|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:48:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/6/2019 8:54 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote: Am 06.06.2019 um 14:14 schrieb Duane: You can listen or talk on a radio without looking at it.Â* Same with a phone.Â*Â* Especially if you have some hands free device as most cars do now. But you canÂ’t text without looking at it. Well actually you can send text by voice using Siri on iPhone and there's probably some app that reads it. Siri can do that as well https://www.dummies.com/consumer-ele...r-texts-aloud/ (and with the appropriate in-car integration, without needing to touch the home button). I have sat in a car as a passenger when the driver was texted by his wife and sent an answer via Siri.Â* Needed a few repetitions to get the right text but still simpler than ringing her to pass the estimated arrival time. And it's now so important to tell one's arrival time? I can accept it may be important in some few instances- perhaps "I'll be there before the baby is born!" But from certain friends, I now get texts saying "We're almost there, see you in five minutes." That's over-communication. We shouldn't need minute by minute reports. Strange that in all my years I cannot remember an instance when it was important for me to notify someone when, exactly, I would arrive. And yes, there were innumerable instances when I was required to be at a certain place at a certain time - "Be home at supper time or your father will see to you!", or "If you aren't here for roll call you will get a week of extra duty". Sad that no one gives a **** when you show up. In short this irrational desire to be certain that you inform the universe of every detail of your life is just that, irrational. You should talk to my wife. Or perhaps not. Perhaps it is simply evidence of an overweening arrogance that you are so important that everyone must be interested in your minute by minute activities. Or perhaps what’s not important for you is not not important for the rest of the world. -- cheers, John B. -- duane |
Ads |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:54:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 6/6/2019 1:43 AM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 19:24:48 -0700 (PDT), AK wrote: On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 1:28:42 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 23:47:42 -0700 (PDT), Andy wrote: I have thought about carrying a short range cell phone jammer while biking. I guess you know that cell phone jammers are illegal. https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement I have given it careful thought. Think some more. But when traveling as a passenger I increasingly see drivers drifting over into other lanes. They are irresponsible idiots who are a danger to everyone. It won't work the way you expect. Jamming a cell phone will cause the phone to disconnect unexpectedly. The driver will wonder what happened to their call in progress and begin finger poking at the screen trying to re-establish the call. That's not a great idea while moving. Prior to your jammer being turned on, the driver was minimally distracted. After jamming, the driver became actively engaged in operating the phone and has become seriously distracted. You may think that full time jamming only prevents initiating or receiving phone calls. That might be true if you were moving at the same speed as the traffic. However, there will be many cars passing you on your bicycle, in both directions, some of which might be engaged in a legal hands free phone conversation. Your jammer will disconnect their call in progress, cause them to finger poke at the screen, and probably cause an accident while they are distracted. Also, there are now so a substantial number of cellular bands in use (and growing with every FCC auction). Unless you plan to carry a rather large box on your bicycle, it is unlikely that you can efficiently jam all of them. At best, a simple jammer will take out all the customers of one particular vendor, leaving the other vendors bands unaffected. http://www.gasiajammer.com/sale-8508330-new-all-in-one-16-channels-high-power-desktop-signal-jammer-70-meters-sheilding-range.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMOpxrs53YQ -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Any phone use whether hands free or not is distracted driver. i.e. dangerous driver If not every phone is knocked out, no problemo. They may figure out that their phone only misbehaves when driving. :-) Fred My guess is that the immediate result of someone's phone stopping would be an immediate flurry of shaking the phone and feverously pushing buttons to get the damned thing to work. Rather than cause the driver to pay more attention to driving I suspect that it would have exactly the opposite effect and he/she/it's attention would be wholly on the phone. The only way I see this happening would be if the phone did not go dead. Instead, the phone would disable all apps but GPS and it would begin yelling at the motorist "Stop using the phone. WATCH THE ROAD!" over and over. And that's going to be very difficult to achieve. Given that folks ignore stop signs, stop lights, "no left turn" signs and even "school zone please drive slowly" signs. What's to say that they would obey a mechanical voice saying "watch the road"? -- cheers, John B. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On Thursday, June 6, 2019 at 7:17:46 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 08:18:54 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 6/5/2019 11:30 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 6:33:06 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Wed, 05 Jun 2019 08:16:55 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 6/5/2019 1:47 AM, Andy wrote: I have thought about carrying a short range cell phone jammer while biking. I have given it careful thought. But when traveling as a passenger I increasingly see drivers drifting over into other lanes. They are irresponsible idiots who are a danger to everyone. Good luck with that. FCC has an unkindly view of pirate transmitters. Somewhere on the net a guy wrote that "back in the day" a driver had a wheel, a gear shift and three pedals and one switch on the floor and had to be at least minimally alert to handle all this. Now with cruise control the drive has only the wheel and this can spend more time on other things like day-dreaming, sleeping or messing about with a hand phone. I wonder whether he may not have been correct? "one switch on the floor" Do you mean the older cars that had the light dimmer on the floor as a silver button sticking up and you dimmed or flashed the lights by stepping on it? As a kid I vaguely remember driving one of those new modern fancy cars that had the light dimmer by moving the turn signal back and forward. Dim the lights with your hands!!!!!! My cars all have the light switch on the floor. I thought Mr Slocumb meant the starter button. I haven't had a car with that in a very long time. Yes, but than you apparently drive what you probably refer to as "classic cars" (and others refer to as "old bangers") but, if I remember correctly, the old bangers that had the starter on the floor had an actual pedal that when pressed shifted the starter motor into engagement with the engine flywheel. Or maybe not always, I remember that Ford flatheads had some sort of weird starter system that was different from other autos of the same vintage. -- cheers, John B. Must have been nice when they moved the starter from the outside front of the car to the interior of the car. Cheers |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 23:12:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote:
John B. wrote: On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:48:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/6/2019 8:54 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote: Am 06.06.2019 um 14:14 schrieb Duane: You can listen or talk on a radio without looking at it.* Same with a phone.** Especially if you have some hands free device as most cars do now. But you can?t text without looking at it. Well actually you can send text by voice using Siri on iPhone and there's probably some app that reads it. Siri can do that as well https://www.dummies.com/consumer-ele...r-texts-aloud/ (and with the appropriate in-car integration, without needing to touch the home button). I have sat in a car as a passenger when the driver was texted by his wife and sent an answer via Siri.* Needed a few repetitions to get the right text but still simpler than ringing her to pass the estimated arrival time. And it's now so important to tell one's arrival time? I can accept it may be important in some few instances- perhaps "I'll be there before the baby is born!" But from certain friends, I now get texts saying "We're almost there, see you in five minutes." That's over-communication. We shouldn't need minute by minute reports. Strange that in all my years I cannot remember an instance when it was important for me to notify someone when, exactly, I would arrive. And yes, there were innumerable instances when I was required to be at a certain place at a certain time - "Be home at supper time or your father will see to you!", or "If you aren't here for roll call you will get a week of extra duty". Sad that no one gives a **** when you show up. In short this irrational desire to be certain that you inform the universe of every detail of your life is just that, irrational. You should talk to my wife. Or perhaps not. Perhaps it is simply evidence of an overweening arrogance that you are so important that everyone must be interested in your minute by minute activities. Or perhaps what’s not important for you is not not important for the rest of the world. And when did all this become so important? And why now when just a few short years ago no one was frantically advising the world that they would arrive in just three short minutes? Or perhaps 2 minutes and 59 seconds? -- cheers, John B. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 17:25:49 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Thursday, June 6, 2019 at 7:17:46 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 08:18:54 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 6/5/2019 11:30 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 6:33:06 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Wed, 05 Jun 2019 08:16:55 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 6/5/2019 1:47 AM, Andy wrote: I have thought about carrying a short range cell phone jammer while biking. I have given it careful thought. But when traveling as a passenger I increasingly see drivers drifting over into other lanes. They are irresponsible idiots who are a danger to everyone. Good luck with that. FCC has an unkindly view of pirate transmitters. Somewhere on the net a guy wrote that "back in the day" a driver had a wheel, a gear shift and three pedals and one switch on the floor and had to be at least minimally alert to handle all this. Now with cruise control the drive has only the wheel and this can spend more time on other things like day-dreaming, sleeping or messing about with a hand phone. I wonder whether he may not have been correct? "one switch on the floor" Do you mean the older cars that had the light dimmer on the floor as a silver button sticking up and you dimmed or flashed the lights by stepping on it? As a kid I vaguely remember driving one of those new modern fancy cars that had the light dimmer by moving the turn signal back and forward. Dim the lights with your hands!!!!!! My cars all have the light switch on the floor. I thought Mr Slocumb meant the starter button. I haven't had a car with that in a very long time. Yes, but than you apparently drive what you probably refer to as "classic cars" (and others refer to as "old bangers") but, if I remember correctly, the old bangers that had the starter on the floor had an actual pedal that when pressed shifted the starter motor into engagement with the engine flywheel. Or maybe not always, I remember that Ford flatheads had some sort of weird starter system that was different from other autos of the same vintage. -- cheers, John B. Must have been nice when they moved the starter from the outside front of the car to the interior of the car. Cheers Yes it was :-) Although when the battery got weak one still had to crank the car to get it started :-) -- cheers, John B. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On 6/6/2019 7:12 PM, Duane wrote:
John B. wrote: In short this irrational desire to be certain that you inform the universe of every detail of your life is just that, irrational. You should talk to my wife. She keeps you on a short leash, eh? -- - Frank Krygowski |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On 6/6/2019 7:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:54:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/6/2019 1:43 AM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 19:24:48 -0700 (PDT), AK wrote: On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 1:28:42 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 23:47:42 -0700 (PDT), Andy wrote: I have thought about carrying a short range cell phone jammer while biking. I guess you know that cell phone jammers are illegal. https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement I have given it careful thought. Think some more. But when traveling as a passenger I increasingly see drivers drifting over into other lanes. They are irresponsible idiots who are a danger to everyone. It won't work the way you expect. Jamming a cell phone will cause the phone to disconnect unexpectedly. The driver will wonder what happened to their call in progress and begin finger poking at the screen trying to re-establish the call. That's not a great idea while moving. Prior to your jammer being turned on, the driver was minimally distracted. After jamming, the driver became actively engaged in operating the phone and has become seriously distracted. You may think that full time jamming only prevents initiating or receiving phone calls. That might be true if you were moving at the same speed as the traffic. However, there will be many cars passing you on your bicycle, in both directions, some of which might be engaged in a legal hands free phone conversation. Your jammer will disconnect their call in progress, cause them to finger poke at the screen, and probably cause an accident while they are distracted. Also, there are now so a substantial number of cellular bands in use (and growing with every FCC auction). Unless you plan to carry a rather large box on your bicycle, it is unlikely that you can efficiently jam all of them. At best, a simple jammer will take out all the customers of one particular vendor, leaving the other vendors bands unaffected. http://www.gasiajammer.com/sale-8508330-new-all-in-one-16-channels-high-power-desktop-signal-jammer-70-meters-sheilding-range.