this sounds like viral marketing for JJ Abrams' new movie.
The Buzzer
11–20 of 57 posts
Re: The Buzzer
#12Another fascinating, possibly related link based on the hypothesis that this is a dead-man's switch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_(nuclear_war)
So, which of you wise guys did this? http://imgur.com/HIJCj.png
Re: The Buzzer
#13Clearly they ditched the radio transmission and switched to transmitting secret messages over the Buzz API.
Re: The Buzzer
#14"On June 5, 2010 Chuck Norris breached the compound's walls and shut down the transmitter"
don't be a vandal
Re: The Buzzer
#15did you see this in the description:
On June 5, 2010 Chuck Norris breached the compound's walls and shut down the transmitter.
Re: The Buzzer
#16did you see this in the description: On June 5, 2010 Chuck Norris breached the compound's walls and shut down the transmitter.
Yes. It's someone trying (and failing) to be funny. It has been reverted a couple of times already.
Re: The Buzzer
#17did you see this in the description: On June 5, 2010 Chuck Norris breached the compound's walls and shut down the transmitter.
Yes. It's someone trying (and failing) to be funny. It has been reverted a couple of times already.
No, it's clearly some conspiracy involving spies and movie stars.
Re: The Buzzer
#18It will be interesting to see whether use of these stations declines over the next few decades. Surely global adoption of the internet has made it the easiest place to hide clandestine communication?
It's a question of where connectivity is available and how easy it is to track. For example, how do you replace a submarine surfacing somewhere to receive a pre-scheduled radio transmission?
Re: The Buzzer
#19The article speculates that its use as a way of communicating regular instructions to the military is "unlikely considering the station transmitted the simple buzz tone for at least 15 years before any words or numbers were broadcast." Yet: "The station transmits a buzzing sound that lasts 0.8 seconds, pausing for 1–1.3 seconds, and repeating 21–34 times per minute." Given that the transmission even of the "buzz tone…
There are a dozen ways to encode a message in that buzz if you don't mind the bandwidth being poor. That is, it will take a long time to send a message of any length. The buzz might also be a cover for the message.
There are other considerations. First, it's essential to have a variety of media for transmitting messages. They need to be set up well in advance, so as to be readily available when an operation is set up. By staking out a multitude of such options, an agency is planning well for the future.
Next, by spreading their operations out over more channels of comm, they also minimize the risk when one is compromised. One never knows when a channel will be compromised, and at some point some of them will be.
By using a variety of channels, including radio, packages (diplomatic and not), tourists, etc., and each channel having sub channels, such as different radio frequencies, different encoding methods, breaking one such method doesn't afford much understanding of the others.
Re: The Buzzer
#20Another fascinating, possibly related link based on the hypothesis that this is a dead-man's switch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_(nuclear_war)
So, which of you wise guys did this? http://imgur.com/HIJCj.png
In the comments everyone is civil here on HN, but as soon as they're on Wikipedia...