601–610 of 632 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there’s a jammer out there that also sends WiFi deauth packets
Plenty, this is something off the shelf consumer hardware can be modified to do. However it's not super effective anymore as 802.11w (protected management frames) is a thing and mandatory for WPA3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11w-2009
Indian-American here. Thank you for this! I have hearing sensitivity and have repeatedly asked my parents to lower the volume on TVs, whatsapp videos, insta reels 100s of times. They always lower it for 5 minutes before raising it back. Likely because they are losing their hearing, but unable to admit that. I tend to be very mindful of others (maybe because I grew up in America), but my parents are not even mindful o…
Flipper Zero
> me being me, didn't have the courage to speak up I hardly imagine a situation where speaking up is less "couraging" than using such tool to mock annoying person.
Speaking up would have a higher failure rate. Speaking up overtly stimulates the annoying person's defensiveness and propensity to challenge back. Subtle manipulation always works better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is dangerous advice. You need to read the situation very carefully: Antisocial behavior is often an attempt to gain status in the subjects in-group. Breaking rules in a way conveys power. Violence against members of the out-group is an even more effective way to display dominance and hence gain status. Unless you play a repeated game with the other person there is little to gain for you by initiating conflict. E…
The advice is not about initiating a conflict. It is about not to appear an easy victim in order not to provoke aggression. But life is always about fight-or-flight, so flight should remain an option, very often the best one. By not signalling readiness to fight back, you increase probability of aggression by removing all costs to the potential perpetrator from their calculation.
“Are you looking at my girl?”
1. “Fuck off, if you want to live”.
2. Try to run.
Both options are valid but you miss the: “Just zoning out mate. Hard day at work, you know? Boss dogged my pay and I have to muster up the courage to tell the misses. She’s been talking about leaving and taking the kids …”
Violence can arise at many different levels of the classical hierarchy of needs.
Existencial: A crack head robber in a crisis, needing to feed their habit, is hard to deter by threat. For them it is life or death, for you it is just money.
Self actualisation : Many serial killers preferred easy victims. Looking ready to defend one self most likely would dissuade them.
Social: A member of a social group, trying to establish status by conflict with an outsider? Looking tough might achieve just the opposite of what one intends. But being a type of non-target, simply because one is outside of the established hierarchy can work really well.
My perspective is probably skewed: In my by now admittedly boring life, violence is usually social and best side stepped.
I might be in a minority saying this - and particularly so here on HN - but I struggle to understand why you'd be willing to use a tool like this, as OP did, but not to politely ask someone to keep it down?
People doing these kinds of things don’t give a F about anyone else. They’re terrible “humans” and should be treated as such.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is definitely the wrong thing to do. It isn't rude to use the bell, and as a pedestrian I appreciate a single ring (obviously, don't ring like a madman either). Playing music loudly in a public space is way more rude than using your bicycle bell.
Too many close calls with inattentive pedestrians in my area. I ring, no move, or worse, they get startled, and turn around into the middle of the bike lane. If I have to choose between coming off as rude and keeping my brain enclosed, I know what to do.
(I have an ebike, so this is especially important. Mine is a legal one: 25 km/h max, 250 W, etc. If yours is faster, this is even more important.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is saying don't make noise. They are saying be considerate of those around you. It is not a radical idea.
So you would advocate for someone to do this in public against someone else playing a video on their phone? Do you think this is the most considerate option?
I'll also take into consideration whether or not you appear to be homeless if you stink (choosing not to shower and deciding not to shower are two different things). I'll take into consideration who it sounds like you're talking to when you're telling on the phone ("are you ok" vs interminable conversations on speakerphone in the break room/restaurant/other public places). If you're playing loud music in your car, before calling you out I'll consider whether the doors are open (you might not realize) or if you have the windows open (sharing your music choices with the world).
Consideration is the entire point. It doesn't mean letting people do whatever they like, it means judging (thinking about) then before doing anything. You have every like right to play your video, and I have every right to get annoyed at you for doing it without being considerate yourself.
Considerate: 1. Having or showing regard for the needs or feelings of others. synonym: thoughtful. Similar: thoughtful 2. Characterized by careful thought; deliberate. 3. Given to consideration or to sober reflection; regardful of consequences or circumstances; circumspect; careful; esp. careful of the rights, claims, and feelings of others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Too many close calls with inattentive pedestrians in my area. I ring, no move, or worse, they get startled, and turn around into the middle of the bike lane. If I have to choose between coming off as rude and keeping my brain enclosed, I know what to do.
You need to ring when you are still some way away, so they have time to react, and if they don't you can slow down and ring a second time. And travel at an appropriate speed for the location. (I have an ebike, so this is especially important. Mine is a legal one: 25 km/h max, 250 W, etc. If yours is faster, this is even more important.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bear bells have been shown to not be effective.
Cite? In some parks, there use is required by-law. Given that they've been in continuous use for centuries I question the conclusion that they're not effective, but I'm open to altering my opinion backed-up with data.
> Bear bells may be a popular item to put on your backpack, but they don’t effectively warn a bear you’re in the area. Bears won’t hear the bells until you’re too close. Yelling, clapping, and talking are more effective ways of alerting a bear to your presence.
https://www.backpacker.com/stories/ask-a-bear-do-bear-bells-...
> In the most advanced testing, bear biologist Tom Smith jingled bear bells in varying volumes in front of brown bears in Katmai National Park. Regardless of how vigorously he shook, 15 different sets of bruins ignored the bells. And yet they snapped at attention the second he broke a pencil in half.
It's not that the bells definitively have zero value, but their effectiveness has been questioned enough that there's been a shift in opinion about them over the last couple of decades.