Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Tampa Bay Online)   Florida Man arrested after being caught operating a mobile phone jammer during his daily commute to work. Bonus: When pulled over, the police radios got blocked, too   (tbo.com) divider line 191
    More: Hero, police radio, Federal Communications Commission, Seffner, MetroPCS Communications Inc., Larry McKinnon, two-way radio, transmission tower, radar detectors  
•       •       •

7671 clicks; posted to Geek » on 30 Apr 2014 at 10:44 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-30 04:46:01 PM  
andyofne:
Or maybe he caused some? People dicking with their phone trying to figure out why it stopped working.

He's an asshole not a hero.


He is Darwin's Scythe. And good on 'im, too.

farking hand-wringers ..
 
2014-04-30 04:49:16 PM  

Gunderson: This A-hole was blocking cell phone calls done in a legal manner as well.  There are people who talk on cell phones using bluetooth or a hand-free device.


Those must be very important powerful people.
 
2014-04-30 05:02:12 PM  

Rent Party: dittybopper: Rent Party: Does this device have some other legitimate purpose?  If the answer to that is "no" then there is no practical difference between prohibiting possession and prohibiting use, but a very real difference in the  public safety outcomes.

RF noise generator.

That isn't designed for broadcast.   No antenna, no amp, no nothing.  That, in and of itself, doesn't do what you think it does.  It's about as hazardous as your cable connection.


Add an antenna, and you've got a short range jammer.

Add a wideband RF amplifier between the two, and you've got a longer range jammer.

None of those things are illegal to own, or even, indeed, to assemble.  Hell, you could even transmit with it in the middle of farkin' nowhere and no one would give a crap.
 
2014-04-30 05:10:38 PM  

dittybopper: Rent Party: dittybopper: Rent Party: Does this device have some other legitimate purpose?  If the answer to that is "no" then there is no practical difference between prohibiting possession and prohibiting use, but a very real difference in the  public safety outcomes.

RF noise generator.

That isn't designed for broadcast.   No antenna, no amp, no nothing.  That, in and of itself, doesn't do what you think it does.  It's about as hazardous as your cable connection.

Add an antenna, and you've got a short range jammer.


That is akin to adding an antenna to your cable connection and calling it a "jammer."

It's not.  I've got about 250W of combined radio wired up on my desk right now.   The leakage out of the attenuators puts out more power.

Add a wideband RF amplifier between the two, and you've got a longer range jammer.

I'm glad you have come to realize that that device, in and of itself, is not a jammer.  Adding a wide band RF amp between your cable connection and an antenna, and it would accomplish the same thing.

Moving the goalposts around isn't going to find you some other legitimate use for this device.

Which is why they are, and should be, illegal.
 
2014-04-30 05:11:15 PM  

impaler: give me doughnuts: If they were dicking around with their phones rather than paying attention to traffic, then they earned their tragic deaths.

Because traffic accidents always only affect the one guilty driver.


Because someone who is driving and chatting on a cellphone would just shrug and give up if his phone suddenly stopped working, instead of screwing with it and taking more of his attention off of the road.

There are reasons why ordinary citizens shouldn't enforce the law. It's because they suck at it.
 
2014-04-30 05:17:06 PM  

nyrB: And that's why I said you have to weigh the pros and cons. If far more lives are being lost because of driving and cell phones than we're saving, then that's a net-negative.


As opposed to the pros and cons of using a very illegal cellphone jammer? Because this guy is at a net-negative of $30,000.
 
2014-04-30 05:17:43 PM  
"You are cutting off any communication for any type of emergency,'' McKinnon said. "You are potentially putting people's lives at risk."

But you can own a gun and shoot someone if you feel they are threatening the 1 foot square space you are standing on. Carry on.

Cell jammers, more dangerous than your average shotgun.
 
2014-04-30 05:25:22 PM  

Rent Party: It's not.  I've got about 250W of combined radio wired up on my desk right now.   The leakage out of the attenuators puts out more power.


