Cell Phone Jammer.....

[Bluefront]

[Link deleted]

Don't like those rude cell-phone people? I don't......and many times I wished I could do something about it. Well now I can. Of course it's illegal, and many people will cry. Like the world never operated without the things.....

Right now jammers are costly......but the cost of silence is always high. Right?

[Davinator]

Jeez! Just as I'm hoping those new cheap Intel boards w/ Celeron (GLY2) will be in stock soon in the US you go dangling these toys in a post!

Cracks me up as well the way people think the world won't get by without cell phones.

[Bluefront]

Think about it....for $!50 you put one of these things in a fake cigarette pack, and turn it on when you want a quiet dinner someplace, or a quiet theater experience. Ahhh......heaven.

[andyb]

If they cost $50 (£25) I would get one just to piss my friends of when they come to visit, or when I visit them

But at that cost, its not an option


Andy

[VanWaGuy]

Maybe there is an advantage to old age, but I remember hearing about people using a circuit as simple as an oscilator, a step up transorfmer and a spark plug to generate random RF noise. Could certainly do that for a lot less $$. I bet it could get nasty though the first time someone is caught blocking an emergency call

[Davinator]

They do have more sophisticated wireless jamming devices that don't just spit out a signal of higher amplitude in those bands, but are digital and specific to the call signals instead, and allow for the passage of any call to 911. Naturally, they are far more expensive. Can't imagine they are legal in the technical sense and certainly aren't portable like these.

I have been thinking a better product for broader application in society would be a system for the car/truck that makes ignition and phone use mutually exclusive at a range limited to the driver's chair.

[walle]

If you’re in a restaurant (for example)why not politely ask them to turn their darn mobile phones off. Heck, I do and my friends tend to do it as well, it works like a charm. Granted; it should not be needed really, but than again, at times it is and asking doesn’t kill you.

[Bluefront]

The thing about that small jammer....no interaction with the offender is necessary (who might not be so easy-going). His cell phone won't transmit or receive while your device is on....in theory of course.

IMO....no need to be polite to people using a cell phone in a restaurant.

[walle]

Why not be polite towards mobile phone users, seriously now Bluefront

[lm]

Shoot first, ask questions later, right?

I definitely use my cellphone where ever I wish, but I keep it on vibration mode only so that the ringing tone does not annoy other people when not appropriate, and I don't yell into it, so others don't have to listen to my conversation.

Why is it that people yell into cellphones, louder than they talk to people that are in the same table with them?

Restaurant is definitely acceptable, but keep them on vibration and don't talk loudly into it. But things that require absolute quiet, like movies, lectures and stuff, my phone is turned off.

[walle]

Well, most of the times I only turn on my mobile phone when I need to make a call, however; if I’m expecting a call I of course keep it on, but on vibration mode.

Added:

Why people keep yelling in their darn phones escapes me, unless you’re on a construction site there’s never any need. Perhaps 90% of the mobile phone users out there are hearing impaired. Actually; I read an article a while back, (shall try to find it) in which it was stated that mobile phone use harms your hearing.

[Das_Saunamies]

If it was in my power, movie theaters, schools and restaurants would have these as mandatory. Whatever your mode of communication, it's just rude. The people are in that place for a purpose, and that purpose is not to be disturbed by pillocks and rude reminders of the world outside.

[klankymen]

the new cinema in our town has one of these blockers - it's very annoying to me as I work in the same building and have no reception.

also though the blockers may be cool, they block my own reception also. I'd rather I could use it directionally to block certain obtrusive people, and leave people who have the social intelligence to use their phone sensibly and un-annoyingly alone.

[Das_Saunamies]

They should tone the power down to allow reception for people elsewhere in the building. That just can't be legal, preventing a paid-for service just like that for people not in their jurisdiction.

[NyteOwl]

Well, they're illegal in the US and Canada - the fine and sentence can be considerable if taken to the maximum. There are countries where they are not and others where they require a permit.

There are more ramifications to the use of jammers than just illegal rf transmissions; though they are illegal for a reason. Let's picture a surgeon having a nice meal out with his family, or taking his daughter to a movie and someone dies or suffers major complications because he couldn't be reached for an emergency call. Or the volunteer fireman or rescue worker - all because someone decided that seeing a movie or having a meal without hearing a cell phone ring was more important. Thos jammers don't differentiate they allso block outgoing so in the event you needed to make a 911 call from a cell phone you would be SOL.

