Shutting Up Annoying Cellphones 152
NoWhere Man writes: "North Carolina-based BlueLinx, which produces consumer applications for short-range wireless systems, and" Hold on I gotta take this call.... " a telecommunications center at the University of Adelaide in Australia are developing a feature for mobile phones that interacts with Bluetooth shortwave radio-link systems in public places. The feature is designed to automatically silence cellphone ringing. Once inside the Bluetooth coverage area, cellphones with the "Q-Zone" feature will be silenced."
And I would buy this phone why? (Score:4)
sulli
Re:Censorship (Score:2)
A Q-Zone for Everything (Score:1)
I can't wait till BlueLinx develops a chip to implant into my brain so I can block out Slashdot Troll posts about Natalie Portman...We wouldn't need a moderation system...
Actually, I would like a Q-zone that blocks out genomics patents from the Patent Office Computers!! The best part is, there are no buttons, and doctors are allowed to overide it!! Q-zone sounds like the MacOS.
If people will use it... (Score:1)
"If you are a doctor, you can override the Q-Zone feature on your cellphone," said Mary Beth Griffin, BlueLinx executive vice president.
So basically, this only works if people dont set up their phones to exclude it. Wonderful. This will help out all of the fogetful people, who accidentally leave their phones on in movie theaters. Both of them.
But for the other trolls who think that the next call is too important to miss, they will turn off the feature anyway.
Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but whenever this comes about, I don't forsee it changing things too much.
Not Terribly Interesting (Score:4)
At best, this is just a small feature to allow busy people who don't want to have to remember to turn their phones off when they enter a movie theater, to have it done automatically. Fine with me. This isn't going to prevent the annoying noise of cell-phones, unless people make the voluntary decision to do so.
I don't really even find cell-phones that annoying, unless it's in certain circumstances such as theaters. And chances are that some dumbass is going to think that waiting for a call from his buddies downtown is just as important as the call for the doctor who has to rush to the hospital to save a car-accident victim's life.
I'm not suggesting we should force anyone to turn their phones off or down, either. That's a bit stupid and big-brotherish, to me. It also could leave a lot of room for lawsuits and liability issues.
This only serves to make life a tiny notch simpler for those who care to be responsible enough to keep their volume down or off in certain public places. The problem of those who could care less about making those 'sacrifices' will have to be dealt with via old-fashioned intolerance by people around them when their phones go off and they engage in annoying conversation while you're trying to enjoy a flick. That is, next time someone's phone rings in the middle of a movie and they don't immediately shut it off -- or worse, they answer it and start talking, the people around them should chastise them for it. It's better than enforcing some dumb law and the moron still has the choice of leaving the theater or staying there and being a prick, if he can put up with the resulting disapprovement of the other movie-goers.
---
seumas.com
Ask Tog about this... (Score:2)
As one poster pointed out, a feature that involuntarily cripples your cellphone will be a tough sell.
not as bad as it sounds (Score:1)
i think it's great. i can't even begin to count how many times my classes were interrupted by someones wonderful 8 bit rendition fo the fugue toccatta in dmol, played in rich one-tonal harmonies
Excellent! (Score:5)
/* TNW */
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
I agree, I think this is the most ridiculous use of technology to control people's lives I've heard of in a long time...
My company is doing something like this too. (Score:5)
"Many people are bothered by individuals who use their cell phones in innapropriate places." announced Shoeboy. "Just yesterday I was taking a leak and the guy at the next urinal was on the phone with his wife. I'm sorry, but if a guy is going to say 'I love you honey' in a public restroom, I expect a blow job."
Shoeboy Industries hopes to combat these annoying mobile phone users by introducing a technology called ActiveGlock.
"ActiveGlock will provide a convienient point and click interface to silence those mobile users once and for all!" exclaims John Cheese, tech stock analyst for pointlesswasteoftime.com. "I'm very bullish on Shoeboy Industries stock right now. Shoeboy should be able to mow down the competition and shoot his way to the top of NASDAQ."