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMOpxrs53YQ -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Any phone use whether hands free or not is distracted driver. i.e. dangerous driver If not every phone is knocked out, no problemo. They may figure out that their phone only misbehaves when driving. :-) Fred My guess is that the immediate result of someone's phone stopping would be an immediate flurry of shaking the phone and feverously pushing buttons to get the damned thing to work. Rather than cause the driver to pay more attention to driving I suspect that it would have exactly the opposite effect and he/she/it's attention would be wholly on the phone. The only way I see this happening would be if the phone did not go dead. Instead, the phone would disable all apps but GPS and it would begin yelling at the motorist "Stop using the phone. WATCH THE ROAD!" over and over. And that's going to be very difficult to achieve. Given that folks ignore stop signs, stop lights, "no left turn" signs and even "school zone please drive slowly" signs. What's to say that they would obey a mechanical voice saying "watch the road"? The main benefit would be the part about disabling everything except GPS. The "watch the road" message would just be a small bonus, plus a reminder that the sudden lack of function was a feature, not a bug. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
On 06/06/2019 8:54 p.m., John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 23:12:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:48:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/6/2019 8:54 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote: Am 06.06.2019 um 14:14 schrieb Duane: You can listen or talk on a radio without looking at it.Â* Same with a phone.Â*Â* Especially if you have some hands free device as most cars do now. But you can?t text without looking at it. Well actually you can send text by voice using Siri on iPhone and there's probably some app that reads it. Siri can do that as well https://www.dummies.com/consumer-ele...r-texts-aloud/ (and with the appropriate in-car integration, without needing to touch the home button). I have sat in a car as a passenger when the driver was texted by his wife and sent an answer via Siri.Â* Needed a few repetitions to get the right text but still simpler than ringing her to pass the estimated arrival time. And it's now so important to tell one's arrival time? I can accept it may be important in some few instances- perhaps "I'll be there before the baby is born!" But from certain friends, I now get texts saying "We're almost there, see you in five minutes." That's over-communication. We shouldn't need minute by minute reports. Strange that in all my years I cannot remember an instance when it was important for me to notify someone when, exactly, I would arrive. And yes, there were innumerable instances when I was required to be at a certain place at a certain time - "Be home at supper time or your father will see to you!", or "If you aren't here for roll call you will get a week of extra duty". Sad that no one gives a **** when you show up. In short this irrational desire to be certain that you inform the universe of every detail of your life is just that, irrational. You should talk to my wife. Or perhaps not. Perhaps it is simply evidence of an overweening arrogance that you are so important that everyone must be interested in your minute by minute activities. Or perhaps what’s not important for you is not not important for the rest of the world. And when did all this become so important? And why now when just a few short years ago no one was frantically advising the world that they would arrive in just three short minutes? Or perhaps 2 minutes and 59 seconds? -- cheers, John B. Who said anything about 3 short minutes? Maybe you're replying to Frank's straw man? |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting yourself
Am 07.06.2019 um 14:03 schrieb Duane:
On 06/06/2019 8:54 p.m., John B. wrote: On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 23:12:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:48:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/6/2019 8:54 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote: I have sat in a car as a passenger when the driver was texted by his wife and sent an answer via Siri.Â* Needed a few repetitions to get the right text but still simpler than ringing her to pass the estimated arrival time. And it's now so important to tell one's arrival time? And when did all this become so important? And why now whenÂ* just a few short years ago no one was frantically advising the world that they would arrive in just three short minutes? Or perhaps 2 minutes and 59 seconds? Who said anything about 3 short minutes?Â* Maybe you're replying to Frank's straw man? The real situation was as follows: We (two dads a coaches) were taking some kids to a "First Lego League" regional competition, leaving home early in the morning; we had only a vague idea how long the competition would run. Perfect communication would have been to text the wife before getting into the car for the way back. As the husband forgot to do so, the wife texted short before 8pm "When are you coming home?", and the husband answered "Almost home. I'll drop M. off in Dossenheim and be home in 30 - 60 mins". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Protecting the head ... | Nick Kew | UK | 24 | December 30th 06 10:19 AM |
Protecting my shins | pkplonker | Unicycling | 8 | November 19th 06 10:02 AM |
Protecting your saddle? | firisfirefly | Unicycling | 0 | August 3rd 06 06:43 AM |
Protecting your saddle? | mornish | Unicycling | 0 | August 3rd 06 06:40 AM |
Protecting your saddle? | Jerrick | Unicycling | 0 | August 3rd 06 06:39 AM |