Slashdot Mirror


Disposable Cell Phones

davie writes " A patent has just been issued for what amounts to a disposable cell phone. No LCD, limited battery life, outgoing calls only. The inventor envisions these devices being sold with a limited block of air time, about 60 minutes, at a cost of about $20. Once you use up the air time, toss it. " And, hey, if it means it can be thrown in a bucket of water and you can just get a new one, that's even better!

235 comments

  1. The enviroment - screwed again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would hope that the phones would be recycled, rather than thrown out. As if our land fills weren't stuffed with enough potentially reusable items...

    1. Re:The enviroment - screwed again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piss on the environment, I live in the WIRED.

    2. Re:The enviroment - screwed again? by robotech · · Score: 1

      I have to agree with you on this one. I mean not only will it be taking up useless space in a landfill, but it really does waste the planet's resources. I'm not some ecogeek, so don't paint me as one. I just think that we could really be making some reasonable choices about resource use, and conservation.

    3. Re:The enviroment - screwed again? by Lord+of+Caustic+Soda · · Score: 1

      People who going around inventing new ways to generate rubbish should be force to do rubbish cleaning on the streets...

      A cheap disposable phone will not have the same kind of range as a good quality cellphone (I assume), limiting its use in emergency situations (if you're in the wilderness, you should be packing radio equipment instead of relying on a cellphone to save your butt), and in a city, what's the point of a disposable cellphone that that can't receive? If you only make an occasional call that don't justify spending on a proper cellphone (which are pretty cheap anyway), you probably won't need an disposable one and just stick to using the public phone booth.

      --
      Kill'em! Kill'em all!
  2. first post, yeah! by killmeplease · · Score: 0

    FIRST POST, YEAH

    --
    - Kill Yourself, spare us all! -
  3. Calling card phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In canada you can now get phones like that which use calling cards. Kinda like that.

    1. Re:Calling card phones by GossG · · Score: 1

      The Canadian plan is C$150 including about $50 of air time. Even with our dollar, that's still about USD$100. The article said $20 for the phone with a block of airtime.

    2. Re:Calling card phones by Lord+of+Caustic+Soda · · Score: 1

      Here in New Zealand you can get a cellphone for about $140NZ ($80 US), that comes with $100 air time.

      --
      Kill'em! Kill'em all!
  4. what a waste by thelopez · · Score: 1

    going for filling the landfills again huh??

  5. Anyone find this very useless? by NaTaS777 · · Score: 1

    I find that this is just another way of hurting the enviroment. Sound like flamebait eh? Seriously tho...this seems kinda stupid if you ask me. I mean what are they gunna make disposible next....computers? I still use 486's ect. Don't get me wrong I like fast computers (I got a P3 500) but this is just stupid if you ask me :")
    FLAME AWAY!

    --
    Natas of
    -=Pedophagia=-
    http://www.mp3.com/pedophagia
    Also Admin of
    http://loki.linuxgames.com
    1. Re:Anyone find this very useless? by Agar · · Score: 1

      I think that's the point of Hemos's "mmm-feed-the-land-fill" tagline.

      I hope the manufacturers have the good sense to charge a "deposit fee" that's refundable if the phone is sent back for recycling/recharging/remanufacturing.

      More to the point, why make them truly disposable when the unit still has implicit value? A much better business model would allow a user to buy additional time if there's battery life left. When the battery's dusted, turn the phone in and get your deposit back and credit for unused time.

      ------

    2. Re:Anyone find this very useless? by kcarnold · · Score: 2

      Not useless, in fact it satisfies the #2 reason for having a cell phone (making this up of course): for emergencies. What's #1, you ask. Tie between work and to call friends (and other means of fun). There are people who buy a cell phone, stick it in their glove compartment, and pay their bills every month even though they don't use it. This kind of phone is perfect for them. So I'm not going to bother asking if it has a cellular modem connection or if you can convert it to play Doom, because that deosn't matter. What matters is that it serves an important purpose well.

      This isn't going to get moderated up, is it?

      Kenneth

    3. Re:Anyone find this very useless? by Bald+Wookie · · Score: 1

      This isn't going to get moderated up, is it?

      No, but it really should be up near the top. At least it should be above all of the "expensive, shoddy, deadly" enviro-weenies.

      I think that you are dead on in your analysis. Currently I know three people who have the "Emergency" phone in their glove box. This would be a perfect choice for them. Over the course of a year, they would probably save at least 100 bucks.

      Personally, I hate cell phones. I dont want to be reached most of the time, and I sure as hell dont want to talk while I am in the grocery store. In the past year I can think of about five times that I could have used a cell phone. At current prices, that level of usage just isnt worth it. For a 20 dollar one time charge, sure it would be nice to have.

      As far as environmental concerns, I dont think that these phones will present too much of a problem. My buddies who use their cell phones have upgraded two or three times in the past four years. That doesnt include breakage, dead and buried batteries, or toilet droppage. Everyone that I know who has an emergency phone still has the first phone that they bought. Keep in mind that people who are going to go through five or ten of these disposables in a year probably already have a phone, or will buy a real one. With well designed phone deposit and return programs, the environmental impact will be negligable. Think it through, disposable does not always equal environmentally unfriendly.

      -BW

    4. Re:Anyone find this very useless? by LocutusMIT · · Score: 1

      > I dont want to be reached most of the time, and I sure as hell dont want to talk while I am in the grocery store.


      I agree. I carry a cellphone with me all the time, but it's usually off. I use it often enough to pay the bill, but mostly it's for my personal use. The only incoming calls I get are expected (ie. I know that someone's trying to reach me and I need to leave, or I just ordered a pizza from lab, which doesn't accept off-campus calls).

      For this purpose, however, I have found it extremely useful. Especially for unexpected or emergency situations.

    5. Re:Anyone find this very useless? by jafac · · Score: 1

      I'd say it was even the #1 reason.

      Not so prevalent this year, but LAST year I can remember all the TV ads were directed at scaring people into buying cell phones.

      Since it became common knowlege that a 911 call made on a cell phone could be blocked if you're in a competing network's region, the industry suddenly stopped that advertising practice (although I think the FCC banned the 911 blocking).

      I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  6. Wow, this is really great! by cruise · · Score: 1

    I love this! As it is, I consider my Qualcomm 1960 "disposable" It was like $30 and I would not miss the $30 replacement of the phone itself too much if it died, what I would miss is the $50 activation fee for the new phone! If these things start showing up for $20 I'll dump my current carrier and opt for these phones. I hate paying for "plans" where I'll use all the minutes this month but none next month but need the savings the plan offers.

    This could bring a whole slew of "smalltimers" into the cell phone market. Just like the phone cards you can get at the WallMart checkout brought relative nobody phone companies into the picture. Not to mention the resale potential for these things.

    Brain cancer or not, cell phones rule. I've dumped my home phone completely and use only digital cell at the moment. It is a CDMA phone so I can even use it with my laptop while I'm fishing with almost no extra hardware (plugs right into the serial port, the phone is the modem. I love it!)

    1. Re:Wow, this is really great! by Paranoid+Diatribe · · Score: 1
      I would think that authorities would get a little upset with the anonymity this kind of disposable tool brings with it. Granted, it's not near as untraceable as the Iridium phones, but at least your name isn't tied to the accouting systems anywhere.

      I'd love these things (if the the bang-for-the-buck was good, unlike their calling-card cousins), and would probably use them if they delivered what is promised.

      I'm almost certain a recycling mechanism would be in place, much like the disposable camera system. Though this analogy is weak, as your pictures are held hostage by the fact that you must return the camera to get them. I imagine maybe a deposit/refund system would work. The phone with time costs you $30, but you get $10 back for returning the phone.

      Can you imagine vending machines dispensing cell phones and SIM (correct term?) chips for extra time? Very neat idea.

    2. Re:Wow, this is really great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do not have to turn in the camera to get your pictures. You open the little panel on the bottom and remove the film can, and then you take the camera apart and keep the flash. With an SCR and the existing neon bulb you can make a strobe light out of it, or just have fun making noise/shocking people with the capacitor.

    3. Re:Wow, this is really great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way the FCC has been cracking down on the cellular operators and requiring infrastructure providers to have cell phone calls tracable (and globally locatable!) you can bet your ass that the authorities would disapprove.

      I work for a leading manufacturer of Cellular Infrastructure. The thought of a register (database in telcomm terms) having the extra capacity to store those additional thousands of little records for those disposable cell phones along with the hundreads of thousands of regular subscribers makes me shudder. Just the management of those thousands of extra transient records becomes a nightmare.

      The only way it might be feasable is to have small cards (like SIM cards in the GSM phones) that let your information persist and the mobile station be the variable.

  7. Waste not, want not by Aigeanta · · Score: 1

    You know, I don't really like the idea of disposable technology...we already have enough litter lining the highways as it is.

    --
    a prophet on the burning shore
  8. If they hold a charge... by Rombuu · · Score: 3

    ...this could be good for the "emergency cell phone to keep in the glove compartment so if stranded in the middle of Nebraska in a snow storm you don't have to pull a Donner party" scenario.

    --

    DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
    1. Re:If they hold a charge... by Mr_Plow · · Score: 2

      If I were stranded in Nebraska I would volunteer myself to be the first meal, cell-phone or not.
      -------------------------------------------- --------------

    2. Re:If they hold a charge... by mochaone · · Score: 1

      Damn...that was funny as hell!

      --
      Hates people who have stupid little sigs
  9. Pre-Paid Cell Phones by exeunt · · Score: 1

    I'd much rather use one of these, they are more environmentally safe. Both my parents have one, and are satisfied with them, and they say they have pretty good rate plans.
    ---

    --
    "...silence is a dangerous sound."
    1. Re:Pre-Paid Cell Phones by Levine · · Score: 2

      The thing with prepaid cell phones is that they usually operate on a 'buy x minutes of time over the phone' philosophy. The problem lies in this: the lowest denomination of minutes you can buy is usually high (around 30) and are fairly expensive, and the phone requires that you buy minutes every [other] month, or it stops working and you have to get it re-activated.

      So, in other words, it's still basicially a monthly fee, they just disguise it a little.

      Levine

    2. Re:Pre-Paid Cell Phones by linuxonceleron · · Score: 1

      Are there any prepaids that aren't like this, I know the MCI Worldcom phones are(made by Uniden) I would really like a phone that could be used for emergincies without the $x a month fee for unused minutes, At least the minutes add up when you don't use them, but it doesn't help that the minutes are about 80 cents each!

      --

      Shine on, you crazy diamond.
    3. Re:Pre-Paid Cell Phones by LocalH · · Score: 1

      Well, I used to be on prepaid with Bellsouth Mobility DCS (East TN region). The prepaid cards were either $25 or $50 (with the first card purchase required to be $50, with $25 of that for an activation fee) and the minutes were 50 cents (75 for LD), and (get this!) it wouldn't allow me to make ANY 800/888/877/900 calls (why? who knows...) The cards didn't roll over UNLESS you bought more time before the existing time expired (90 days for $50 cards, 60 days for $25). If you went 60 days with a $0 balance, then the account was deactivated. Oh well, that was better than a $700 deposit for normal rate plans (I had no credit rating then)
      _______
      Scott Jones
      Newscast Director / ABC19 WKPT
      Game Show Fan / C64 Coder

      --
      FC Closer
  10. No incoming calls? by Admiral+Burrito · · Score: 1

    The article says it only does outgoing calls. This certainly won't replace the non-disposable variety.

    It might be useful for non-cellphone owners who just want something handy in case of emergency, but with regular cellphones getting so cheap I doubt it'll really take off.

    1. Re:No incoming calls? by Paranoid+Diatribe · · Score: 1
      The article says it only does outgoing calls. This certainly won't replace the non-disposable variety.

      The anonymity would be of great value, though most people don't know (or care) how much their privacy is invaded.

      Imagine a drug dealer and one of his clients decided to "meet" on a local party line (most are free anymore). Talk in "code" slang and they are safe.

      Better yet... modem adapters! Totally (well... almost) anonymous surfing, chatting, etc., though that would chew up cell time fast.

    2. Re:No incoming calls? by Admiral+Burrito · · Score: 1


      The anonymity would be of great value, though most people don't know (or care) how much their privacy is invaded.


      It provides anonymity for the caller only, as the called person has to be at a real phone number in order to be reached.



      Also, it would probably be very easy to identify who owns a disposable phone by keeping a log of what numbers they dial, assuming the phones are each used at least several times. Everyone has their own individual calling patterns.



