TOM V. HALSON [03.12.07 01:18 AM]

I'd like to get my hand's on one of those.
Where can I get one?

  bryan [03.12.07 02:37 AM]

personally I hope this guy gets caught and charged.

When does it become your space?!?! when you can hear someone? she wasn't even sitting next to you she was sitting a few rows ahead. It's too bad she was annoying, I get annoyed quite often too. If you or your friend don't have the balls to say hey lady, shut up then you don't really deserve to have the lady shut up.

Anyhow, did she call up her friend and then your friend shut off the cell remotely? Did you reimburse her for the call, how about that she had to make another call? No, you think it would be a good idea that you can go around basically doing petty theft on people so they don't annoy you? I'm sorry but that is pathetic and weak.

If some guy shoplifted a candy bar you would think he was some sort of lowlife, but your hacker friend stole from this lady and you think its a neat idea that should be explored.

And this, as opposed to a lot of the various things rhetorically called stealing (such as using someone else's wireless bandwidth)really is stealing. Someone had to pay for that call, and it wasn't you or your hacker friend sitting in the back and snickering over how clever you are.

Hell. I don't know what it is but this story pissed me the hell off, now I have to do some debugging when what I really feel like doing is destroying something.

  djol [03.12.07 03:03 AM]

Dale,

While such a device is immediately intellectually and technically appealing, it obviously represents an uncomfortable balance between personal rights and community responsibilities.

Quoting from your post:

...Phil and Limor speculated that maybe we ought to declare that we own the air space immediately around us. What if others could not violate this air space with cellphones? ... could ensure that everybody gives me "my space."

Using such a device to deny a communication service to your (immediate) neighbour, is no different than the selfishness that is shown by the cellphone loud-talker ("Yeah, I'm on a train. No, no, on a train. A train.")

The whole point of mobile phone etiquette is that public space is a shared space, and thus requires us to behave in a way that is sensitive to how our actions affect our neighbours. Using technical means to block a cellphone call is simply another way of imposing a personal desire on a shared, public space - no different from playing loud music to drown out a cellphone conversation, and no different from the loud conversation itself.

The best way to deal with the obnoxious loud-talkers ("Yeah, on the train. No, on the train") is simply to point out that their conversation is socially unacceptable. Sometimes a little human interaction goes a long way to resolving an issue.

If such devices were readily available, who is to police and educate for appropriate use? (Case in point - the first post above, from Mr Halson: "I'd like to get my hand's on one of those. Where can I get one?") - we haven't quite suceeded in educating people about polite cellphone use, why would it be any different with a cellphone blocker?

How is using such a device any different from a DOS attack, or the threat to net neutrality? Just because we can, doesn't mean that we should.

"The price of greatness is responsibility." - Winston Churchill

  michael schrage [03.12.07 05:33 AM]

let's have this approach tested in iraq...

  jboeke [03.12.07 07:49 AM]

I could see the very limited application of a technology like this. In a movie theater perhaps, where you just add some additional legal jargon to the back of the moviegoers ticket.

Allowing this on the street is dangerous. Why wouldn't a criminal carry a gun AND a Wave Bubble? Sorry, no 911 call for you...

  pt [03.12.07 07:53 AM]

learning about this technology and sharing how it's created is the most interesting part of this - but that said, the wave bubble also jams rfid, gps, bluetooth and wifi. there are many many debates on how these technologies are used and used improperly or used against citizens.

one of the good things about a project like this is it encourages a lot of discussion (like the comments here).

one quote i heard about the wave bubble was "oh great, another technical solution to a social problem" - and it's true. the wave bubble will never be sold, but it's a real world example of a "defensive" technology for our personal spaces that shouldn't need to exist.

cheers,
pt

  nford [03.12.07 08:05 AM]

"Allowing this on the street is dangerous. Why wouldn't a criminal carry a gun AND a Wave Bubble? Sorry, no 911 call for you..."

All the more reason that the technology needs to be understood and engineered well. As it stands, cell phones are vulnerable to this - no amount of legislation will change the fact. It's not a matter of 'allowing it on the street' any more than it's a matter of allowing physics to pull people who fall off of buildings to their doom.

But the point about shared versus personal space is interesting. Can I, as a private landowner, disallow people to use cell phones on my property by the simple prophylactic of preventing a signal? Theaters, classrooms, libraries and countless other shared-but-privately-owned spaces disallow the use of cell phones. Do I not have a right to airspace I own, nevermind shared airspace near me?

And, for that matter, I certainly have the right to my person. Can I jam signals traveling through me? What about a situation where, for security reasons, it's best that no signal gets passed through? Such as during a military or police operation?

