allows low power RF devices to operate so long as (1) they are below a certain power output (typically 10w max) and (2) that they do not interfere with whoever actually has the frequency allocated to them.

      This is, among other things, how those home TV broadcast devices are allowed (the ones that let you broadcast over a TV frequencey to your TV), the FM transmitters you can buy for you MP3 player, and numerous other RF devices on the market today.

      Office of Spectrum Management:
      http://www.vendian.org/mncharity/dir3/frequency_al location_chart/UnstableURL/allochrt.pdf
      That is an old copy from 1996. It shows the frequency being "Government Exclusive" for 335.4-399.9Mhz.

      Given what I know of the history of RF allocation, most likely the only people who had that frequency before the DoD was the Ham Radios and that was only up until 1960 at the latest. Prior to sometime before WWII, the Hams had all frequencies above 1500Mhz as it was believed to be useless for anything.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    5. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by EvanED · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would suspect that making a device which intereferes with first responders (or any gov't) frequency would count as harmful interference and be illegal under most coutnries laws.

      Who said they did?

      "Interference" is not a reflexive relation. If you put a WAP next to six microwaves, you're going to have problems with your wi-fi network. But your WAP isn't going to overcook your food.

      This story is about the USAF's use blocking garage door openers, not the other way around.

      The questions is *when* did the US gov't acquire this frequency?

      Another poster says 1934.

    6. Re:Fault lies with door manufacturers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      These frequencies have been allocated to the military for a long time AND the military has been using them throughout. What has changed is the system. In the past these frequencies were used by radio systems that only broadcast when someone actually was talking on them. They are gradually being replaced by digital radio systems that are constantly communicating between the handheld units and the towers. Noone noticed the interference on the old systems because it would only occur when someone was actually communicating on the system, but these newer systems, making much greater, constant use of the frequency, are constantly blocking use of the low-powered and un-licensed devices.

  10. And what occurs when... by boule75 · · Score: 2, Funny

    And what occur the garge owners use their remote-control? Does this jam the Airforce frequency??

    8:30 am:
    "- Chief, we have fired the missile!
    "- Hum, which missile?
    "- Well, The Missile, ya know!
    "- Ah..... Ah? Who has given that order?
    "- Well, you know, Washington signals nowadays are rather mixed but I confirm the emission was on the usual frequency and has been repeated frantically in the last minutes. According to the Terrestrial Message Bluring Scheme we have had for some years now, the Message came from many locations but with the same words in it".
    "- Hum... It certainly comes from the White House then. Big affair."

    --
    I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
    1. Re:And what occurs when... by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Right. It doesn't work that way. The way to jam a transmitter with power 10X is by puting out a signal with power 100X. It doesn't work the other way. It might raise the noise floor, but it certainly won't jam the more powerful transmitter. That's why one of the easiest ways to cut through jamming is to just raise the transmission power of the transciever- it makes the signal easier to distinguish from the background noise.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    2. Re:And what occurs when... by myth24601 · · Score: 1
      And what occur the garge owners use their remote-control? Does this jam the Airforce frequency??

      8:30 am:
      "- Chief, we have fired the missile!
      "- Hum, which missile?
      "- Well, The Missile, ya know!
      "- Ah..... Ah? Who has given that order?
      "- Well, you know, Washington signals nowadays are rather mixed but I confirm the emission was on the usual frequency and has been repeated frantically in the last minutes. According to the Terrestrial Message Bluring Scheme we have had for some years now, the Message came from many locations but with the same words in it".
      "- Hum... It certainly comes from the White House then. Big affair."


      What really happens is this:
      "-chief, the missile bay doors just opened.
      "-chief, the missle bay doors just closed.
      "-chief, the missle bay doors just opened again.
      etc.
      --
      No matter where you go, there you are.
    3. Re:And what occurs when... by alx5000 · · Score: 1

      Maybe the GP's joke flying over your head jammed your humour system...

      --
      My 0.02 cents
  11. The Garage Doors, sir...they appear to be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JAMMED...

    Raspberry...there's only one man who DARE give me the Raspberry

    1. Re:The Garage Doors, sir...they appear to be by displaced80 · · Score: 1

      LONE STAR!

      --
      What's the frequency, Kenneth?
  12. A conspiracy to keep us from Christmas Decorations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats my excuse this weekend.

  13. Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by istartedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wager these garage doors have that little notice on them, you know, the one that says "this is an FCC class B(?) device... must not interfere, must accept any such interference, blah, blah, blah...". The manufacturer can stand behind that. It's CYA compliant, probably, from a legal standpoint. It's definitely not PR compliant. I don't see this so much as a problem with the Air Force trampling on our rights, as a company that took a gamble that there would never be any powerful interference that would mess with their device. Usually there isn't.

    All that aside, USAF should either stop using the frequency or offer to refund a retrofit of existing doors--whichever is cheaper. I can also foresee the mfct recalling the doors; but if they do that they probably have no recourse with the government. After all, they knew they were taking a chance by producing such a device. And then the garage door people could start using ultrasonic or infrared, with a crypto key of some kind between the receiver and transmitter to guarantee non-interference, and that would be that.

    This is just another reason for me to be happy I don't have a car, nevermind a garage.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      All that aside, USAF should either stop using the frequency or offer to refund a retrofit of existing doors--whichever is cheaper.

      Umm... Why? Garage Door companies have been using military frequencies for years? They've just been usuing it at such a low power that they get an exemption. By requirement for that exemption, and even in the regulation you reference, they must not interefere with whoever has official licensing on the band. So, why should the Air Force have to change or pay?

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by istartedi · · Score: 0

      So, why should the Air Force have to change or pay?

      There's probably no legal reason for them to change or pay. I think it would be the moral thing to do.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by Ironsides · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The moral thing would be for the Garage Door manufactureres to pay for it as they were the ones knowingly making a product that uses a military frequency. It's not as if the DoD was just allocated this frequency last month. They've had it for decades.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    4. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by enosys · · Score: 1

      Why is should the Air Force be morally obligated to pay? If they had the spectrum for a long time as some other articles claim then I think the garage door opener companies should pay instead. They were basically betting that the government was not going to use that frequency and they lost their bet.

    5. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      The right thing to do would have involved the MFGs anticipating the frequency collision XY years ago & spending another pocketful of cents per unit so that it came with a removable frequency crystal.

      Hell, the MFG's could sell new crystals & remotes if they'd thought about it ahead of time. I guess long range planning loses out on short term penny pinching.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Heh. Mea culpa for not reading TFA. Yeh. Company should totally pay then.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    7. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by bcat24 · · Score: 1

      In that case, Linksys owes me a new router. :) After all, wifi is just an unlicensed secondary service operating on the ham band, and so is subject to interference. I mean, seriously, most consumer RF devices operate on frequencies allocated to something else. Most of the time this isn't a problem. Sometimes it is. Would you really want to replace all those devices?