A representative for the Disgrunted Postal Workers Association revealed that it's members had been evaluating ActiveGlock technology and hope to implement it "When those bastards least expect it."
Others are less optimistic. "Technically it's murder," declares University of Utah law professor Dr. Rajeev Papshigali, "we wish it was justifiable homicide, but it isn't."
Dr. Papshigali's warnings went unheeded on wall street where Shoeboy Industries closed at 2.25 for a gain of 2.24 points on the day.
--Shoeboy
Re:Censorship (Score:4)
Yes. Here's the clue: Censorship can only be done by the government.
You don't like the fact that the theatre you paid to get in to blocks cell phones? Walk out.
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
The only thing I want in my Q-Zone (Score:2)
Actually, the most irritating thing I find about wireless phones (come on folks, lots of them aren't technically CELL anymore) are those vanity rings. It's incredibly annoying to hear La Cucaracha, Fur Elise, Ode to Joy and any number of other songs blaring when someone has an incoming call. I realize that it makes things easier in crowds where there may be many people with wireless phones, but they could at least use a different ring instead of obnoxiously long and high pitched snippets from a song...
Can they do this with car stereo's? (Score:1)
Sorry, I don't want to hear Britney Spears at 3000 db at 2 am in the morning. Come to think of it, I just don't want to hear Britney Spears, period!
Geoff
RE: censorship....How about polite.... (Score:1)
Cheap cell-phone whackers? (Score:1)
Not that I'd ever do anything like that. No.
Just curious, ya understand.
Re:Not Terribly Interesting (Score:1)
classrooms (Score:4)
Red Queen Paradox (Score:1)
Better yet, get the 1 mile radius version installed in my car. I should get an insurance discount for this due to all the people around me guaranteed not to be distracted by ringing phones.
Of course, someone is going to invent the Silencer Override, followed by the Silencer Override Override, etc, much like the "Caller-ID", "Caller-ID blocking" and "Caller-ID blocking auto-refusal" mess we've gotten ourselves into.
--
Or, for the more proactive... (Score:1)
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/09/10/0826258.shtm l [slashdot.org] 1 772,00.html?chkpt=hpqs014 [zdnet.com]
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,233
Mmmmmmm....HERF guns....
Still doesn't fix the main problem... (Score:2)
...using cellphones while driving. Will public highways start setting up Q-zones?
---
Zardoz has spoken!
phonebashing (Score:4)
Q-Zone (Score:2)
And, I can see the slogan now, as doctors can turn it off: "More Doctors Use Q-Zone than Any Other Phone!"
sulli
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
Of course not! The fact that you know about it should point that out. Just because one stinking site (ebay) wimped out to Gawd-Amighty Microsoft does not censorship make. The fact that we are talking about it here, now, makes my point.
Censorship is when you and a bunch of your friends gather around a street corner yelling "Bill Gates Sucks!" and the governing body shoots you all dead.
See also Tiemenn Square (sp) in China. When you've been run over by a tank because of your views get back to me.
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
Mobile phone etiquette (Score:4)
Re:My company is doing something like this too. (Score:1)
Why shouldn't you encourage me? The post was on topic, original and made a point, albeit in a non-traditional manner. When I posted stuff like that a year ago, I'd get 4's and 5's consistently. The last few months though, the moderation on
--Shoeboy
Obsurd (Score:1)
Good Idea, but Needs Work (?) (Score:1)
No where in the article did I see exactly what it does. It said that it silences the phone, but does that mean it makes it more quiet or that it shuts off the cell phone sound completely. There was a line in the article that implies the former, but just in case...
I think it would be nice to make the "silencer" customizable by the organization Bluetooth is installed in. Say, for instance, the organization would rather turn it to buzz mode than have any sound at all, like a church where everything is really quite quiet. Plus, who couldn't use a little "buzz" to keep them alert at some services! ;-)
Personally, I wouldn't mind some organization "buzzing" me while I'm busy. "Gets me all tingly inside!"
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
(Assuming this is from the United States...)
