If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   FCC: When can we shut down wireless serv   (arstechnica.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, Federal Communications Commission, wireless, Bay Area Rapid Transit, public transit, amplifiers, Johannes Mehserle, BART Police, Trans Bay Tube Portal  
•       •       •

6113 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 May 2012 at 3:33 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-08 03:37:14 PM
BART is the worst of the worst.

It's open season on passersby -the only restitution is if the officers in question get caught on camera "hunting" people. Then when the public protests -they do everything in their power to prevent publicity of the events.

Why don't they just dismantle the whole system?
 
2012-05-08 04:07:01 PM
Because People in power are Stupid: BART is the worst of the worst.

It's open season on passersby -the only restitution is if the officers in question get caught on camera "hunting" people. Then when the public protests -they do everything in their power to prevent publicity of the events.

Why don't they just dismantle the whole system?


Dismantle the entire BART system? Yeah, that sounds like a great plan. I'm sure that those riders can just walk across the Bay Bridge to get to work, amirite?
 
2012-05-08 04:07:31 PM
I am guessing CB radios will have to be banned now.
 
2012-05-08 04:18:49 PM
HempHead: I am guessing CB radios will have to be banned now.

Don't tell Pig Pen and Rubber Duck
 
2012-05-08 04:21:10 PM
Don't worry; after all the criticisms they've made about similar black-outs undertaken by China, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE -and in light of the effort they've put into promoting communications freedom internationally- I'm sure the Obama admin will step up to support the ACLU and EFF in their fight to protect our inalienable right to share information with devices we've purchased where and when we want to.
 
2012-05-08 04:37:51 PM
It sounds like it was BARTs network, not any commercial entities network, that was shut down. I see no problem with this. There is no government guaranteed right of wireless access and there is no infringing on commercial interests.
 
2012-05-08 04:52:37 PM
None of these protocalls stop a timer triggered device from going off. Since the trains run on relatively accurate time tables, it would be simpler to use such a trigger as it can not be affected by outside changes (i.e. no wireless signal). Where terrorists have used cell phone triggers is when they can not predict the timing of their targets, such as with a motorcade/patrol or for when an event will end or begin.

This blackout policy is simply a way to limit information movement and it works poorly at best. Modern smart phones are capable of using and repeating WiFi signals. All it would have taken for the protesters to be able to have outside communication would be to have a few of them along the tunnel leading to the surface and to the nearest WiFi Hotspot. All of the towers in the area could be off and this would still work.

\the more shady organizations try and suppress information, the more they show that they are out of touch with reality
 
2012-05-08 05:03:21 PM
bhcompy: It sounds like it was BARTs network, not any commercial entities network, that was shut down. I see no problem with this. There is no government guaranteed right of wireless access and there is no infringing on commercial interests.

I think you missed the point. It's not a problem that the system was down it's the reason why they took it down. IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

You mention commercial interests, what about the people's interests? Who pays for BART?

The real world isn't like EVE.
 
2012-05-08 05:08:32 PM
Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."
 
2012-05-08 05:12:27 PM
ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.
 
2012-05-08 05:18:58 PM
The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."


Exactly. Every right has limitations, and protest is restricted by time, place, and manner restrictions(as well as the O'Brien test, which doesn't really apply here)
 
2012-05-08 05:23:41 PM
Lego_Addict: BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

You mention commercial interests, what about the people's interests? Who pays for BART?


To further iterate, doesn't matter who pays for BART. The government did not hamper a public demonstration. The demonstration is not affected by access to the phones/internet. Let me know if they put up a barricade
 
2012-05-08 05:52:34 PM
Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

EIP. Seriously.
 
2012-05-08 05:54:20 PM
Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.


I like your idea and wish to bid at your auction
 
2012-05-08 05:55:50 PM
gozar_the_destroyer: None of these protocalls stop a timer triggered device from going off. Since the trains run on relatively accurate time tables, it would be simpler to use such a trigger as it can not be affected by outside changes (i.e. no wireless signal). Where terrorists have used cell phone triggers is when they can not predict the timing of their targets, such as with a motorcade/patrol or for when an event will end or begin.

