Cell-Phone Wars

Makarand writes "According to this article in the Houston Chronicle people fed up with cell phone chatter have declared war against cell phones. They are arming themselves with detectors, jammers and other gizmos to defend privacy, security, sanity and blissful silence. Although jamming cell phones is not legal in the US, pocket-sized jammers are available online and even on eBay. Cell-phone jammers typically work by disrupting the communication between handsets and cellular towers by flooding an area with interference or selectively blocking signals by broadcasting on frequencies used by these phones. The FCC has received very few complaints about jammed cell phones and has never taken action against anyone for that violation."

Misleading article

[Anonymous Coward]

The 'Safe Haven' system by Iceberg is not a camera phone jammer.

It's basically a feature that needs to be built into the phone. When it receives a certain signal it disables the camera. Iceberg claim it could be used for laptops and PDA's but neglect to mention that disabling the technology would be trivial for any determined pervert.

The complaints over camera phones are pretty idiotic anyway. The determined pervert could just use a tiny camera if they really wanted to take photo's anywhere.

I'm not paying Nokia et al to integrate technology that selectively disables my phone. It reminds me the recent debacle about printers with built in mechanisms to defeat currency copying. I'd rather Nokia and HP spent their time working on useful new features than trying to nursemaid me.

If you are worried about someone taking your photo in the locker room, that is your problem.

Re:Not good

[Anonymous Coward]

As a top IT executive for a fortune 50...

The courts would see it my way, as well.

C'mon, you will always win in the courts, you have an army of lawyers and money to crush anyone, even if you are not right.

Now I will buy one of those things for my own protection. Don't worry, I'm not in the US. In my country there are places where cell phone use should be banned because people have used the phones for malicious purposes (I mean inside banks).

Re:Safety?

[Avihson]

What cafes and restaurants do you frequent that do not have a land line for emergencies?

I don't care if you use a cellphone in public, I just watch you intently and take notes! I only interrupt if I miss part of the conversation.

You lose your right to privacy when you talk in public. I take advantage of that to embarrass the obnoxious by being just as obnoxious.

Re:Cell phone jamming on private property

[jgabby]

Being the primary service in the bands they are located, the cell phone providers are entitled to interference protection throughout their service contour, regardless of private property or not. By emitting a signal to purposely interfere, if someone complains, the FCC will likely fine the perpetrator and confiscate the equipment (if they can find him).

What IS entirely legal however is to design your building such that cell phone signals are unable to penetrate it...For example, by making your building a faraday cage. This I think could be a lucrative business - retrofitting movie theaters to block (not interfere with) the cell phone frequencies.

Re:No action taken

[Anonymous Coward]

The jammer is transmitting one helluvalotta radio signals, and radio signals can be tracked...

Re:Cell phone jamming on private property

[LostCluster]

The act of jamming a cell phone is illegal no matter where you are, even on your own property. Simply put, it's transmitting on a licensed frequency without a license to do so.

Cell phone companies hold the licenses to any frequency being used for cell phones, and that license extends to their subscribers for using the service only. If you're jamming, you don't have permission to transmit on that frequency, and that's where the FCC can come down on you.

Jammers and Dampers

[ldrhcp]

Though jamming a cell phone is illegal, it is legal to dampen the signal with certain materials. Strategies like this are already employed in some buildings such as theaters, and if this backlash continues we can expect to see damping in many more public places.

Re:Not good

[mabhatter654]

As somebody who's spent a lot of time in the service industry [i.e. Mcdonalds!] it really is rude how many people will answer the phone while ignoring their place in line...not paying attention to the service they're requesting, but of course they won't step aside and allow the next person to place their order....so they then snear and shout at the cashier or other customers because Those other people are in the way?

It's about respect for your fellow person...starting with the one in front of you!!! I can understand the shopkeeper who deals with this 50 times a day. people come to your shop and you can't give good service because they interrupt your transaction with them for the phone....and OFTEN have the nerve to get mad at YOU "because you're taking too long!" Not to mention disrupting other customers patiently standing in line with loud disagreements, or lack of attention to what's going on around them. It's a menace!!!