Might I suggest you take a long, hard look at your Social Security Number and just how many places that puts YOU in some database?
Sounds like another way... (Score:1)
Tempest-proof Movie theaters (Score:3)
If you don't like it, I hope you choose not to patronize these places - I expect business will pick up as a result!
A.
Re:Not Terribly Interesting (Score:2)
--
Ski-U-Mah!
Stop the MPAA [opendvd.org]
Re:classrooms (Score:1)
"Is my refrigerator running? I'm not sure. Why would I need to catch it?
No, I don't know what part of my body my 'trombone' is located in. Which toe would I need a towtruck for? What?"
And then he hangs up and says "I'm not sure what that was about." True story! All I can figure is that he was trying to make class more interesting (it was a really boring numerical methods class...and this is a really boring professor). Still, it wierded me out. Woke me up, though.
Communications jamming (Score:2)
The best part about this system is that it would be backwards compatible with older phones, doesn't require getting manufactures on board and losers can't override it.
>;-)
--
Simon
Re:Still doesn't fix the main problem... (Score:3)
The problem with cellular phones being used while driving is that they occupy not only your attention but your physical capacities. So do these other activities which people are frequently engaged in while on the freeway.
I hate new laws. I hate throwing a law at every problem or question, but I don't see any way around this, since there is a direct connection between the behavior and the resulting accidents -- just like putting a 'WIDE LOAD' sign on the back of a long semi carrying a mobile home. Why is that sign there? Because carrying a house tends to make it a bit dangerous for the guy behind you!
But how do you come up with a reasonable list of things that you can and cannot do while moving (note that I don't see a problem with snacking away or shaving in your car if you're in gridlock))?
Shaving, putting on makeup, reading a book, getting dressed -- really bad thins to be doing while driving. They demonstrate absolutely horrible common sense on behalf of the driver. But drinking... It seems a little strong to say that I'm not allowed to have a few sips of my soda while I'm on the road. Should I have to pull over to the side of the road each time I get thirsty? Maybe not. Probably an acceptable thing to do, compared to unwrapping a big-mac and sinking your teeth into it, removing your concentration from the road.
Cellular phones are fine, if you have a hands-free system. If you can call-up a number and have your system dial it and, further, have yor conversation, without physically having to removing your concentration or hands from the wheel, then great. And I think we're moving closer to this, as technology becomes available.
You also have other issues, such as sleeping. Being extremely drowsey is a massive cause of accidents. In fact, it is generally accepted that if you've been awake for over sixteen or seventeen hours straight, you are operating at an impaired level similar to having a blood/alchohol mix of .05 percent. Almost a legal limite in many states.
But driving while sleepy isn't illegal. We don't pull you over and ticket you if you're caught yawning.
It's a difficult line to draw, but I think that for the attempt of safety, lines do need to be drawn. Where possible, alternatives need to be advanced and used. If you can do something in a safe manner while on the road, that's great -- cellphones with speakers and hands free operationg. If you can't do it safely -- trying to hold your phone, dial it, hold it between your ear and shoulder as you tilt your head sideways and converse and drive in this position -- then that's not so great. Should be an offense that can be fined. The same can then be applied to several other well-known hazards that drivers engage in routinely.
People will dislike the changes and scream that they are having their rights invaded, but people need to realize that while it seems to them that they're just pitting their foot on a pedel and moving a little wheel to the left and right, they're actually still responsible for a piece of metal and fiberglass, several tons in size, rocketing down the freeway at seventy or more miles per hour.
---
seumas.com
Re:Obsurd (Score:1)
Here's a radical idea, we used it back before there were cell-phones. If you're not completely comfortable with the situation your child is in, maybe you shouldn't leave it.
Yeah, I know - that could impact your lifestyle. Bummer.
Being a grown-up and having kids tends to do that.
what about security (Score:2)
1) set up a transmitter to broadcast the "silence" command to my victim's area
2) intercept incoming calls
3) since the victim is not notified of the call, I open up on the channel and pretend to be him/her.
This was one of the reasons our old friend the Denial of Service attack was invented oh so long ago.
