A New Form of 'Hot Spot' Appears

spongebob

I know of one secondary school in Galway City who have something like This installed on the premises. They turn it off at lunchtime

M

Capt'n Midnight

Be kinda handy in cinemas.

reminde me there used to be a company in Dundalk that devloped a system to eavesdrop on EMI from VDU's (TIP: use LW radio to pickup the synch) - once they proved it worked the plan was to sell Faraday cages... - maybe they could have a new lease of life selling bigger ones ??? (with gaps tuned to the appropiate frequencies..)

LFCFan

AFAIK the Savoy did use something like this but COMREG told them to stop using it. Typical. Something that actually helps the general public by stopping mobiles from ruining a film is stamped out by COMREG but when it comes to actually doing something to help the public by making the Telecoms industry more competitive they're useless.

bk

Originally posted by LFCFan
AFAIK the Savoy did use something like this but COMREG told them to stop using it. Typical.

And what happens if someone in the Cinema has a heart attack. You can't call an ambulance on your mobile and every second counts, you could be dead by the time some one finds a land line.

Or what about the neighbours to the cinema, I'm sure they where pretty pissed off with having no reception.

If every restaurant, bar and hotel in Dublin city centre started using these, then you wouldn't get reception anywhere in the city centre and I mean even on the public street, these devices aren't very precise and obstacles like walls etc. won't stop them.

ComReg is right to ban their use and fine people who use them.

dod

My information is that it is illegal to use one of these in Ireland under any circumstances. This would mean that your school is breaking the law.

I am less sure about whether it is legal or not to even possess this equipment in Ireland, but I'm pretty certain that in using one you are breaking the law.

spongebob

Originally posted by Muck
I know of one secondary school in Galway City who have something like This installed on the premises. They turn it off at lunchtime
M

The principal of the school concerned believes that the staff are far more productive as well as the kids. The principal in question actually hid it in or near the staffroom but it covers most of the school from there.

ISTR it cost them €200 . Part Time teachers cost €40 an hour so what is the payback period then children?

M

bk

Originally posted by Muck
The principal of the school concerned believes that the staff are far more productive as well as the kids. The principal in question actually hid it in or near the staffroom but it covers most of the school from there.

ISTR it cost them €200 . Part Time teachers cost €40 an hour so what is the payback period then children?

M

And all it will take is one phone call by a vindictive teacher or pupil to ComReg and s/he would be in big trouble. These things aren't difficult to track.

spongebob

Comreg had better send their whole legal team down if they want to get any satisfaction outta this person. They will get no backup from any Guard in Galway either so they will have to bring a few fat Branchmen down from Dublin for the day when they do come.

I'll give short odds that the backup system will be up and running within 48 hours and that it may be even more powerful than the current one according to a vague description that I was given :ninja: in a loud pub one night.

Comreg would be Much Better advised to help this person in policing and enforcing a mobile phone ban in the school....during school hours. The school is currently not allowed to search a suspect. That would be a valuable use of their legal resource and may well prompt a generous response in reciprocation.

Remember that the welfare of the children is paramount. They have a constitutional right to an education. The school has a duty to ensure that that constitutional right is upheld.

M

bk

Originally posted by Muck


Remember that the welfare of the children is paramount. They have a constitutional right to an education. The school has a duty to ensure that that constitutional right is upheld.

M

Muck, this is ridiculous, what about the rights of the people who live near the school.

S/he should be able to stop the use of Mobiles in schools by normal means.

If a student is seen with a mobile or one goes off, it is taken off them until the end of the day and they get detention or whatever.

Most schools use the above method and it is generally very effective.

By using technology to stop the use of mobiles s/he is simply showing a lack of discipline in the school.

Capt'n Midnight

All mobiles contact the base station at regular intervals
"It's me and I'm here"

So if you had proper detectors (not just RF noise detectors) then you could tell if a phone was in use.

What is needed is chaff - find out the quarter wavelength - go down to the hardware store and buy nails or something of the right dimension and sprinkle them on the roof - the idea is passive attenuation of the signal..

Unfortunately the jammer is still cheaper... and quite rightly illegal

PS. Re heart attacks in Cinemas - they have landlines you know..
but RF noise might upset some pacemakers ...

Considering all the fuss over mobile phone masts - surely the parents would go mental if the realised the dosage being received by thier little darlings is way higher than any from a mast (by virture of being closer)

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
PS. Re heart attacks in Cinemas - they have landlines you know..
but RF noise might upset some pacemakers ...