Pfft.  I've got about as much myself sitting on the desk next to me.

Plus more in my car.

Right now I'm monitoring 146.52 MHz FM simplex, PSK31 on 20 Meters, and CW on 40 Meters.

And you're well aware, I'm sure, that it doesn't take very much power when you are very close to a receiver to drown out a much more distant, but more powerful, signal.

BTW, if you're a ham, let me know.  I keep the list for the next Fark QSO Party.
 
2014-04-30 05:26:49 PM  

LoneWolf343: impaler: give me doughnuts: If they were dicking around with their phones rather than paying attention to traffic, then they earned their tragic deaths.

Because traffic accidents always only affect the one guilty driver.

Because someone who is driving and chatting on a cellphone would just shrug and give up if his phone suddenly stopped working, instead of screwing with it and taking more of his attention off of the road.

There are reasons why ordinary citizens shouldn't enforce the law. It's because they suck at it.


Except that's not enforcing the law.  That's breaking the law.
 
2014-04-30 05:32:36 PM  

Walker: I need one of those on the rare occasion that I go to see a movie. Annoying people texting and playing on their phones during the movie is why it's a rare occasion for me.


One of the many advantages of living in Austin (some NSFW language):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z98vawSOlK4
 
2014-04-30 05:34:31 PM  

nyrB: This Looks Fun: Which is to say that, yes, you're correct; cell phones are not the only way to summon help in an emergency and before their invention, lots of people still survived emergencies. But if you're arguing that cell phones do not help save lives, then I have to disagree.

I'd be willing to bet there's been a lot more deaths caused by people talking on cell phones while driving than lives saved by people talking on cell phones while driving.


And how many deaths do you think will be caused by drivers talking on cell phones distracted by it fading in and out as vigilantes with jammers go past in the opposite direction? Cell phone jammers are hardly likely to cause the people that are trying to use them to give up, it will just make them even more distracted and less aware of what is happening around them while they try to redial, check the phone connection, etc., and when they crash more innocent people will get injured and killed in the ensuing increase in traffic accidents.
 
2014-04-30 05:35:58 PM  
Allow me to also point out that if the police in this case weren't using stupid-ass trunking networks, the jammer would have been ineffectual against them.

I'm a big believer in having public safety communications being as independent of the local infrastructure as possible.  Now, I get that there are day-to-day advantages to trunking, but you end up relying on infrastructure that is going to fail when you need it the most.  That's what happened in New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina:  Once the emergency generators got flooded, the network the NOPD radios depended upon went down.

So yeah, have your fancy digital trunking system, but have a basic analog VHF or UHF system that will work when all the fancy shiat goes down.
 
2014-04-30 05:36:38 PM  

foo monkey: BigSnatch: Jammers have no effect on my cell phone service, I already have Sprint.


You misspelled AT&T.


The letters are right next to each other.
 
2014-04-30 05:37:33 PM  

xria: nyrB: This Looks Fun: Which is to say that, yes, you're correct; cell phones are not the only way to summon help in an emergency and before their invention, lots of people still survived emergencies. But if you're arguing that cell phones do not help save lives, then I have to disagree.

I'd be willing to bet there's been a lot more deaths caused by people talking on cell phones while driving than lives saved by people talking on cell phones while driving.

And how many deaths do you think will be caused by drivers talking on cell phones distracted by it fading in and out as vigilantes with jammers go past in the opposite direction? Cell phone jammers are hardly likely to cause the people that are trying to use them to give up, it will just make them even more distracted and less aware of what is happening around them while they try to redial, check the phone connection, etc., and when they crash more innocent people will get injured and killed in the ensuing increase in traffic accidents.


Would they even notice?

Back when cell phones were analog, you'd be able to hear the rising noise.  Now?  You'd just not hear them for a few moments, which you might not notice if you're the one jabbering away.
 