    8. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      The DoD has had the frequencies since at least 1996 and most likely since before 1966. The MFGs have ALWAYS been in 'collision' with a licensed band. This is entirely the MFGs fault and none of the DoDs or governments.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    9. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by jesdynf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait, what?

      The Air Force was assigned the uncontestable right to use certain frequencies, it has made use of this right, some class B devices were manufactured that are by statute designed to fail in this exact circumstance, and now it's the government that needs to start writing checks?

      --
      Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
    10. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by ghjm · · Score: 1

      Only if the Air Force's money is free. But consider that the Air Force is funded by tax money (which libertarians describe as "taking by force" - and they aren't entirely wrong). Because of this they also have a moral responsibility to spend the money wisely. I don't think giving away free garage door openers counts as wise.

    11. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by Rix · · Score: 1

      The Air Force isn't being asked to change at all. Quite the opposite, it's being asked *not* to change. By not using the frequency, they allowed it to be usurped by a de facto standard.

    12. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by walt-sjc · · Score: 1

      USAF should either stop using the frequency or offer to refund a retrofit of existing doors

      Um, who do you think FUNDS the USAF? Why should I, as a taxpayer, be forced to pay more taxes because some boneheaded garage door opener manufacturer used frequencies assigned to the military???

      No, the obligation falls on the manufacturer 100%.

    13. Re:Well, that's (probably) the risk the mfct. took by Forbman · · Score: 1

      no, the responsibility is on the lazy-ass consumer. (hey, I'm one, too)

  14. Common BS Urban Myth Story by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

    I don't know if this one is actually true, but I've seen quite a few of these stories pop up, none of which ended up being true. In fact, our town had one, but there was no military base anywhere near, but in spite of that, the Air Force still got blamed. Just change your batteries.

    1. Re:Common BS Urban Myth Story by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      but there was no military base anywhere near

      Ah, but that's what the Air Force wants you to think!

    2. Re:Common BS Urban Myth Story by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The frequencies in question are reserved for governmental use and the majority of the government user are local, and can be anyone from the city's sewer cleaning crew to the NSA.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  15. Re:Obligatory joke by risk+one · · Score: 1

    There was nothing obligatory about that. And the "joke" part wasn't that accurate either.

  16. That's what happens in the Garage Band. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    'nuff said.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  17. Canadian instance by The+Hobo · · Score: 3, Informative

    This also happened in Ottawa in 2005. This story and this story sum up the incident. I was in Ottawa at the time, and I keenly remember the US Embassy lying to our face about using this signal. "Oddly" enough, the problem stopped once the CBC contacted the Embassy and asked them about it. Too bad those engineers didn't get to trace the signal back. What also got to me while trying to get through downtown is how the embassy is allowed to eat up a lane of traffic for their precious concrete walls, as if there was ever a real danger in Canada. I heard that those walls were tested in Canada because of the low risk, I guess it's convenient to test concrete walls and signal jamming here.

    --
    There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
    1. Re:Canadian instance by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      What also got to me while trying to get through downtown is how the embassy is allowed to eat up a lane of traffic for their precious concrete walls, as if there was ever a real danger in Canada.

      Real danger? You mean like these fine Canadian Al Qaeda supporters? I doubt they will be the only ones to pop up given Al Qaeda's recent warnings and references to Canada. Al Qaeda underestimates Canada ... assuming the Canadian people are committed to arms and action. The Germans of yesteryear would not make that mistake.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Canadian instance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Real danger? You mean like these fine Canadian Al Qaeda supporters? I doubt they will be the only ones to pop up given Al Qaeda's recent warnings and references to Canada. Al Qaeda underestimates Canada ... assuming the Canadian people are committed to arms and action. The Germans of yesteryear would not make that mistake.
      I don't know if you've ever been in downtown Ottawa.

      Let me describe to you the US Embassy in Ottawa: The embassy is protected by panes of bomb-proof glass. Then there is a 10 foot buffer zone. Circling the buffer zone is a 10 foot tall steel gate. Then there is another 2 feet buffer zone on the street level. Finally, surrounding that, are concrete pillars.

      But that's not all. Post-9/11, the US embassy cut off the high-traffic road that's around the building (remember: the embassy is in downtown Ottawa.) So outside of those concrete pillars, which is itself outside a buffer, steel shield, another buffer, and bomb-proof glass, is yet another 5 foot buffer zone, followed by a 4 foot tall concrete wall.

      It's overkill. It's costing the city in aesthetics and practicality (lane reduction.) So whilst I agree with you that there is a real danger in Canada, the removal of that concrete would not place the US embassy itself in danger. I know this is beside your point, I just wanted to point that out for anyone not familiar with the brute of a building.
    3. Re:Canadian instance by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I wish I could say that I've seen it in person, although from the pictures it doesn't look like anything I would go out of my way to see. It does look rather ugly. :)

      I also won't argue that the situation isn't a pain. I hope that improvements in design, materials, engineering, and the security situation will eliminate the need for those measures. I will say that the US has, regrettably, accrued a certain amount of experience with what happens to poorly protected buildings when targeted by truck bombs. I will also say that if the US embassy is an unappealing target due to the protective measures, the people in all of the buildings around it will probably benefit in the long run. (Al Qaeda has called off attacks before when they had doubts about killing enough people for it to be worthwhile to them. They prefer for both the attacks and body count to be rather spectacular. The simultaneous bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed 258 and wounded more than 5,000. I would hate for a similar attack to occur in Canada.) I hope Canada will not find it necessary to take such measures, but it may be coming.

      Cheers

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    4. Re:Canadian instance by TeflonTB · · Score: 1

      QQ more. Aesthetics...heaven forbid we forget about those when human life is at risk! Practicality...its a lane of traffic...learn to go another way. Brute of a building...what about the brute of a 1000kg bomb exploding in your face?

    5. Re:Canadian instance by max99ted · · Score: 1
      Human life at risk? Ok, eh. I guess you haven't been to Ottawa and as such could not know that the street the US embassy is on is one of the busier ones during rush hour, not to mention right smack downtown between the Chateau Laurier and the market. Eliminating one of the three lanes on this street so that they can add an additional layer of ugly concrete posts to block what? Canadian Suicide Car Bombers??


      The worst is they apparently don't pay property tax on the additional square footage...

      --

      Please stop APK.. you're only hurting yourself.

    6. Re:Canadian instance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the close relationship between Canada and the US, it's somewhat understandable that the US Embassy is where it is in Ottawa (consider, as a counterpart, where the Canadian Embassy in DC is....). The extra security measures are just a reality of the times, I'm afraid.