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
Re:Cheap cell-phone whackers? (Score:1)
I was sort of hoping to keep the local CPUs on line. Seeing as they run the tranny, engine, radio et al.
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
The user has to allow it. (Score:4)
I have a feeling that the features that allow this sort of thing (stopping ringers) will not be automatically enabled (unless Microsoft dominates the technology). Would you be willing to share the contents of your PDA with anyone who walks by?
Now we just need bluetooth implants in babies.... (Score:2)
Cell phone jamming (Score:2)
Of course, these devices are only sold outside of the US and are completely illegal to operate in the US.
The first commercial one that I'm aware of was developed in 1998, here is an article [techweb.com] about it.
Re:My company is doing something like this too. (Score:1)
What ever happened to the Wave Wall? (Score:1)
Reality Check (Score:1)
Basically this is just a way of automating something that people may want to do anyway. It's not for everyone, but not everyone has to use it.
In conclusion, it's a good thing.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
Re:Communications jamming (Score:1)
I believe that a cell phone interference device is in place in the Israeli Parlaiment to render the cellular phones of the legislators non-functional while in session. But such a device would never be approved for sale or use in the US.
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
We really are belaboring the obvious here, but what the heck, I'm bored. Here's the difference:
If a theatre manager shoots you for using a cell phone, that's murder. Because we have laws about killing people, and where and when you're allowed to do it. They are answerable to a higher authority, the Government.
If the government shoots you, it's because they felt like it. It's perfectly legal, because they write whatever laws they like. They answer to no higher authority than the people, and so far the people don't seem to have any problems with the Government blowing away folks in order to "Save the Children".
Hope this helps.
Re:Communications jamming (Score:1)
Re:Obsurd (Score:1)
Good idea... err... I'm not quite sure, finally (Score:1)
Now, instead of ringing, phones are also able to vibrate.
Which means users who don't want to disturb other people are already able to do so.
Doesn't that turn that feature pointless?
What's wrong with a sign. (Score:1)
Instead of spending all that money on new technology and creating lawsuits, why not just put up a big yellow sign outside movie theaters, university classrooms & other un-cellphone friendly places (like my house, my car..) as a reminder:
Turn your cellphone/pager on vibrate or off or you will be shot. Dead.
Seems like a simpler, and more elegant solution to me. It's so logical it appears that no-one's thought of it yet. Then you don't have the hassle & expense of installing the bluetooth transmitters or whatever in the appropriate places. Let's stop getting gadget happy, you gadget freaks.. (myself included)
Bullshit! (Score:1)
Censorship can only be done by the government.
Censorship, enforced by anyone is still censorship.
What if all theatres did this? Do I still have the freedom to choose not to go in? Yeah, you can claim I don't have to go in there. But no one had to buy computers with Windows installed either. What if Microsoft added something to Windows which (I'm stretching here) disallowed you from typing the word Linux? Would that be censorship?
Any sufficiently large or powerful group restricting freedom of thought, speech or other form of expression is committing censorship.
Disclaimer: I'm not claiming banning the use of cellphones is censorship - just that it doesn't have to be done by the government for it to be considered censorship
Because most phones bury the feature 3 menus deep. (Score:1)
Outlook is grim... (Score:1)
What about for personal use..... (Score:1)
Re:My company is doing something like this too. (Score:1)
I've been with
I say we need to kick off everyone with user id > 10k and bring back MEEPT!
Posted anonymously to preserve my precious karma for the great Troll Wars.
Re:And I would buy this phone why? (Score:1)
<highhorse>It's not only, that some people can't be bothered to switch their cellphone to vibrate instead of one of those annoying would-be musical-snippets-in-endless-loop, which can be "enjoyed" for minutes while they dig out their phone from the bottom of their heavily filled bag. After which you will be filled in on all kinds of details about their and others' private lives, which you're not interested in, but are unable not to overhear, since they are trying to speak louder than the person next to them on his or her cellphone. And all I want is to read my newspaper in peace, in the train en route to my job.