Anyone who would risk the above just for the possibility of reducing a bit of minor noise makes a perfect statement about where their priorities lie and what kind of person they are. And before you say it's all hypothetical, the patient didn't die but the situation of a doctor being unreachable did occur several years ago. The restaurant owner was fined about $10,000 under the communications laws, and if I recall correctly sued by the patient's family for reckless endangerment.

Now, I agree those that need their phones available in such settings as quiet restaurants (McDonald's doesn't qualify) and movie theatres (though damn few of those are quiet anymore) should put them on vibrate if available or at least scale down the volume of the ringers. But just because some people are inconsiderate, doesn't mean jamming all phone signals is a good idea.

[Bluefront]

Wow....sounds like a commercial for a cell-phone company. I'll make a bet with anyone that stupid cell phone usage, by dumb people, has killed more far people than cell phones have ever saved.

We were all better off without the things.....IMHO.

[NyteOwl]

Wow....sounds like a commercial for a cell-phone company. I'll make a bet with anyone that stupid cell phone usage, by dumb people, has killed more far people than cell phones have ever saved.

No just the position of someone that thinks about more than their own convenience and volunteers with emergency services. As for the harm/help ratio of cell phones, you may well be right - but would you really want to add to the harm statistics by jamming one?

We were all better off without the things.....IMHO.

I'm of two minds on that but on the whole I think I agree with you

[maria_]

Wow....sounds like a commercial for a cell-phone company. I'll make a bet with anyone that stupid cell phone usage, by dumb people, has killed more far people than cell phones have ever saved.

We were all better off without the things.....IMHO.

Well said, last time i used a cell phone was in 1997 i guess. I had a Nokia Communicator 9000. They give me a burning sensation in my brain. Besides, i do not like to be reached whenever someone likes to reach me.

I am going to order one of these. I would like to stop those 17-18 years old life-saving doctors from doing their 30 mins phone conversations in cinemas.

[maria_]

But just because some people are inconsiderate, doesn't mean jamming all phone signals is a good idea.

That exactly is a very good idea. Why to be inconvenienced by the inconsiderate? Why to leave it to somebody else?

The probability of a life-saving doctor being in a cinema is an impossibility (anything over 1 in 10k) in maths compared to the amount of other people in younger age groups being in there. This probability is further amplified with the fact that a doctor is likely to watch his/her own movie in his/her own home theater as opposed to the student/adolescent who barely makes ends meet. Futhermore, people go to cinemas for a purpose and expect others to go there for the same reason as well: TO WATCH A MOVIE.

Besides, a doctor is likely have a pager of some sort and there probably is a backup person in case someone is not reachable. All in all, the likelihood of some emergency situation that requires a cell phone is very minute unless they are restaging "scream" and someone is being slaughtered at the back seats.

I was looking for something like this for a long while -- never bothered to check it on the net though. But now, i definitely will be having a ball when the bozo sitting on the next table talks on the phone as if he/she is in a warzone.

[fri2219]

God knows these are tempting to use, but don't- you have a decent chance at blocking an emergency communication or interfering with public transportation.

That said, they're trivial to build- you can put one together as a "proof of concept" for around $20.00US. Random RF takes too much energy- a full wave antenna with a 100mW emitter is all you need to disrupt (CDMA, GSM, et. al) cell communications within a 30m radius if you put out at the right frequencies.

P.S. Did I mention that it's not worth that risk of harming others, no matter how annoying they act?

[walle]

Let me put it like this, before mobile phones entered our lives (I hate them damn mobile phones) things was still working like a charm. As previously mentioned; there are pagers, there are stationary phones. So unless people make this into a problem (not having mobile phones around 24/7) there is no problem IMO.

last time i used a cell phone was in 1997 i guess. I had a Nokia Communicator 9000. They give me a burning sensation in my brain.

Yes, the mobile phones are hazardous to our health, this has been well established, yet the information is disregarded. Last year we had 3G mobile phones starting to MELT when they were used. The fact that you felt this burning sensation in your brain (such as heat around your ear and so no) is because the frequency that the mobile phones generate interferes with your brain waves frequency. I have stated this before; using a mobile phone for two minutes will disturb the brain frequency for two weeks, do the maths.