Of course, once a policy is in place, and has thwarted the remote detonation of 1 or 2 bombs, the next bomb (and all that follow) will detonate precisely when service is interrupted. After all, if service is interrupted, the authorities are likely aware of your nefarious plans, and the bomb should detonate ASAP to prevent it being found and disabled. Just like suicide bombers use a dead man's switch for detonating explosive vests. (Not to mention that it's not exactly rocket science to find a transceiver that operates on a different frequency.)

So you get all of the downsides (no-one can call emergency services or their loved ones, free speech implications) and none of the upside. And all this effort that's gone into writing protocols was of course completely wasted; score for the terrorists.
 
2012-05-08 05:59:17 PM
Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.


Interestingly, it's been suggested the CIA has developed and distributed that kind of equipment in Libya.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander apparently doesn't apply to the domestic US citizenry.
Kind of like the cold war.
 
2012-05-08 05:59:54 PM
Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.


And what am I going to do with 50 square meters of 169.254.*.* address space that is not connected to the outside world? Throw a LAN party to fight the man?
 
2012-05-08 06:13:55 PM
The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."


I don't see shutting down communications as a safety precaution, it was an underhanded attempt at disrupting organization among protestors. They do it all over the World, I was hoping we were above that. I would consider BART shutting down communications to riders as a disrtuption as well.
 
2012-05-08 06:16:47 PM
fluffy2097: Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.

And what am I going to do with 50 square meters of 169.254.*.* address space that is not connected to the outside world? Throw a LAN party to fight the man?


it's connected to the other protesters...which is the entire point. the cops can't shut it down without arresting the ENTIRE crowd, then going through the contents of all their backpacks and purses.
 
2012-05-08 06:17:26 PM
bhcompy: Lego_Addict: BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

You mention commercial interests, what about the people's interests? Who pays for BART?

To further iterate, doesn't matter who pays for BART. The government did not hamper a public demonstration. The demonstration is not affected by access to the phones/internet. Let me know if they put up a barricade


I'm all for barricades at protests, especially between the protestors and the police. That's an actual safety precaution, disrupting communications isn't. Not in this case anyway.
 
2012-05-08 06:26:25 PM
Lego_Addict: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."

I don't see shutting down communications as a safety precaution, it was an underhanded attempt at disrupting organization among protestors. They do it all over the World, I was hoping we were above that. I would consider BART shutting down communications to riders as a disrtuption as well.


The system was shut down because the protestors were going to use an SMS tree to get the word out about which station to occupy just minutes before the protest began. Since it would be nigh impossible for BART police to cover all entrances of all of the main SF stations, they simply shut down service in the platform areas.

So yes, shutting down the service was a safety precaution. If the effect was a disruption of organization among protestors, then fantastic. Again, they could have simply walked UP to the street and started their message tree. No communications were actually disrupted by those that wished to use them for organizational purposes. They were just not allowed the use of the BART repeaters.

As for us riders of BART, I can't say that I even noticed the shutoff. See, service in the tunnels was relatively new to us at that point.
 
2012-05-08 06:44:46 PM
The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."

I don't see shutting down communications as a safety precaution, it was an underhanded attempt at disrupting organization among protestors. They do it all over the World, I was hoping we were above that. I would consider BART shutting down communications to riders as a disrtuption as well.

No communications were actually disrupted by those that wished to use them for organizational purposes. They were just not allowed the use of the BART repeaters.

As for us riders of BART, I can't say that I even noticed the shutoff. See, service in the tunnels was relatively new to us at that point.


Hell, that makes BART look even worse. They claim it was for safety but it wouldn't have stopped threatening communication anyway.
 
2012-05-08 06:47:23 PM
Lego_Addict: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lego_Addict: IIRC, BART is a government agency and they can't be allowed to hamper public demonstrations.

Time, place, manner restrictions.

Should BART open its doors to massive protestors that will disrupt service and quite possibly put lives in danger? I mean, to do so would be to "hamper public demonstrations."

I don't see shutting down communications as a safety precaution, it was an underhanded attempt at disrupting organization among protestors. They do it all over the World, I was hoping we were above that. I would consider BART shutting down communications to riders as a disrtuption as well.

No communications were actually disrupted by those that wished to use them for organizational purposes. They were just not allowed the use of the BART repeaters.

As for us riders of BART, I can't say that I even noticed the shutoff. See, service in the tunnels was relatively new to us at that point.