2014-04-30 05:43:27 PM  
Rather tangentially, would it be enforceable for a theater to have fine print to the effect "By entering, you agree that any non-emergency use of cellular phones on these premises will result in forfeiture of that hardware. The burden to prove that any given instance was an emergency is yours."?
 
2014-04-30 05:45:19 PM  

LoneWolf343: nyrB: And that's why I said you have to weigh the pros and cons. If far more lives are being lost because of driving and cell phones than we're saving, then that's a net-negative.

As opposed to the pros and cons of using a very illegal cellphone jammer? Because this guy is at a net-negative of $30,000.


Don't get me wrong -- I am NOT advocating vigilante cellphone jamming.  That guy was an out-and-out moron.  I'm just saying the ability to drive and use your phone at the same time may not necessarily be a good thing, and maybe we would all have been better off if we'd never been able to do so in the first place.
 
2014-04-30 05:48:32 PM  
My cousin just picked me up and running he whole time we on our way to her house she was yapping on the phone and eating.
 
2014-04-30 05:58:27 PM  

This Looks Fun: Wellon Dowd: It's amazing our species survived before the invention of the mobile phone. All those people dying on the side of the road because they couldn't summon a tow truck, or because the only IT guy who knows how to reset the server was at the cinema.

This sounds like the same argument my parents use when attempting to recommend things to me like putting pillows in my kid's crib. They say "well, you survived while having pillows in your crib." And it's true; I did. However, many children did not. Knowledge has improved and led to increased life-expectancy.

Which is to say that, yes, you're correct; cell phones are not the only way to summon help in an emergency and before their invention, lots of people still survived emergencies. But if you're arguing that cell phones do not help save lives, then I have to disagree.


I wonder how many SIDS cases were actually Shaken Baby Syndrome, before it was identified. I used to see all sorts of SIDS cases mentioned on the local news; now, not so much. But I do see the SBS cases making the news almost like SIDS has gone away...

https://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Protection/Keep_Children_Safe/sbs _s ids.asp
 
2014-04-30 06:03:18 PM  

nyrB: LoneWolf343: nyrB: And that's why I said you have to weigh the pros and cons. If far more lives are being lost because of driving and cell phones than we're saving, then that's a net-negative.

As opposed to the pros and cons of using a very illegal cellphone jammer? Because this guy is at a net-negative of $30,000.

Don't get me wrong -- I am NOT advocating vigilante cellphone jamming.  That guy was an out-and-out moron.  I'm just saying the ability to drive and use your phone at the same time may not necessarily be a good thing, and maybe we would all have been better off if we'd never been able to do so in the first place.


Well, Pandora's Box is open, so you might as well stop whining concern trolling about it.
 
2014-04-30 06:11:55 PM  

LoneWolf343: Well, Pandora's Box is open, so you might as well stop whining concern trolling about it.


But what about the children???
 
2014-04-30 06:16:34 PM  

This Looks Fun: I dunno about steak and lobster, but a few years back a dude right in front of me answered his cell phone (ringer was NOT on silent) and was talking on it for like 2 minutes. I did not video tape it, but it happened. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't make it a lie. That was the last time I went to the theater on a Friday or Saturday night. Seems to me like that's when people that simply want to be entertained go. People that want to watch the movie go during the slower times.


nscsb:

Several years ago we're sitting in the movies and the guy behind us gets a call.  First it's the ring tone.  Then he answers it and carries on a conversation for maybe 5 minutes.  It's all, no, we're not doing much.  We're just at the movies.  Watching (insert name of movie I can't remember here).  Came over with my wife.  After the movies we're probably going shopping, maybe grab some dinner.  I hear so and so is having a special.  Etc, etc, blah blah blah.

Everybody around him was shushing him, there were several yells of get off the damn phone.

In the end he was like, okay, I'll let you go now.

What an asshole.

/nscsb
 
2014-04-30 06:43:36 PM  

ZAZ: The offense is a "forfeiture" rather than a "crime", meaning the government does not have to prove its case to a jury of human beings who just might think he is a hero.