There would also be the delay as people switch on the phones and try and obtain a signal. It might be several minutes before they figure out that the signal is being jammed and they go to the lobby. Do they have signs indicating that mobile phones won't work?

Considering all the fuss over mobile phone masts - surely the parents would go mental if the realised the dosage being received by thier little darlings is way higher than any from a mast (by virture of being closer)

Yes and most of the campaigns, if successful, result in mobile phones operating at much higher powers as they attempt to connect with transmitter further away.

dod

In the same way as there are class-action suits being pursued against the tobacco companies and the fast food companies suing them for billions for selling a product without responsibly informing the public about identified dangers associated with that product, I forsee a suite of class action suits against the Telecoms companies by people who have become debilitated by overuse of mobile phones or residence too close to base stations etc. in the not too distant future.

spongebob

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
What is needed is chaff - find out the quarter wavelength - go down to the hardware store and buy nails or something of the right dimension and sprinkle them on the roof - the idea is passive attenuation of the signal..

Some form of reverse Faraday cage was considered too. Could you spec one Captain ?

Capt'n Midnight

If the US class action suites are anything to go by the lawyers will get most of the settlement and the telco's will be able to give compensation in the form of discount vouchers for call credit or new mobiles....

echomadman

reminde me there used to be a company in Dundalk that devloped a system to eavesdrop on EMI from VDU's (TIP: use LW radio to pickup the synch) - once they proved it worked the plan was to sell Faraday cages... - maybe they could have a new lease of life selling bigger ones ??? (with gaps tuned to the appropiate frequencies..)

ah Van eck phreaking.


Get your tin-foil hats out lads.

Seriously though, a low wattage one of these has legitimate uses, schools as muck pointed out, to all you who say that the school should increase vigilance.....
Why should they. Kids shouldnt have mobiles anyway in my opinion
And cinemas, Put up a big sign saying mobile phone usage not possible.
Either that or build all new cinemas out of this

Nitrox

Originally posted by bk
And what happens if someone in the Cinema has a heart attack. You can't call an ambulance on your mobile and every second counts, you could be dead by the time some one finds a land line.
ComReg is right to ban their use and fine people who use them.

To Run a place like Savoy or any other public place where you charge for people entering i am pretty sure you have to prove that you are prepared for situations like this, so the fact the people would not be able to use their mobile would not make a huge difference. However someone might get so angry and excited from getting his experienced of a movie ruined by constantly having mobiles ringing around him that he have a heart attack, just as likely as your example!

We survived for quite a few years before we got the mobile so please dont say that we will all die if they happen not to work in a few situations......
:cool:

Urban Weigl

I just turn my mobile to vibrage when going to the movies. That way if I do get a call or text message, I can check whether it is important, without disturbing anybody else. If everybody did this, we wouldn't have any issues.

spongebob

Originally posted by Urban Weigl
I just turn my mobile to vibrage when going to the movies. That way if I do get a call or text message, I can check whether it is important, without disturbing anybody else. If everybody did this, we wouldn't have any issues.

That would deal with the cinema where the issue is noise...and ONLY noise.

The issue in a school is that inappropriate communications are taking place where the school is in loco parentis and liable.

What happens if some unstable teenager gets a txt at 10.15 am , while sitting in class, from the squeeze, vibrate on and no sound.

The Text Says To Young Spotty in the Modern Teenage Vernacular.

u r dmped, its ovr btween uz

Spotty promptly hoofs it outta the classroom and fecks itself over a bridge by 10.27 am (still during school time) . Apart from the Darwinian aptness of it all, you may be certain that Spottys parents will sue the school on the grounds of neglecting their duty of care to poor Spotty. The fact that Spottys parents gave it the phone in the first place is immaterial.

Compared to that kind of legal issue you may take it that the school gives not one fig at the thought of Etain and her drones waddling in the door and wuffing and puffing around the place looking for a jammer. The most Etain can do is to confiscate the jammer....if she finds it .

(The thought of Etain busying herself looking in false ceilings and under floors is peculiar, I must stop thinking those thoughts !)

M

bk

Originally posted by Nitrox
However someone might get so angry and excited from getting his experienced of a movie ruined by constantly having mobiles ringing around him that he have a heart attack, just as likely as your example!

