More on Cell Phone Jammers

My post in October 2007, Cell Phone Jammer Foolishness, received a couple of interesting comments and is still attracting a lot of spam from sites that offer cell phone jammers. A recent piece of spam ended up pointing me to an excellent November 2007 New York Times article on this topic. A few examples of jammer users from that article made me realize that many of them are simply incompetent at their jobs and want to use jammers to cover up their shortcomings.

… upscale restaurant in Maryland …
The owner, who declined to be named, said he bought a powerful jammer for $1,000 because he was tired of his employees focusing on their phones rather than customers.
“I told them: put away your phones, put away your phones, put away your phones,” he said. They ignored him.

This owner can’t control his employees so he uses an illegal jammer to make up for his inability to discipline his employees. IMO, he deserves to go bankrupt as he is clearly not cut out to run a business with employees. This reminds me of the companies who’s supervisors can’t recognize when employees are under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Instead of training them to spot the problem they institute drug testing. This eliminates the drug abusers and the outside of work casual drug users while retaining the staff with drinking problems. I do not believe technology is ever a good replacement for competent managers and supervisors.

The carriers also raise a public safety issue: jammers could be used by criminals to stop people from communicating in an emergency.

This is aspect of the jammer issue I hadn’t thought about, it’s another good reason to keep the ban on all radio jamming devices.

In evidence of the intensifying debate over the devices, CTIA, the main cellular phone industry association, asked the F.C.C. on Friday to maintain the illegality of jamming and to continue to pursue violators. It said the move was a response to requests by two companies for permission to use jammers in specific situations, like in jails.

This reminds me of a comment I received on my previous post.

in need of info about jaming cell phones at a large prison , inmates are paying officers and employees some were around 500.00 bucks per phone to sneak them in effective range would have to be 1/4 mile to fully cover the site, and maybe mounted out side or on top of a bldg for max range , please notify me of any companys that sell this type of equipment.

I replied:

My first thought is that the officers and employees are breaking the law and need to be prosecuted. What other items are they smuggling in for the prisoners, weapons, money, heroin, crack, arresting the law breakers will work for all these problems. Frankly, IMHO, smuggling items into a prison is a worse breach of the law than all the prisoners in for drug possession. If the prison authorities don’t care about their employees and officers breaking the law then why should anyone help them.

That said, if the prison officials want a lazy, ignore the law breakers, way out of their problem they should consult the FCC as special licenses to do radio jamming might be available for prisons.

Since their are no special licenses or regulation waivers for prisons the only legal options they have are to use RF shielding materials in the prison or prosecute the law breakers. Another user described in the NY Times article is:

Gary, a therapist in Ohio who also declined to give his last name, citing the illegality of the devices, says jamming is necessary to do his job effectively. He runs group therapy sessions for sufferers of eating disorders. In one session, a woman’s confession was rudely interrupted.
“She was talking about sexual abuse,” Gary said. “Someone’s cellphone went off and they carried on a conversation.”
“There’s no etiquette,” he said. “It’s a pandemic.”
Gary said phone calls interrupted therapy all the time, despite a no-phones policy. Four months ago, he paid $200 for a jammer, which he placed surreptitiously on one side of the room. He tells patients that if they are expecting an emergency call, they should give out the front desk’s number. He has not told them about the jammer.

Sorry Gary but I don’t buy it that you can’t do your job effectively without breaking the law. Why don’t you just insist that your patients leave their cell phones outside when they enter a session. I’m guessing your patients don’t feel you are worth the visit if they have to follow rules of courtesy demanded by you. How can you be truly useful advising your patients if you can’t even get them to be courteous. The final example is:

… New York school bus driver named Dan.
“The kids think they are sneaky by hiding low in the seats and using their phones,” Dan wrote in an e-mail message to Mr. Thakkar thanking him for selling the jammer. “Now the kids can’t figure out why their phones don’t work, but can’t ask because they will get in trouble! It’s fun to watch them try to get a signal.”

Smooth move Dan, you can’t control the kids in your charge so you use a jammer. How would you feel if there is an accident, you are disabled and some of the kids are hurt. You can’t turn off the jammer so now any surviving children with phones or spectators nearby can’t get help as quickly as they could. Seconds can save lives so when you use a jammer you may end up preventing someone’s life from being saved. I just hope that the only people who suffer due to a situation like this are the bozo’s who feel this need to use illegal cell phone jammers.