I like music, as a matter of fact I like most of the original music those phone tunes were taken from. But that only makes them worse. And, besides music, I like silence a lot. A scarce commodity nowadays, if you leave your soundproofed home. It used to be walkmen, and cars with open windows (or not), with the stereo on $KILL_HUMAN_HEARING_SYSTEM_IF_NOT_THE_HUMAN_ITSELF . I think there's a good future in a device, that kills all stereo's and cellhpones in a, let's make is 500 meters or yards cubic, area. I promiss I'll stop smoking then, even if it's allowed, provided I find a cure for my need to.
But at least this /. article and reaction lead to me putting in Rachmaninov's Pino cencerto Nr.2 and Nr4, so this contribution turned out much less heated than it otherwise would have. :-)<highhorse*gt;
Stefan. Good musix might stop wars. So might a well placed silence.
It takes a lot of brains to enjoy satire, humor and wit-
Re:Obsurd (Score:1)
First, there's a "vibrate" function on most recent cell phones and damn near all pagers. What this means is that you can receive incoming calls without annoying those around you with the ubiquitous "beebeebeebeebeep" (or worse, the cutesy little songs some phones sing nowadays). Just set the damn phone/pager to "vibrate" if it bugs you that much.
And second, no, nobody is able to watch their kids 24/7. And this may be a shock to you, but there are bazillions of parents with no cell phones and no pagers that manage to keep on top of what's up with their kids. How do you think your parents did it? How do you think your grandparents kept tabs on your parents? Think about that.
P.S. "Absurd."
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
No, MS was enforcing an illegal clause in their software license which didn't allow one to sell the software.
Re:classrooms (Score:1)
Re:Now we just need bluetooth implants in babies.. (Score:1)
You forgot: and where walkmen stop, and loudmouths shut up. And women said "Yes." when they mean "Yes."
Stefan.
It takes a lot of brains to enjoy satire, humor and wit-
Re:Obsurd (Score:1)
No, I'm someone who actually thought about it, and decided that (a) I don't like kids, and (b) the responsibility that comes with crotch-fruit (if you're more civilized than a baboon) isn't something I want to be stuck with.
Wow. Being responsible for your actions. What a concept.
what about missing an emergency call about your wife being in the hospital or your father,
I'm not a doctor or an EMS specialist, so there's jack all I can do about it in the immediate sense. Call me NOW, call me 8 hours from now, it don't make a whole hell of a lot of difference to the body in the meatwagon when push comes to shove. Or do you figure you'll arrive at the hospital just in time to deliver the live-saving technique that will save your loved one? This ain't TV. This is Real Life. Has been for quite a while.
there are thousands of calls you CANNOT AFFORD to miss
Or, alternatively, you take your instant-access status just a tad too seriously.
This may come as a shock, but civilization did manage to get along for one or two centuries before we even had cell phones.
Cell phones are convenient. They are not a necessity.
Re:Censorship (Score:1)
Re:The only thing I want in my Q-Zone (Score:1)
Why? Unless you are referring to cordless phones that people connect to their landlines, then yes, they very much are cellular. It doesn't make any sense not to be, it would be a huge step backwards.
I do agree about the various "music" rings though. They are irritating... Even worse, some GSM phones let you send your own ringtones to the phone, and the alt.cellular.* newsgroups are full of people requesting ringtones of a particular song or movie/tv show theme...
BFD! (Score:1)
Now where's the Bluetooth device that... (Score:1)
Why only go cell phones. Let's go whole hog!
Re: (Score:1)
Clapping` (Score:1)
Another Idea (Score:3)
Would work on ANY cell phone. As well as my neighbors blaring TV. Dangerous drivers with their fancy electronic ignition. The machine at the grocery store that claims my checks are bad. Those androids that the CIA has used to replace my family members.
All kinds of useful things.
Overkill? (Score:1)
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a fine idea, and when the bluetooth people have their way in a couple years, we'll all be living in a wirelessly connected world and have our phones muted in q-zones without giving it much of a thought.