      If you really want anonymity there's always payphones.


    3. Re:No incoming calls? by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 1
      Better yet... modem adapters! Totally (well... almost) anonymous surfing, chatting, etc., though that would chew up cell time fast.

      Yeah, but what happens if your phone runs out of minutes in the middle of a download? That could be inconvenient, to say the least.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
    4. Re:No incoming calls? by Indomitus · · Score: 2

      One of the main uses I can see for this is for kids. Give your kid a throwaway phone to keep in their backpack and they can use it to call for help/a ride/etc.
      In Israel they have cell phones that have programmable buttons fordialing home and the police that can only be used for outgoing calls. That's an excellent idea that would be perfect for this.

  11. Somewhat off-topic by maan · · Score: 1

    Hey,

    Just a quick question...does anybody know what happened to hemos and his (burnt down) house ?

  12. Already been done by Brian+Knotts · · Score: 5
    I mean what are they gunna make disposible next....computers?

    Packard Bell already thought of this, and for years sucessfully marketed computers which were ready to be tossed in the trash as soon as you took them out of the box.

    --
    Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

    1. Re:Already been done by mochaone · · Score: 1

      This was funny as hell!

      --
      Hates people who have stupid little sigs
    2. Re:Already been done by Artie+FM · · Score: 1

      That almost made me bust my gut!!!

      --
      Be insightful. If you can't be insightful, be informative.
      If you can't be informative, use my name
  13. This is stupiod by TummyX · · Score: 1

    Making things disposable is so silly. Stop it damn it >:|.

    Just have cheap cellphones and calling cards ...wait there already are.

  14. complete anonymity by say-tan · · Score: 1

    so the price is about $20 for 60 minutes of cellular phone time.

    would it include long distance, because a disposable cellular shouldn't be tied down to a certain area.

    i guess that would be completely anonymous as well.

    --
    Men use thought only to justify their wrong doings, and speech only to conceal their thoughts. -- Voltaire
    1. Re:complete anonymity by say-tan · · Score: 1
      oops, i meant to add that at $20 for 60 minutes, it's 33 cents per minute of anonymous cellular phone calls. (yes, i know the math is simple but i'm just pointing out the low price of anonymity.)

      --
      Men use thought only to justify their wrong doings, and speech only to conceal their thoughts. -- Voltaire
  15. Hmm.. interesting by Guyle · · Score: 1

    There are several issues to consider with the disposable cell phones. Well, maybe only two. But anyway, I'll lay 'em out for you.

    First of all - probably what drove the creator to make them in the first place - they're convienient as hell. You get one of those things, toss it in your car, and BOOM - instant emergency communication wherever you're at. Going on a backpacking trip? Pick one up at the store on your way out - if you get lost, you won't be without help. You're a poor college student who needs to be able to call the professor when you're snowed out somewhere? Take one with you. The creation of these makes having communication when you need it - without the hassles of signing contracts and paying outrageous bills - easily accessible.

    On the other hand, they could create a waste problem. I would certainly hope that the company(ies) who market the phone would have some sort of recycling program going, so that they're just returned somewhere (like maybe the store you got it from) so they can be reactivated and resold. It would just be good business practice to do that, really - lesser manufacturing costs.

    I'll admit that if I see one of these at Wal-Mart someday, and I've got some extra cash, I'll probably pick one up and toss it in my car. Never know when I might need to call someone out in the middle of nowhere, especially living in Wyoming. Excellent idea on the creator's part.

    1. Re:Hmm.. interesting by kickahaota · · Score: 1

      In most circumstances, 'emergency use' would probably be the worst possible justification for a phone like this. Since it's intended as a disposable phone, it probably won't be rechargeable. So you throw one in your glove box; then, once you've driven into the snowbank, you pull it out and... the battery's died. You're up a creek with no way to recharge it. With a normal, rechargeable phone, you've got a much better chance in this situation; just plug the phone into the cigarette lighter, as long as your car battery hasn't gone dead too. And with a rechargeable phone, you can afford to test the thing before you head out on your trip, without worrying that your test call will be the straw that breaks the battery's back.

      If all you want is a phone for true, life-threatening emergencies, there's another option; just find someone who's recently cancelled their cellphone plan, and offer to buy their phone. In these days of subsidized, system-locked digital phones, people who switch companies usually have to buy a new phone anyway, so they'll often sell their old one for a pittance. (Online auction houses are great for this.) You don't even need an airtime plan; FCC regs require cellular carriers to accept 911 calls even from unactivated phones. And if it's not quite that much of an emergency, most carriers have a special number (like *CALL) that will allow you to place calls from an unactivated phone using a credit card; you'll pay outrageous airtime rates (like $2 a minute), but it will still probably be cheaper than buying a prepaid disposable phone and airtime just in case something like this turns up. And there's no waste; in fact, you're reducing waste, by reusing a phone that would probably otherwise be thrown away.

      There is one real potential use I can see for disposable phones, which could be a major plus or a major minus depending on how you look at it; it could make it much easier to legally place truly anonymous cellphone calls.

    2. Re:Hmm.. interesting by vivekb · · Score: 1
      I would be careful about using these as emergency phones. I would think that to cut costs, transmit power would be decreased. Your range might not stretch too far from the tower.

      I just hope this doesn't wind up raising the cost of a regular phone.

  16. Is there a Bad Side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If criminals can just buy these to do a single drug deal then it would be very difficult for the police with a valid search warrant to monitor a criminals activities.

    But it would make the average citizen more anonymous than in a long time.

    1. Re:Is there a Bad Side? by gorilla · · Score: 1
      We already have anonymous calling, because you can walk into any convience store and buy a prepaid calling card with cash, which can be used at any phone to make calls which can't be traced back. (Obviously they can identify that a call was made, but not who made it, and there are many more phones which make 1-800 numbers usable than make long distance numbers)

      This would just be a new way to acomplish the same thing.

  17. Please No!!! by blahtree · · Score: 1
    This is sick! I can't believe that anyone would do this! Don't we have enough problems with garbage as it is? It's not worth destroying our planet just to stay connected.

    Having stated the obvious, the sad thing is that according to the article, this woman has put "everything [she] owns" into this project. I can only hope that after it flops, she can at least eke out a living on her other inventions.

    1. Re:Please No!!! by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      It would make more sense if you returned them back to the manufacturer for reloading. Perhaps they could give five bucks off of a new phone if you return the old one, or somesuch.

      --
      The cake is a pie
  18. Phone hacking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since these phones would be very anonymous could they be hacked to give free long distance?

    1. Re:Phone hacking? by Savage+Henry+Matisse · · Score: 1

      A glance through the article reveals that tampering with the case (it would basically be a piece of laminated, flexible circuit-board with no "true", hard-plastic case) would ice the whole phone. I guess, where there's a will there's a way, but still, it looks like they've got tamper-proofing in mind in their design.

      Also, side-note, is it just me, or have most of the folks who posted in response to this not read the article? Whatever happened to looking before leaping?

      --
      Much Love,
      "S"HM
      *****
      (I refuse to spellcheck out of contempt for your belief system)
  19. Puts new meaning to the term 'throw-away comment'! by dustpuppy · · Score: 1
    Think what a benefit this will be as a stress relief tool.

    After that aggravating conversation with your significant other or that one-sided angry monologue from your boss, you could beat the living daylights out of your phone on the nearest tree. You would feel much better after that!

  20. yeah right by HarveyNeon · · Score: 1

    i'll belive it when i see it. this is one of those things that would be at the beginning of a bad movie in the fifties on 'popular science.' this guy's got it all wrong. disposible dishmosible. 20 bucks yeah right.

    --


    /-//|/

    "..Constructive critizism is always welcome however."
  21. The piles for miles by Microlith · · Score: 1

    Disposable phones, disposable computers, diapers, anything else you can dispose of.


    I expect to see a Disposable Society quite soon.

  22. what they really need by llornkcor · · Score: 1

    What is really needed, as for as disposible phones go. Is to have one that is edible !! That way, if you get stranded, you can make a call for help, and then chow. It wouldn't go in the dump. Except that dogs would REALLY love eatting the phone then.

    1. Re:what they really need by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Well they probably said the same thing about underwear, but an edible phone just doesn't seem as fun...

    2. Re:what they really need by Rhys+Dyfrgi · · Score: 1

      Except that you can't make a phone call on underwear.

      No, don't tell me. I don't want to know. I really don't.
      ---

      --
      END OF LINE
    3. Re:what they really need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh actually, it seems to me that since most of it would not be terrbly digestible, it *would* wind up in the "dump"!

  23. cellular internet (off topic) by GossG · · Score: 1

    Cruise says"I can even use it with my laptop while I'm fishing with almost no extra hardware."

    Forget the "almost". A friend has a phone with an IR port that can talk to his pilot. He dials the phone, puts it on the coffee table, and starts surfing on the handheld. The phone sure ain't disposable, though.

  24. seems like kind of a waste by paxx · · Score: 1

    What's the point of buying a disposable cellphone? If you need a phone, why not just get one of the plans offered by the various phone companies? Those plans practically give away the phone in the first place. It's also a waste of silicon and plastic to make one that is only good for 60 minutes of use. If you want something you can throw away, why not just buy a prepaid cellphone? It serves the same purpose as a disposable one would, and you can get more time without having to buy a new phone, thereby keeping trash out of landfills and protecting the environment, etc, etc, ad infinitum...

  25. The ideal would be... by maan · · Score: 1

    The really ideal plan for planet Earth would be the following: a set of frequencies that all nations agree on (no more gsm on 1900 mhz for the us and 900 and 1800 for the rest). All the rest that is needed already exists: phones with a card that plug into it. So you can have your normal cell phone account wherever you live. And if you're travelling...you take the phone with you and you buy a prepaid card where you are. So wherever you are on this planet, you can have a cheap way of owning a cell phone, even if you're travelling...

    My 1 italian pound...

  26. Silly idea by seizer · · Score: 1

    Putting aside the obvious fact that this is completely daft from an environmental point of view, can this even be done economically? I've heard that a cellphone is worth about 150 pounds (240 bucks or so). So how could it be done?

    Furthermore, the system now in place in Britain, called pre-pay, is far better. You buy a phone, and then buy credit in the form of scratchcards which have unique serial codes - you can then type these into the phone and this tops up the call credit. No contract, no other fees - just an increased charge to make a call. Really rather simple. And of course, more environmentally friendly.

    &lt/ADVERT&gt

    This disposable idea sounds mad. As virtually everyone else has said.

    Bah. Humbug.


    --Remove SPAM from my address to mail me

    1. Re:Silly idea by say-tan · · Score: 1
      sorry if this appears to be flamebait, but i'd like to suggest that you read the article before making uneducated posts.

      --
      Men use thought only to justify their wrong doings, and speech only to conceal their thoughts. -- Voltaire
  27. Sometimes useful, sometimes not by Daffy+Duck · · Score: 1
    I can see these things being useful in the same situations where disposable cameras are useful: when you're on vacation or somewhere where you'd be afraid to lose your "real" phone.

    But I don't think any regular cellphone user would want one. The high-volume customers are where all the money is at, so they practically give you the phone for free anyway. What's the advantage of having an extra-crappy disposable one that can't have any of your "personal" features? And is the inventor going to pay for the roadside-cellphone cleanup industry this will inevitably require?

    Or I could be completely wrong. It's getting to be a habit with me.

  28. This was in Gibson's latest... by kreinsch · · Score: 1

    These were actually in William Gibson's latest book.
    You could buy the phones based on the amount of time you needed.
    The point seemed to be that you could buy them out of a vending machine and they would be anonymous. (From what I hear, they sell most anything out of a vending machine in Japan, these days.)
    Of course, in the book you can make and receive calls on the disposable phones. So reality still has a little way to go.

  29. Blasphemy! by Splat · · Score: 1

    Oh these phones are SO NOT useful if I can't play Nibbles (copyright Microsoft, uh.. 1992 or something) on them.

    Well seriously eh, what the heck is the point of this? Why don't they put effort into making $20 cell phones - period. Forget disposable phones, someone should put some engineering power into a lowcost phone in general with some modern features that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

  30. network overload? by dakky · · Score: 1
    I wonder how many Big Mac eaters and Walmart shoppers it would take to flood the wireless network with cheap talk.

    It seems to me that each phone would need some sort of ID in order to place an outgoing call. What do you think? Is there an unlimited amount of bandwidth/phone ID's out there, or will I be sharing my conversations with the Happy Meal family in line next to me?