That said, jamming or blocking phones isn't the answer, it just makes people ruder! Cell phones have spread the general problem of computers to the masses...computers have allowed businesses to micromanage and interrupt business plans on moment's notice...cell phones allow thoses same types of people to deal with everything NOW...instead of budgeting their time and attention to allow their responsibilites to be properly performed...And THAT is the bigger problem with "instant everything"!!

The main tool to fight this would be better voicemail/sms messages...allowing people to be notified of messages, but keep the phone off until they can give proper attention, those tools are available, but still don't work that well for every minute use. Businesses with "quiet, private places" for phone conversations would help too...they wiped out most phone booths about 10 years ago and didn't replace the "space" to make communications in.

Re:'War on' cell phones

[QEDog]

Why is it socially acceptable to talk to people but as soon as the person is separated by a bit of technology is it considered obnoxious and socially unacceptable?

The question is why is it socially acceptable for people with cellphones to be rude by being loud and interrupting social situations with them? I strongly feel that presential interaction should be more valuable and respected than the typical cellphone call "I'll be there in five minutes".

Re:Jammers and Dampers

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry to hear about your problems. Here is another way to approach the problem:

• Check the ARRL for a ham radio club in your area [arrl.org]
• Ask them where you can find an Official Observer (or OO)
• The OO has the expertise to track down the interference and will try to resolve the problem.
• If the OO can't resolve the problem, they should pass the information on to the FCC.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[shepd]

>I dont know about you,
>but in the last year i havent been to a
>"no service" area..

Depends on where you live. If you're in Canada and use a GSM handset, you can expect to spend more time outside of service zones than in.

I'm actually rather surprised when I can make a clear call with my GSM phone.

That being said, I'd not switch to TDMA/AMPS/CDMA for all the signal in the world. I like being able to switch between providers (even if there are only the two biggies).

Re:No complaints now, but...

[balloonpup]

As a trucker, I see a lot of the country, and I can say that there's loads of places with no signal. Beyond the areas where there are just no towers, there's a lot of dead spots in big cities that I've been to, and even odd places where you just have to move a few feet. I've seen this with Nextel, Verizon and Sprint (I've had all three on the road recently). They haven't eliminated deadspots by a long shot.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[Ralph Wiggam]

The biggest factor in determining whether someone will survive a major heart attack is how fast the paramedics arive. The 2 minutes it takes to get outside the jamming range or find a land line phone may be 2 minutes more than someone has.

The good news is that they're putting automatic defibrilators in airports and malls, which are saving lives everyday.

-B

Re:This would be in America. right?

[SpectreGadget]

To clarify, in most of America, there is signal, but not necessarily the signal you need. It might be the signal for a rival service provider that you can't get on. It's too fragmented to guarantee service for your phone everywhere.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[CaptainJeff]

Absolutely not. CPR keeps blood moving in the body in a forced way, very dissimiliar to the heart's natural movement. CPR aims to keep that person revivable by spreading oxygenated blood around the body - it has an approaching zero chance of actually reviving someone. For someone experiencing a cardiac arrest, the most important action that can be taken is early defib. The parent is correct - these AED devices are going everywhere and they are so easy to use that an average 8 year old can successfully use them if need be. True story - I have seen someone defibed who was without a pulse for around 5 minutes, within 20 seconds he was talking and fully aware. AEDs are that effective. I have NEVER seen anyone regain their pulse after CPR - it simply does not happen.

Re:This would be in America. right?

[Bobulusman]

As I understand it, that's how it works in the US as well.

Re:Telemetry

[EvanED]

They didn't.

That's the point. Cell phones, in some circumstances, save lives.

Re:This would be in America. right?

[WuphonsReach]

I don't know about US networks, but in the GSM network, emergency calls (112) have to get through even if you are on a different network, or haven't paid your subscription.

AFAIK, US is the same - in fact there are charities that will collect old, in-active, cell phones for use as portable 911 (our emergency number) phones.

Re:jammers

[DJStealth]

FYI, it is my understanding that Spread Spectrum technologies, such as CDMA (Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum) and Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum over GSM are designed to prevent jamming.