Hell, that makes BART look even worse. They claim it was for safety but it wouldn't have stopped threatening communication anyway.


Well, nothing short of taping everyone's mouths shut and breaking all their fingers would have stopped the potential for threatening communications. BART took the steps that they had available to them at the time.
 
2012-05-08 06:47:59 PM
Weaver95: it's connected to the other protesters...which is the entire point. the cops can't shut it down without arresting the ENTIRE crowd, then going through the contents of all their backpacks and purses.

I don't need WiFi to talk with someone within shouting distance of me...

They want to shutdown communication networks to prevent the organization of flash mobs of shoe bombers or something. If you are within wifi range of the site, you are already past organizing flash mobs.
 
2012-05-08 06:57:43 PM
fluffy2097: I don't need WiFi to talk with someone within shouting distance of me...


you do if you want to talk to 500 people nearest you all at the same time...


They want to shutdown communication networks to prevent the organization of flash mobs of shoe bombers or something. If you are within wifi range of the site, you are already past organizing flash mobs.

then I see nothing wrong with making things easy for the protesters to organize.
 
2012-05-08 06:59:01 PM
This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.
 
2012-05-08 07:08:02 PM
dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

They can be blocked out with a more powerful transmitter.
 
2012-05-08 07:09:08 PM
fluffy2097: dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

They can be blocked out with a more powerful transmitter.


ah yes...but not without thwacking their own communications in the process....
 
2012-05-08 07:10:33 PM
Weaver95: you do if you want to talk to 500 people nearest you all at the same time...

I have an idea that's cheaper and doesn't require computers.

www.survival-supply.com
 
2012-05-08 07:11:36 PM
dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

Noise can be made great enough to limit your broadcast area to effectively 0 range. Also, you are transmitting a very traceable signal so they could just come and break your gear instead. And maybe you for trying to defy them.

\we need cells and only use in person communication or pre-arranged codes.
 
2012-05-08 07:12:45 PM
Weaver95: ok, f*ck it. i'm gonna build portable battery powered wi-fi hubs and sell 'em on ebay. I think there's a market in developing reliable, low cost, portable, open source communication platforms that anyone can bring with 'em and use to pass messages along in the event of a government attempt to shut down free and open communications among citizens.

f*ck you guys. seriously.


That's what I was thinking, hell they didn't shut down electricity so just use theirs......

But if its their network then they do have a right to shut it down, sucks but they can cite in the interest of public safety.
 
2012-05-08 07:13:36 PM
fluffy2097: Weaver95: you do if you want to talk to 500 people nearest you all at the same time...

I have an idea that's cheaper and doesn't require computers.

[www.survival-supply.com image 450x376]


which is illegal at any protest these days. seriously - pull out a bullhorn at a protest and the cops will taser your ass and cart you away.
 
2012-05-08 07:13:48 PM
Weaver95: fluffy2097: dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

They can be blocked out with a more powerful transmitter.

ah yes...but not without thwacking their own communications in the process....


Selective jamming isn't too hard to do. The stories you hear from troops stationed in the Sand Box about the IED's using radio are from triggers that wait to hear a transmission from their target, not from being triggered remotely.
 
2012-05-08 07:16:37 PM
gozar_the_destroyer: Noise can be made great enough to limit your broadcast area to effectively 0 range. Also, you are transmitting a very traceable signal so they could just come and break your gear instead. And maybe you for trying to defy them..

trust me...the cops aren't equipped to track down random wifi/radio signals in the middle of a protest.
 
2012-05-08 07:17:48 PM
Weaver95: which is illegal at any protest these days. seriously - pull out a bullhorn at a protest and the cops will taser your ass and cart you away.

Somehow... I doubt it. East and West coast representing the bullhorn fo shizzle.

www.loupiote.com
www.washingtonpost.com
 
2012-05-08 07:18:32 PM
gozar_the_destroyer: Selective jamming isn't too hard to do. .

actually, yeah - it is. plus, it's also against FCC rules so even if the cops DID spend the cash for that sort of set up, the FCC would slap 'em down hard for doing it.

personally, i'd LOVE to see the cops spending exhorbitant amounts of cash on ECM/ECCM gear. that's the sort of thing that makes someone like me happy in the bank account. I'd sell to both sides.
 