On the other hand, he doesn't have to appear in front of a jury of humans who just might think that his car needs to be set on fire with him and the jammer inside.

Instead the defendant in an administrative forfeiture action is asked to prove he is innocent.

To be fair, the government should have to prove he's guilty.

Exhibit A: all the technical data gathered by the people investigating this shiat.
Exhibit B: the jammer recovered from his car
Exhibit C: the part where he confessed to the police.

So he's pretty farking guilty.  Let's move to the penalty phase, where we multiply the amount of time he had it in operation by the value of the inconvenience/harm caused and end up with a dollar amount greater than his total   lifetime earnings.
 
2014-04-30 06:48:02 PM  

Rent Party: Just turn off SSID broadcast. I think that's been a feature for about a decade or so.


That's farking useless.
 
2014-04-30 07:03:36 PM  

dittybopper: Rent Party: It's not.  I've got about 250W of combined radio wired up on my desk right now.   The leakage out of the attenuators puts out more power.

Pfft.  I've got about as much myself sitting on the desk next to me.

Plus more in my car.

Right now I'm monitoring 146.52 MHz FM simplex, PSK31 on 20 Meters, and CW on 40 Meters.

And you're well aware, I'm sure, that it doesn't take very much power when you are very close to a receiver to drown out a much more distant, but more powerful, signal.

BTW, if you're a ham, let me know.  I keep the list for the next Fark QSO Party.


These are commercial radios for industrial applications.  4QPSK, 132 channels on the 220MHZ band.   There are some serious radio geniuses around here (you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a Ph.D) that might be able to carry voice on them, but I'm not one of them.   :)

I do have a little Yaesu at home and have been studying for the technicians exam.  I just haven't taken it yet.  The statutory stuff kills me.
 
2014-04-30 07:50:10 PM  

Wellon Dowd: kronicfeld: StrikitRich: Bet there were a lot of upset teenagers and soccer moms between Seffner and Tampa.

Or, you know, people with emergencies trying to call tow trucks, 9-1-1, highway services, etc.

It's amazing our species survived before the invention of the mobile phone. All those people dying on the side of the road because they couldn't summon a tow truck, or because the only IT guy who knows how to reset the server was at the cinema.


Heh.  This.  So people in an emergency tried to use their phones once, and got jammed.  Then...never tried again and instead died on the side of the road.

Seems legit!
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-04-30 07:50:19 PM  
It's Me Bender

It would be an interesting trial if, as in some states, the jury chose the penalty. There is a good chance of a "hang up and drive" juror hanging the jury. On the other hand, lots of people here assumed evil corporate plaintiff RIAA could never win against the little guy. The jury could buy the public safety argument just like the juries in the RIAA cases accepted executives' testimony about billions of dollars in losses.
 
2014-04-30 07:52:57 PM  
When I use my cellphone in the car its because i need too.  Everyone is a maniac who can't drive
 
2014-04-30 08:26:26 PM  
Many law enforcement agencies keep connections with laptops using air cards over cellular service. When those things go down, it can be a real biatch to reconnect and then log back onto various programs. This jerk off is really only thinking about himself. Also, passengers riding in a car don't pose a threat at all, yet this guy thinks he can lord over them, too, and disconnect them. Plenty of places on I-4 are you basically stuck in one spot, slowly moving, the same car next to you for miles and miles. I'd hate to be the poor shlub who is running late, stuck in traffic, and gets in trouble with his boss because he didn't call to notify them because his call wouldn't go through, thanks to the ass hat in the car next to him blocking his signal.
 
2014-04-30 08:33:00 PM  

TNel: By default a S anything that is not on a carrier that allows wifi calling does not have the ability. My S3 does not even have the option in settings because ATT does not allow it. You must use an app like:


Just because your carrier rapes you in the ass, that does not mean that other carriers are inferior for not raping their customers up the ass.