Please note: They have (since the mobile phones were introduced) lowered the mobile phone frequency a bit so that most people dont feel this effect (as you described). Still, they do disturb the brain frequency as I mentioned and they are hazardous to our health. Electromagnetic radiation is a huge, huge problem in our "high tech" societies today. The darn 3G masts are even worse (we have 18000 of them) and the interesting thing is that most people still uses the GSM system here. Heck we didnt even ask for the 3G system, we didn't need it and we still don't need it. It's of no use what so ever!

That said; most people still refuse to absorb the information, still refuse to accept it. After all; them darn phones have become a "must", a "necessity" you know.


Edit:
Here in Sweden we have been told not to let our children use mobile phones because it harms them, strangely enough thou; that doesn't seem to apply for grown ups. One can't help but wonder what revolves in their daft little minds.

We were all better off without the things.....IMHO.

QFT


cheers

[qviri]

Let me put it like this, before mobile phones entered our lives (I hate them damn mobile phones) things was still working like a charm.

Same with computers, automobiles, telephones... Things change.

Heck we didnt even ask for the 3G system, we didn't need it and we still don't need it. It's of no use what so ever!

High-speed data wireless data transfer does have its uses.

[maria_]

God knows these are tempting to use, but don't- you have a decent chance at blocking an emergency communication or interfering with public transportation.

I doubt that. We need the ones with the shortest range. Radius is listed as 5 meters -- meaning that the persons affected will be in the vicinity, hence exposure is limited. Perfect for a cinema or a restaurant. Anyone further away than that is likely to be no disturbance on me. I am not saying we should get yogis or 40 dbi parabolic antennas.

P.S. Did I mention that it's not worth that risk of harming others, no matter how annoying they act?

It is well worth it. I sure would enjoy to harm someone who has been harming everyone else all through his/her life .

[walle]

Same with computers, automobiles, telephones... Things change. .

Mobile phones and electromagnetic radiation are far more hazardous to our health than those examples you listed. Why not do some research? And yes, times do change. And looking at the world at large it doesn’t change for the better either.

High-speed data wireless data transfer does have its uses.

No, not really, and since its introduction it has been of no use what so ever. What it has done however, and still do, is to harm human beings and other living creatures. Strangely enough thou; despite no use of the system, all these masts were to cover the entire country. It’s insanity.


Again; research and you shall find a great many disturbing things...

...such as birds nesting close to these 3G masts get sterile due to the radiomagnetic radiation. Now; I fail to see the progress!


Cheers.

[qviri]

Same with computers, automobiles, telephones... Things change. .

Mobile phones and electromagnetic radiation are far more hazardous to our health than those examples you listed.

More hazardous than automobiles? Really?

Why not do some research?

I'm going to interpret the question literally: I have a major assignment due soon.

And yes, times do change. And looking at the world at large it doesn’t change for the better either.

If the cell phones were the largest problem in the world today, we'd be living in happy times indeed.

High-speed data wireless data transfer does have its uses.

No, not really and since its introduction it has been of no use what so ever.

To who? To you? To people who view youtube on long commute? To people who use a mapping application to find a acquiantance's house for some socializing? To humanity as a whole? What definition of usefulness are we using here anyway?

[walle]

More hazardous than automobiles? Really?

More hazardous to our health, yes; really. Or were you referring to car accidents as hazardous to our health? If so, please define what falls under hazardous to your / our health please.

I'm going to interpret the question literally: I have a major assignment due soon.

Good luck with the assignment.

What definition of usefulness are we using here anyway?

I’m excluding faster text messaging, excluding surfing on your mobile phone as usefulness. Those are not useful enough (if you like) pointers, to motivate a system that is as hazardous to humans and wildlife as this 3G system is.


Again; research electromagnetic radiation and its impacts, and it shall become clear.


Cheers.

[Plissken]

High-speed data wireless data transfer does have its uses.

No, not really, and since its introduction it has been of no use what so ever.

Did you have a straight face when you typed this?

[walle]

Did you have a straight face when you typed this?

Actually yes, here in Sweden it has been of no real use, unless you view faster text messaging and surfing on your mobile phone as a “valid useâ€

[Plissken]

[quote="walle"]Actually yes, here in Sweden it has been of no real use, unless you view faster text messaging and surfing on your mobile phone as a “valid useâ€

[walle]

So "no use what so ever" = a lot of use, to a lot of people, just not you. Ok

.

If you view those two factors as â€