Halfway there... (Score:2)
>I think there's a good future in a device, that
>kills all stereo's and cellhpones in a, let's make
>is 500 meters or yards cubic, area. I promiss I'll
>stop smoking then, even if it's allowed, provided
>I find a cure for my need to.
Well, I can't help ya with the stereos... but as for the cellphones, check out this article in this week's SF Weekly:
http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2000-07-05/bayvi
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Re:The only thing I want in my Q-Zone (Score:1)
Then again, there may be hope. Non-POTS phones have been renamed by marketers time and time again -- there was "car phone", which Motorola made inaccurate, then the "cellular phone", which was a pain to pronouce, so marketers shortened it to "cell phone" instead.
There is some hope, though. Once the technology is even more widely adopted (probably in the next five years), it won't even matter anymore -- "phone" will be synonymous with "cell phone".
Places I want to see this: (Score:1)
Let's see here
First of all, it's not censorship. Grow up and stop complaining every time someone does something that means you can't run around being a jerk.
Second, let's see my list of places I'd like to see this deployed:
That's just a partial list, but then I'm in favor of ridding the world of all the morons when I become the evil overlord of the world. (Click the link for my homepage to see the details.)
Matthew Miller, [50megs.com]
Re: My company is doing something like this too. (Score:2)
heh, sometimes I feel the same way while writing up a post and how it feels like I'm being graded unfairly on a written essay exam by a committee that will never like me. I'd still be pursuing usenet news full time, but very interesting topics and good discussion lure me back here.
MEEPT was a true rebel who fought the rigid adherance to a formal discussion with his zany prose. Such comic character was inevitable when the number of users reached a few thousand. Now we have magnitudes more than that and my mind can explode when trying to consider who we have here and what is appropriate.
But humor is often appreciated, especially when falling off the chair ROFL style. Humor may be a sore subject, but it was pretty damn funny.
Re:What's wrong with a sign. (Score:1)
We don't live in an ideal world.
Sadly, the world if full of rude and stupid people who go 50 miles per hour in a school zone and speed past stopped school busses even when the big red STOP sign is sticking out of the side. Signs don't bother them or change their behavior.
The fact that you proposed just putting up a sign leads me to suspect you're the kind of person who would see such a sign and think "Gee, I forgot to turn off my pager. I'll do that right now so I don't bother anyone." If there were more people like that, we wouldn't have people getting funding to build this technology.
Of course, if there were more people who paid attention to signs, smoking would stop, no one would speed, no one would pirate M$ products, all forest fires would be the result of lightning and lava flows and that athletic baby boomer jock wouldn't park in the space reserved for the WWII war vet with a walker and a false leg.
In short, there are too many jerks to just put up a sign.
Matthew Miller, [50megs.com]
This is an OUTRAGE!! (Score:1)
I hereby call on Slashdot's paranoid faithful to find a way that is a violation of someone's free speech. C'mon, I dare you! This is YOUR RIGHTS that are at stake here!
Re:The only thing I want in my Q-Zone (Score:1)
The DSL interface box is a modem. The data is used to modulate one or more carriers.
Re:Still doesn't fix the main problem... (Score:1)
Actually it *is* illegal in most areas to drive when you are not 'fully awake' (the legal terminology varies.) Granted, it's not enforced very much; I suspect because it would be so difficult to prove in court. People have a way of becoming fully awake when those flashing blue and red lights are behind you! You can't as easily become 'un-drunk' if pulled over.
sigh (Score:1)
Hands Free doesn't fix the problem (Score:2)
The conclusions of these studies was that cell phones took away from the drivers' concentration, which slowed reaction time in the same way alcohol slows reaction time. And in the same way shaving in the car slows reaction time, I suppose...
If you really need to both shave and drive but can't find time for both, why not just wake up 5 minutes earlier?
-Ted
Shortwave?!?!? (Score:1)
Erm, Bluetooth uses spread-spectrum in the microwave range, not the shortwave range. It's much shorter than shortwave.
Short distance is perhaps what was meant?