2012-05-08 07:20:11 PM
Weaver95: that's the sort of thing that makes someone like me happy in the bank account. I'd sell to both sides.

NOW I see why you want to make a useless wifi AP.

I didn't realize you worked for Linksys. :P
 
2012-05-08 07:20:30 PM
fluffy2097: Weaver95: which is illegal at any protest these days. seriously - pull out a bullhorn at a protest and the cops will taser your ass and cart you away.

Somehow... I doubt it. East and West coast representing the bullhorn fo shizzle.

[www.loupiote.com image 500x499]
[www.washingtonpost.com image 500x333]


doubt it all you want, all I know is that if you pull out a bullhorn at an OWS protest you WILL be arrested and you will end up in a cell.
 
2012-05-08 07:22:02 PM
Weaver95: doubt it all you want, all I know is that if you pull out a bullhorn at an OWS protest you WILL be arrested and you will end up in a cell.

Can you try it for me? I'm waaaay to comfy in my chair annoying the Fark alcoholics to go out and actually rabble rouse for science.
 
2012-05-08 07:22:18 PM
fluffy2097: Weaver95: that's the sort of thing that makes someone like me happy in the bank account. I'd sell to both sides.

NOW I see why you want to make a useless wifi AP.

I didn't realize you worked for Linksys. :P


oh yes...'useless'. please keep thinking so...makes it so much easier.
 
2012-05-08 07:23:24 PM
fluffy2097: Weaver95: doubt it all you want, all I know is that if you pull out a bullhorn at an OWS protest you WILL be arrested and you will end up in a cell.

Can you try it for me? I'm waaaay to comfy in my chair annoying the Fark alcoholics to go out and actually rabble rouse for science.


how 'bout you waddle down to your local OWS protest and start blaring out something on yer bullhorn. lemme know how that works out for yaz.
 
2012-05-08 07:46:08 PM
Weaver95: gozar_the_destroyer: Selective jamming isn't too hard to do. .

actually, yeah - it is. plus, it's also against FCC rules so even if the cops DID spend the cash for that sort of set up, the FCC would slap 'em down hard for doing it.

personally, i'd LOVE to see the cops spending exhorbitant amounts of cash on ECM/ECCM gear. that's the sort of thing that makes someone like me happy in the bank account. I'd sell to both sides.


Effectively jamming a local radio signal is hard. You need a high power transmitter unless you are right near the damn things.
 
2012-05-08 07:52:27 PM
dittybopper: Effectively jamming a local radio signal is hard. You need a high power transmitter unless you are right near the damn things.

they could do it, but it'd require a special set up. hmm...at a minium, a dedicated comms vehicle with seperate power source and broadcast array. plus you'd have to issue specially modified walkie talkies to the cops so that they wouldn't lose comms. and even then ground clutter would f*ck with your jamming signal.

I figure you'd get to use the damn thing once (maybe twice) before the FCC came swooping in and got in your face about it. they really do not like broad spectrum jamming by civilians. that shiat is mil-spec only, cops need not apply.
 
2012-05-08 07:56:29 PM
Weaver95: gozar_the_destroyer: Noise can be made great enough to limit your broadcast area to effectively 0 range. Also, you are transmitting a very traceable signal so they could just come and break your gear instead. And maybe you for trying to defy them..

trust me...the cops aren't equipped to track down random wifi/radio signals in the middle of a protest.


Most cops are too stupid, my uncle is a detective and every time something breaks on his network I get too fix it even if its just his printer doesn't work. Last time I told him a helpful hint, plug it in.

And yeah its illegal to block cellular/Wi-Fi and even suggesting it will get you a letter from the FCC, advertised a trivia competition as using boxes to block cell service and got a form letter saying its illegal. So we just banned them in the room.
 
2012-05-08 07:59:02 PM
gozar_the_destroyer: dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

Noise can be made great enough to limit your broadcast area to effectively 0 range.


That's very tough to do, the police don't have the equipment *AND* it's illegal for them to jam the public airwaves. Only the military is allowed to do that, and I can't see them being involved in something like that.

Also, you are transmitting a very traceable signal so they could just come and break your gear instead. And maybe you for trying to defy them.


This fear is *VASTLY* overstated.