    7. Re:Canadian instance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well I guess its to bad for the CBC since the American government has the right to use the specific frequencies. There are three types of spectrum allocations in Canada:

      Primary Allocation - When a service is granted primary allocation, its users do not have to worry about causing interference to users of a secondary allocation in the same band. On the other hand, if there are two primary allocations in the same frequency band, they must share and must work out arrangements so as not to cause each other interference.

      Secondary Allocation - A service that has a secondary allocation, must accept interference from, and cannot cause interference to, users of a service having a primary allocation in the same band.

      License Exempt - Are Devices that are usually very low power, may not interfere with users of any licensed service, and must accept interference from users of any licensed service.

      Take guess What section garage door openers are licensed under.

      Garage door openers operate around 360MHz. From the Canadian Table of Frequency Allocations. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst. nsf/vwapj/cane2006-e.pdf/$FILE/cane2006-e.pdf

      5.254 The bands 235-322 MHz and 335.4-399.9 MHz may be used by the mobile-satellite service, subject to agreement obtained under No. 9.21, on condition that stations in this service do not cause harmful interference to those of other services operating or planned to be operated in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocations except for the additional allocation made in footnote No. 5.256A. (WRC-03

      C12 (CAN-03) The band 360-400 MHz is designated for Mobile Aeronautical Telemetry Service (MATS) applications. The Government of Canada has priority on the use of this band. Access to spectrum by other entities for MATS may be permitted subject to coordination with the Government of Canada systems.

      C13 (CAN-03) The bands 305-320 MHz and 345-360 MHz are designated for Wireless Communication Service (WCS) applications under the fixed and mobile service allocations. Use of these bands is subject to domestic spectrum utilization policy.

      If the manufacturer wanted to avoid this problem they could run the opener in one of the ISM bands. * 900 MHz band (33.3 cm wavelength) * 1.8 GHz Band (16.7 cm wavelength) * 2.4 GHz band (12.5 cm wavelength) * 5.8 GHz band (5.2 cm wavelength) http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/09nov20051 500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/pdf/47c fr15.247.pdf

    8. Re:Canadian instance by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Canadian Suicide Car Bombers??

      This Canadian suicide bomber killed fellow Canadians in Afghanistan. These Canadian Al Qaeda supporters, who had world-wide connections, were preparing to start attacking various targets in Canada, and were trying to obtain enough explosives for a large truck bomb. Al Qaeda has warned Canada that it is subject to attack (due at least in part to the fact that Canadians as a whole don't follow extreme Islam). If Britain can have suicide bombers attack inside the country, I doubt that there is any reason Canada couldn't. A suicide bicycle bomber killed four Candian soldiers in September, and a suicide car bomber killed two Canadian soldiers last week. Canadians are already being killed by suicide terrorists, at least one of which was Canadian, and there are more like minded people already operating in Canada, partially due to extremists exploiting holes in Canada's immigration policy. Hopefully, when the Canadian security services break up terror cells in the future, they won't just deport them, but will send them to prison. Canada is a great nation facing some difficult choices and tasks.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    9. Re:Canadian instance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You were making some useful points and were kind of convincing up until this:

      You've been eating retard sandwiches again, haven't you? Bob & Doug Mackenzie have been playing on the radio again up there?

      You have no common sense. None. Do your parents let you walk around in public by yourself?
    10. Re:Canadian instance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I would expect you to know that US embassies worldwide have become high risk locations.

      What also got to me while trying to get through downtown is how the embassy is allowed to eat up a lane of traffic for their precious concrete walls, as if there was ever a real danger in Canada.
      I'd assume that the Argentinians would have held the same opinion prior to March 17, 1992. Buenos Aires is not usually referred to as a dangerous city (such as Nairobi, Kenya), and yet an embassy was destroyed there.

      As for your complacent demeanor: of the groups that hate the US for it's recent foreign affairs, many aren't fans of Canada either.
  18. Airports are closed perhaps? by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    I know of more than a few people due to fly out of JFK/EWR that weekend, who made it all the way to the toll tunnels into NYC and be returned...

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  19. What Joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one wish to welcome our new garage opening Overlords!

    What Joke?

    Please people make an effort, this posters comment is just lame!

  20. FCC isn't doing its job by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    All this "unlicensed transmitter" stuff which says basically if the thing doesn't work it's not the manufacturer's fault and it's not the FCC's fault, is nonsense.

    It's as if there were an "unlicensed vehicle" exception for small devices like Segways and pogo sticks, that said "you are allowed to operate this device on interstate highways, but you are required not to interfere with big trucks and you are required to accept any interference from big trucks."

    The FCC's job is--or should be--to regulate spectrum usage so that garage door openers don't interfere with the Air Force, and vice versa. I think they got distracted by Janet Jackson's nipple.

    1. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by Detritus · · Score: 1

      It isn't nonsense, it's how spectrum management has been managed for many decades. For each part of the spectrum, there is a hierarchy of users. At the top are primary licensed users, then secondary licensed users, then unlicensed users. You are not allowed to cause interference to users in a higher classification, and must accept any interference they cause. It's like building a highway system for big trucks, and saying small trucks can also use it, providing they always yield right-of-way to the big trucks. It allows for more efficient use of the resource, without compromising its original purpose.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by enosys · · Score: 1

      Unlicensed transmitters make sense for hobbyist or experimental use. I just don't understand why large companies would routinely use them in popular consumer products.

    3. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      I just don't understand why large companies would routinely use them in popular consumer products.

      $$$

    4. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I agree with your overall view of the FCC abdicating its responsibility for regulating the spectrum to prevent interference, focusing instead on "wardrobe malfunctions" and Howard Stern, the existence of Part 15 devices isn't really the problem here.

      Without the Part 15 rules allowing various low power equipments to share spectrum with each other, as well as other services, you would need to buy licenses for your garage door opener, cordless phone, car alarm remote, WiFi gear, etc. There would only be as many licenses available for a given area as there were reserved channels, so if all your neighbors got theirs first, you would be SOL.

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    5. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      All this "unlicensed transmitter" stuff which says basically if the thing doesn't work it's not the manufacturer's fault and it's not the FCC's fault, is nonsense.

      Yep, its not going to cost anything to allocate a few Khz in the UHF band for low power remote controls. As far as I know that is how it works here in .au

      The USA had this kind of thing (lots of cars, garages, urban sprawl, etc) a couple of decades before the rest of the world and it occures to me that exceptions may have been made early on for transmitters which couldn't be easily built to use a tight spectrum, and that you are paying for that execption now.