Spectacular Windmill Failure

The video below shows the most spectacular video of a windmill failure I’ve ever seen. There aren’t a lot of details on the intertubes but I have found a couple of articles from Danish newspapers one in English and the other not. The windmill was a ten year old Vestas windmill located in Aarhus Denmark. Piecing together blog comments, the articles and, my own knowledge, this is what appears to have happened. A large storm came through the area, the central monitoring station detected that the main and backup safety braking systems had failed in this particular unit. They sent a crew to make sure the area was secure and to observe the failing windmill, after a few hours the result is shown in the video. While this was clearly a dangerous situation, the fact that the operators had ample warning to get there to observe the failure clearly shows that these types of problems should not be a cause for panic by the public. In general windmill’s are a safe and effective method of generating power, the failures usually have only economic consequences for the owners.

 

Hat tip to Phil Plait from Bad Astronomy for pointing me to this story.

A lesson for UK hosting providers

The first good news is that the Quackometer is back! A great big thank you needs to be given to The Positive Internet Company Ltd. whom picked up the hosting for Quackometer.

The next good news, if true, should send a clear message to UK hosting providers. The news comes from Joe Obi’s blog:

The fact that I am currently suing the Quackometer’s former Internet Service Provider (Netcetera Ltd) …

If he is to believed, then he is proceeding with suing Netcetera even though they caved to his bogus threat and removed Quackometer from their servers. This should be a lesson to all UK based hosting providers, even when you cave to the demands of a con-man like Obi he will still try to drag you through the courts to steal some cash from you. Since Obi’s claims are bogus I believe Netcetera would prevail in court and likely recover their costs in defending themselves from Obi. However because they dumped Quackometer, they have gotten a bunch of bad publicity along they way. If they had been willing to stand up for what’s right they would have ended up with good publicity and the same trial outcome, heck it could have even made their defense less costly and simpler because Le Canard Noir and others would have been motivated to help their defense.

The only way UK hosting services can be sure to avoid this situation is to pre-screen all content your customers wish to post. I think you’ll need to limit your customers to people who want to post about kittens, puppies and other non-controversial topics. Somehow I don’t think this is a workable position for UK hosting providers. I suggest they form an industry lobbying organization and push the UK government to give them legal protection like they have in much of the civilized world. I suspect a UK hosting support lobby would get much support from the science friendly blogosphere for a protective law, at least I know I would do what I can to help publicize their cause.

Please Boycott the Netcetera hosting service

Last night in a comment on Orac’s blog I found out that Le Canard Noir’s great Quackometer site has been taken down by his hosting provider. This was prompted by more groundless threats by the ridiculous pseudo-scientist Joe Obi. While Mr. Obi deserves to be ridiculed and taunted for his outrageous pseudo-science and legal bullying what is even more important is to send a message to the hosting provider who caved in to Obi’s threats.

If you are a customer of Netcetera Limited I strongly urge you to notify them that you are moving to a hosting provider who has a spine. Personally I’ve been very satisfied with GoDaddy for hosting services and from what I’ve heard about Netcetera pricing I think they are less expensive as well. As consumers we have very little power over corporations but we do have the power to vote with our wallets. This is an important issue, hosting providers must be made to understand that free speech on the Internet is a right we demand, not a casual service they’ll give us until they have some nutcase threaten them.

If you are going to cancel your service with Netcetera then sending a letter explaining why you’re leaving will be helpful (email just doesn’t have the same impact). Here’s Netcetera’s contact information from their web site:

Netcetera Limited
The Dataport
Ballasalla
Isle of Man
IM9 2AP
British Isles

For more details see:

The Bad Science Forum :: View topic – Quackometer silenced

Quackometer silenced! « gimpy’s blog

Today’s News: Quackometer Silenced. Netcetera Tossers. Obi A Disgrace. « jdc325’s Weblog

Science and Progress: The Duck is dead, long live the Duck

shpalman: Regrets to inform you that Quackometer.net is dead because Netcetera were stupid

Thinking Is Dangerous: Netcetera condemn themselves as pathetic caitiffs

Quackometer blog taken offline – by its cowardly Netcetera host, and spurious legal threats « Holford Watch

Apathy Sketchpad » Blog Archive » Netcetera Are Spineless Morons

Netcetera Cave In « Letting Off Steam

Quackometer Silenced – JREF Forum

Not that Little Black Duck

Respectful Insolence: Le Canard Noir in trouble? I’m there!

The Bronze Blog: BOYCOTT NETCETERA

Save le canard noir! « WhiteCoat Underground

badscienceblogs

Hawk/Handsaw: Netcetera fold like a cheap suit

Netcetera are a pathetic, cretinous excuse for a webhost at Badchemist’s Blog

Twonilblankblank · Netcetera bad, well done Positive Internet

netcetera QUACKOMETER – Google Blog Search

New paper shows evidence for the Salem hypothesis

I was pointed to this EDN blog post about an Oxford University paper via a mail list posting. I later found another article about it in EETimes. The title of the paper is “Engineers of Jihad” the full paper as a PDF is here and here. It’s part of the Department of Sociology, Working Paper Series at the University of Oxford. The paper is by Nuffield College Professor Diego Gambetta FBA, PhD and Steffen Hertog.