    ----------------------------
    Her vocabulary is as bad as, like, whatever.
    - Winner, "Worst Analogies" contest

  31. do theeses mess the brane??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i herd that thes pfones mess the brane.,, i say forr u to smok wead to hellp yur brane and stuf,; if u uses this stuuf tehn smokke waed to help yu brane be snmart yaeh!!,,,

    1. Re:do theeses mess the brane??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow man... Did you get involved in a car accident or something? I think you need to see a doctor.

    2. Re:do theeses mess the brane??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a study done that pointed toward the effects of loss of memory due to cell phone use, or such. It was done with rats, so, only if you are a rat, submersed in a tub of milk, and forced to swim toward a platform, should this be taken into consideration.

      However, in your case, I would not take any chances, considering that you've forgotten every bit of grammar that was taught to you in school already.

    3. Re:do theeses mess the brane??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "you've forgotten every bit of grammar.." Duh- you missed the whole point of the post, dude, it was like, a joke. Plus, phones do actually mess with your brain even if you are not a rat. Read the studies, quake at night. (On a LAN).

  32. Bad news for the environment, again! by BlackHawk · · Score: 1
    This is ludicrous! We're being buried in our own garbage already, and now someone wants to add cheap throwaway phones to the trash stream. Bad for the environment and bad for us!

    --

    Believe nothing, not even if I say it, if it violates your sense of reason -- Buddha

  33. DIVX? by drivers · · Score: 0

    Use it then throw it away... the best idea since DIVX!

    1. Re:DIVX? by j+a+w+a+d · · Score: 1

      Except that, for anonymonity (sp?) and privacy, this is the *anti* DIVX. And wasn't that the whole issue with DIVX?

      --
      i dont display scores, and my threshhold is -1. post accordingly.
      Discuss /. policies
  34. Yeah nr 38 by pol-pot · · Score: 0
    I got post nr 38 I got post nr 38 I got post nr 38

    And by tha way I just wanted U to know that I have post nr 38...

    (Please don't spam me (I really hope U do...))

  35. Analog Network by ddpg · · Score: 3

    I bet you this is the way the cell phone companies plan on continuing to rake the money in from their analog networks that are being replaced by digital ones. So instead of abandoning them, they offer cheap phones/airtime and with outgoing only, they can use their phone numbers for their digital networks. So basically it's an End of Life strategy.

    I'm sure that they would try to recycle them kinda like bottle redemption... you buy a phone for $25, when you are done you buy another for $25 but you get $5 off for returning the other phone.

    Not a bad idea.

    Peter Gogas

    1. Re:Analog Network by dingbat_hp · · Score: 1

      cell phone companies plan on continuing to rake the money in from their analog networks

      Not over here in Europe they're not. Analogue is extinct -- there's a bandwidth shortage and the last thing the operators want is to waste their valuable spectrum licences on the poor spectrum / profit ratio of analogue. There have even been trade-in bounty schemes on ETACS gear.

      Last Xmas the UK had a massive surge in pre-paid SIM phones. They're a low capital outlay for a capable, but not leading-edge, GSM phone (display, SMS, lots of memories, voicemail, but nothing like data connectivity) and a regular purchase of top-up cards for the price of a few six-packs of beer. Now you can't look around a trailer park without seeing piles of these old pre-pay phones up on bricks.

  36. Special Car Phones by Mr_Plow · · Score: 2

    I'm waiting for the phones that automatically detect if they are in a car or not, and disable themselves accordingly. Either that, or require car-phone users to post their cell numbers on the outside of their cars.
    ------------------------------------------- ---------------

    1. Re:Special Car Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is insightful? Boy, the moderators here are really whacked.

    2. Re:Special Car Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you got flipped the bird while phoning and driving today, huh?

      I'm sure when you drive behind some moron on the phone tomorrow on a busy street, you'll change your mind.

    3. Re:Special Car Phones by acb · · Score: 1

      Or a numberless line-of-sight infrared phone system for communicating to neighboring cars.

    4. Re:Special Car Phones by hawk · · Score: 2

      >Either that, or require car-phone users to post
      >their cell numbers on the outside of their cars.

      Nah, not the regular number. A special one to kill the engine and engage the brakes . . .

    5. Re:Special Car Phones by jafac · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for a missile warhead that seeks cell-phone emissions.

      Why wait for brain cancer?

      I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  37. Anon login with: slashdotac/slashdotac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    they disabled cypherpunks/cypherpunks so I created slashdotac/slashdotac to keep information free and anonymous.

    Power to the poeple.

    1. Re:Anon login with: slashdotac/slashdotac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was cyberphunk/cyberphunk

    2. Re:Anon login with: slashdotac/slashdotac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdotid/slashdot works also

      When NYtimes first opened their web site, their tracking of users was discussed on the cypherpunks mailing list. Someone created cypherpunks/cypherpunks as an anonymous login. It worked for almost 2 years...

  38. Mac had "Trash Can" Windows has "Recycle Bin" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you taste the bile?

  39. great by DarkClown · · Score: 1

    what a fucking gross idea.
    sorry, that's all.

  40. Prior art... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iain Banks had these in Against a Dark Background, which was copyrighted in 1993. Who can go me one earlier?

  41. Cadmium in throwaway phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course everyone throws old nicads away anyway because very few recycling/disposal facilities can get licensed for Cd. It's really nasty stuff. But when every place in town says "We can't accept those", what else can you do? Shipping cadmium to a facility that accepts Cd is legally problematic too [shipping hazardous substances and all]. So what's left? The garbage can! Hey! I tried to do it the right way.

  42. this is ridiculous! by RelliK · · Score: 1

    American society promotes enough waste as it is. Please, let the insanity stop!

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:this is ridiculous! by Vector+Inspector · · Score: 1

      Folks, read the article. The phone isn't even really meant to be disposable: Part of it is credit card shaped so it can be swiped through and given more air time. You can keep using this sucker 'till the battery dies... and then give back to the company for recharging (and hopefully get a discount on new phones). Too bad about the outgoing calls only thing, that and the brain cancer and memory loss.

      --


      spoo

  43. No one bitches about throw-away cameras? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they don't get recycled. I knew a guy who worked at Crest photo in Burbank (they do all film dev for all vons and save-ons nationwide). They just yank the film out of disposable cams and toss the camera into the dumpster. I used to raid the bin for the cameras and tear them apart as most of the throw-away cams had two fully charged AA alkaline cells in them!

    1. Re:No one bitches about throw-away cameras? by say-tan · · Score: 1
      they also have a 330V 120-160uF capacitor

      fun for the whole family :)

      --
      Men use thought only to justify their wrong doings, and speech only to conceal their thoughts. -- Voltaire
    2. Re:No one bitches about throw-away cameras? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "disposable" cameras are reused most of the time. Of course it depends on who processes the film

    3. Re:No one bitches about throw-away cameras? by linuxonceleron · · Score: 1

      I had fun with one of these on a school trip, after the pictures of new york were taken, I shorted the capacitor with the metal end of a pencil. Nice loud POP, right in the middle of some museum. Security came over toward me and my friends, and we slipped into the elevator...Some kid thought throwing it into some river after charging the flash would kill some ducks, but happily it didn't work :)

      --

      Shine on, you crazy diamond.
    4. Re:No one bitches about throw-away cameras? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing beats the reaction one gets when you throw one of these at someone. Most people are reactive enough to try to catch it... :-)

      BTW: Don't try the above. You might injure/main someone... I won't be held responsible. That's means: Your Bad. So there.

  44. Poof... there goes the environment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disposable everything... Unfortunately, the environment is not disposable, and it recharges rather slowly. If the fantastic visions of the future we often discuss right here on /. are ever to come true, maybe we'd better be more careful in what we support or we'll wade through mountains of disposed cellphones and computers before we know it.

    /rant{ So pray tell me, why-oh-why does this thing have to be disposable? Why not make it rechargeable? Why do these marketing-driven morons fail to learn time after time some basic truths about conservation of limited resources? Why do they only think about `bottom line' and why do they not look any further than their next management position... }

  45. This could be wonderful by Hollins · · Score: 1

    With the U.S. FBI forcing surveillance measures down the throats of cell phone users (instant wire taps and location tracking possible w/o warrent), this could be a great end-run around around these Orwellian measures. If all this surveillance hardware becomes pointless, maybe they won't install it to start with.

    On the other hand, Congress's response will probably be to push through legistlation requiring that all cell phone buyers show id and be registered in a database (as is becoming the case to buy a plane ticket). *sigh*

    I'm already envisioning teenagers diving into trashcans at the mall trying to find a cell phone with 0:30 left in it so they can call their moms to pick them up. :)

  46. reduce & reuse? by decomp · · Score: 1
    Please don't tell me these things will actually get thrown out! Sure, both the inventor and the product sound cool, but we really shouldn't be making more one-use only gadgets. This seems like a poster-product for a European policy (proposed or actual?) I once heard about: making product manufacturers take responsibility for the garbage they produce (packaging, etc.). As things stand now, society subsidizes manufacturers who produce garbage-intensive (and other resource-hogging) goods. They make the stuff, get the profit, we have some fun, and then we pay for it be hauled away and stored (as well as a bunch of other "externalities"). Shouldn't the burden be shared a little more equitably? Since manufacturers never have to deal with the disposing of their items, there are no incentives for them to reduce garbage production. How different would Ms. Altschul's throw-away-cell-phone look if she knew that she would have to pay for dealing with them after they're used? This kind of thing sure makes the U.S. look hypocritical when we try to tell the rest of the world to slow population growth or forest felling.

  47. Why are ppl allowed patents on generic IDEAS? by poopie · · Score: 1

    Can I get a patent on my great idea for a biodegradable phone?!?

    Sheesh! Someone in the patent office is asleep at the wheel. Some people in the US gov't are asleep at the wheel as well.

    US patents are issued for either 7,14, or 21 years.

    That might have been appropriate in the 1800's to allow somebody to profit from their idea, but in 1999, even a 7 year patent on computing products is ABSURD!

    Image if I would have patented the WEB BROWSER in 1985 and the US patent office would have issued a 21 year patent -- I'd still have 7 years of my patent left.

    technology patents and especially internet or computer-related patents should be looked at VERY CAREFULLY and I suggest that they should be issued for 1,2, or 3 years instead of 7,14, or 21 years.

    In the meantime, all you internet patent attorneys are probably loving this, huh? (enjoy it while it lasts...)

    1. Re:Why are ppl allowed patents on generic IDEAS? by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 1
      Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this patent is for this one specific phone, not the idea of a disposible phone. (I tried to go back and look at the article to make sure, but I got a server error.)

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
  48. Woohoo! I can start my own drug cartel! by Randy+Rathbun · · Score: 3

    Just think, boys and girls - a phone that can never be traced to you! Granted, it would be hard to do a drug ring with this because it won't accept calls, but big deal!

    Maybe I am just being stupid, but this is worse than divx. Who in their right mind, asside from criminals and kids who want to look cool (also known as wannabes) would want one of these things? PCS service from Sprint is dirt cheap and the phones from them are like $50, and if you are really stingy you can get one from one of the other companies for one cent.

    It's pure idiocy, so they will probably make a fortune off of them - just not from me.

    1. Re:Woohoo! I can start my own drug cartel! by Keeper · · Score: 1

      I can actually think of several legitimate uses (provided these "phones" don't work like phone cards [ie: "expire" on mm/dd/yyyy]).

      Put one in all your cars in case of a break down. Alot cheaper than installing mobile phones in each car and paying for them. You lose less money if someone breaks into your car and steals it.

      Give to your kids when they go out in case of an emergency. Cheaper than having several phones, loss due to breakage/left it on the bus/whatever is minimal.

      If I really thought hard I'm sure I could come up with other uses... (and currently, I do not own a cell phone, mainly because I can't afford monthly fees right now [ie: college student]).

  49. Great kid phone by Agar · · Score: 1

    Limit the outgoing phone numbers to parents' work, home, pager, etc, give it to your kid and don't worry that he'll lose it or abuse it.

    Ideal.
    ------

  50. Waste or Want----a good idea with a bad execution by tomwhore · · Score: 1

    The idea of a Use Once and Burn vector for messages is a sound one.Anonymous messaging is fast going the way of the dodo bird. This exectution though leavs a lot to be desired.

    I bet ya the devices are serialzed in some way and traceable to a store. Once traceable to a store it wont be all that impossible to track a customer.

    If you pay in cash that may be ok, but i bet there will be a credit card needed to buy them.