      I think they got distracted by Janet Jackson's nipple

      Who wouldn't :)

    6. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by daverabbitz · · Score: 1

      Well In New Zealand, it is illegal to operate any radio transmitter equipment without a license.

      Devices like Garage door openers, wifi, ISM, and alarm remotes, are covered by the General User Radio License, which is an implicit license to operate any device on certain frequencies, below a certain power level. Also I think some bands covered by the GURL are secondary allocations, meaning that just like unlicensed radio devices in the US, they can be interferred with by primary users (Government, and others with Specific licenses).

      CB Radios are covered by a different license which I can't remember the name of, but allows a greater transmit power of 5 Watts.

      --
      What could be better than a jet powered motorcycle? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8l6GTHLSWE
    7. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do not attribute to greed that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

    8. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by inKubus · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your overall view of the FCC abdicating its responsibility for regulating the spectrum to prevent interference, focusing instead on "wardrobe malfunctions" and Howard Stern, the existence of Part 15 devices isn't really the problem here.

      In addition to electromagnetism, they manage the spectrum of taste and skin, to prevent interference with common values?

      OR

      When we're not regulating the eletromagnetic medium, we also dabble in the message.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    9. Re:FCC isn't doing its job by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Do not attribute to incompetence that which is adequately explained by greed.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  21. Garage Doors Jam Air Force by finity · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The original article title was so negative... Hooah!

  22. First Meeting With The Insurance Company by berenixium · · Score: 1

    "Let me get this straight, ma'am... you actually drove _through_ your garage doors?"
    "Well, they usually open pretty fast... when bits of the door started landing on the car roof, I started to realise that something had gone wrong. Is that ok?"

  23. Obey. by bumptehjambox · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I, for one, welcome our garage door regulating overlords.

    If they could, I'd like them to make sure that the door stays closed when the local jam band tries to get a little fresh air in on the session.

  24. a sacrifice for national security by fermion · · Score: 1
    As the article stated, the military has a right to use the frequency, so I don't see what everyone is complaining about, especially around there. IAs far as I can tell, the county voted overwhelmingly for Bush, which seems to suggest that the county is conservative and values national security. One also assumes, that since the AFB is nearby, much of their economy depends on it, and they would be toast without it, or at least that what seems to be said everytime an base closure is suggested.

    So, this is just one sacrifice that has to made in this time of war. Certainly opening up your own garage door is not too much to ask when Americans are being killed everyday overseas. It is like higher gas prices. If we are going to be at war, then everyone has to sacrifice a little.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:a sacrifice for national security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first off, people did not overwhelmingly for bush, it was one of the most hotly contested elections in our nations history. second, the reason people suggest that local economies might dies off due to base closure is likely spoken in self interest, I really cant imagine some of the larger cities like San Antonio or various coastal cities will die overnight because they dont have soldier coming in to buy liquer and cigarettes and get roudy on the weekends. third and finally, opening my garage door should not in any way interfere with the american war machine so why the hell should i have to make allowances for it, also the higher gas prices are due to a very limited supply and a voracious demand thats only growing, not the war (though it may certainly influence price)

    2. Re:a sacrifice for national security by BishonenAngstMagnet · · Score: 1

      I didn't vote for this president. I don't support this war. Why should my garage door be sacrificed?

    3. Re:a sacrifice for national security by RoboRay · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess you should have bought a garage door openener that operates on legally authorized frequencies. Complain to the manufacturer, not us.

    4. Re:a sacrifice for national security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the area under discussion, about 2 out of every 3 people who voted voted for Bush. That is overwhelming. And of course god forbid that anyone should be inconvenienced because of a war.

    5. Re:a sacrifice for national security by BishonenAngstMagnet · · Score: 1

      I don't actually have a garage door opener...I'm just playing devil's advocate.

  25. This happened in the 1970s as well by purplelocust · · Score: 1

    My spouse grew up in the 70s near Laguna Beach and the El Toro Marine Air Station in SoCal and there were regular instances of people's garage doors opening and closing as various military jets flew nearby. It was just a fact of life that people got used to from living nearby, and nobody was too bothered about it.

  26. unprecedented evile unprepared for creators' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    newclear powered planet/population rescue/mandate.

    it's definitely going to adversely effect stock markup FraUD 'profit' margins.

    alternatively, becoming a member of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate is a win/win scenario for almost all of the rest of us.

    from previous post: many demand corepirate nazi execrable stop abusing US

    we the peepoles?

    how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

    all they (the felonious nazi execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

    for many of US, the only way out is up.

    don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

    'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

    some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

    it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

    as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

    concern about the course of events that will occur should the corepirate nazi life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

    'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

    consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

  27. Frequency Usage by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to this article, most door openers use 390 MHz, with some using 315 MHz and 372 MHz. All of these frequencies are in a band that is reserved for the federal government. For example, military aeronautical radio systems, including the backup communications system on the Space Shuttle, use the 225-400 MHz band. Any unlicensed users of this band do so at their own risk. The manufacturers of garage door openers have only themselves to blame. It's like building a house in that nice, empty artillery practice range.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  28. Urban Myth? Not sure. by giminy · · Score: 1

    I've seen this one before, and before. I'm pretty sure the story was confirmed each time, though, but that the affected range is quite small (within a few miles of the base, depending on geography).

    I'm still not sure whether I believe it, of course, as I'm not being affected (nor do I know anyone that is). If you've got some articles pointing out to the urban legendness of the stories, I'm all ears. Er, eyes.

    --
    The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
  29. Wahey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's time we blow this scene... ..get everybody and the stuff together. Okay, three, two, one... let's jam.

  30. Re:GarageBand.app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah that explains it!

    I was clicking that damn guitar icon for the last 5 minutes. I was going to give up and call Apple tech support. I'm relieved now that I know that it's the Air Force making it not work.

  31. There really is NOT much else they can do... by OmniGeek · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unlicensed radio systems (like the garage door openers, ALL your WiFi gear, your car keyfob, etc etc, but NOT, IIRC, cell phones) operate under "FCC Part 15," widely mentioned elsewhere in this discussion. The important point in this regard is that ALL Part 15 devices operate subject to two inflexible rules: 1) you can't interfere with licensed users, and 2) it's your bad luck if licensed users interfere with you.

    Unless a manufacturer of wireless gadgets wants to require every user to get a license (not an option for most gear), there is basically NO way to avoid the Part 15 restrictions; licensed users (emergency services, licensed commercial radio systems, and militery users) will always trump nonlicensed users. It won't happen often, but when it does, ya just gotta live with it.