First, to trace a radio signal the radio has to be transmitting. You can't DF a radio that is in receive. Secondly, in order to triangulate a signal you either have to have at least two separate fixed stations, or a mobile station that can take bearings from widely separated areas. Those readings tend to be confounded greatly by reflections in urban areas.

Secondly, once you stop transmitting, they can no longer tell where you are. You transmit your message, then move to a different location. You put the radio in your pocket so that it's not obvious that you have one.

\we need cells and only use in person communication or pre-arranged codes.


You can utilize those, along with radio communications.

Trust me, I used to be in the SIGINT business. Google "ditty bopper" to see what I used to do. I'm also a bit of a student of the history of it, and I keep up on current tech. The tech might change and get more advanced, but the basic principles remain the same.

Ironically, while they are less secure against casual eavesdropping, short range analog radios are *MORE* secure than cellphones against government snooping. A cellphone periodically transmits it's location, and the service providers keep a record of that, and of what numbers were called. Just that alone can provide a lot of information. A radio, on the other hand, doesn't do that. If you aren't listening when they are being used, that information is lost forever, and while you can tell where a transmitter is using special equipment, you can't tell who is listening, or where they are.
 
2012-05-08 08:03:19 PM
dittybopper: Trust me, I used to be in the SIGINT business. ...

I used to be in VQ-2, way back in the day. suffice to say I learned some neat tricks there.
 
2012-05-08 08:29:50 PM
The_Six_Fingered_Man: Because People in power are Stupid: BART is the worst of the worst.

It's open season on passersby -the only restitution is if the officers in question get caught on camera "hunting" people. Then when the public protests -they do everything in their power to prevent publicity of the events.

Why don't they just dismantle the whole system?

Dismantle the entire BART system? Yeah, that sounds like a great plan. I'm sure that those riders can just walk across the Bay Bridge to get to work, amirite?


They've got thumbs. They can hitchhike.
 
2012-05-08 08:36:18 PM
dittybopper: gozar_the_destroyer: dittybopper: This is why I carry radio gear instead of a cellphone. You can shut down cell service. You can't shut down the electromagnetic spectrum. Radios that don't depend on intervening infrastructure to communicate can't be just "shut down" by government fiat. They'll still work.

Noise can be made great enough to limit your broadcast area to effectively 0 range.

That's very tough to do, the police don't have the equipment *AND* it's illegal for them to jam the public airwaves. Only the military is allowed to do that, and I can't see them being involved in something like that.

Also, you are transmitting a very traceable signal so they could just come and break your gear instead. And maybe you for trying to defy them.

This fear is *VASTLY* overstated.

First, to trace a radio signal the radio has to be transmitting. You can't DF a radio that is in receive. Secondly, in order to triangulate a signal you either have to have at least two separate fixed stations, or a mobile station that can take bearings from widely separated areas. Those readings tend to be confounded greatly by reflections in urban areas.

Secondly, once you stop transmitting, they can no longer tell where you are. You transmit your message, then move to a different location. You put the radio in your pocket so that it's not obvious that you have one.

\we need cells and only use in person communication or pre-arranged codes.

You can utilize those, along with radio communications.

Trust me, I used to be in the SIGINT business. Google "ditty bopper" to see what I used to do. I'm also a bit of a student of the history of it, and I keep up on current tech. The tech might change and get more advanced, but the basic principles remain the same.

Ironically, while they are less secure against casual eavesdropping, short range analog radios are *MORE* secure than cellphones against government snooping. A cellphone periodically transmits it's location, and the ser ...


We are talking about organizations that don't care about violating civil rights and beating innocent citizens. Sure, they will ask for permission from the FCC if they plan to do it so they don't get in trouble after they have done it a couple of times.

We should be more worried about the fact that they want to even try this.
 
2012-05-08 10:02:28 PM
Weaver95: dittybopper: Trust me, I used to be in the SIGINT business. ...

I used to be in VQ-2, way back in the day. suffice to say I learned some neat tricks there.


I've got a ham radio friend who was at Rota, back in the late 1960's/early 1970s. He was a Navy dittybopper.
 
2012-05-08 10:44:18 PM
Alot of people would be stunned to find out that modern police radio traffic could be shut down if someone knew how to send the right signal.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report