That is unless you are enjoying that ass rape.
 
2014-04-30 09:11:25 PM  
csb time (second hand story from a broadcast engineer)

A radio station has a microwave link from their studios (in the city) to their transmitter (in the sticks).  Suddenly, the microwave link starts dropping every afternoon during afternoon drive, the prime advertising time after work.  The engineer cannot find any reason for the drops, but is told to find the reason and fix it or find another job.

The problem happens every weekday about the same time, but not at the exact same time, and never on the weekend.  The engineer starts to wonder if the issue is rush-hour traffic related.

He goes out in front of the building with his radio and a camera, and when the signal cuts out, he takes a snapshot of the traffic.  He does this for a few days until there is only one vehicle, a blue truck, that's common to all the photos.  The next afternoon, he waits for the truck.  The link dies as the truck passes, and the engineer then follows the truck home and confronts the driver in his driveway.

Turns out it was the same kind of guy; he had a mobile jammer and just hated people talking on phones.  The engineer explained the trouble it was causing him as well as it being a crime and what the possible penalties are.  Told the guy to either cut it out or start going home a different way, because the next time the link dropped unexpectedly, he was calling the police and the FCC.

The engineer was nicer (and braver) about it than I would have been . . . I would have gone straight to the cops.  Some nutter with a jammer might be some nutter with a gun!


/ end csb
 
2014-04-30 10:15:07 PM  

Wellon Dowd: Crotchrocket Slim: TNel: DaStompa: Wellon Dowd:

It's amazing our species survived before the invention of the mobile phone. All those people dying on the side of the road because they couldn't summon a tow truck, or because the only IT guy who knows how to reset the server was at the cinema.

Because the call wouldn't drop and they couldn't call right back when the man drove past, their phones would explode, killing hundreds, nay, thousands.

Learn to science

I'm glad you are on board with vigilante justice.  This is just a douche who thinks he better than everyone else.

This. There are very practical reasons these jammers are pretty damned illegal.

I agree that jammers shouldn't be available to the general public. I just hate the argument that mobile phone use is sacrosanct because of won't somebody please think of the children?!


That's not why jammers are illegal, dumbass.
 
2014-05-01 12:57:40 AM  

dittybopper: Allow me to also point out that if the police in this case weren't using stupid-ass trunking networks, the jammer would have been ineffectual against them.

I'm a big believer in having public safety communications being as independent of the local infrastructure as possible.  Now, I get that there are day-to-day advantages to trunking, but you end up relying on infrastructure that is going to fail when you need it the most.  That's what happened in New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina:  Once the emergency generators got flooded, the network the NOPD radios depended upon went down.

So yeah, have your fancy digital trunking system, but have a basic analog VHF or UHF system that will work when all the fancy shiat goes down.


VHF and UFH don't magically work without power either, and besides all trunking radio networks can failsoft into a standard frequency with talkgroups assigned beforehand to a control frequency. Your suggesting cities buy, maintain and service two separate radio systems, all users which are usually hundreds to carry two different radios which is logistically difficult and hideously expensive.. If NOPD lost trunking due to generators they planned poorly especially for a city inside a bowl surrounded by water. Perhaps if 1% of the cash Nagin stole made it into infrastructure chocolate city would of kept their radio system up?
 
2014-05-01 01:03:23 AM  

Wake Up Sheeple: I wonder how many SIDS cases were actually Shaken Baby Syndrome, before it was identified. I used to see all sorts of SIDS cases mentioned on the local news; now, not so much. But I do see the SBS cases making the news almost like SIDS has gone away...

https://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Protection/Keep_Children_Safe/sbs _s ids.asp


As a fairly new parent, my hours of rigorous online research would say it might be some isolated cases, but the bigger studies have controlled for that and found the highest correlation to SIDS was higher bedroom temperatures, stomach sleeping, and restricted skin circulation.
 