    --

    "My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
    1. Re:There really is NOT much else they can do... by kj_in_ottawa · · Score: 1

      I don't know the fcc rules inside out. I beleive the rule you talk about is for adjasent bands. I seem to recall that licensed bands and unlicenesed bands are supposed to be mutual excusive. FCC arguing aside... If it was my garage door opener, I would go back to the manufacturer using the consumer protection rule having to do with "product not fit for purpose" . This is close to my heart because there are certain conditions that exist in my home where this DoS would mean I was outside until it was over and my car heater sucks. Random thoughts- Someone indcated the keypad would have to be used. This wouldn't work because they transmit in the same frequency as the remotes. What if you put 2 remotes in your car and set them to opposite ends of the spectrum your opener accepts. Then if it was only a slight infringement on your openers frequency range, you may hit beyond the jam. This should be possible to acheive with a spectrum analyser, a dozen beers and an afternoon. This makes me think about the external key based override I saw at Sears a while back.

  32. Government Budgets 101 aka the $10,000 Screwdriver by Erik+Noren · · Score: 1

    The few basic laws of US Government budgets.

    1. Funding is allocated each year.
    2. All remaining funds at the end of a fiscal year are lost. (Not rolled over into the next year. This is looking at things from an office perspective.)
    3. Next year's allocation is reduced from the previous years by the amount unused in the current year.
    4. Allocations are divided into Products and Services (items versus contractor work).

    This leaves offices in a bit of a bind at the end of the fiscal year. If they don't use all their money, they get less next year which, of course, is a situation no manager wants to have happen to their unit regardless if they need it or not. Most units use all of their services money easily as contracts typically run over a longer term and are planned for. Product budgets are harder to watch. For the first 3/4 of the fiscal year, managers are trying to scrimp and save on everything they do "just in case." At the end of the year they find themselves with leftover money. How do they spend it to keep it from getting taken away next year?

    Typical draining methods of product budget allocations:
    1. Transfer the money to another unit. (This helps to get big ticket items purchased and solve many problems at once. New servers? Well, we decided we didn't need them before (savings mode) but let's get the top of the line (gotta drain it! mode).
    2. Buy lots of external storage drives and thumb drives.
    3. Recognizing that they still need service work completed but have no more money in that fund, negotiate a contract with a company to "buy" necessary items which happen to come with "free" service. So, a $10,000 screwdriver translates into short-term facilities contract. (Most likely re-re-reconfiguring offices and cubes to make the new feel powerful.)

    So while it all seems very dubious, rest assured that it is, in fact, dubious.

    Unfortunately it is all necessary as well. As long as budget allocations are done on a set scale from year to year, units can never plan for things like systems upgrades (heavy spending year) versus maintenance (lighter spending year). This means each unit needs to clear their account by the end of the fiscal year to ensure they have, at some later point, almost all the money they might need for that project which will probably need to be done, maybe. (Wording is intentional.)

  33. Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by purduephotog · · Score: 1

    Look, I'm not going to take the popular road here, but CHRIST this is NOT a big sacrifice that's being asked of people. The AF is looking for a secure communications in case of a MASSIVE emergency. This isn't some podunk little thing that gets run every wed at 5pm, this is a massive attack due to natural disaster, accident (such as a petrol plant exploding) or a planned staged attack!

    People are WHINING because their doors don't work.

    Here's a clue, and maybe it's because of the way I was raised ("Son, get out and go open the door for your mother") or maybe it's because there are more importan things to bitch about, but "YOU DO NOT HAVE THE INNATE RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE YOUR GARAGE DOOR FROM YOUR CAR!".

    There is a little thing about Life and the pursuit of happieness, but that's just a little thing some people forget about on a regular basis.

    1. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by Kamineko · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jesus Christ drives an SUV?

    2. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by purduephotog · · Score: 1

      *snicker*

      Thanks. I needed to calm down and that was the perfect laugh to get it.

      I guess I'm just torqued- I just talked win an individual who arrived back in the states after a 2 year 'volunteered' stay overseas. His replacement, whom he had trained for 6 weeks, was killed the day he left- he had to sign for his body and fly home with him before reporting back to work.

      I also remember staring into the two holes in the grounds and thinking about my cousin, whom, if not for a misplaced sense of civic duty, would have been upstairs

      So yeah, Jesus Christ drives a SUV but it runs on Bio-Diesel and ethanol and, for some reason, the tank never goes empty.

    3. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by TrebleMaker · · Score: 1

      Nah, he drives a 4WD Ford F150 with a lumber rack, just like most of the other carpenters I know.

      --
      In Soviet Russia a beowulf cluster of these things imagines you welcoming your new, neural-network overlords.
    4. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Jesus Christ drives an SUV?

      Don't you remember your scriptures from Sunday School?: "What is Ceasors is Ceasors, but I get the Hummer."

    5. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by LordPhantom · · Score: 1

      Just ask yourself - What Would Republican Jesus Do? for the answer ;)

    6. Re:Jesus Christ- GET OUT OF YOUR SUV! by hab136 · · Score: 1
      Look, I'm not going to take the popular road here, but CHRIST this is NOT a big sacrifice that's being asked of people.

      It's an unnecessary sacrifice - the garage door openers could use a different frequency, or more resilient technology like spread-spectrum transmissions - and it's a sacrifice people were not aware they were making. Hence the complaining.

      There is a little thing about Life and the pursuit of happieness, but that's just a little thing some people forget about on a regular basis.

      Not sure what point you're trying to make there, but not having to get out of my car in the rain to open the garage door is a (very small) portion of my pursuit of happiness.
  34. Could be worse... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use to live by Hanscom airforce base. Some nights, in the middle of the night, our garage door would randomly open, allowing racoons and the like inside...

  35. It's a rather cunning plan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Al-qaida sleeper cells can't do much damage with their car bombs if they can't get them out of the garage.

  36. This is not new by ScottFree2600 · · Score: 1

    I lived near (the former) George AFB near cosmopolitan Victorville, California in 1987.

    Air Force ONE visited the area once and our garage doors were unresponsive to their remotes, and at one point that week my garage door opened by itself. Periodically there would be such occurrences even when AF1 wasn't around, but the word in the neighborgood was that it was related to AF1, (and we had plenty of Zoomie types living there who would know) and I personally witnessed exactly one (possibly coincidental) occurance of that.

    The base closed around 1992, and all garage door anomolies ceased.

    The receivers on these units are pretty simple, though there is a bit more sophistication these days with the addition of more complex digital codes. There is little RF selectivity in the front ends. I had a pathetic "genie" type unit.

  37. Lore by pipingguy · · Score: 1
  38. So where are the Geeks to the rescue? by CFD339 · · Score: 1

    Where is the RF geek who is going to figure out exactly how much extra power you'd need to but through that jamming at say, 200 feet. Increasing the power of the transmitter through some simple mod, or soldering on an antenna connector and using something from a 1970's movie about CB's and trucks seems like the clear call of the day!

