... Ordinary analogue land line phones all have this feature. There is probably a good reason why it is not implemented in digital systems, but I'm not sure what that is.

Good note.

Likely its all a problem of how best to do echo cancellation on the physically ever smaller devices...

The effect of people SHOUTING down the phone is rather annoying and it seems far more annoyingly prevalent for the sales shooters.

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Personally I think that the "technical reasons" that the FCC cited - viz. interference with aircraft operational frequencies, are a crock - CP's operate on the 850-900 Mhz band - and there is nothing that civilian aircraft use that operates anywhere near that band! (radar is up in the 2.5 Ghz range, radio communications are down in the 120 Mhz area [AM, BTW] and navigation is all over the place, depending on which system you're talking about... but none are near 850-900 Mhz!) (Mhz= MegaHertz, Ghz= GigaHertz. 1 Hertz = 1 cycle per second)

Wrong.

For cellphones there are 4 bands in use: GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz!
But not only these bands are important. Think about resonance, interference and more of these things. That's one of the reasons that in hospitals CP's are not allowd. Even not in standby mode! On high care units and intensive care units CP's can disturb the high sensitive equipement. And that can cost someone his/her life!

Paul

---

Being a motorcyclist, I can't count the inumerable times where drivers have been talking on their cell phones, failed to look over their shoulders when changing lanes, and tried to share the same space that I already occupied. I also frequently see someone who has very poor lane control and can nearly bet that the odds are higher that they are on the phone instead of being a drunk driver. Blowing stop signs, placing themselves and others at risk (the truck incident above) and more are not chance; they are too consistent and repeatable to fall within the relm of chance.

If they want to kill themselves, that's one thing, but on public roads (or walking when it involves crossing public roads) it then intrudes into my sphere (safety and responsibility for them if I mow over a pedestrian).

Taking a call while in the middle of an existing conversation with me is "rude". The above is (at a minimum) assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder.

---

Never mind the techical reasons for it, but I am certainly happy that the FCC chose to NOT change their rules prohibiting the use of cell phones on board airborne aircraft. Can you imagine being stuck next to a long play salesman on a transcontinental flight? They think air rage is bad now! :-)

Personally I think that the "technical reasons" that the FCC cited - viz. interference with aircraft operational frequencies, are a crock - CP's operate on the 850-900 Mhz band - and there is nothing that civilian aircraft use that operates anywhere near that band! (radar is up in the 2.5 Ghz range, radio communications are down in the 120 Mhz area [AM, BTW] and navigation is all over the place, depending on which system you're talking about... but none are near 850-900 Mhz!) (Mhz= MegaHertz, Ghz= GigaHertz. 1 Hertz = 1 cycle per second)

There have been anecdotal instances where interference to avionics systems has been cured by finding and shutting down a cell phone on the plane. While the cell phone does not operate on the same frequencies as the nav/comm systems on the plane, it can be defective and have significant out of band emissions, or the nav/comm system in question may lack sufficient immunity to out of band signals. In either case, nothing good comes of the interference.

And, even if the FCC relaxed their rules, you still have Part 91.21 and Part 121.306 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to deal with. Look them up here http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=66ba2d2132eec6b3af76b3da8becde0f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv2_02.tpl for the text. They deal with the use of portable electronic devices on board aircraft (and are why the flight attendants tell you to shut them off, etc).

Oh, and I'm an EMC engineer by profession, and a private pilot for fun, so I get to deal with both sets of regulations (FCC and FAA).

---

I have a question about the packet size. Why have they suddenly gotten longer to computate? The last one I received has a 24 hr process time. They used to take from 4 to 6 hours on my computer. The points received per packet is still the same though.
Gary

---

I'm not a Luddite - I'm a Neo-Luddite.

Hey! I resemble that remark!

---

Being a motorcyclist, I can't count the inumerable times where drivers have been talking on their cell phones, failed to look over their shoulders when changing lanes, and tried to share the same space that I already occupied. I also frequently see someone who has very poor lane control and can nearly bet that the odds are higher that they are on the phone instead of being a drunk driver. Blowing stop signs, placing themselves and others at risk (the truck incident above) and more are not chance; they are too consistent and repeatable to fall within the relm of chance.