    The enviro aspect is also not so hot. Better still would be a cell you could erase down to the core and have recoded. Of course this still would require, im betting, some sort of tracable transaction.

    The need for this sort of thing is real, but this is not it.

    --
    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
  51. There's still the Grand Canyon by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3

    Has the cell-phone craze and consumerism reached the point where cell phones are just too blasé?

    Who is this market? People with such crappy credit they can't get approved for or afford a cell phone contract. They'll probably make them in various crazy colors a la iMac to get kids into it.

    Patents like these really make me wonder if the ecology movement is completely dead. Faster, cheaper, and better should eventually equal out to reliable equipment that lasts a long time. Instead faster, cheap, better = disposable crap. Eventually you'll be able to buy a disposable version of any electronics you like. Imagine the landfill nightmare of having thowaway TV's, CDplayers, fax machines, etc. If this is the first wave of disposable electronics, I'll be the first to boycott.

    Heh, I got a kick out of her reasons why this throw away idea will work:

    "An engineer's mentality is to make
    something last, to make it durable. A toy's life span is about an hour, then the kid throws it away. You get it, you play with it and -- boom -- it's gone."


    Why if kids do it, it must be the smart thing to do. Or she's admitting her target market is really dumb adults.


    "It's the ultimate in-your-face advertising," Ms. Altschul said.


    That just says it all doesn't it?



    1. Re:There's still the Grand Canyon by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      >"It's the ultimate in-your-face advertising," Ms. Altschul said.
      >
      >That just says it all doesn't it?

      Yeah, she needs to have more attitude and be pro-active in this paradigm

      Rich

      Perhaps she needs sun glasses

    2. Re:There's still the Grand Canyon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd be seriously frightened at the number of 10 year olds in the UK with cellphones. The pre-pay ones are so cheap (50 pounds - about $80 - for a GSM phone, battery, charger, then you buy top-up cards. Incoming calls don't cost you anything, they just cost the caller around $0.50/minute) that kids get them for christmas. It's wierded me out several times when I see pre-teens walking down the street with their friends and a motorola or nokia welded to their ear...

    3. Re:There's still the Grand Canyon by SatanLilHlpr · · Score: 1

      I agree with this.

      This development is just disgusting. How much industial capacity ( == (pollution output && resource consumption) ) does this represent? We've got to get a handle on ourselves, folks, our thoughtless urge to consume will do us in materially in the long run, if not spiritually in the short run.


      -Helping Satan Daily, in small portions

  52. Grrrr... by FrankBlues · · Score: 1
    It's called anything made by Nokia....


    I give up... next thing will be disposable web terminals, graciously donated to schools by Micro$pend, with 30-day licences for Win2K...


    Both concepts are equally useless.

  53. Recycling would work.... by kraptv · · Score: 1

    I would think that a recycling program would work fine in this program. If this caught on and you could simply pick the things up at K-Mart, Tesco, etc, you could simply take the used-up one and maybe get a $1 or $2 credit back. I'm sure the internals could easily be reused and the plastic case could be recycled.

    Think of how some states have a bottle/can deposit that you get back when you recycle. Apply it here.

    With this in mind, I think it's a great idea! I'd be interested in keeping one around for emergencies and special activities!

    --
    -- kraptv@skylab.org * LUDDITES UNITE. *
  54. thoughtless by zigzag · · Score: 1

    Yet another environmentally thoughtless idea.

  55. Cameras == cell phones? by BLiP2 · · Score: 1

    Interesting concept, but i have reservations about the idea of continuing the promotion a disposeable mentality. Of course, if they have anywhere near the popularity of disposeable cameras (remember those silly things, why would someone buy a camera to throw away?) she'll make a lot of money.

    also, view the full patent text here

    return 0;
    //(BLiP)

    --
    Vote Technocratic! Government by killer robots!
    1. Re:Cameras == cell phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disposable cameras are great though. Keep one on your glovebox incase you have a smash & you get some photos to remember the scene (might save your bacon one day).

      Also, you get to take them places you'd fear to take your "real" camera, like good parties :)

      They're also not really disposable - they go back to the film developer, who reconditions them, fits a new cardboard outer, and resells them. The problem with the cellphone concept is that there's no incentive to return them to base (unless you get a deposit back?)

    2. Re:Cameras == cell phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ACtually the throwaway cameras had one nice feature -- they came in a water-resistant form, and real cameras usable underwater were really expensive.

  56. Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by xtal · · Score: 4

    I would like to point out that we're not being "buried in our own garbage". This is largely a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is, and sometimes, "just throwing it away", is the best thing to do from a environmental perspective!

    I don't want to start a flamewar, and I'll probably get moderated down by an eco-freak, but please concider that when you recycle something, it doesn't magically turn into another product. It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free. It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant. Recycling is often worse than throwing it away!

    Interestingly enough, a study done in England (Referenced in American Scientific, Sigma Xi Jorunal) indicates that recycling causes _more_ consumption, since people _feel good_ about using recycled products!

    This doesn't mean a throw away culture is OK - but if you need the service or product, it might make sense. There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need, 'cause we'll do ourselves long in based on current population projections before this is an issue.

    Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Recycling is last, because it doesn't work very well! Why does everyone forget about the first two, which work _Really_ well. Cut down, and reuse.

    Just because it's disposable, doesn't mean it's bad. It might even be BETTER. It might not feel good, though. Consuming resources is something we should think about, and I think people think sucking energy is OK just because it's being recycled, which sometimes is really dumb.

    Think about that when you're haulin those bottles back in your 4 ton Ford Extrusion, er, Excursion, wasting a resource we should conserve - gasoline.

    Kudos!

    --
    ..don't panic
    1. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by ai0524 · · Score: 2

      I have to agree with your analysis generally, but you miss one important point. Most eco-freaks also support the elimination of nuclear, coal, natural gas, etc., power plants and instead support replacing those power plants with wind, solar, geothermic, hydro, and other eco-friendly power plants. When the energy is "free" (solar) the extra energy required to recycle becomes moot. The root of the problem is not recycling, but power consumption.

      Not to mention the fact that serious eco-freaks do not consume any fuel when they haul their bottles to be recycled; because they are pedalling a bicycle.

      --
      Share bicycle touring info worldwide: http://wheretocycle.com
    2. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by kronos · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing the point here. Disposable cell phones mean those phones are thrown out *more often* than normal phones. With a standard phone, you act to "reduce" waste by not throwing it out shortly after purchasing it (not to mention "reusing" it for a greater length of time).

      The criticism here isn't "we should be recycling disposable cell phones instead of just throwing them out" -- the argument is that we should promote tools which have a longer life span so that we don't have to dispose of them (by throwing them out or recycling them) for as long a period as possible.

    3. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember reading somewhere (I dare say it was Reader's Digest... Hey, it _is_ a step up from National Enquirer! :-), that the environmental cost of recycling an Aluminum can is about the same (or more) as the cost of throwing it away, based on some national average of power from coal, gas, hydro, nuclear, etc... power plants.

      Glass bottles seemed to work out better than even, although these calculations never included the environmental "cost" of building and maintaining the recycling depots...

    4. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by tekan · · Score: 1
      Hah!

      "... a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is...".

      Oh boy, yeah this planet is large. How long until I'll have to start lookin' where I'm steppin' to avoid your trash piles! :()

      According to the EPA's own projections (Circa 1996), most of the Northeast will use up their Landfill capacity in the next 5 years or so. Do you want a dump in your backyard? Probably not, and a lot of people in the northeast probably don't want anymore dumps either. Hell, it's dirty enough already (in spots).

      The EPA also projects that the Midwest and Southeast will use up their space in 10 years or so. Well, they have a little more room to spare, so you might see dumps migrating to the Great Plains, since it's probably more cost effective to turn the land there into dumps, since the farmers will probably get more money for storing garbage then the paultry sums they've been receiving recently for cash crops like corn, wheat, and hogs.

      As for the Western States, the EPA projects more than 10 years worth of capacity left in pre-existing dumps.

      The good news is that the overall trend (according to their data) is that total yearly deposits to dumps are decreasing due to improvements in packaging, recycling, etc.

    5. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by xtal · · Score: 1

      Hey, I said there was a lot of space - which there is - I didn't say there was a lot of space in convienent areas, or areas where it would be cheap. Just that there's lots of room to put garbage. The world isn't confined to the United States, either - there are extrememly huge wastelands in Canada (and the US).

      You don't have to go ruining artic environments, either. There's _lots_ of room to go under, just bury it in the proper geology. But, that's not cheap. (or easy!)

      When the cost goes up, so will the cost of disposable products. If you need that product, and the disposable product's impact is smaller, then the disposable product is a better choice _right now_. That might change, but lots of things might change.

      One of the prices of being technologically developed is a negative impact on our planet. That's just the way it is. There's nothing we can do about it besides get rid of a lot of people, and Mother Earth hasn't gotten that cranky (yet).

      Just putting things in perspective, I hope.

      Kudos..

      --
      ..don't panic
    6. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kindly correct me if i am in error, but gasoline is NOT a *resource*. as a matter of fact, it is a combination of resources that comprise it. gasoline is one of the worst and most inefficient 'sources of power' because of its intense and exorbitant release of toxins into the environment, such as CO (carbon monoxide). CO is *not* released in the exhaust of methane (natural gas) or other viable alternatives to gasoline.

      my 2 cents...

      damn i'm picky!

    7. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by sc7007 · · Score: 1

      As a note:

      In-stream hydro power is very high on the list of the most environmentally unfriendly power sources out there. It does terrible things upstream for quite a distance and downstream till the end.

    8. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Drayke · · Score: 1

      The approach I think I'd take to this one would have to be the swap-out program I've seen a few people mention. Now obviously, this is going to require a replaceable or rechargeable battery (in the latter case, there might also be a way to make the phone a true inexpensive replacement to an analog cell phone), but that, in effect, reduces the cost even more. It's the kind of thing I'd be willing to do, just because I don't have great credit, I don't have -frequent- use for a cell phone, but I've had times when I know it would be nice to be able to reach somebody now instead of whenever I can find a phone.

      -Drayke

      --

      -Drayke

      If all the world's a stage, it must have been an easy audition.
    9. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by grappler · · Score: 2

      It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free. It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant.

      This might be true for some things (I'm not sure about cellphones) but it usually takes more energy to make a new thing than to recycle an old one, when you consider all the costs of getting new raw materials. It's an often repeated fact that recycling a pop can saves enough energy to run a TV for an hour.

      Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Recycling is last, because it doesn't work very well! Why does
      everyone forget about the first two, which work _Really_ well. Cut down, and reuse.


      Sure, but "Throw away" could be tacked onto the end of the list as an even worse option. Selling phones that are meant to be used for several years would fit under "reuse".

      --
      grappler

      --
      Vidi, Vici, Veni
    10. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      when you recycle something, it doesn't magically turn into another product. It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free. It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant. Recycling is often worse than throwing it away!

      We're not talking about plastic bottles here. Nobody's suggesting that old cellphones should be melted down and turned into new cellphones. They should be reusable without any high energy processing at all -- just upload a new authorization code to it.

      This is wasteful, no matter how you look at it. Whether we have landfill space for it isn't nearly as relevant as the fact that you're taking ten bucks worth of perfectly good electronics and losing it. Maybe that doesn't seem like a big deal, but in the words of professional musician Geddy Lee, "Ten bucks is ten bucks."


      ---
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    11. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Kalani · · Score: 1

      kindly correct me if i am in error, but gasoline is NOT a *resource*.

      Merriam-Webster defines "natural resource" as "industrial materials and capacities (as mineral deposits and waterpower) supplied by nature." The gasoline you put in your car is a fossil fuel (though a recent slashdot article presents the view of a scientist who rejects that notion) and is thus a natural resource (it's of limited supply and is provided to us by mother nature). As you mentioned, gasoline is processed, purified, and additives are inserted; it's still a depletable resource.

      gasoline is one of the worst and most inefficient 'sources of power' because of its intense and exorbitant release of toxins into the environment, such as CO (carbon monoxide). CO is *not* released in the exhaust of methane (natural gas) or other viable alternatives to gasoline.