I have only skimmed through most of the paper’s 90 pages so far but I plan a more detailed reading as time permits. The only section I read completely is the section “Religiosity of engineers” beginning on page 51. This section refers to the Salem hypothesis and gives data from a 1984 survey of academic engineers. While the survey does not explicitly deal with creationism it clearly shows engineering academics to be more likely to be conservative and religious. In my experience, the combination of conservative and religious is a good predictor for creationist beliefs, hence my feeling that this supports the Salem hypothesis.

This reply on the mail list surprised me:

Sounds to me more like paranoia over the protestors who are attempting to stop Oxford University building a laboratory where animals will be used for experimental medicine. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4707251.stm for typical news item on it.

This engineer jumps right up to say the paper is merely a conspiracy to draw attention away from the PR problems Oxford is currently having. Lets see if this makes logical sense based on the evidence that I see. First, the paper was published three months ago and has not been actively promoted by the university. To me that seems like the absolute worst way to use the paper for deflecting public opinion away from the other troubles. Active early promotion of the paper would help support the premise that this was a diversion but that didn’t happen. Second, I’ve never seen conservative religious groups protesting against animal laboratories, in my experience these types are more likely to defend the laboratory. The paper makes the case that academic engineers are more likely to be conservative and religious. Intentionally irritating those who are most likely to support your cause does not seem to me to be a good way to deflect public criticism. So, from what I see if this paper was meant to diffuse the animal laboratory issue, Oxford has made a very illogical choice.

Reading over the comments at the EDN blog and EETimes article, I see many irrational and conspiracy minded responses from people who likely haven’t even read the paper (some even admit this). The ad hominem attacks, claims that all sociologists are fools and multiple commenter’s saying how they know so many religious non-Muslim engineers, all provide evidence to support the basic premise of the paper and the Salem hypothesis. It sure looks like many of the commenter’s didn’t take the time to read the paper and instead are simply reacting to the papers title, sigh. With all the ridiculous comments is it any wonder that scientists are suspect of engineers when it comes to questions of science.

Another interesting data point is that economics and business majors came in number two, right behind engineers, in the conservative and religious proclivity. Now where have I been recently seeing a high profile member of this 2nd group involved in promoting creationism? Bueller?… Bueller?… Bueller?

While researching this post Tyler DiPietro published an interesting post, Irrational Engineers: A Conjecture. I’m thinking about this and will comment over at Tyler’s site later.

Netiquette for blog carnival readers or how to confuse a group of blog readers

It had never occurred to me that the following would be need to be said but clearly there is at least one person out there who needs to hear this. When you read a blog post linked from a blog carnival, you should post your comments about the post, at the post. Don’t post your comment at the carnival host’s post, the main carnival site, the carnival organizer’s notice of the carnival or, at a random post at the carnival organizer’s blog.

Until this evening it didn’t occur to me that anyone would need to be told this because I’ve never been told this, it just seems like common sense. Tonight this situation came to light at Orac’s blog, it was a simple little humorous post about a nasty email he’d received. I’m skimming through the comments when I encounter this long winded comment that doesn’t appear to be at all related to the post. The replies and comments go on and on and I can’t easily figure out what precisely the commenter Roy is trying to say. Many of the replies from others show that they also are having trouble figuring out what Roy is complaining about. I see references to the denialists deck of cards from a totally different blog and mentions of the Skeptics Circle blog carnival.

Then it finally clicks for me, Roy dislikes and/or disagrees with blog posts in various Skeptic Circle carnivals. Does he post a comment at the blog post he has issues with, no. Does he at least post at the carnival host’s post, nope. Does he post his comment at the main blog carnival page, not. Does he post at the carnival organizer’s notice of that edition of the carnival, no way. Instead he places his comments at the most current post of the blog organizer, a post which has absolutely nothing to do with the blog carnival. Hmm, I don’t think I can even imagine a more effective way to make readers totally confused about your comment. 😉

So to re-iterate what should be obvious to most people, when you have a comment about a blog post, place your comment on that exact post. This way the author of the post sees your post and the blogs readers will be able to have context for your comment.

The only other acceptable alternative is to put the commentary on your own blog as a new post and link back to the original blog post. Oh and while we’re on the subject of blog carnivals, do not assume that the carnival organizer and/or carnival edition host agree with the other blogger’s posts that make up the carnival. Just because a post meets the criterion for a host to include it in an edition of the carnival does not mean the host agrees with it.

Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani & TechNet, lying or clueless?

In this weeks EETimes there is an article on the presidential candidates, Tech off radar in ’08 race. In a photo caption they have this quote from Mitt Romney:

Reform Sarbanes-Oxley to aid small businesses

The text of the article repeats this sentiment.