If they want to kill themselves, that's one thing, but on public roads (or walking when it involved crossing public roads) it then intrudes into my sphere (safety and responsibility for them if I mow over a pedestrian).

Taking a call while in the middle of an existing conversation with me is "rude". The above is (at a minimum) assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder.

According to recent studies by Govt. and Insurance companies, cell phone use in now involved in more accidents of all types than DUI. In flight training they always stress, "First Fly the Plane, then talk to ground controllers"!
And conversation with tower and other ground/center controllers is very rehersed phrases and responses.
In my opinion, driving while talking on the phone kills more people than handguns in this country. It is a antisocial activity and should be banned.

---

When we finally figure it all out, all the rules will change and we can start all over again.

I suggested a "pixel of the day" which picks a random spot on the sky, its current scientific interest (especially once Jeff's persitency checker gets rolling), and who looked there so far using BOINC. And that's just the beginning.

Back in the days of Classic, I was using SETI Spy along with Classic, and there was a tab in Spy that would show you a skymap with dots of where all the WUs that you've done were in the sky, and clicking on any of them would show the results of that WU. I just loaded Spy up with one of my old logs to get a screenshot of the skymap and details about a workunit:

skymap.gif (44k; 975x512)
tooltip.gif (45k; 975x512)

Is this feature you're talking about similar to that?

In my opinion, driving while talking on the phone kills more people than handguns in this country. It is a antisocial activity and should be banned.

There are already laws against “driving without due care and attention” and the like—but they’re rarely enforced unless the offence is obviously the proximate cause of an accident. It seems that almost all the effort is directed at speeding and intoxication, largely ignoring other equally discourteous, careless, or dangerous behaviours.

---

In my opinion, driving while talking on the phone kills more people than handguns in this country. It is a antisocial activity and should be banned.

There are already laws against “driving without due care and attention” and the like—but they’re rarely enforced unless the offence is obviously the proximate cause of an accident. It seems that almost all the effort is directed at speeding and intoxication, largely ignoring other equally discourteous, careless, or dangerous behaviours.

One of the problems enforcing such laws is that 1) most laws are against having a cell phone up to your head but allow use of a "hands free" set (which largely ignores the fact that it's still taking away concentration from driving) and 2) how do you tell, beyond a doubt, that a driver is on the phone (especially when taking into account the aforementioned "hands free" set)? The driver could simply be singing along with the radio but looking like (s)he's in the middle of a call. Or (s)he could be talking to him/herself. It's rather hard to determine absolutely, and the police don't really want to pull over every single citizen that appears to be on the phone (they'd get too many police harassment complaints).

---

Allow me to continue with some semi-humorous ranting:

I understand some people need them for business or family, but I can imagine this only accounts for 5-10% of their actual use. Not to toot my own horn, but I work on the world's biggest supercomputing project by day, and have an active music career at night, which finds me playing in as many as 8 different bands locally, or flying up and down the coast, performing at celebrity parties in LA or even once the national governor's convention in Seattle (and that required FBI clearance). Still don't find any pressing need to get one. In fact, I'm too busy to have one interrupting me all the time.

Of course, people then throw the "good for emergencies" argument at me. You know, I'm more of a fan of disaster preparation and prevention. The world would be a much better place if everybody embraced the suffering in their lives rather than throw all their money at faceless cell phone corporations just to indirectly quell their (usually unfounded) fears. Anyway the world is overpopulated - when disaster strikes, I'd rather evolution chooses people who survived on their own merit rather than ones who called for help on their cell phone.

- Matt

---

-- BOINC/SETI@home network/web/science/development person
-- "Any idiot can have a good idea. What is hard is to do it." - Jeanne-Claude

How do you tell, beyond a doubt, that a driver is on the phone (especially when taking into account the aforementioned "hands free" set)? The driver could simply be singing along with the radio but looking like (s)he's in the middle of a call. Or (s)he could be talking to him/herself. It's rather hard to determine absolutely, and the police don't really want to pull over every single citizen that appears to be on the phone (they'd get too many police harassment complaints).

If an accident happens in a city / state / area that has this law, they now look at the logs of the phone from the Cell company, to determine if you were on the phone.