      A properly tuned engine will not emit high levels of CO, laws like California's help enforce that. CO is especially harmful to aerobic life because it is smaller/lighter than oxygen and is absorbed by red blood cells quicker than oxygen. The threat, then, is that an aerobic creature can suffocate while still sucking in lungfulls of "air." Methane (CH4) is lighter than air, colorless, and odorless (just like CO) and is produced naturally by human beings, swamps, rice, bovine, basically anything that can decay. The threat with methane is similar to the threat with CO, in that people locked in an airtight (or near-airtight) enclosure will suffocate if given only methane (look to shows like Geraldo and Oprah for instances of depressingly introverted people who've unwittingly committed suicide this way). Furthermore, methane production is a big issue for global warming advocates, because it has such a large capacity for trapping heat and turning this planet into a "Lil' Susy Homemaker" oven. See this for a brief synopsis of the implications. Still, most people scoff at this citing cows as the leading producers of methane. Regardless of what releases the most methane, it is a potentially harmful gas to have floating around in large quantities. Though I'm not an expert on the subject by any stretch of the imagination.

      --
      ___
      The ends are ape-chosen, only the means are man's. -- Aldous Huxley
    12. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by jmac · · Score: 1


      This doesn't mean a throw away culture is OK - but if you need the service or product, it might make sense. There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need, 'cause we'll do ourselves long in based on current population projections before this is an issue.


      While I agree that the concept of throwing things away isn't inherently a mortal sin, and don't know enough about the effects of landfills on ecology (if any) and the amount of "dumpable" space left on Earth's surface to argue those points with you, the rationalizaion you provide above is frighteningly broken.

      I think humanity has at least a fighting chance to see a bright and indefinitely long future, a future on worlds beyond our trusty little mudball, but the surest way to doom ourselves is to have enough people believing fatalistic statements like those above. Thinking 'eh, we'll eventually nuke/starve/plague each other into oblivion anyway' leads to short-term thinking, which leads in turn to self-fulfilling prophecies.

      Throwing things away won't in itself lead to mankind's destruction, no. But doing so in the belief that there's no future worth preserving? That just might.

      (Homework assignment: "Earth", David Brin. One view of what the world might look like in 50 years if people (and governments) learn to become far-sighted only after starting to lose bits of civilization due to 20th century myopia. Very scary, and thought provoking.)

      (And I bet there are cell phones in it. Yay, I'm on topic!)

      J
      MacOS Open Source

      --
      jmac
    13. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      You don't have to go ruining artic environments, either. There's _lots_ of room to go under, just bury it in the proper geology.
      Yeah, I like the idea from Brin's Earthclan books, where environmentally-aware cultures bury their trash in subduction zones - recycling via plate tectonics.
      When the cost goes up, so will the cost of disposable products.
      Where do you live, that the cost of disposal is included in the cost of a product? Where I am, trash and recyclables pickup is funded by property taxes and is completely unrelated to how much I throw out. How would you include disposal costs in the purchase price? I guess it would have to be a local sales tax, since the cost of disposal could vary widely from place to place.
      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    14. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by mattc · · Score: 1
      There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need

      As a demonstration of earth's infinite capacity to store garbage, perhaps we should move our dump to your back yard. There should be L O T S of room there!

    15. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      It strikes me as interesting that people always forget the basic law of physics:
      "Matter is neither created or destroyed."

      That's ultimately why we'll never destroy the planet with trash. There's only a fixed amount of material here, no matter how we decide to use it or convert it from one form to another.

      We spend our entire lives trying to make order from chaos, and a lot of that involves expending energy converting things around from one form to another.

      Why do a lot of conversions needlessly? (AKA. Why create a bunch of electronic parts which normally function just fine for years and years, assemble them on a circuit board, package and market it, and then have the end user throw it out after only 60 mins. of use? Just seems like a waste of effort.)

      I'm no eco-freak either, because I think most of it proves to be silly, pointless endeavours.
      (AKA. The "environmentally friendly gasoline" that turned out to be more likely to seep into the water supply than regular gas. Non-oxygenated gas ran better in cars to begin with -- shoulda left it alone.)

      The true issue is all about efficiency, though. As people already said here - filling up landfills with items we'd be better off using longer or reusing makes no sense, efficiency-wise.

    16. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by Riktov · · Score: 1

      Geddy Lee's Canadian, so his ten bucks is only seven bucks.

    17. Re:Garbage: People rarely examine facts! by jafac · · Score: 1

      Basically, the whole point of these things is to allow lazy people to not have to return the phone to the retail outlet where they got it for reprogramming (and hopefully cleaning. . . what is that gunk in the speaker holes? I'm not putting that to MY ear!)

      I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  57. oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why doesn't this guy just patent a disposible car while he's at it, one tank of gas and then dump it off a bridge! The EPA should step in and stop this one...like we need more garbage.

  58. Re:I tried to do it the right way. by unitron · · Score: 1
    So did I. Same deal with regular ol' "flashlight" batteries. No option but the trash can.
    (Although I'm still daydream designing a battery draining machine that would fully exhaust them first, with pulse modulation, inverters, diodes, capacitors, and other fun stuff.)

    --

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

  59. Not exactly Thomas Edison here... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

    And Ms. Altschul is looking to license her "interactive cereal" --cereal sculpted into monster shapes that crumple into soggy heaps when doused with milk.

    And to think I've been eating "interactive cereal" my whole like and didn't know it. Make me a cereal that DOESN'T become soggy heaps and you might have something.

    "I was driving in my car, and I kept losing my cell signal, and I wanted to throw my phone out the window. And -- bingo -- I came up with the idea," Ms. Altschul said.

    Here I am eagerly waiting to read her solution to losing cell signals till I realize her 'idea' is actually throwing away phones.

  60. next thing you know... by Xkill_ · · Score: 1

    there will be disposable cars. you drive them for a week then throw them away. maybe they will even be suv's (the most polluting class of cars on the planet). but hey as long as American's are happy who knows how far things will go in the name of progress.



    "The importance of using technology in the right way has never been more clear."

    --

  61. News Flash: USPO Patents non-trivial concept by Ted+V · · Score: 2

    In a shocking display of ingenuity, the United States Patent Office actually patented a non-trivial concept.

    Said an anonymous inside source, "We don't know what happened. We thought the patent was for some software algorithm that had been discovered two decades ago. I thought I saw internet somewhere on the proposal, but it's just not there. We really screwed this one up and from now on it's only damage control. I just hope everyone realizes this is a one time only thing. We're working hard to make sure this won't happen again."

    Film at eleven.

  62. IBM Really did this. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

    They had a Green PC which when it served its useful life, had a case which could be taken apart with your hands and separated for recycling. The display was geared towards low power consumption -- it was one of the early colour flatpanel LCDs. IIRC, it had one of the "Blue Lightning" motherboards a 486SLC type system.

    It costed around $7000.

    I remember wanting it because it produced very little heat, required very little noisy cooling, had a relatively small footprint and naturally, the display was dead sharp. The recycling end of it was completely bogus though. A small box in a landfill is nothing compared to copper mines, smelters, chip fabs and chemical plants. It was around the same time that reusable glass bottles began to dissapear, replaced with "environmentally friendly" recyclable plastic bottles. I have trouble believing that cleaning glass bottles is worse for the environment than pouring plastic.

    Wow, I'm wickedly off topic.

    I guess if he patented "recyclable" cell phones, nobody would care. Ah well, my girfriend bought her digital phone for roughly $70CDN, and pays roughly $20CDN for more airtime than she can use. That's already less than $20USD.

    I'll go find my bed now.

  63. Phones without numbers? by unitron · · Score: 1
    Since the demand for telephones or other things such as fax machines that use the phone system continually (continuously?)threatens to outstrip the supply of unique numbers available for assigning to them, it seems pretty obvious that they couldn't be used for incoming calls, as phone numbers aren't plentiful enough to be disposable.

    --

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

  64. no service contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason i never got a cellphone is that my need for it is outweighed by the trouble of dealing with a monthly service contract, rate plans, etc. Where do i get one? p.s. i promise to dispose of it responsibly

  65. No incoming calls... by Mr.Plow · · Score: 1

    Imagine a world where all we had was disposable cell phones, no LCD's, no Incoming Calls... hey wait a minute.

  66. Disposable planet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least such a thing would be good for criminals.

  67. now we're waiting for.. by RoLlEr_CoAsTeR · · Score: 1

    disposable laptops
    mm!

    (mine needs disposing.. grr.. that POJ)

    --

    Insert mind here.
  68. Hey, great! Another way to pollute our environment by jlowery · · Score: 1

    Does the world really need this?

    --
    If you post it, they will read.
  69. This is environmentally sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well great now we can fill our landfills with disposable cell phones. Am I the only one who see's the problem here...

    1. Re:This is environmentally sound by xHost · · Score: 1

      Can somebody tell me the usefulness of a 'disposable cell phone' ?

      This is a very bad idea because this anonymity afforded by these phones allow it to be used for not very nice tasks, and do I even have to mention how un-enviromentally sound this is ?

      Whatever the case, I'm happy with my Nokia 6188, these disposables probably don't come with all the nice features that real cells do, text messaging, call display, call waiting, address book, vibrator option, and of course the games : ).

  70. How will law enforcement react? by ttyRazor · · Score: 2

    I wonder how law enforcement types are gonna react to something like this. A bunch of numberless, disposable phones and a pager don't sound very easy to tap, and you know how they (the same people who want to embed sattelite phones with GPS locators) are about being able to intercept and locate calls.

  71. Patents on non-stuff by ajs · · Score: 1

    So, if I want to get a patent, all I have to do is take a product that currently exists, and remove stuff? Ok, here's one:

    A microwave oven.... with no buttons!

    Wow, this is fun! Ok, one more:

    Windows... without the bugs!

    Oh damn, I'm gonna get rich!

    1. Re:Patents on non-stuff by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 1
      Windows... without the bugs!

      Um, if you remove all the bugs, I don't think there's anything left to patent.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
  72. Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wrong by Guyle · · Score: 2

    I just thought of something that could spur from this that just turns my stomach. If the calls are truly anonymous, what's going to stop people from making threatening and harassing calls? I mean, you pick one of these things up, and you have sixty minutes of time to spend making bomb threats and death threats and whatever else you've got in mind. Sound farfetched? Not even close. What's going to stop anyone from making a bomb threat to the establishment that has pissed them off lately? Not a thing. It can't be traced to them.

    I'm interested to see what thoughts anyone has on this particular angle of these phones.

  73. uses for this technology... by Polo · · Score: 1

    I think big-time drug dealers have been using this
    technology for years to elude the police (but
    with regular cell phones that they threw away
    after making a call).

    Of course, who would come forward with prior art?

  74. They'd all originate from one number, perhaps.. by Myself · · Score: 1

    I'm not too familiar with the most inner workings of switching, but I'm sure all these damn things could be made to show up as "Junkphone Inc" with one number on Caller ID, and not have individual DNs themselves.

  75. ? disposable camera facts? by decomp · · Score: 1
    Ok, folks, we need some facts here. A lot of people are claiming (though it sounds a lot more like hoping) that those cardboard-box cameras are reused/reprocessed/re-something (other than recycled ! the distinction is very important).

    One of the first posters claimed to have worked in a photo shop where these thing were routinely thrown out.

    Does anyone else out there have some facts/direct personal knowledge about what happens to these things? If so, please enlighten us!

    1. Re:? disposable camera facts? by gorilla · · Score: 1

      Both Kodak & Fuji make disposible cameras, and both companies make many different models. I'd be suprised if they are all identical, perhaps the cheaper ones are thrown out, while the more complex ones are recycled?

  76. Except you're missing #2 by / · · Score: 1

    Reuse. How are you supposed to reuse the thing if it's disposable? Besides, though recycling is certainly not energetically free, it does have some other major benefits besides any potential savings of energy, including: it conserves scarce and/or toxic chemicals (eg, whoever thought to make mercury batteries disposable needs a lobotomy or two).

    Yes, most SUV-driving environmentalists are hypocrites. That doesn't disqualify the intentions they fail to realize, however (unless you believe in the logical validity of ad hominem arguments, in which case you're twice a fool).

    --
    "If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
  77. um...actually... by decomp · · Score: 1
    Sr. Vector Inspector nags us:

    Folks, read the article.

    Which made me think, well, I did read the article, maybe not slowly enough, though. So back I went. And now I think it was he who didn't read it slowly enough:

    Vector Inspector:

    The phone isn't even really meant to be disposable: Part of it is credit card shaped so it can be swiped through and given more air time. You can keep using this sucker 'till the battery dies..

    Article:

    ~~~~~~~

    ...so inexpensively that they could be sold for a fixed amount of air time ... and then tossed in the garbage once their minutes have been used up.

    ...further down, about the credit card option that Vector Inspector mentions:

    It would require a longer-lasting power source than the 60-minute battery Ms. Altschul envisions with the purely disposable cell phone.

