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

High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

arlnow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 118 posts

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#91

Post by 127361 »

closewith wrote: post #90
Freak_NL wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who use such a feature would surely have a backup strategy in case their phone dies, the battery dies, is stolen, is lost, or is unavailable for any number of reasons (fucked up OTA update? hacked? some dumb app crashing their device?), right? If they don't and just rely on that single consumer-grade device working all the time , I feel sorry for them. This glucose monitor excuse gets trotted out for these top…

> People who use such a feature would surely have a backup strategy in case their phone dies, the battery dies, is stolen, is lost, or is unavailable for any number of reasons (fucked up OTA update? hacked? People become inured to extreme risks. It's common to come across people with history of anaphylaxis who only carry one or zero epipens, despite the extreme risk of death.

And it is their negligence there. It should not be the fault of the prankster who used the Flipper Zero to temporarily crash consumer information devices (people's iPhones).

Some schools ban phones completely. And the school is not responsible if the children can't call 911 if there's some emergency for example.

And some buildings are constructed of materials which will obstruct the mobile signal as well. Nobody is held responsible for that when they can't call 911.

And I believe it's perfectly legal for me to use radio-blocking paint on the walls of my own house, that might obstruct the signals for the neighbours as well, if I'm hypothetically in a weak signal area. In that case the mobile operator has no right to force their signals through my home, it's within my right to block it as long as I don't use any form of illegal jamming.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#92

Post by falserum »

maccard wrote: post #75
skygazer wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Unlimited fines” sound mind-bendingly excessive — risk of financial singularity. I’d opt for the merciful two years.

You don't get a choice in it.

You don’t know that. Maybe parent is a judge.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#93

Post by closewith »

127361 wrote: post #91
closewith wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People who use such a feature would surely have a backup strategy in case their phone dies, the battery dies, is stolen, is lost, or is unavailable for any number of reasons (fucked up OTA update? hacked? People become inured to extreme risks. It's common to come across people with history of anaphylaxis who only carry one or zero epipens, despite the extreme risk of death.

And it is their negligence there. It should not be the fault of the prankster who used the Flipper Zero to temporarily crash consumer information devices (people's iPhones). Some schools ban phones completely. And the school is not responsible if the children can't call 911 if there's some emergency for example. And some buildings are constructed of materials which will obstruct the mobile signal as well. Nobody is h…

Nah, if you effect other people's property, you are morally responsible for the foreseeable outcomes. You don't get to absolve yourself of responsibility because you've decided that their preparedness didn't meet your expectations.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#94

Post by jpc0 »

bgro wrote: post #87

Interfering with radio (phone) signals seems to be one of those perhaps unexpectedly serious crimes especially for how easy it seems to be even by accident. If only other similar service rights were given the same protection. Like the constant data leaks/thefts.

> especially for how easy it seems to be even by accident.

This does seem to be one of those places where you would have to prove intent to get a conviction but IANAL.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#95

Post by 127361 »

closewith wrote: post #93
127361 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it is their negligence there. It should not be the fault of the prankster who used the Flipper Zero to temporarily crash consumer information devices (people's iPhones). Some schools ban phones completely. And the school is not responsible if the children can't call 911 if there's some emergency for example. And some buildings are constructed of materials which will obstruct the mobile signal as well. Nobody is h…

Nah, if you effect other people's property, you are morally responsible for the foreseeable outcomes. You don't get to absolve yourself of responsibility because you've decided that their preparedness didn't meet your expectations.

Some examples, e.g. court judgements?

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#96

Post by Arch-TK »

lozenge wrote: post #81
Arch-TK wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a sizeable number of the continuous glucose monitor systems rely on a cellphone app I thought medical hardware had to go through stringent approval processes with health authorities? This is just an awful design in general. An auxiliary control system for your body should be much more resistant against electronic interference and self contained to prevent this kind of vulnerability. Yeah, interfering with people's m…

As far as I know there is no general method of resisting electronic interference?

Not using a wireless communication method reduces the chances that electronic interference will cause a problem. Obviously there's no way to completepy prevent issues but it's not so hard to implement things such that a misbehaving Bluetooth (or whatever) radio doesn't lead to a dangerous situation.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#97

Post by malfist »

pixxel wrote: post #71
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the ban extend to recesses/entire school grounds? I was very introverted throught my childhood and spent my first school years' recesses not talking to anyone, just mindlessly wandering the hallways and yard. It got to a point where I didn't even know many of my classmate's names, even after spending years "with them". When I grew old enough to have my own phone that I could bring to school, it made recesses mor…

With respect, pandering to outliers is never the answer.

Is a handicap ramp, pandering to outliers?

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#99

Post by revlolz »

malfist wrote: post #97
pixxel wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, pandering to outliers is never the answer.

Is a handicap ramp, pandering to outliers?

Ramps are a needed accomdation for medical necessity. To my knowledge, a phone likely exacerbates the social reclusiveness. I think it's a bad analogy.

Re: High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones

#100

Post by [deleted] »

rdtsc wrote: post #22

I liked the first comment there: > "According to an APS statement, 'by turning off those teenagers' phones, the student created a dangerous environment in which students might actually have been able to learn something instead of staring at their phones all day. We're just not equipped to handle that kind of thing, so we called the police instead.'"

[deleted]
Post reply on HN