Spread Spectrum was developed in WWII specifically for that purpose. Only recently were the documents declassified for use in such systems.

All CDMA phones should be able to avoid jamming, and GSM carriers who make use of frequency hopping should also be able to avoid this.

Re:Not good

[MrBlint]

There is a simple technical fix to the shouting problem which is to feed the phone users voice back through the earpiece. I think it's known as sidetone in the telecoms industry.

When you have a normal conversation you unconsciously adjust the level of your own voice relative to other people talking and the general background noise level. Phone designers can use this fact to provide some control over the volume at which people talk when using the phone.

The amount of feedback has to be carefully judged otherwise you will talk to quietly and the user at the other end won't hear you properly. I suspect that this feature is left off of mobile phones because if people speak louder then the speach quality will be better at the other end.

Re:jammers

[Anonymous Coward]

"Where do you buy those by the way" http://www.globalgadgetuk.com/ just for starters. There's many.

Re:Jammers and Dampers

[lscotte]

I wish every theater jammed cell phones. The last few movies I've gone to, people around me have not only had their cell phones ring, but actually answered them and had a conversation during the movie.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[wronskyMan]

AEDs that are put in public places have sensors that, when you put the pads on the persons chest, it will analyze their heartbeat and only deliver a (appropriately measured) shock if the heart appears to be fibrillating. The less-automatic older ones carry some risks of messing up the heartbeat because of the potential to be used when the heart is not in fibrillation; that is why they were in hospitals and ambulances instead of libraries and shopping malls (because of the need for a skilled user).

Re:This would be in America. right?

[csteinle]

No they don't. The spec allows for it - even for a phone with no SIM in it, but it's not mandatory. None of the UK networks support it. Certain phones - including Ericssons - will display "SOS Calls Only" when they only have coverage from networks they have no access to, but it won't actually work in many countries.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[lga]

This is because the phone is picking up the more extensive army network.

I'm sorry, but that's complete rubbish. The British army does not run a GSM network, at least not on the standard 900Mhz or 1800Mhz channels needed to operate with a GSM phone. And when the phones says "emergency calls only" in the UK it's actually lying. The GSM spec allows for phones to make emergency calls on networks not their own, but no UK network allows it.

And how did you count 6 networks? Vodafone, O2, T-Mobile, Orange and 3. That's 5 networks. (In case you didn't know, Virgin uses T-Mobile's network.)

Re:No complaints now, but...

[jcp797]

How did this get modded +5 Informative?

AEDs are not a magic bullet. AEDs are only effective for two *specific* types of cardiac arrest: v-tach and v-fib. They are not definitely NOT a substitute for CPR. While you may have witnessed a miracle case, recussitation usually requires drugs and constant airflow in addition to shocks.

It is *essential* to keep the oxygenated blood moving to the brain to prevent tissue death (via CPR), until the paramedics arrive. As the grandparent poster said, The biggest factor in determining whether someone will survive a major heart attack is how fast the paramedics arive.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[jcp797]

Oh, and as a side note: you are correct that CPR alone rarely is enough to recussitate a victim. I believe that laymen CPR classes now exclude pulse-checking from their training. Health care professionals, however, are still required to check for pulses.

Re:No complaints now, but...

[CaptainJeff]

Absolutely correct. When I refer to AEDs, I include the application of CPR. While the AED can do a great job restarting a heart that is not behaving correctly, CPR will continue a flow of O2 to the brain - although a much reduced flow. The AED has two critical things going for it: (1) It's easy to use. We've trained 8 years olds to use it. It will not shock anything besides v-fib and venticular v-tac. It is literally as simple as putting the two pads where the pictures show and pressing one button. All done. (2) It actually can shut down and then restart a heart, correcting the condition that is threatening life. CPR has an approaching zero chance of correcting that condition - it's goal is simply to continue O2 flow to the brain until such treatment can be applied.

Re:Jammers and Dampers (OT)

[kellman]

which only makes the mobile and the base station turn up the power level, increasing the health hazard......
Slightly off topic, but...
Actually, studies are showing cell phones are not dangerous [consumeraffairs.com].