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    So folks, let's be sure to recognize this beast for what it is!

  78. Donner Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly I'm currently taking a small break from reading a book by Donald L. Hardesty "The Archaeology of the Donner Party." Its a really good book. Like anyone cares...;-)

  79. reduce/reuse >>> recycle by decomp · · Score: 1
    Hey xtal -

    Kudos to you. Any "eco-freak" who moderates you down is an ignorant "eco-freak" because your point is a good one. In fact, your point is very much more "eco-freak"y than that of someone advocating recycling! ;) That being said, why did you have to make your point with such flame-ish language and name calling? Furthermore, though I agree that the issue needs more thought than knee-jerk reaction, I doubt that the "garbage problem" is as non-existent as you claim it to be. Does anyone out there have some nice, solid numbers (as opposed to agendas)?

    It wasn't too long ago that I too thought recycling was the most damned important thing for an environmentally-friendly person to do. Fortunately, a wise, more rational friend pointed out that as soon as you start including energy into your resource calculations, recycling is often Not a Good Thing (tm). Somehow the word "recycling" got so much airtime in the U.S. that it has embraced and extended its much more important colleagues: reduce and reuse. This phenomenon is in plain view in the comments for this article. People are using "recycle" to mean everything from breaking down into elemental components and rebuilding to recharging the battery. It would be easy enough to develop a corporate-conspiracy theory for this phenomenon (no corporation ever benefits from reducing/reusing), but that would be silly. Or would it?

    So come on folks, use the right word for the idea you want to express. When promoting resource conservation (including energy):

    reduce >> reuse >>>>> recycle.

  80. Re:IBM Monitors SUCK. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is off on a tangent, but you said:

    >and naturally, the display was dead sharp.

    [I hope that was sarcasm, in which case, ignore the below].

    From what I've seen from IBM, their displays have plain old just sucked real bad. I've seen the original color VGA 13". Focus so bad, I don't think it could pass as a TV. The crap they put on their crAptivas is so lame, a freind of mine (who was the unlucky owner of a crAptiva) and I noticed something. On some AcerView 56e monitors, pushing the middle two buttons at the same time resets the settings. On the crAptiva monitor, which had a similar size, similar nasty picture, same button positions, and same LED positions, pushing the two middle buttons... reset the settings. ie. IBM was brading Acer Crap (tm) with their name. Hahaha!

    And, I've seen the monitors they used to sell on their high-end 486's when they were out (and when an MCA [or was it EISA/VLB? Don't remember now] 486 IBM cost $3500 or so) their standard monitor with that package couldn't do 1024x768 in non-interlaced mode. That was poor, although about average... If the computer had cost $1000...

    And, of course, going to high school in the WRDSB (aka. WCBE) of Ontario, Canada, we were forced to have the great choice of IBM or Mac. No, not IBM clone, IBM only. The school board foolishly got themseleves locked into a deal with IBM, who didn't even give them a decent price break. I used the monitors on those computers... Gotta love the .39 pitch that came with a P120-P166... Pathetic.

    Ok, the rants over now. I guess I just have a special sore spot in my heart for Big Blue.

  81. Not useful, not a good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this would be pretty useless in an emergency situation, because batteries lose charge with time... you'd have to replace your emergency phone in your car every year or two. I'd never remember, although maybe some people would. I guess the other problem is that batteries generally are considered hazardous waste... you couldn't drop your disposable phone in the garbage; instead you'd have to dispose of it as hazardous waste. Recycle, good... reuse, better, if it is possible with the final design... reduce, better, just don't use the lousy thing at all. If you don't want the hassle, get a prepaid phone. Much more versatile, and not much more money.

  82. The Matrix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me, or does this seem eerily close to what the characters did in the film "The Matrix"?

  83. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .

    1. Re:You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes. I do like gummi bears. They are indeed yummy. What an excellent point. You are full of wisdom. Please, expand on your theory.

    2. Re:You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you rarely see such pure irony.

  84. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..

  85. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...

  86. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....

  87. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .....

  88. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ......

  89. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now.

    1. Re:Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sa-904 0xA4692BAC44

  90. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oaoue

  91. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -sonut-aoe

  92. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .3'465245

  93. Shut up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....aoue

  94. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sa-903

  95. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -sl9283hlaoa65

  96. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [49c[284

  97. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [08[9381eeeeeee

  98. Shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    09c,a09c3

  99. You are cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4562

  100. You are cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    324234324

  101. You are cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0[984[0[0121

  102. Gummi bears suck. You are an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    //o/39

  103. Re:Nuclear Power Plants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered, other than the waster, and the possibility of danger, when running properly, does a Nuclear Power Plant damage the environment at all (except for waste)?

    Personally, I've always figured 'no', so, I've never really been against well-managed Nuke Plant, so long as the waste is dealt with properly. Buuut, there have been accidents, so I've never felt fully confident with the idea...

    So, want to clue me in? :-)

  104. Hey Rob: ipchains -A input -s a.b.c.d/32 -j REJECT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where a.b.c.d is the IP of this AC luser.

  105. Call-only cell phones... by Wolfier · · Score: 1

    As far as my observation and experience goes, people carry cellphones primarily to receive calls. Making calls is a second priority.

    It also serves as some kind of identity that people can relate you to this number, so personally that you are sure that your friend, and not his/her family is going to pick up the phone. It's sort of like an email address.

    Some companies tried call-only cell phones before, coupled with a pager. They didn't last...let's see how this goes.

    By the way, I'm against disposable anything as long as they are not biodegradable.

  106. Re:Nuclear Power Plants by xtal · · Score: 1

    There is a big question about nuclear power plants - I've heard that cancer rates go up around them, and you need to mine uranium, which is hard on the environment - but thanks to Nuclear Weapons, there's lots and lots of fissionable material available.

    Some people argue that the damage that radiation can do doesn't make it worth it at any rate. You can ruin land _forever_ if there is an accident.

    In my opinion, while other sources of energy are available, we should use those, instead. We still don't understand photosynthesis - plants dissociate water into H+ for energy transport - much like a fuel cell - and nobody is exactly sure how they do this without burning up. My dad who is a PhD Genetist laments about that frequently - in most biology textbooks, there's a "and then a miracle happens" box in the explaination. OTOH, Not many engineers take biology! :)

    The technology is important though, because it might lead to breakthroughs in other forms of atomic power, like fusion, or ways to deal with radiation we're not aware of. This is why I suspect no more nuclear plants are being built, but they're not being shut down, either.

    The end of the world speeches by environmentalists are largely without regard for technology. We're only beginning to understand the marvels of the universe, and there's lots of friendly energy sources to exploit along the way. In other words, your computer won't be SOL anytime soon (barring Y2K disasters! :)

    Kudos..

    --
    ..don't panic
  107. Why buy a disposable cell phone? Here's why. by Giordana · · Score: 1

    Who in their right mind, asside from criminals and kids who want to look cool (also known as wannabes) would want one of these things?

    How about someone who wants a cell phone only for emergencies? Twenty five dollars for 60 minutes (including the phone) is the best prepaid deal I've seen. It's even better if those minutes don't expire. Most prepaid deals expire within 6-12 months, and you still have to buy the phone.

    It would also be great for travel, since it's more convenient than a phone booth. When you're on vacation and your rental car breaks down in he middle of nowhere, it helps to have a cell phone.And if it's lost or stolen, you haven't lost much. You won't be billed for hours of calls to some country you've never heard of.

    Why do people buy long-distance calling cards instead of signing up for a long-distance carrier? If you travel a lot, or you don't make many long-distance calls, cards cost less than long distance service. Disposable cell phones would appeal to those consumers.

    P.S.- Sprint PCS isn't available in a lot of areas (like my hometown, which is 50 miles from Boston but hardly in the boondocks).


    --

    Put my clarinet beneath your bed 'till I get back in town.
  108. ���C���h�̒��ɁA�ǂ�������H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LainݽH

  109. Fun for Geeks With Attitude(tm) by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 4
    Heh... I remember doing things like that back in the day during electronics class. Ahh, the fun we used to have sticking 16v capacitors into the lab-bench sockets. Had the whole room go off like a string of firecrackers one time (BTW - Tantalum caps, although more expensive, make a much more satisfying *snap* than little bitty barrel caps, but cause shrapnel.)

    Here's a particularly nasty toy you can make with some commonly available goodies, for all you Dr. Evil-in-training types (I wonderink if Mikhail makink these device when leetle boy, da?)

    What You'll Need

    • A brain. (You'd be amazed at how many people don't get past this point)

    • A capacitor. The best types are the big old barrel caps from circa 1960-1970 TV sets... you know, the ones that look and feel about the weight of a relay baton. Polarized or non doesn't matter. Axial (one lead on each side) or radial (both leads on one side) are both fine, but radials take just a bit more work.

    • Tin/Aluminum Foil. Not a whole bunch, just raid your mom's kitchen cabinents, or order some chinese food and use the tin from thier plates. As long as it's conductive, can be easily wrapped a cylindrical object, and cheap, it'll do.

    • Electrical Tape. You MIGHT be able to substitute duct tape, but apparently some substrates can become conductive under certain circumstances. Best to play safe and get the genuine article (the black rubbery stuff).

    • Some wire, soldering iron and solder. Not much solder is needed, nor wire. In fact, if you have an axial (one lead on each end) capacitor with long enough leads, you may not need these at all.

    • A continuity meter. The best in the world are made by Fluke Industries. No self-respecting electronic/electrical engineer would be caught dead without one. Of course, deletantes may use whatever cheesy little analogue meters they find in thier gran-pappy's toolkit.

    • A power source. The best are ones are bench supplies which can generate a specific voltage, but even a cheap-ass wall-plugged model will do in a pinch. Try to get it as close to the rating of the capacitor as possible. I've found that a couple car batteries in series makes a good 24v or +/-12v supply in a pinch, so long as they're kept charged and outdoors when not in use. Oh, and try not to spill their contents on your Nikes.
    What You Do
    1. Read the Fine Print. I absolve myself of all issues that may arise from you assembling and using this little beast. Don't blame me if you use this on the head jock of your school and end up getting a boot up your ass. You're a big boy and/or grrl and you know what you're getting yourself into. CAVEAT ENGINEO.

    Discharge the Capacitor. Just bridge the leads of the capacitor with some wire, a screwdriver, or any other ol' peice of metal you got on hand. Better safe than sorry... at least for the time being. >B)

    (optional) Extend your Leads. Depending on the size of your capacitor and the length of the leads, you may need to add a little more metal on to the end of 'em. If you have a radial style cap (two leads at the bottom), you'll probably need to extend one lead so that it'll reach up to the top of the cap.

    Tape Up the Cap. Lay down a layer of tape across the length of the capacitor. Don't leave any metal exposed except for the leads themselves. If you have a radial cap, run the long lead along the length of your cap and tape down two-thirds of it overtop of the base layer to electrically isolate it until it gets past mid-way up your cap.

    Make Your Contacts. Tinfoil time! Cut out 2 strips. Make them wide enough so that they're just a bit less wide than half the length of the capacitor, and long enough so you can wrap it around a few times.

    Attach the Contacts to the Cap. Tape the short end of one of your strips to the barrel at one end. Wrap it around once, then put the lead for that end on the foil and continue wrapping (with that lead embedded in the foil) until you run out of strip. Tape down the short end and long ends of the exposed foil, then repeat for the other end. Make sure the foil contacts don't touch in the middle, and only make contact with one capacitor lead each. The intent here is to make two really big foil-based leads to the capacitor.

    Test the Contacts. Pull out your continuity tester and put one probe on each of the two contacts. If you did it right, the resistance should start close to 0, then steadily increase to infinity. This is because testers use a little current to see if there's a connection, and you're slightly charging the cap when you test. If the resistance stays at or near zero, you either have a dead cap, or you have a short between the two contacts.

    Charge 'er Up. Set your voltage to the rating on the cap (or as close as you can get) and let it sit for a minute. Right now you're sucking billions of fun-filled electrons from one plate and depositing them on another inside the cap. Can't you just feel the tension?

    Choose Your Victim Carefully. Young, relatively healthy individuals of whom you know you can run faster are best. People you really dislike are also good. Try to avoid old people, people with pacemakers, epilepsy or similar physiological/neurological disorders, people holding hot drinks (cold drinks can add to the fun ;), sharp or heavy objects. People who own lots of guns are probably not very good targets, but YYOJ. Remember the fine print.