I don't know what the big deal with mobiles in the Cinema is, I go to the Cinema once a week, and in the last year only once has a persons mobile gone off in the Cinema (and that person nearly got battered out of the place by everyone else).

Most people just put their mobile on Silent. No problem.

bk

Originally posted by echomadman

Why should they. Kids shouldnt have mobiles anyway in my opinion

Most parents want their kids to have mobiles. That way they can keep in touch with them and tell them if they will be late collecting them or find out where they are etc.

What some parents do is get the phone restricted so it can only ring certain numbers (mum, dad, etc.)

dod

Originally posted by bk
I go to the Cinema once a week...

I've been to the cinema five times in all my life. Bugger the mobile phone problems, I stopped going because the movies were crap!

LFCFan

Originally posted by bk
I don't know what the big deal with mobiles in the Cinema is, I go to the Cinema once a week, and in the last year only once has a persons mobile gone off in the Cinema (and that person nearly got battered out of the place by everyone else).

Most people just put their mobile on Silent. No problem.

I've seen situations where people have actually started chatting away on their mobile in the middle of a film and had the cheek to tell people around them to shut up when they were asked to go outside to take the call. It's all part of the anti-social attitude that has manifested itself in the youth of Ireland today. People who break the rules of the cinema should be removed from the cinema and banned for a period of time and that would soon get the message across.

Anyway, this is all way off topic

bk

Originally posted by Muck
That would deal with the cinema where the issue is noise...and ONLY noise.

The issue in a school is that inappropriate communications are taking place where the school is in loco parentis and liable.

What happens if some unstable teenager gets a txt at 10.15 am , while sitting in class, from the squeeze, vibrate on and no sound.

The Text Says To Young Spotty in the Modern Teenage Vernacular.

u r dmped, its ovr btween uz

Spotty promptly hoofs it outta the classroom and fecks itself over a bridge by 10.27 am (still during school time) . Apart from the Darwinian aptness of it all, you may be certain that Spottys parents will sue the school on the grounds of neglecting their duty of care to poor Spotty. The fact that Spottys parents gave it the phone in the first place is immaterial.

How is that different to one student passing another student a note in class that they are dumped, or telling them between classes/during break. What are you going to do then, stick each of them in a seperate cage. (Yes I know some of you would love to do that to all teenagers).

Your example is as equally contrived as my heart attack example.

My Sister is a secondary school teacher, she says that the policy of her school and most schools is that mobiles aren't allowed. If a mobile is seen in the possesion of a student or if it beeps etc. then it is confiscated, given to the prinicipal and only returned to the student after the parents have been contacted.

She says while yes the odd student does text under the table, the vast majority don't. The kids just can't bare getting their mobiles taken off them for a few hours, so they usually don't risk it.

BTW If a student tries to leave the class the teachers try to stop them. I believe the usual procedure is to talk (scream) at them until they sit down, if they do leave the class then the teacher asks the teacher next door to watch the class and the teacher follows the student and will usually call for backup from other teachers. They obviously don't try to restrain the student physically, but if the student tries to leave the school grounds, then they call the gardai and the kids parents and will normally continue to follow the student to make sure s/he doesn't do anything stupid like you said.

bk

Originally posted by LFCFan
I've seen situations where people have actually started chatting away on their mobile in the middle of a film and had the cheek to tell people around them to shut up when they were asked to go outside to take the call. It's all part of the anti-social attitude that has manifested itself in the youth of Ireland today. People who break the rules of the cinema should be removed from the cinema and banned for a period of time and that would soon get the message across.

Yes, most good cinemas have security staff to deal with that and they usually do get turfed out.

dahamsta

u r dmped, its ovr btween uz

ROFL

echomadman

Most parents want their kids to have mobiles. That way they can keep in touch with them and tell them if they will be late collecting them or find out where they are etc.

Make em wear gps tracking collars

Seriously, these have legitimate uses, schools, theatre, cinema, concerts (the civilised type they have in UL for example, not slane etc.),
Does anyone have specs? range ouput wattage etc?


For those of you who think that cinemas can just throw out a phone user: Cinema "security" generally consists of spotty teenagers, the kind of tosser who will make a phone call in the cinema will laugh in their faces and cause a fracas if anyone trys to physically remove him.
I have seen this with little scum smoking spliffs in the cinema, and have heard numerous people answering phonecalls in the cinema and getting indugnant when asked to STFU.

u r dmped, its ovr btween uz

heheh

oscarBravo

Seriously y'all, this belongs in Humanities.