2014-05-01 01:20:43 AM  

Saiga410: Click Click D'oh: I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell us the physics are all wrong and it's not possible to do what this guy was doing... but if we had read the original specs in German we would have known that already.

It wouldn work in a moving car.  If he was driving at relativistic speeds the jaming signal would red shift and out of the needed radio frequency band.


How about at say 10 mph?
 
2014-05-01 01:47:32 AM  

Wellon Dowd: All those people dying on the side of the road because they couldn't summon a tow truck, or because the only IT guy who knows how to reset the server was at the cinema.

I know you're trying to be facetious, but combined with seatbelts and airbags, the capability of being able to call emergency services much more quickly has helped to reduce roadway deaths dramatically - so that there are now less deaths than seen in nearly 70 years.

In the 'golden hour' of being able to take care of someone after a serious wreck/injury, every minute counts. The spread of cell phones may cause some distracted driving crashes, but they save many, many more people with being able to contact emergency services moments after an incident.

Blocking, indiscriminately, nearly all communications in an area is serious stuff. It may kill the signal for people immediately around him, but it introduces all sorts of havoc in the EM spectrum, that'll affect all wireless communications for miles around, likely with reduced transmit distance and greatly increased static.

/used to run a pirate FM radio station
//got pretty good at bouncing the signal around
 
2014-05-01 07:46:56 AM  

abiigdog: dittybopper: Allow me to also point out that if the police in this case weren't using stupid-ass trunking networks, the jammer would have been ineffectual against them.

I'm a big believer in having public safety communications being as independent of the local infrastructure as possible.  Now, I get that there are day-to-day advantages to trunking, but you end up relying on infrastructure that is going to fail when you need it the most.  That's what happened in New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina:  Once the emergency generators got flooded, the network the NOPD radios depended upon went down.

So yeah, have your fancy digital trunking system, but have a basic analog VHF or UHF system that will work when all the fancy shiat goes down.

VHF and UFH don't magically work without power either, and besides all trunking radio networks can failsoft into a standard frequency with talkgroups assigned beforehand to a control frequency. Your suggesting cities buy, maintain and service two separate radio systems, all users which are usually hundreds to carry two different radios which is logistically difficult and hideously expensive.. If NOPD lost trunking due to generators they planned poorly especially for a city inside a bowl surrounded by water. Perhaps if 1% of the cash Nagin stole made it into infrastructure chocolate city would of kept their radio system up?


Every single radio the NOPD had was a worthless brick.  They didn't work without infrastructure.

VHF or UHF handheld radios that they could distribute in an emergency to their patrols, along with base stations at the individual police stations, would have gone a *LONG* way to mitigating that problem.

And yes, power is an issue, but you just have to worry about power at the police station, where the base station is and where the handhelds get recharged.  You don't have to worry about it at every single trunking site.  Instead of needing, say, 100 generators to cover all the trunking sites, you just need 20, and they aren't at remote sites where no one is typically stationed, they're at sites that are manned and where the people can take measures to protect them and refuel them (if possible).

The idea is to *NOT* depend on infrastructure in an emergency, because things like hurricanes have a way of wiping out the infrastructure, despite the best laid plans.

Maintenance would be rather minimal, really:  Check radio function every 6 months, replace items that no longer work.  Wear and tear would be minimal, so no issue there, as you can budget for 10% replacements every year.  Keep the batteries on conditioners that properly charge and discharge them for extended life while in storage.

Hell, even just having a bunch of spare GMRS radios would go a *LONG* way to fixing the problem.

In other words, if you rely 100% on an intricate communications infrastructure, you should plan for what happens when that infrastructure goes down for extended periods of time.

It's just common sense.

And it's cheaper than making the infrastructure redundant enough to maybe survive a major natural (or man-made) disaster.  The added cost of something like that is much less than building a toughened infrastructure, which includes things that aren't under police/fire/EMS/etc. control, like the physical copper or fiber optic networks between the trunking sites.
 
