Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

myfoxny.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 207 posts

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#81

Post by georgemcbay »

zo1 wrote: post #59
jablan wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is not only logical, but also an answer to lots of other problems: ditch the car-centric culture and move these people out from their cars to buses, trains, trams, bicycles and other forms of sustainable transport. It's not that hard, takes some time getting used to, but will do good to all of us.

Here's another non-obvious solution to the problem: Start making sure that insurance companies have no payouts if the driver's phone was on X amount of time before the accident. That way they pay for their own damage, and the damage done to everyone around them. Regardless if they were "at fault" using conventional reasoning. How about another one: Require all vehicles to install cell phone tethers that have the driv…

"Almost ALL problems have a technical/legislative solution for them"

Still waiting to hear practical solutions, because the ones you gave thus far don't cut it in the real world, IMO.

I like using my phone (responsibly, in a dashboard mount) as a network-connected mapping/GPS device. If I'm heading to an event with a guest and running late, I like being able to ask a passenger to quickly use my phone to call ahead and let them know, etc, etc.

I'm all for attempts to keep people off their phones while they are driving (even when using a hands-free system, because there is quite a bit of evidence that just removing the button-pushing part doesn't help), but there are a lot of perfectly valid use cases that would be destroyed by either of your solutions.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#82

Post by georgemcbay »

koenigdavidmj wrote: post #80
prawn wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will frequently have my wife look up something on my phone or handle the GPS on it while I'm driving or take a call. These are perfectly reasonable and go against your two suggestions. Further investment in public transport is one part of a solution (and has other benefits) but another part should be reducing the "always available" expectation. Phone calls are almost always a huge intrusion. I'd rather they act, ra…

If parent commenter already wants to require tethering your phone and your car in order to disable the phone, I have little doubt they're okay with what they would likely describe as a small inconvenience to save lives.

Well if that is his stance, why stop there?

Let's just ban cars altogether and everyone can walk everywhere they need to go. Not only would it be much safer for everyone in the short-term but the exercise would improve long term health as well.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#83

Post by rdl »

xacaxulu wrote: post #4

I got to play with these in Afghanistan. They were installed in our SUVs but they were so huge and unwieldy. I'd be interested in seeing what setup he had. Unless the traffic was very dense and slow, I'd imagine him just forcing calls to be dropped as he passed by which doesn't really seem helpful. Restaurants/theaters/anywhere-there-be-tweens, yeah bring it on in those locales!

You can do network-specific jamming really easily (P25, the dominant digital trunked police radios, can be locked out by reprogramming a toy pager to tie up the trunks, for about $20 and in the milliwatts...).

JIEDDO was generally trying to jam more than just cellphones, and wanted high assurance, and while they were in motion (so, you needed range).

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#84

Post by Bluestrike2 »

zo1 wrote: post #59
jablan wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is not only logical, but also an answer to lots of other problems: ditch the car-centric culture and move these people out from their cars to buses, trains, trams, bicycles and other forms of sustainable transport. It's not that hard, takes some time getting used to, but will do good to all of us.

Here's another non-obvious solution to the problem: Start making sure that insurance companies have no payouts if the driver's phone was on X amount of time before the accident. That way they pay for their own damage, and the damage done to everyone around them. Regardless if they were "at fault" using conventional reasoning. How about another one: Require all vehicles to install cell phone tethers that have the driv…

Having insurance companies deny payouts when their insurant's distraction is the cause of an accident is a horrible idea that, in nearly all instances, will shift the cost onto their victims.

Few people can pay for repairs out of their own pockets. Are we going to garnish their wages or place a lien on their assets? Great, the repair will be paid for after the next car gets traded-in. The end result will be victims paying for it themselves, whether directly or through their insurance carriers.

Uninsured and even underinsured drivers create significant externalities that are shifted onto their victims. The last thing in the world we need to do is effectively create more of the little bastards.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#85

Post by JohnTHaller »

sukuriant wrote: post #44
Nogwater wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since hands-free phone usage is just as distracting[1], it would be very challenging for a police offer know if someone is using a cell phone while driving. Probably we just need a cultural shift to make people reluctant to use a phone (or even talk to their passenger) while driving. My guess is that we'll get self-driving cars first. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safet... Edit: https://w…

I need to read those studies closely; but, I imagine there's a difference between gabbing about nothing and doing serious mental work when it comes to the amount of focus taken away by talking. Singing with the radio probably has similar focus requirements to gabbing. I have not done any tests on this; and we're not going to stop singing on the radio. Fiddling with a phone is probably the most dangerous of phone rela…

I know there was a study and analysis a few years back that found the reason people are more distracted having a hands-free conversation in the car vs a conversation with someone next to them is that the person on the other end of a phone call doesn't have awareness to your situation. So, while someone talking with you while sitting next to you in the car will naturally quite down while a change in driving conditions happens (or even alert you), the person on the phone is unaware of it and demands more of your attention. I can't recall when or where I saw the study, unfortunately.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#86

Post by jlgaddis »

cheeseprocedure wrote: post #11

Does anyone here work for a wireless service provider? It would be interesting to hear how major sources of interference are identified and dealt with.

Spectrum analyzers and directional antennas, for the most part.

If you're interesting in more details, Metageek makes similar gear for the Wi-Fi bands, which is probably more relevant/interesting for the HN crowd.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#87

Post by TeMPOraL »

maresca wrote: post #74
hueving wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This completely ignores everyone considerate enough to car pool. One of the major advantages is being able to read emails, check news, etc. If you can't do anything on your phone, it kind of wrecks one of the major perks.

A very valid point. I wonder what people did before all of these wonderful gadgets. Enjoy the scenery?

Read books, papers, do some noting/writing work if the ride is smooth.

That's actually another good argument for self-driving cars. The used-to-be-driver doesn't have to waste his/her time anymore during commute.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#88

Post by baddox »

mikestew wrote: post #42
grecy wrote: post #14

Does anyone know if it would be legal to use something like this if it was sufficiently clear with big signs? I'm thinking movie theaters or coffee shops that have huge signs "Your cell phone will not work in there. If you don't agree, don't come in", etc.

Putting a sign up is not the equivalent to an FCC license. And if you're going to transmit radio waves, you'll need an FCC license (yes, there are exceptions and I'm vastly simplifying for this specific topic). Good luck with getting the FCC to grant you that license. That's not to say that a movie theater or coffee shop couldn't passively attenuate cell phone signals with metallic paint or other equivalents to a gia…

If you could ensure that the interference didn't extend pass your own property, I don't think there should be a problem. That's probably not how the FCC works though.

Re: Driver caught using cell phone jamming device

#90

Post by baddox »

sukuriant wrote: post #54
sean-duffy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As other people have said, jamming would certainly be illegal because of the potential for interference. However, they could fairly easily implement some kind of passive signal blocking. I know that a few schools, including the one I went to, install aluminium foil in the ceiling for this exact reason.

So school shootings and medical emergencies go unreported?

Like every school shooting and medical emergency before 20 years ago.
Post reply on HN