Dr_Teeth

What's the story with the use of these mobile phone jammers on private property? Assuming the device doesn't interfere with handsets outside the area, how can their use be illegal?

Teeth.

dod

The use of mobile phone jammers in Ireland is illegal under any circumstances. See, for example, this report from the Australian Communications Authority, and this report from the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association.

bk

Originally posted by Dr_Teeth
What's the story with the use of these mobile phone jammers on private property? Assuming the device doesn't interfere with handsets outside the area, how can their use be illegal?

Teeth.

Because it is almost impossible to limit these devices to a particular area. They will almost aways "leak out" into your neighbours property, public property etc.

dod

Even the possession of one is illegal unless it has been explicitly licensed by the Department of Communications. Something that they will not do.

spongebob

Mobile phone Jammers MAY be used in a School or in a Church if the SOLE purpose is to defend the exercise of a Constitutional Right. Comreg, in their spectrum management, and in their cell spectrum management directives have not protected these rights.

There is a Constitutional right to freedom of religion which includes collective worship. A commercial entity such as a mobile phone operator cannot take precedence over a church where this collective worship occurs.

There is a Constitutional right to an education. There are education acts which develop this further. The rights of the teenager (to an education) are far greater than the right of a mobile phone operator yet again.

A cinema is a commercial operator who does not provide a service that is in any way protected by the Constitution The cinema and the phone operator have EQUAL rights. The mobile phone operator has the licence to the frequencies not the cinema operator. Touché Cinema


M

dod

Don't take it personally Muck, but I'm guessing you're making that up rather than basing it on any codified law or legal precedence. Would I be right?

Capt'n Midnight

RE: What's the story with the use of these mobile phone jammers on private property? Assuming the device doesn't interfere with handsets outside the area, how can their use be illegal?

By that sort of logic you would not need TV licenses (even though they don't transmit) but you do.

The Govt own the airwaves. <-- Full stop

This means they can sell blocks of frequencies off to the highest bidder (except where allocations have been perviously agreed with other bodies like ETSI - even then standards mean more equipment is used and so they get more VAT eg: 2.4GHz )

Once you realise it affects Gov't revenue a lot of the restrictive regulations make sense.

In theory the Telco's (for a purely nominal consideration of course) could setup a GPRS service where phones are disabled with a certain geographical area. - On phones with cell display it might say -"Quiet Zone".

But then again the Telco's could have used the IMEI to send "STOLEN" text messages to phones reported stolen - it would cut down on crime and probably save lives of mugging victims.....

spongebob

Originally posted by dod
Don't take it personally Muck, but I'm guessing you're making that up rather than basing it on any codified law or legal precedence. Would I be right?

Not quite.

1. It is not in a statute
2. It is in the constitution...if I said it was.
3. It is based on previous constitutional cases and interpretations.
4. The Supreme court takes the 'balance of rights' approach if the matter is contested as in two rights are affected. It then takes the 'hierarchy of rights' approach it hurriedly invented in 1979 or so in the Shaw case.
5. It is much cheaper to get a case stated if ya know whaddaImean like.

Let Comreg mounts their steeds and sally forth from the Pale in Etains taxpayer funded car.

RTÉ have a statutory right to exist under the Broadcasting Act 1961. Voodoofone and Oh Pooh do not. Thats apart from CEPT/ETSI/ERO/ITUT frequency allocations which is what Comreg do.

M

Moriarty

Jimminey crickets. Maybe we should have a competition to see how off-topic somone can get a thread. Moved to humanities.

Nitrox

Originally posted by bk
I don't know what the big deal with mobiles in the Cinema is, I go to the Cinema once a week, and in the last year only once has a persons mobile gone off in the Cinema (and that person nearly got battered out of the place by everyone else).

Most people just put their mobile on Silent. No problem.

Yep, most put it on silent, me included, but quite often some dont and more often than not it is Asian people who may just have a different cultural view to getting calls during a movie, anyone know if that is the case or not?
Anyway, i also go once a week on average and i find that about 1/3 shows at least once a mobile starts ringing and in 1/2 of those cases the person actually answers and start talking!!

now i said it was mostly Asians, but that might just be what i have seen, if a bunch or Irish kids manage to get in i bet none of them ever bother to turn of their mobile, they even seem to like the atention of the crowd when it starts ringing or they start changing the ring tone to piss people off.