    Surely someone here can do the math...

    --
    The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
    1. Re:So where are the Geeks to the rescue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more appropriate fix would be simple frequency hopping. Hire real engineers to design your RF products. Problem solved.

  39. Ha! No one said this yet? by ElephanTS · · Score: 0

    All your doors are belong to us!!!

    (Who called? Who wants their joke back?)

    --
    spoonerize "magic trackpad"
    1. Re:Ha! No one said this yet? by Faylone · · Score: 1
  40. those rules didn't exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    113 years ago, such rules didn't exist.

    These people are grandfathered in.

  41. I wrkd 4 a grg dor opnr cust suprt call cntr. by paynesmanor · · Score: 0

    The new homeland security emergency channel which was derived from 9.11 as a way for the resquers to communicate, does interfere with remote control devices and recievers operating on a 390feq. Most of or, all of, the GDO companies have switched (within the last two years) to a 315 or simmilar feq, which is not affected. If you have a GDO that only runs on 390feq, you will need to update to a 315 feq. The govt is still doing tests on the 390 FEQ (unknown if it will be a continous loss (forever), or a loss, only if there is a emergency. People that live near airforce bases testing this emergency channel have had a total loss of useability of their remote controls or so they said.
    FYI
    The Govt owns ALL the feq and the companies rent or lease the FEQ they wish to use, from the govt.

  42. Re:Technically??? / NTIA assigns gov. use by LM741N · · Score: 5, Informative

    "However, the spectrum is licensed by the FCC as part of the public airwaves." The FCC has no jurisdiction over government (eg military) radio/spectrum use. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration does. www.ntia.gov

  43. Re:Technically??? / NTIA assigns gov. use by Nethead · · Score: 5, Informative

    And the NTIA trumps the FCC. The NTIA assigns frequency blocks to the FCC.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  44. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    Well, after 9/11 we ARE all under constant surveillance of all our phone and internet traffic, and we've lost the right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

    Sounds to me like it's been pretty damn convenient for SOME folks and their companies.

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. They blocked the wrong GDOs! by bbitmaster · · Score: 1

    from the article: "The signals were coming from Cheyenne Mountain Air Station."


    They must have meant to block the iris from being opened on the stargate.

  47. are they that simple? by belmolis · · Score: 1

    For this to happen as described, garage door openers must be responding to the mere presence of a signal. Are they really that simplistic? I would have thought that they would respond only to a particular pulse sequence or code of some sort. Not only would that prevent this kind of interference, but it would prevent one person's garage door opener from interfering with the neighbor's.

    1. Re:are they that simple? by Randseed · · Score: 1
      For this to happen as described, garage door openers must be responding to the mere presence of a signal. Are they really that simplistic? I would have thought that they would respond only to a particular pulse sequence or code of some sort. Not only would that prevent this kind of interference, but it would prevent one person's garage door opener from interfering with the neighbor's.
      Damn, I sure hope that the GDO (garage door openers) that the Stargate teams use to open the iris are more secure than that! We're all doomed!
    2. Re:are they that simple? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      For this to happen as described, garage door openers must be responding to the mere presence of a signal. Are they really that simplistic?

      For all low end and many mid range openers - yes.
    3. Re:are they that simple? by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      There may be crappy cheap ones that are, but my garage is a twin. Both door openers from same mfg. Neither opens the other.

  48. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    Well, after 9/11 we ARE all under constant surveillance of all our phone and internet traffic, and we've lost the right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

    Sounds to me like it's been pretty damn convenient for SOME folks and their companies.



    What's the evidence for this? Can you back up any one of those statements?

  49. this is a cool technology by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

    if they ever find out a terrorist is about to leave his home, they can prevent it by locking his carbomb up in his own garage!

    1. Re:this is a cool technology by 0x537461746943 · · Score: 1

      Not a great idea if he/she lives next to you.

  50. obvious by alshithead · · Score: 0

    All your air force base belong to us...

    --
    I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
  51. Ha! by malkir · · Score: 1

    "Honey? Is the garage door working? Hm.. that's odd." *click* *click* "Oh no! Get the children we're UNDER ATTACK by terrorists!!"

  52. Tax break by Joebert · · Score: 0

    Everyone who has one of theese garage door openers writes the cost of a new one, including installation, off on thier taxes this April.
    Problem solved.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  53. ALL YOUR GARAGE ARE BELONG TO BASE! by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 0
    Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began using nearly three years ago at some bases. Signals have previously interfered with garage doors near bases in Florida, Maryland, and Pennsylvania."

    ALL YOUR GARAGE ARE BELONG TO BASE!


    i think there's also an abbott and costello joke in there somewhere
  54. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  55. obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1: all your garage doors are belong to us
    2: ???
    3: Profit !

  56. Metal key ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    What ios the problem with an old fashionned metal key ? Maybe this is because I live in EU, but I know of next to nobody with a remote to open their garage... And I used to live in place where tehre is maybe 30 days of a sun during the year (northern coastal area: lot of rain there).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  57. Re:The point of the robot... by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    "Are you seriously telling me you weren't concerned ... You weren't looking up in the sky for any more planes?"

    It had been broadcast in short order that the airline planes were accounted for and grounding in progress. I was in Columbus, one of the "targets". I was concerned as to what it all was, but I wasn't looking "in the sky".

    Your sentence fulfills the 'paranoid fantasy' aspect. Getting information, yet being paranoid.

  58. So... This could work both ways then right? by fltsimbuff · · Score: 2

    So, who wants to build a really big garage door opener and point it at the base?

  59. HOLY FREAKING CRAPOLA!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I simply canNOT believe I have to 'splain this on Slashdot of all places, but apparently you (and at least one other who actually bothered to sign-in) are too INCREDIBLY STUPID to have picked this up: the "joke" is a reference to a WORLD-FAMOUS and CLASSIC episode of the cartoon The Simpsons in which news reporter Kent Brockman in total, abject, blabbering panic at the belief that giant space ants had taken over the Space Shuttle made the statement
    "Ladies and gentlemen, uh, we've just lost the picture, but what we've seen speaks for itself. The Corvair spacecraft has apparently been taken over- 'conquered' if you will- by a master race of giant space ants. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the captive Earthman or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves." -- Kent Brockman


    Since then, the running gag (which, apparently, is only open to those of us with three-digit IQ's) is to always "welcome" whatever kind of "overlord" the particular article refers to. It's most certainly a joke, and a good one (in a "Slashdotty" way), and one deserving of mod points (if I only had some...) And you, my friend, are an idiot.

    posting A.C. because I am one.
    1. Re:HOLY FREAKING CRAPOLA!!! by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Q. Why did the chicken cross the road?