Among the industry interest groups, TechNet‘s senior-executive membership has put forth perhaps the most detailed economic agenda. The group calls for reforming Sarbanes-Oxley to reduce the legislation’s unintended repercussions and compliance burdens, especially on small companies.

Both Giuliani and Romney call for reining in the excesses of Sarbanes-Oxley, particularly for small businesses.

Sarbanes-Oxley only applies to publicly traded companies, last time I looked there are no small businesses listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ. Therefore small businesses are not required to follow Sarbanes-Oxley. So obviously changing Sarbanes-Oxley is not going to help companies for whom it does not apply. I suppose it’s possible that Mitt, Rudy & TechNet are so clueless about business that they don’t actually know what a small business is but, they certainly don’t portray themselves that way. That quote seems to me like they are simply trying to muddy the waters to push for regulatory relief that benefits big businesses on the pretense of helping small businesses. If that’s their purpose then it’s just classic political lies. A rewording of the quote to, reform Sarbanes-Oxley to aid smaller public companies, would make this an honest sound bite and is what is currently being worked on in Congress.

My conclusion, Mitt, Rudy & TechNet are either clueless about real world businesses or they they are lying to muddy the waters. Either case means they can’t be trusted on this issue.

Technorati Tags: ,

Miro on OpenSuse a DLL Hell fix

A couple weeks ago I posted about switching to Miro the Internet TV program running on Linux from another app on WinXP. Well a day or two after I wrote that post, OpenSuse 10.3 had some mandatory updates. Miro was running at the time so I exited Miro and waited for the updates to finish. No reboot was requested so I clicked the Miro icon, a little processor usage then nothing. I rebooted, tried again and the problem remained, time to open a console to see what’s going on.

paulh@linux1:~> miro
/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.8.1.4
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/miro.real", line 123, in <module>
startapp()
File "/usr/bin/miro.real", line 58, in startapp
import singleclick
File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/miro/singleclick.py", line 36, in <module>
import app
File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/miro/app.py", line 610, in <module>
import frontend
File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/miro/frontend.py", line 50, in <module>
import MozillaBrowser
ImportError: libgtkembedmoz.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

I see the last line and knowing there was just an OS update I immediately think DLL Hell. I know, most people only use that term for Windows *.DLL files but, I use it whenever I hit  a problem with shared code in any OS. Actually I can’t remember the last time I had to deal with DLL Hell in Windows or Linux. Both Microsoft and the Linux community have done a great job of eliminating dependency issues. Since I’m lazy when it comes to fixing PC problems these days I simply searched Google for ImportError: libgtkembedmoz.so. Many plausible looking solutions are in the results and I spend a bit of time trying out some of them but no luck.

When I get back to working on the problem a few days later I try out some more suggestions found on the net. Still no luck, no time left to play around that night and I want to see the new Cranky Geeks episode. Here’s where the cross platform feature of Miro pays off, I put it on the Media Center PC and tell Miro to use the Samba share for storage. I get my Cranky Geeks fix and plan to revisit the problem later.

Tonight I decide to try again but this time I actually read the whole console output instead of just the error line. There’s the answer in the first line, the OpenSuse package for Miro is looking for xulrunner-1.8.1.4 and I have xulrunner-1.8.1.10 and a symbolic link for xulrunner-1.8.1. I take the easy way out and just create a symlink for xulrunner-1.8.1.4 (ln -s /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.8.1.10 /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.8.1.4).  That does the trick and Miro launches again on OpenSuse. 🙂 I’m assuming the recent OS update upgraded xulrunner-1.8.1.4 to xulrunner-1.8.1.10.

I had seen a thread about this issue on the Miro forums before so I head over to post my fix. What do I find, pturner7 posted the following fix two days ago.

Looking in this folder /usr/lib/ reveals that I have xulrunner-1.8.1.10
To fix this, edit as root the file > /usr/bin/miro
Change both instances of /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.8.1.4 to /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.8.1.10 (or whatever version is residing there).
That should get it past the .so error.

The problem was that the OpenSuse package builder used a hard coded library reference in the startup script creating this DLL Hell.

Comments closed 7/18/08 to slow the spam

Netscape Navigator is going away

According to the Netscape Blog, on February 1st support for Netscape Navigator ends. I switched my primary browser from Mosaic to Netscape in 1995 and used it almost exclusively up until Internet Explorer 5.0’s release in 1999. Although I have rarely used any of the Netscape versions since Phoenix (1st version of Firefox) came out in 2002, I still think it’s a bit sad that the Granddad of the Mozilla/Firefox/SeaMonkey lineage is gone.

Hat tip to John at Stranger Fruit