DaithiSurfer

hmmmmm.
i wonder can you get pocket sized jammers.
Wouldn't it be great to sit watching a movie safe in the knowledge that you've just destroyed several sh*theads social lives.
Now thats something i'ld gladly pay to be able to do.

Dr_Teeth

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight

By that sort of logic you would not need TV licenses (even though they don't transmit) but you do.

That makes no sense.

If I use a television, I need to pay a TV license. If I use a mobile, I am under no obligation to ensure signal reception in my house.

Even if there WAS a 'mobile phone license' to pay, it still has nothing to do with either choosing to receive the signal in an area I control or blocking it.

Teeth.

sceptre

Originally posted by Nitrox
Yep, most put it on silent, me included, but quite often some dont and more often than not it is Asian people who may just have a different cultural view to getting calls during a movie, anyone know if that is the case or not?

In my limited experience, in Japan, Japanese people are almost reverential when they're in the cinema. They don't laugh at comedies, buy much popcorn or have sex in the back of the theatre.

De Rebel

Originally posted by Urban Weigl
I just turn my mobile to vibrage when going to the movies. That way if I do get a call or text message, I can check whether it is important, without disturbing anybody else. If everybody did this, we wouldn't have any issues.

Originally posted by bk
I don't know what the big deal with mobiles in the Cinema is, I go to the Cinema once a week, and in the last year only once has a persons mobile gone off in the Cinema (and that person nearly got battered out of the place by everyone else).

Most people just put their mobile on Silent. No problem.

Actually, having someone sit beside you and take out a mobile with its screen lit up and then read a text and type a response and repeat this 3 or 4 times is bloody annoying not to mention inconsiderate. Its every bit as annoying as hearing a ringtone.

oscarBravo

I've given up on the cinema. Never mind mobiles, there's always at least one bunch of juvenile fuckwits who insist on sitting in a clump over three or four rows, and continuously talk/laugh/take the piss throughout the movie. The management don't seem willing or able to do anything about them. Maybe it's just a Castlebar thing. When the new Ballina cinema is complete I'll give it one or two goes, but if it's the same, forget it.

I'm a patient man: I can wait for a movie to come out on DVD, and enjoy it in the comfort of my own home theatre.

36" Phillips widescreen, multi-region DVD, Eltax Silverado surround speakers, big-ass subwoofer - woohoo!

Silent Bob

People are (for some bizarre reason) worried about radiation from mobile phone masts. These aren't the ones to be worried about. the power decreases proportionally with the square of the distance from the mast.
While the output of the mast itself in all directions may be quite high what reaches you if you were 5 metres away would be approximately 25 times less than a distance of 1 metre. Not many people would ever be that close to the transmitter (the masts tend to be high). 30m away you get 1/900th of the total power output hitting you.

Of course all these figures assume that a person can present an area of 1 square metre to the transmitter.

Now mobile phone has less power than a phone mast. BUT you hold it far closer to your head so approximately half the power produced by the phone is likely to go into your skull (assuming it transmits uniformly in all directions).

Which would you be more concerned about?

I would imagine the reason that phone jammers are illegal is because they aren't licenced to transmit on those areas of the spectrum, and rightly so.

I also can't see what the issue is with phones in a class room. Tell people not to use them, outline the penalties for using them in class and then enforce those penalties. Kids would be pretty ticked off to lose their phone for a month, and probably wouldn't risk it.

Sometimes using technology for the sake of using technology (or for being to lazy to really deal with the problem) is a bad thing.

andrew163

Originally posted by Silent Bob
(assuming it transmits uniformly in all directions).

most of them don't (my nokia 3310 beams most of its radiation out through the back) ..........although im not saying the front of it is 100% radiation-free...it can still do some pretty bad brain damage after a few years of constant talktime :rolleyes:

I also can't see what the issue is with phones in a class room. Tell people not to use them, outline the penalties for using them in class and then enforce those penalties. Kids would be pretty ticked off to lose their phone for a month, and probably wouldn't risk it.

people DO tell them not to use them. they ARE pretty ticked off when they lose them for a month. but that doesn't stop them using them................ we teenagers are masters of disguise :ninja: (out of about 27 people i've seen using phones in class, only one or two of them are caught) (not that I'D ever DREAM of having my mobile phone switched on in class.....im a good little boy )

oscarBravo

Originally posted by andrew163
most of them don't (my nokia 3310 beams most of its radiation out through the back) ..........although im not saying the front of it is 100% radiation-free...it can still do some pretty bad brain damage after a few years of constant talktime :rolleyes:

It can? How do you know?