Finally, Bryan; it's not theft because the hacker/blogger wasn't taking anything. It's a destructive act, more akin to vandalism than robbery. But I really must recommend debugging to destruction. ;)

  pt [03.12.07 09:37 AM]

nford - *exactly* these are a lot of the same questions i think this physical object raises.

one thing to keep in mind (bryan) if you were not at the session a lot of this will be out of context. for example, i've been to lock picking talks, but that doesn't mean i went out and broke in to a house afterwards.

  Rob Flickenger [03.12.07 10:11 AM]

"Can I, as a private landowner, disallow people to use cell phones on my property by the simple prophylactic of preventing a signal? Theaters, classrooms, libraries and countless other shared-but-privately-owned spaces disallow the use of cell phones. Do I not have a right to airspace I own, nevermind shared airspace near me?"

According to the FCC (who regulates RF transmission in the US) you may own the land, but you do not have the right to limit transmissions. Although this is now " rel="nofollow">being challenged.

911 and emergency issues aside, let's look at it from a geek perspective. Suppose I find it very rude that people use laptops in my local cafe. After all, it's not very social and laptop users take up twice the space of regular patrons, making it hard to get a table. Do I have the right to jam Wi-Fi in the hope that people will pack up and leave me a good table?

Until we have software definable radio that can adapt its transmissions to fit the local spectrum use, jamming will be possible (and technically pretty easy, at close range...) But just because it's easy (and funny) doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea.

  Rob Flickenger [03.12.07 10:35 AM]

Oops, link broke. Should have been: http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/2100-1035_11-6139854.html

  Eric B [03.12.07 01:35 PM]

Rob, I think you broke it!

Anyways, I always find it amusing that people think they have the right not to be upset, or the right not to be annoyed. If you're in public, the space around you is PUBLIC space, not your own personal space to deem what actions you find acceptable. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who think any and all cell phone calls are annoying. Or, as stated in a previous post, that people on laptops at coffee shops are annoying, because they take up more space and stay longer.

And for those who are thinking that this would be great tech to have to regulate wireless signals on your land: just try to imagine who the first users of this tech would be... Hotels. Have fun paying $1.25 / minute (or more) for long distance calls again.

  Scott Gever [03.12.07 06:32 PM]

What sweet irony ... an electronic "airspace neutralizing" device shrouded in the packaging veneer of the most insidious, personal "airspace polluting" device of all time - the cigarette!

Point deux - I like mischievousness; find it endearing if no harm done but clearly, there's significant potential for harm given the non-discriminatory nature of the jamming coverage, a.k.a. collateral damage. What other signals are going to be suppressed in the interest of passive-aggressive salvation?

Finally, Bryan ... the most pathetic and weak components in this thread are your analogies and apparent disposition to anger. So, to begin, lighten up and try to laugh a little. Now then, I steal candy bars all the time and my social status still hasn't descended(or ascended) to that of lowlife as a result. It's the other things I do. ;)

You also seem to be injecting curious gender distinctions in your hypotheticals, as in "If some guy ...", and "... from some lady". Be careful of the White Knight syndrome; it'll get you in more trouble, quicker, than well, a wave bubble device. And come to think of it, the wave bubble technology might be a partial basis for the enormous revenue streams that the wireless communications companies enjoy - I'm always losing my connections and having to redial/reconnect/pay marginal initial charges again.

But all that aside - "I don't know what it is ...", is a bit disconcerting.

I rest my case.

Oh, balls! Where's that damn TV Remote Code Interceptor?

  TC [04.20.07 05:18 PM]

Sorry folks but today on my bus ride home this woman was talking very loud on her cell phone and I simply turned around looked her in the eye and in a very loud tone said: DO YOU MIND KEEPING IT DOWN, NO ONE ON THIS BUS WANTS TO HEAR YOUR PHONE CONVERSATION! She then continued to keep talking loud until her conversation was finished. I wanted to throw her through the window. My point, sometimes it doesn't matter what you say. There are people out there who are so rude, obnoxious and disrespectful of others that no matter how much you complain, they don't care. I repeat "THEY DON'T CARE". I don't work all day to have to hear some asshole's loud phone conversation. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with people talking on there cell phone provided they use there libray voice, and most people are good, but here are a handfull of them who are over the top.

So with that said I would love to have a jamming device just for those who abuse "our" airspace. Phew, Now I feel better. Good luck to all you peace and quiet lovers!

  Carlos [04.24.07 03:38 PM]

I will like to invest in one of this device. Where can i buy one of them. I need to by stocks. If anyone have one of this device let me know

  Tiffany [12.16.08 08:04 AM]

idk

  regina smith [03.25.09 11:22 AM]

Im trying to get on myspace at school...