    Special Delivery! Hold your device with a glove, or carefully by only ONE contact. Approach your victim, and when about 10 feet away or so, shout "Hey , catch!" and gently toss the thing to 'em. Human nature is such that it makes us believe that small, slow moving objects should be caught in those situations, typically with both hands.

    *POP!*

    Laugh Your Ass Off and/or Run Like Hell. Self explanatory. Hope you had fun. Besides, you have to run home and build some more, unless your victim forgets about the thing and leaves it on the ground for some other Geek to take home and play with. Ah, the joys of simple electronics. The idea can be scaled down to smaller caps too (for little bitty jolts) if you want. Axials work MUCH better in those situations, as trying to line up the wires on one inch wide caps is a major PITA. For small caps, discard the tinfoil and just wrap the leads around the barrel as long as you can without them touching. Some hot-glue might be useful to hold things down. Make sure they're at least large enough to be easily visible to the naked eye while in the air, as they have to be seen to be caught. Have fun, and play safe!

    --
    rickf@transpect.SPAM-B-GONE.net (remove the SPAM-B-GONE bit)

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  110. Disposable Linux! by SMN · · Score: 1

    Coming Soon: You too can share the convenience of disposable technology with new patent-pending Disposable Linux.

    Simply purchase Disposable Linux at your nearest computer software distributor for a mere $69.99 - less than Red Hat. After installing Disposable Linux, simply register your copy by providing us with personal marketting data and a signed disclaimer giving us the full rights to sell your email address to mass mailing lists and you're set for life!

    Whenever a new kernel is released, dispose of your hard drive at the nearest Disposable Linux office. We'll provide you with the newest edition of the Linux kernel and an updated version of Disposable Linux for a only $39.99.

    With Disposable Linux, you can always claim to be on the bleeding edge of technology. See your cow-orkers' amazement as you walk in daily with the newest edition of Linux available.

    In addition, Disposable Linux does not harm the environment in any way, unlike our competitors' disposable products. We recycle your old hard drives and processors and reuse them to avoid wasting the world's limited silicon supply!

    Look for the Disposable Linux IPO in the next few months!

    ---
    SimCity 3000: The Ultimate Geek Game
    http://www.planetsimcity.com

    --
    -- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
  111. Somewhat similar to a system we have in Brazil by Molina+the+Bofh · · Score: 1

    It reminds me of something we have here in Brazil. It's a pre-paid cellular phone. It works like this: You buy the cellular phone in any shop (for about US$ 125 - yes, you cannot throw that in a bucket of water) and you have some minutes of credit (I don't know the exact figures, as I don't own one).

    When the credit expires, you simply "recharge" it, paying for more minutes. The scheme for recharging is very practical: once you pay for it (either in vending machines or via internet banking or on special ATMs, or even by phone), you are given a code. Just type in this code, press the ENTER key and you're ready for another round. You decide how much you are going to pay (and, therefore, how many minutes of conversation you have). It's very much like refueling a car.

    Different from this one that has just been patented, this Brazilian model also receives calls. The good thing is that the owner of the cell. phone does not pay for incoming calls. The drawback is that outgoing calls are very expensive (US$ 0.70/min., flat). So it's a good thing to have if you want to be called but don't need to make many calls. The credits expire after some time, from 3 monthes to 1 year, depending on how much you paid. If you pay US$ 50, you can have it working for 1 year, provided you don't use it too much.

    It's becoming quite popular.

    --

    -
    Roses are #FF0000, Violets are #0000FF, find / -name '*base*' |xargs chown -R us && mv zig greatjustice
  112. Forget it. Gov't won't allow anonymous phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember the flap over the gov'ts demand to make iridium calls traceable (more so than just to the nearest hemisphere). I think they wanted to mandate GPS receivers in the phone. There has been some talk about GPS in conventional cell phones too to tracek exactly where calls originate from. But even cell phones and sat phones are registered to someone. A disposable cell phone would be too anonymous for the gov't comfort.

    1. Re:Forget it. Gov't won't allow anonymous phones. by radja · · Score: 1

      Cellphones don't exactly need a separate GPS. any cellphone can be traced to its location by triangulating its signal. It's been done successfully by the police in extreme cases.

      //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    2. Re:Forget it. Gov't won't allow anonymous phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's my understanding that it is common practice.
      It doesn't really have to be that extreme...

    3. Re:Forget it. Gov't won't allow anonymous phones. by radja · · Score: 1

      in the netherlands (where I happen to live) this is quite an extreme thing. The Dutch like what little they have left of their privacy in this age...

      //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    4. Re:Forget it. Gov't won't allow anonymous phones. by twinpot · · Score: 1

      Someone was running a trial in Italy, where you could phone a number and it would give information relating to the area you were calling from.

  113. Plutonium dioxide mobile phone battery Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Howaboutit. A battery that has a half life 86,000 years. Good for the life of the phone or the user, whichever comes first. Features micro thin lightweight gold plate sheilding, and a glow in the dark light at no extra cost. Great for camping, doubles up as a hand or pocket warmer. warning to retail outlets: do not store batteries together. Wonder what would happen in a big convention centre?

  114. Re:Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wr by Detritus · · Score: 1
    What stops someone from doing the same thing from a pay phone?

    That was the technique of choice when I was in high school.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  115. Re:Ch��AǤ���H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darn, I wish lynx had Japanese character support... (and I could read Japanese) Lain rocks.

  116. Yes, this can be done. by mr · · Score: 1

    (But do we want to?)
    Electronic Design News
    Sept 30, 1999
    A final design bill of materials for a dual-band GSM phone should be less than $10, with the chip set accounting for about half that figure.

    Analog Devices' ADS6523/6524 chip set

    --
    If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
  117. and still is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple has continued that trend with the introduction of the little round (and incredibly un-ergonomic) mouse that comes with the new colorful macs.

  118. did somebody say All Tomorrow's Parties? by eclectic9 · · Score: 1

    anybody remember this idea as one of William Gibson's?

  119. Nah - use smart simchip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    teeny weeny SM piclike cpu, that randomly alters the important numbers. While you walk around it is busy working out new valid combinations. A push of a button randomly selects one out of the valid cache. Slide out your own chip, slide this baby in. Now patent that.

  120. This is a HORRIBLE idea by haggar · · Score: 1

    How much more are we going to abuse the resources of the Earth? We are producing a lot of resource-consuming goods already, we don't really need to produce cell phones that we can toss after 60 minutes! I am as horrified of this as of the people who change cars every 1-2 years. To produce those cars you gotta consume a lot of energy, a lot of minerals, a lotof clean water and air, and then you use it one year only? And this cell phone is even worse, an hour only????
    OK, let's move to another planet, this one we screwed up already.

    (did you know that an average USA citizen consumes about 800 times more resource-units than a citizen of India?)



    --
    Sigged!
    1. Re:This is a HORRIBLE idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, do you think we are gonna run out of dirt or something? All these posts confuse me... What exactly is the problem? Last time I checked, the eart was a great big ball of metal. I can understand getting upset about toxic waste in the atmosphere / bodys of water, and clearcutting forest / stripmining, but I just can't understand what the problem with disposable phones is. If you are concerned about space in landfills, I think you'd be hyppocritical to not worry about much larger items. I mean, how big is a cell phone?? I think it is unreasonable to expect any large group of people to voluntarily reduce their standard of living, unless there is a very compelling reason for them to do so.

    2. Re:This is a HORRIBLE idea by Chuck777 · · Score: 1

      just one cell phone and just one razor and yadda yadd all adds up.

      We need a new landfill, so how's your house sound? Lets put one in your backyard.

      and what standard of living does throw away items give you? I want stuff to LAST. I want quality, I'll pay 300+ dollars for a good camera.

  121. Re:Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wr by radja · · Score: 1

    Ofcourse your average public phone does not allow this? Not much problem there.. not to mention calling from other public places, it's not necessary to be afraid of this just because of anonymity, there's already more than enough ways to use a telephone without anyone being able to trace you fast.

    //rdj

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  122. A better solution. by Helge+Hafting · · Score: 1

    A disposable phone is silly. We have another kind where I live. You buy the phone, and pay for the hardware only. No monthly bills. Then you buy a card that lets you talk for x hours. When it is used up, toss the card and and buy a new one. The phone remains. This has all the advantages of the disposable phone (privacy, paid in advance) but a lot less garbage, and recycling a card is easier than the whole phone too.

    Some might argue that the police can trace you as you use the same phone all the time. Not so, you can sell the phone to anybody and buy a new one as often as you wish. There is no paperwork at all involved in that. Yes - there was a debate that criminals might like this and it looks like they do. Having criminals at all is the bigger problem though.

  123. Think bigger than disposable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This could actually be an excellent idea if the phone could be 're-charged' with more minutes/hours etc. So many people have already responded with "OH MY GOD, THERE'S SO MUCH GARBAGE ALREADY AS IS!", but jeez, stop whining and think of all the garbage you probably make. I agree that yes, if people could really afford to buy and then toss away a disposable c-phone, then of course it would create a garbage problem. But think about it, we certainly don't have a huge problem with those small disposable cameras. I agree with those that mentioned this would make an excellent emergency type of communication. And think about your personal cell phone, if the battery dies, you always have cheap backup. Some people (like myself) have a cell phone mostly for emergencies or quick calls. I would much rather buy one of these than have to pay the monthly service fee. If those of you that were kicking and screaming about how this would create a garbage problem, hey, don't use any more batteries. Even the rechargable ones are harmful after they've lived their lifetimes. Become amish or something. Just know your role, or shut your mouth.

    1. Re:Think bigger than disposable... by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

      Don't "disposable" cameras get reused or recycled when you turn them in for photo processing?

  124. So are monster SUVs... by acb · · Score: 1

    ..yet they're selling like hotcakes.

    Most people are short-sighted; the fact that the environment will be horribly polluted by their habits in half a century pales into insignificance next to short-term gratification. After all, one person's use of disposable electronics or gas-guzzling mega-SUVs by itself has negligible impact, and everybody else is happily polluting the planet to hell, so why can't we?

    And so, the environment goes down the toilet.

  125. Re:Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wr by Molander · · Score: 1

    Here in Sweden where we have GSM there is something called cash cards that work in a similar way.
    A cash card is basicly a pre paid SIM card that you can use in any GSM phone until the money in it runns out. The SIM card IS the subscription so you can do both incomming and outgoing calls. If the card runns out of money just buy a new card or refill the old card if you want to keep the old number.
    Many people give this to their kids so that they
    can reach them in case of emergencies.

    These cards are anonymous.

    So how does the law like them?
    Not at all!
    They can bug them or tie calls made on them to a person. There was a debate over makeing them illegal or not but the police lost the debate.

    These cash cards are now about 20 - 30% of the subscriptions in the networks and make BIG BUCKS.

    So this is a patent on an old idea from Europe.

    /Thomas

    --
    -Sig-
  126. Thank you I hoped some one would say that by Egorn · · Score: 1

    Unfortunataly it's true.... Also Unfortunataly you were moderated down
    -------------------------------------------

    --

    Movie News - "Entertainment news, bitch!"
  127. except for waste by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    (except for waste)?

    That's a big 'except'.

  128. Pre-pay GSM by twinpot · · Score: 1

    This is one reason (of many) that the pre-pay mobile phone is so popular in Europe (and NZ). Baiscally you get a phone, and buy cards which let you "charge up" your phone.

    No contracts, no bills, no trace. Most operators insist you upload a minimum amount per quarter/6months/12 months to keep the number active.

    Call charges per minute (originators pay here) are higher than contract type phones, but if you use the phone mainly for incoming use, they work out good value.

  129. Re: The enviroment. A tree hugger writes. by vilms · · Score: 1

    Another great product! Does anyone really NEED a disposable mobile? Tampons and Nappies (Diapers); YES. All the other shit; NO.

  130. Re:Slashnuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think its about time we posted IPs of nuts like you... Instead of posting them to slashdot, we could send them and their comments to the place with the rubber rooms...

  131. Yes! Reuse your cellphone - couldn't agree more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that it takes a lot of energy to make a cell phone in the first place. Reusing it makes indeed a lot of sense. That is why the idea of producing a cell phone that can not be reused untill it breaks makes me sick.

  132. Solar not so friendly, either by hawk · · Score: 2

    While it can heat your water from the rooftop in some climates, solar isn't so friendly to the environment, either.

    Commercially,you have two major choices

    1) Acres and acres of panels. These raise the temperature beneath them by enough to change the ecosystem beneath them (yes, there is an ecosystem beneath the surface in the desert).