Would it be effective? (Score:2)
The building where I work has notoriously poor cell-phone coverage inside, so people tend to migrate to the windows, where my office is. Once I arrived in the morning to find a guy in my office on his cell phone who would not leave even after I made it clear that it was my office. Much like traffic engineering, improvements in technology like this may merely push the problem somewhere else.
Re:Hands Free doesn't fix the problem (Score:2)
---
seumas.com
Re:Hands Free doesn't fix the problem (Score:2)
Why involve Bluetooth? (Score:2)
This will probably work better in the GSM part of the world, where there's usually only one major system. In the US, we have as many as six completely separate cell phone systems in some areas.
Window coating (Score:3)
Re:Censorship (Score:2)
i grew up in america and i seem to remember "the government" was the people. and that's true here in europe in most countries.
and since companies are also run by people, who would also be part of the government, then companies can censor people.
so you're saying that the government - the people - can censor people, but companies - also the people - can't by definition censor people. but they're the same people. by definition. your argument makes no sense. it disproves itself.
Re:Communications jamming (Score:2)
Like so many other things, this is best solved by society at large deciding "We're not gonna take it": The next time a phone rings in the theater, get everybody around the miscreant to shout "Is this a theater or a phone booth?" Keep yelling this as long as the jackass is in the theater. Eventually people will realize that rude behavior (phone in theater) will be met with rude behavior (people yelling at you).
In addition, for folks talking on the phone while driving, go listen to this RealAudio Clip [cars.com] from Cartalk: it's of this moron yapping on his cellphone to a calling when he wrecks! It's a classic!
It has a point, and jammers, too (Score:2)
OK, technically you're right. The real problem is that teh technology in the article is redundant with the existing low-tech gunpowder solutions.
If letting it ring *at all* in a restaurant or theater is part of the "intended use" of a cell phone, then possession of one of these devices should be a crime.
OK, maybe something less lethal than a glock should be used to aprehend the perpetrator, but . . .
I want these things *jammed* in public places. Restaraunts should have wheeled vats of battery acid, and waiters should seize ringing cellphones and drop them in--the rest of the patrons will cheer loudly . . .
shave and drive (Score:2)
>can't find time for both, why not just wake up 5
>minutes earlier?
WOuldn't growing a beard be a more reasonable solution? Running a piece of sharp metal across your throat every morning before you're fully awake is hardly a rational act . . .
:)
hawk, the bearded
my classroom announcement (Score:2)
At his wedding, his wife ordered the watch off, and hannded to me with instructions to grind it under my boot heel if it made a peep. This, I note, would have made me a hero at the school when we returned.
ALas, the watch remained silent. SO I'm still waiting for my chance.
Additionally, I"m checking with the administration on my new policy of summary confiscation or ejection (permanently) from my classroom.
Prof. Hawk
Re:Tempest-proof Movie theaters (Score:2)
Re:It has a point, and jammers, too (Score:2)
If a person is speaking at an innappropriate volume, it's unnacceptable whether he is using a cellular phone or not. If he has to yell into his cellphone because it doesn't pick up his voice very well, the problem should to fix the cellular phone rather than disable it.
And cellular phones should vibrate rather than ring.
What about a jammer? (Score:2)
Re:Obsurd (Score:2)
Re:And I would buy this phone why? (Score:2)
These will almost certainly be optional features/settings on your phone. I mean, think about it.
Late response, ahh...well. (Score:2)
However, what do we do about it? We either ignore it, or we try to create technological solutions to the problem.
The problem isn't technology folks - it's society.
I can think of the one solution that would stop this distress, and in a hurry - if we all did it:
We politely ask the person to stop. In other words, you should go up to them, say "Hi", and tell them that what they are doing (or not doing), is offensive to you, and ask them to please alter their behavior (please silence your phone, please don't touch yourself in public, please calm down). Doing so may bring curious responses (startlement is most common, embaressment follows - but in some situations, a punch might be thrown). However, if we all did this, whenever there was a problem, and weren't afraid to back up our fellow man - these issues would go away...