      A. I, for one, welcome our "new" overdone chicken joke overlords.

      Give it a rest and make up some new material already. God forbid anybody actually make any kind of attempt at NEW humor. That "overlord" joke is done in just about every thread. Once you hear the one about how the blond turns the light on after sex 1000 times it doesn't even deserve a grin any more.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  60. Re:The point of the robot... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Yeah, you were in Columbus. We were in NYC, with planes roaring out of the sky into our buildings, millions of us engulfed in clouds of toxic smoke, hundreds of thousands fleeing on foot over bridges. After the same building had almost been knocked down only 8 years earlier. With the biggest TV/radio towers blown up, the main telephone centers smoking ruins, the mobile phone system swamped. The rumors running through the panicked crowd - that's bigger than your entire city - especially some that a plane had already smashed into the Pentagon, and then that another was headed for the White House (perhaps already hitting it or Congress). That could have been mitigated by the remaining radio/TV broadcasts carrying at least a message that the authorities were in control, so the millions of people who need that reassurance didn't lose their minds in terror. A little bit of incomplete info, with a massively lethal threat already killing thousands right in your face, is the recipe for terror. That's why they do it, and exactly what the government, including its EBS, is employed to protect against.

    So you were "concerned" in Columbus. Millions of New Yorkers were terrorized in an aerial attack causing mayhem that lasted all day.

    'Nuff said. Except the huge amount of "Homeland Security" money you and your matchlessly corrupt state collected the past 5 years, without being a "target". Where did you get that idea from, anyway? That's not even paranoid, just selfserving fearmongering combined with complacency. While you call New Yorkers, already the damaged targets of these attacks twice, "paranoid".

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  61. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    You have Google, don't you? It's been in the news for quite some time. What cave are you living in?

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  62. Re:The point of the robot... by Forbman · · Score: 1

    Millions of people in New York were inconvenienced, not terrorized. How really different for most people was the immediate after affects of 9/11 compared to the most recent major power outage? Take the WTC buildings out of the equation, and not a whole lot different.

    The brilliance of the 9/11 attacks was the plane attacks. No one in our civilized world was able to conceive of that mode of attack, due to our own civilities, etc. Of course, we're aware now.

    Besides, every time an oil refinery or chemical plant pops a cork, thousands of people are exposed to some far nastier shit than came out of the WTC dust. One could argue that the downwinders live with it every day.

    Get over yourself. 9/11 was bad, but it wasn't THAT bad.

  63. Re:The point of the robot... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Three thousand people dead. Toxic smoke inhaled by tens of millions for weeks. Hundreds of people jumping from the top of the burning towers to die in the fall rather than burn to death. While their families and everyone else watched in horror.

    "Take the WTC buildings out of the equation"? What could possibly justify that derangement of reality?

    You should come here to NYC some time and I'll explain it to you much more persuasively than your demented insensitivity allows you safely across the Internet. I'm sure the fear that is the only way a human could dismiss the horror of the actual 9/11/2001 attacks will also keep you safely in your bubble, far away from the reality of NYC.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  64. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Y'know, sometimes I think they must be putting something in the US drinking water.

    The mercury (thimerosal/thiomersal) used to preserve vaccines can't be helping either.

    But then I look at the rest of the world and I guess most people are stupid anyway.

  65. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  66. Nitpick by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    The Sidewinder is an air-to-air missile, to silence a source of interference they'd use a HARM.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  67. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
    If you're (speaking of "you" in the generic sense) going to put forth extraordinary claims, the onus is on you to back up those claims with data. Rather than tell people to google for it, you should already have your bullet points lined up in response. Ideally, the post which spawned this thread would've contained its proof.

    Telling people to "just google it" smacks of intellectual laziness. It raises suspicions with regard to the veracity of the claim.

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  68. Accurate jokes?? by j_w_d · · Score: 1

    Really, what were you thinking - or smoking - when you wrote that?

    --
    ------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
  69. some soldering - an you're all right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I soldered in a new antenna (piece of wire 4x times longer than usual) and that solved my problem. I've got about 2x range (from 3 meters to approx. 10 meters) increase. At least I can now open my garage door without getting out of the car.

    PS I am in California.

  70. Re:The point of the robot... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1
    The brilliance of the 9/11 attacks was the plane attacks. No one in our civilized world was able to conceive of that mode of attack, due to our own civilities, etc.

    Except, of course, for Tom Clancy, anybody who read Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor, numerous CIA analysts who predicted that mode of attack, numerous CIA analysts who reviewed captured al-Qaeda plans for such an attack, and any student of World War II in the Pacific.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  71. Re:The point of the robot... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

    "Mayhem that lasted all day."

    Was there rioting? Looting? A complete breakdown in public services? Were people evacuated from the city and relocated to neighboring states? Why don't you tell the people of Los Angeles or New Orleans how bad you had it.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  72. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

    "Habeas corpus was abolished and the US is wiretapping all our phones" is old news, just like "New Orleans was almost destroyed by a hurricane a couple years back". If you don't know about something that was widely publicized, even on Slashdot, the onus is on you to educate yourself.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  73. Re:The point of the robot... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    You think this is a competition? You want to turn this into some kind of intramural sport, or think that this is some kind of whining?

    FYI, I lived in New Orleans until 2003, and personally handled the evacuation of an entire family from the Katrina Flood. I was back in NO before even a fraction had moved back, working on reconstruction. And have been back several times.

    What the hell have you done to help? Where were you during the various catastrophes in LA/NO/NYC/DC? What the hell makes you think you have anything to say about mayhem? You saw something on TV, and think you know what you're talking about?

    You obviously don't. Keep your gibberish to yourself when there are serious issues for people with some actual perspective to discuss. Or try telling your crap to my neighbors in NYC, like the firehouse in my block. This is like some kind of videogame to you, isn't it?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  74. Re:The point of the robot... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

    I think you're trying to claim that because you were in New York at the time of the attack, your personal judgment of the situation should outweigh the actual evidence. Within the past six years, we've had an entire city almost destroyed by hurricane, an entire ocean coastline devastated by tsunami, a nation the size of California impoverished by two foreign invasions, a decade of economic sanctions, and an ongoing civil war, an ongoing genocide, an ongoing intifada, and countless wars. You, sir, do not know the meaning of the word "mayhem". Getting the rest of the day off from work does not compare with what millions of people have gone through, whether because of natural disaster or because of self-righteous pricks like you.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  75. Re:The point of the robot... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    No, I'm saying that you're a braying jackass who's calling 3000 people killed, millions terrorized and breathing toxic smoke, and other mayhem "a day off from work".

    And you're dragging out any number of other scenes of mayhem to justify your total inaction except to downplay that disaster.