    2) Solar Sattelites, beaming power down (MASER?). Just don't cross the beam . . .

    1. Re:Solar not so friendly, either by jafac · · Score: 1

      "1) Acres and acres of panels. These raise the temperature beneath them by enough to change the ecosystem
      beneath them (yes, there is an ecosystem beneath the surface in the desert). "

      Why bother with acres and acres of panels?
      Most suburbs have acres and acres of rooftops. Why not put panels on your roofs, and tell the power company to go find a more productive way to make a living?

      I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  133. CO is largely gone from emissions by hawk · · Score: 2

    At least for large American cars, CO emmissions were pretty much eliminated about 10 years ago. The last time my 89 Crown Victoria went in for a smog test, its CO emmissions were below what the machine (in Nevada) could detect. Even before connecting it, the attendant told me it would probably blow 0.0 . . .

    I had a client whose ex-husband-to-be tried suicide, with the old hose-from-the-exhaust-pipe trick. But he used an 89 Buick. Same problem. THough I suppose that if the garage was well enough sealed, the engine could have gone through most of the O2, causing him to pass out, leading him to starve to death if the fuel held out :)

  134. Exactly. by hawk · · Score: 2

    I thought a friend was crazy when he referred to a cell phone in his 16 year old daughter's car. Then he explained: emergency use *only*.

    It made sense to me then. Now that I have four daughters of my own, it makes even more sense . . .
    [ok, not just a cell-phone, but something lethal, too :) ]

  135. I say: "Fuck the environment, it'll see me out" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah. And if I have kids they can play in the underground radioactive concrete jungles with the other kids. PS This is not satirical or sarcastic.

  136. It's the packaging, stupid. by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Make the shell out of some degradable material and offer cash refunds for dropping off the old units at some recycling center. Tear off the shell, replace and recycle the batteries, reprogram the phone for the next customer and wrap a new shell on it. C'mon stop being hysterical! This would pollute less than all of the batteries from Palm pilots that people chuck out today. Hell, make it w/o a battery altogether, put the contacts on the outside and sell a keywound generator that attaches to the unit. Return the phone keep the power supply.

  137. Make them edible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...then no landfill problem, you can literally "eat your words" (or someone else's), and if you don't want to eat it you can always call somebody who might.

  138. 'throw away' society returns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty sad. We grow enough food on this planet to feed more than everyone, and still people go hungry. However, as a consolation, we've invented a phone that's cheap enough that you can just throw it away. Woop dee doo.

  139. This has been around for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they have had this in Japan for about two years now. Vending machines.. I wish I could find a link...

  140. RE: "Don't Recycle Eco-Freak!" by imataion · · Score: 1

    I would like to point out that we're not being "buried in our own garbage". This is largely a view promoted by environmentalists that don't understand how big the planet is, and sometimes, "just throwing it away", is the best thing to do from a environmental perspective!

    Good point we can haul our trash to some under, though not un-populated area in the stix. Unfortunately these locations are becoming further and further away from the source of the trash (cities) because of the expanding effect of cities, so it takes more enregy to get the trash to these repositories.

    I don't want to start a flamewar, and I'll probably get moderated down by an eco-freak, but please concider[sic] that when you recycle something, it doesn't magically turn into another product. It requires a LOT of energy to recycle something, and contrary to what suburban SUV-drivin feel-good people thing, power doesn't come out of the wall for free.


    Of course it takes energy to recycle something, but it also takes energy to manufacture something. I find it difficult to believe it takes less energy to mine ore in Argentina smelt it ship it to the US and manufacture soda pop cans than it does to collect cans locally ship the within the US (and probably the state), re-smelt and manufacture it. As to the SUV's Hallelujah! I'll take 30 miles to the gallon over 10 mpg no matter what the fashion statement, and pocket the $15,000 difference.

    It needs to come from a coal, hydro (which ISN'T eco-friendly - flooded land produces methane, worse for the environment than coal!) or nuclear plant. Recycling is often worse than throwing it away!

    Um...yes it is. I can't site any studies here, but I've been to reservoirs and dams and such (which also have their ecological problems, primarily dealing with inability of fish to spawn up river when their if this three hundred foot wall in the way...sort of like the difficulties of a geek getting laid...) and I've been to Eastern Europe. Coal sucks. The stuff you can see is bad enough much less the hydrocarbons.

    Interestingly enough, a study done in England (Referenced in American Scientific, Sigma Xi Jorunal) indicates that recycling causes _more_ consumption, since people _feel good_ about using recycled products!

    Sure more consumption but of what products? Recycled products or non-recycled products? If it's a feel good phenomenon, would people who recycle want to purchase the goods they recycle. And for that matter if you use resources more efficiently you can afford to manufacture more.

    This doesn't mean a throw away culture is OK - but if you need the service or product, it might make sense. There is L O T S of room for L O T S of garbage on this planet - more than we will ever need, 'cause we'll do ourselves long in based on current population projections before this is an issue.

    Sure there is lots of space. Its ridiculous to think that we could bury the planet in trash. However fatalistic attitudes on how we should use the limited resources on the planet are unlikely to lead to any meaningful adjustment of how to properly use those resources.

    Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Recycling is last, because it doesn't work very well! Why does everyone forget about the first two, which work _Really_ well. Cut down, and reuse.

    Reduce - don't get the freaking bag if you only have a few items, its okay to ask that you not get a bag.
    Reuse - if you have a bag at home, put it in your pocket and bring it with you, those pastic bags are both light and compact.
    Recycle - we are all just going to die anyway...I mean, sure when the bag is getting old recycle it.

    Just because it's disposable, doesn't mean it's bad. It might even be BETTER. It might not feel good, though. Consuming resources is something we should think about, and I think people think sucking energy is OK just because it's being recycled, which sometimes is really dumb. Sure sometimes it is good to have disposable items.

    A great couple of examples are needles and condoms. I wouldn't want anyone reusing those. {shiver}

    Think about that when you're haulin those bottles back in your 4 ton Ford Extrusion, er, Excursion, wasting a resource we should conserve - gasoline.

    If you or the (trash person) are going to be hauling it to a dump somewhere, why would it take more energy to haul it to a recycle center?

    --
    Do you ever feel like there are people watching you? You're not alone.
  141. Re:Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wr by Guyle · · Score: 1

    Using a pay phone is different, though. Pay phones have phone numbers that can be traced. Investigators then know exactly where the call was made from. Any little tiny clue whatsoever - including someone seeing you at that phone - could bust your ass. With these disposable phones, though, you could be sitting in your room in your house or crusing down the street yacking like all the other morons who drive and yack. True, pay phones are just as good, but they leave the authorities a clue, and sometimes a person can be tripped up that way.

  142. Just what we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another cell phone scheme.

    I hate the idea of the disposable camera (although I have given thought as to whether you could reload film into one yourself - thus getting a cheap camera). I was appalled at the idea of the disposable Polaroid camera.

    But a disposable cell phone? Come on, is this something that is really needed? Even the "criminals will use it" angle doesn't fly with me - if someone is going to do something wrong with a cellphone, they are not going to care whether it is disposable or not - they will use it and toss it just the same.

    What happened to cell phones you really owned - I remember when it cost close to $1000 for a cell phone, then you paid for the plan. What happens on today's cell phones? You pay x number of $$ and get the phone free? Does that mean you can keep the phone at the end of the contract (RTO rolled into the monthly bill)? Or do you return it? I always get a chuckle when I try to find out what it would cost for analog service to my Motorola Classic block phone...

    One thing is for certain - I am glad that I don't have a cell phone. If people want to get in contact with me, they can wait until I get home - my time is my time.

  143. Not enough electricity by hawk · · Score: 2

    On a good day in California, you can get enough power from your roof to heat some of your water, but not enough to run the house--at least with the solar cells in the forseeable future.

  144. Re:cash cards, 80 bit ID number by anticypher · · Score: 2

    The telephone company pre-paid cash cards contain a unique 80 bit ID number. The first 46 bits are a manufacturer code and lot number. The remaining bits are programable when the chip is finally tested after being assembled on the card. Then the programming fuse is blown and the card can only be used to count down remaining units. This allows police to track all usage of the card, so if it was used to make any other calls, they have a lead.

    [obSecurity sideline: most cash card chips can be reprogrammed after use, and there is a *HUGE* black market all over europe for re-programmed cards. The telcos are now all gearing up to prosecute those who use them ]


    The GSM cards contain the normal GSM identifying codes, and most countries require the selling store to check the ID of the buyer. In France and England the stores must record your details for the security forces, and you have to prove you have a legal residence. Germany is the opposite, requiring no data be collected on the buyers. Sweden sounds the same.

    The GSM cards can be traced to the selling store, its a requirement built into the entire GSM distributuion system. This is to guarantee security for the telcos so someone can track stolen/hijacked/cloned cards. The GSM handset also contains the IMEI number, which is sent along with the chip ID for every call setup (and is tracked from cell to cell whether you are making calls or not).

    You would be surprised how easily it is for law enforcement to track down crimes and terrorist threats made over the GSM network. The french anti-terrorist squad arrested a few dozen corsican terrorists earlier this year using cell site records containing channel, power, IMEI #, time, handoffs, not the billing info.

    the AC (back from 2 weeks in Mongolia)

    --
    Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
  145. It might be a good idea! by togtog · · Score: 1

    It might be a good idea!

    Think about it. A disposable cell phone has at least one really great use. Think about the person who is stranded with a dead engine and has to hunt for a phone and have spare change to use it. This happened to my parents and I not even two months ago. We were on the way to get Tacos when the van died. My father had to walk close to a mile, at dusk just to call a tow. It was good weather, and we were lucky someone was open who had a public phone. What if it was storming, maybe with hail and high winds? Or snow. We would be stuck there. What if someone was trying to break into the car, what could we do? Things would have been a lot safer and easier with a cell phone in the glove compartment. Having only that use for a cell phone one with a contract and monthly payments to get incoming calls is a bit stupid. I would think they [disposable phones] would become *standard* in all road kits, right next to the flares and first aid kit. At $20 people wouldn't have to worry about losing them or breaking them. How about hikers? Bikers? People off at the lake for some fishing? Just about any place where you may need to contact someone be it for help or for some comfort. I would prefer however if the phones weren't quite so disposable, getting it recharged, and reset for a lesser fee [maybe $10] would be great. It might even have some uses for parents who want to make sure their children have a way to call 911 or to call home. I can't really see why so many are against this idea. Road flares are disposable, so are band aids. I don't see anyone cussing those out. CB radios, and a lot of walkie talkies are anonymous. I don't see anyone cussing those out either. Is it just that everyone should have a car phone already, being the late 90's and all? Well I'm sorry but a lot of people don't have car phones because they don't need to talk eight hours a week to six important clients. Calling cards need a phone to use them. CBs need someone who gives a damn to relay for help. Who (excluding those who already have cell phones and use them often) would not want one of these in the car, just in case?
    It could have a cute package in the store too. On the back of the package it could show the state, like Florida and show what areas it covers.
    My mother loves the idea of the phone, so does my father, my brother. They would buy one in a heartbeat. If it meant no monthly fees, no hour long contracts, no service plans. Who really wants to spend more time buying and signing up for a cell and getting a sale pitch then they plan to spend using the cell?

    Think about it.

  146. Smarter than it looks by dingbat_hp · · Score: 1

    This idea isn't as trivial as it first sounds.

    Note the fact that this phone is not only limited-life disposable, but also that it's outgoing calls only. This seems obvious at first, after all, who wants a disposable phone with a number that only lasts a month ? Actually it's much smarter than that for a cell phone.

    • Battery life. An outgoing only phone doesn't need to be left switched on to receive incoming - useful lifetime.
    • Network traffic. If it can't receive, the network doesn't need to track it. That's a lot less BCH traffic to manage and pay bandwidth for.
    • Pre-payment charging model. No need for the network operator to bill, no need to log usage duration, no need to verify the phone is valid (unless you're wisely cautious).
    • No need to negotiate roaming or decent cell handover (I bet it doesn't do this), so that makes the phone simpler.
    • Batteries can be simple alkaline or lithium primary cells, not awkward rechargeables.

    What appears to have been invented here is a disposable version of the old UK Rabbit phone, when in outdoor mode.

    Not being rechargable for call time is wasteful, but probably made necessary by limits in reliable crypto. If you ever managed to break the crypto on the call life recharging machine, then you'd have an inexhaustible supply of free calls. No sensible operator would like the idea of being exposed to that risk.