DeVore

I find a half-filled super-sized coke cup lobbed from higher up the cinema is good for getting them to turn them off. Best if you can find it on the floor rather then losing your own coke. I've done it once to someone who stopped and took the damned call in the middle of the Matrix. I mean is that rude/ironic or what?
Cat calls of "Its bleedin' Morpheus for you mate" from a fellow cinema-goer also helped speed the end of his conversation.

If lobbing cups is too direct for you, you can always aim further away from the target if theres noone else nearby or on the other hand a fist full of popcorn also gets the message accross.

In school they should destroy the phone (with prior, blanket parental permission). A few public phone smashes and you'll find pretty fast that they will turn the damned things off in class.

DeV.

feylya

They used to take the phones off people in my school. I seem to recall silicitors being called because of theft. And isn't the definition of theft taking something not belonging to you without the owners permission? And then there could be destruction of personal property thrown into the to.

sceptre

Originally posted by feylya
And isn't the definition of theft taking something not belonging to you without the owners permission?

Heh, nice try.

No it isn't. The definition of theft can be viewed as "unlawfully taking something not belonging to you without the owner's permission". Take careful note of the additional word.

In the UK the 1966 Criminal Law Revision Committee on Theft and Related Offences regarded "theft" as "the dishonest (my emphasis) appropriation of another's property", leading to the 1968 Theft Act decribing theft as "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it (emphases are mine)"

Here in the Free State™ we're governed by the provisions of the older Larceny Act from 1916 (unless something new was passed in the past few years since I decided that the legal profession wasn't for me). I don't know it off and I'm too lazy to search for it, but the wording is roughly the same (it does regard embezzlement and larceny as different offences, that's the only difference). The same necessity for permanent appropriation by dishonest means still applies.

If you tell your students in advance that you will confiscate their phones the offended kids can go jump. If you have a rule that unwanted items that disrupt the class can be confiscated the offended kids can go jump. If kids are dumb enough to bring a phone into class and use it they're in need of greater schooling and better attention in any case. That's before we even start applying implied provisions of the principle of loco parentis (which isn't an all encompassing provision but teachers can be regarded as being licensed to take reasonable steps to ensure the lack of disruption to class).

Destruction of personal property doesn't come into the equation unless there is in fact destruction of personal property. Not the possibility of destruction to personal property, but actual destruction of personal property. [edit]As DeV says, a rule agreed in advance with parents that all confiscated phones would be destroyed would solve the problem quickly and easily. Actually I quite like this idea.[/edit]

If your school caved they need to hire better solicitors.

spongebob

Originally posted by sceptre
[edit]As DeV says, a rule agreed in advance with parents that all confiscated phones would be destroyed would solve the problem quickly and easily. Actually I quite like this idea.[/edit]

If your school caved they need to hire better solicitors.

The parents will not agree to such a rule. Confiscation until the end of the school year is about as drastic as you could get and is at the threshhold of the law. Punishment must fit the crime . Confiscation from 01 Sept to 31 May is probably overkill, destruction is downright illegal.

You have (ironically IMO ) hit the nail on the head Sceptre.

If the jammer (costing €200) is confiscated then they will simply get another one from what I have been told. Comreg can confiscate it but Comreg has very little legal sanction open to it other than that.

A GOOD Solicitor, hired to advise on the minutiae of a legally enforceable ban on mobile phones /confiscation /destruction policy/ withholding of property / reasonableness of the above and all the rest of it will cost at least €100 an hour and will probably not come up with a watertight policy in less than 4 hours...if ever.

M

mayhem#

Most of the major hospitals in Belgium have these things installed.
You get feck all reception inside the building...

E.

Evil Phil

I remember the savoy case. It's a question of broadcasting, the devices in question broadcasts a signal over various frequencies (those used by mobile phones). They are actually quite weak and can't broadcast though a thick wall but they still broadcast. You can't broadcast unless you have a license to do so*.

So maybe the question is: Should cinemas/schools/etc be granted broadcasting licenses to jam mobile phones?





*I don't know what mobile phones do, do they broadcast?