    Don't call me "sir", you hypocritical cunt. You have done nothing to help anyone with anything, and have said the kinds of stupid shit that get people beat to a pulp here in NYC, if they're insane enough to try saying it. But you will do it again, safely removed at the end of your Internet wire from any consequences.

    I'll call you out again on my question of what the hell you have ever done to help any of those disasters, that makes you think you can rattle them off to minimize the damage of one of them. What have you done, other than type bullshit at me?

    Before you reply with more asinine trash, go do something useful for at least one of the catastrophes you're invoking as if you have any right to their pain. While I have lived through several of those disasters personally, as have my friends and family, and done other personal actions to help mitigate most of the others you think you can itemize as if you have anything to do with them.

    Then don't bother replying. You have nothing to teach anyone about selfrighteousness except a bad example of it.

    Vile scumbag. You're beneath contempt. You won't even get any more of that from me. Abandonment to your own corrosive delusion is all you deserve.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  76. Re:The point of the robot... by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1
    Don't call me "sir", you hypocritical cunt. You have done nothing to help anyone with anything, and have said the kinds of stupid shit that get people beat to a pulp here in NYC, if they're insane enough to try saying it.

    So New Yorkers are short-tempered people who leap to violence as their first response to perceived sacrilege? And you're surprised I'm not falling all over myself to feel sorry for you pricks? You've threatened violence before. I think you have enough information on me that you could track me down and physically harm me, if you wanted to. Until you do that, you're no less a coward as I am, sir.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  77. Correct by Psyjack · · Score: 1

    There's a little piece of paper that comes with every piece of electronic equipment that says that by using that particular device, you understand that you must accept any interference that is generated that may cause the device to operate incorrectly. This would include these interferences. Most people throw that piece of paper away without thinking anything about it, and then raise cain when their nifty new toy doesn't work right.

  78. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    Have you seen the Wall Street Journal in the past 4 years?

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  79. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    So I take it that means that you DON'T have any proof?

    I guess kids just aren't joining debate clubs like they used to.. it's kind of a shame.

  80. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    So I take it that means that you DON'T have any proof to back up a single one of those assertions? If you do, I'd be more than glad to take a look at it, but I have no idea what you're talking about until then.

  81. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    Well, if you're incapable of reading the Wall Street Journal and drawing your own conclusions, it's not my problem.

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  82. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    Man, do you realize how pathetic that sounds? I find it amusing that I put up a post asking for evidence, and every person that has responded has been like "WHAT AN IDIOT! CAN'T YOU SEE IT ALL AROUND YOU!" etc etc.

    Fortunately, that's the good thing about evidence--it means something, rather than rabid lunatic claims that can't be supported by anything other delusional fancy.

    I'm going on the record claiming that there are little green men ALL around us, and if you make claims to the contrary, well OPEN UP YOUR EYES MAN, the evidence is all around you.

  83. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    I suppose if I made SPECIFIC CLAIMS OR CHARGES, providing evidence would be my burden, sure.

    However, such a broad, sweeping generalized comment, as I made, doesn't lend itself to an enumeration of the charges and evidence, does it?

    No.

    So I wonder what you agenda is, to miscast my comment as a more specific claim? Are you working off of prepared talking points and didn't BOTHER to actually think if they were applicable to my statements? It would seem not.

    But hey, you're on a roll, and the actual facts don't really matter, do they?

    If you want claims and evidence, although this is off topic, take a read through Elizabeth de la Vegas hypothetical indictment of Bush et. al.: http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=143205

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  84. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    Actually, you didn't at all make a broad, sweeping, or generalized comment. If you feel that I missed your sweeping broad whatever comment, please show it to me, because I can't find it.. In case you forgot what you said, here it is:

    Your first statement:
    "Well, after 9/11 we ARE all under constant surveillance of all our phone and internet traffic,"

    Your claim: After 9/11 (and ergo, not before) everyone (assumed in the US) is under constant survillenace of all our phone and internet traffic.

    I'm looking for any evidence to back this up. This is a very straightforward claim, and has nothing to do with the Iraq war, foreign policy, etc. I scanned the link you sent and saw nothing relevant to what you posted. So, let's see the evidence.

    Your second claim:
    "and we've lost the right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus."

    Again, let's see the evidence. Your link didn't include any discussion of habeas corpus. This is a very straightforward and SPECIFIC claim, let's see the evidence.

    "Sounds to me like it's been pretty damn convenient for SOME folks and their companies."

    I'm not really sure where this came from, but it sounds like you're claiming that this alleged increase of online surveillance and the alleged suspension of habeas corpus is assumed to be convenient for some folks and their companies? Who exactly?

    I'm also baffled by your statement on "talking points" -- what "talking points" did i use? I'm not sure you understand what talking points are, because saying "can I see the facts behind your statement" is NOT a talking point.

    You then say that (to me?) the "actual facts don't really matter" -- but that's exactly what I'm asking for, I'm asking for facts, and you've so far been totally unable to provide them.

  85. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    "I'm looking for any evidence to back this up. This is a very straightforward claim, and has nothing to do with the Iraq war, foreign policy, etc. I scanned the link you sent and saw nothing relevant to what you posted. So, let's see the evidence."

    Go read the documents in EFF v. AT&T.

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  86. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight--you cherry pick one of your three claims (I assume that means you are conceding your other ludicrous statements?) and use as your primary evidence a dismissed court case that never made it to trial--mere allegations? The program that amongst many others, Democrat Lanny Davis praised for its impressive safeguards and the length the program went to protect privacy.

    I'm curious what exactly YOU know about any NSA program that the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board doesn't?

    As a side note, it's always fascinating to me when people who claim to believe in innocence before being proved guilty will go to any length and any amount of spurious evidence to "convict" those who disagree with them.

  87. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    Weren't you the one who asked for documentation of domestic spying?

    So I told you to go read the documentation for EFF v. AT&T.

    When you've completed the homework you asked for, we can continue with your trolling.

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  88. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    You think an untried, dismissed allegation is evidence?

    Well if you believe that people should be tried according to those rules, then I guess that's why you would portray me, asking for facts, as a troll.

  89. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    When was EFF v. AT&T Dismissed?

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  90. Door manufacturers by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

    ... will be very very happy to sell you another one.

    What else can you do? Stop using the door?

    --
    We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  91. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

    I'll prove it as soon as you prove to me that Hurricane Katrina happened. Until then, you're missing the point.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  92. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    If you're talking about Hepting v. AT&T you're correct.

  93. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by mikelieman · · Score: 1

    Something more recent than the July 20th decision by the judge to let the case move forward?

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  94. Re:Mission Accomplished Again! by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    No--you're correct, I was thinking of a different case.

    reassuring to see the case grind through the cogs of justice?