2014-05-01 08:04:46 AM  

kronicfeld: StrikitRich: Bet there were a lot of upset teenagers and soccer moms between Seffner and Tampa.

Or, you know, people with emergencies trying to call tow trucks, 9-1-1, highway services, etc.


Great point. People may need to call 911.  So lets install emergency phones along the side of the road in high traffic areas where you should pay more attention. And in each phone terminal install a cell phone jammer.
 
2014-05-01 08:05:20 AM  

Rent Party: These are commercial radios for industrial applications.  4QPSK, 132 channels on the 220MHZ band.   There are some serious radio geniuses around here (you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a Ph.D) that might be able to carry voice on them, but I'm not one of them.   :)

I do have a little Yaesu at home and have been studying for the technicians exam.  I just haven't taken it yet.  The statutory stuff kills me.


The statutory stuff isn't hard.  Don't cuss.  Don't broadcast to the general public. No music.  Not for business use.  The rest of it is just knowing what frequencies you're allowed to use, and what modes.  No big deal.

Oh, and BTW, I just got this card in the mail the other day:

i57.tinypic.com

A bunch of us hams transmitted to the Juno spacecraft during it's fly-by of Earth, and it heard us.

Say 'HI' to Juno

Fark thread about it:

http://www.fark.com/comments/8055709/-1400-amateur-radio-buffs-say-H i- in-Morse-code-to-NASAs-Juno-spacecraft-passing-by-on-its-way-to-Jupite r-Heres-what-it-sounded-like
 
2014-05-01 11:58:27 AM  

dittybopper: Oh, and BTW, I just got this card in the mail the other day:


Man, I don't know how to tell you this, but you sent your message 7 months into the future. I think you might be in some kind of time vortex. Or traveling at relativistic speeds around 95% the speed of light.
 
2014-05-01 01:14:59 PM  

dittybopper: Rent Party: These are commercial radios for industrial applications.  4QPSK, 132 channels on the 220MHZ band.   There are some serious radio geniuses around here (you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a Ph.D) that might be able to carry voice on them, but I'm not one of them.   :)

I do have a little Yaesu at home and have been studying for the technicians exam.  I just haven't taken it yet.  The statutory stuff kills me.

The statutory stuff isn't hard.  Don't cuss.  Don't broadcast to the general public. No music.  Not for business use.  The rest of it is just knowing what frequencies you're allowed to use, and what modes.  No big deal.

Oh, and BTW, I just got this card in the mail the other day:

[i57.tinypic.com image 640x480]

A bunch of us hams transmitted to the Juno spacecraft during it's fly-by of Earth, and it heard us.

Say 'HI' to Juno

Fark thread about it:

http://www.fark.com/comments/8055709/-1400-amateur-radio-buffs-say-H i- in-Morse-code-to-NASAs-Juno-spacecraft-passing-by-on-its-way-to-Jupite r-Heres-what-it-sounded-like


And that is exactly the kind of certifiably cool shiat that makes me want to get the ham license.

It's the frequency allocation that gives me trouble.  My radio club teaches a technicians exam and as soon as our calendars line up, I'll take that class and follow up with the exam.
 
2014-05-01 03:57:55 PM  

Intrepid00: mcreadyblue: Crotchrocket Slim: TNel: DaStompa: Wellon Dowd:

It's amazing our species survived before the invention of the mobile phone. All those people dying on the side of the road because they couldn't summon a tow truck, or because the only IT guy who knows how to reset the server was at the cinema.

Because the call wouldn't drop and they couldn't call right back when the man drove past, their phones would explode, killing hundreds, nay, thousands.

Learn to science

I'm glad you are on board with vigilante justice.  This is just a douche who thinks he better than everyone else.

This. There are very practical reasons these jammers are pretty damned illegal.

Cell jammers can be used on private property and by any Federal Agency.

LOL no they can't. You don't own the spectrum over your property not does any interference you put out magically stop at the property line.


Duh, ya.
 
Displayed 41 of 191 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report