If you are pulled over for what looks like reckless driving, they will also do a check and can send you a 2nd ticket, besides the reckless driving ticket.


As for why we can not use cell phones on planes, there are a lot of reasons besides those stated.

1: You need Cells for the phones to work... Many flights go places there may be no coverage (over water).

2: Cells are ABOVE you for a reason. If you try to use a phone above Cells, it's not as clean. In fact, almost all broadcast antennas are on towers for reasons.

3: There are still many analog phones out there (believe it or not), which are very bad at bleeding signal all over the place, and can interfere with voice communication on the plane.

I know there are others, but those few are good examples as why it's not necessarily easy to use a Cell phone on a plane. Now Satellite phones on the other hand should not have an issue (except they may use bands that the plane is using for GPS, etc).

---

My movie https://vimeo.com/manage/videos/502242

I think the main reason is that a cell phone's line of sight range from altitude hits so many cells at once they go mental...
I remember vaguely that it has recently been proved that cellphones don't cause any dangerous interference in aircraft. I wouldn't object to anyone making an occasional discrete call for a few seconds, but the thought of everyone chattering away loudly about nothing fills me with dread.

Only exception would be to say goodbye to loved ones, then I think I would have more pressing concerns than such social pettiness!

If an accident happens in a city / state / area that has this law, they now look at the logs of the phone from the Cell company, to determine if you were on the phone.

If you are pulled over for what looks like reckless driving, they will also do a check and can send you a 2nd ticket, besides the reckless driving ticket.

Yes, but both of your examples are an "after-the-fact" type arrest, added to the ticket for some other violation. How do you actively enforce such a law on it's own?

---

Have a cell phone because, unfortunetly, have to have one but I hate the thing. It is an electronic leash. I don't use the ringer, anywhere, though. In fact, never even answer my cell when someone does call. I let them leave a message. If the message is something to get back to, I will. If not, I won't.

My main cell annoyances with other people:

- Obviously, ring tones!

- The idiots who try to talk on their phone and drive, but can't.

- Intimate cell conversations while standing in line somewhere like at the grocery store.

- The growing number of people that use ear buds and microphones with their cell phones, walking around "talking to themselves". As George Carlin said, they look like schizophrenic air traffic controllers.

- When you are in a public place, such as a mall, and their is a large group of kids in front of you moving at a snail's pace because they are texting someone on their phones. Who are they all texting? Each other? The one kid that isn't there? They are all already in a large group, so why are they messing with their stupid phones, anyway? Why aren't they talking to each other?

--------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the War Room!" Dr. Strangelove

- ring tones - I don't mind these, as long as they aren't stock - if the ring tone is something I can relate to, even better - everyone on my CP has a different ringtone, so I know who's calling without looking.

Re: talking and driving - you haven't lived, until you've been driven by someone who was: a)answering a CP b)answering e-mail on a laptop AND c) driving a big rig on the Interstate! (fortunately, I got off that truck unscathed!) [OY VEY!]

---

.

Hello, from Albany, CA!...

For no reason than curiosity, one of the reasons we talk louder on mobile phones is because they have no "side tone". This is where a little of your own voice is fed back to you so you hear the other person and yourself, you then automatically compensate if your voice sounds too loud. Ordinary analogue land line phones all have this feature. There is probably a good reason why it is not implemented in digital systems, but I'm not sure what that is.

Your voice would come back to you with a slight delay... there's a slight (~50 millisecond, I think) delay with the modern CP's for the analog signal from the mike to be digitized...

---

.

Hello, from Albany, CA!...

Being a motorcyclist, I can't count the inumerable times where drivers have been talking on their cell phones, failed to look over their shoulders when changing lanes, and tried to share the same space that I already occupied. I also frequently see someone who has very poor lane control and can nearly bet that the odds are higher that they are on the phone instead of being a drunk driver. Blowing stop signs, placing themselves and others at risk (the truck incident above) and more are not chance; they are too consistent and repeatable to fall within the relm of chance.

If they want to kill themselves, that's one thing, but on public roads (or walking when it involves crossing public roads) it then intrudes into my sphere (safety and responsibility for them if I mow over a pedestrian).

Taking a call while in the middle of an existing conversation with me is "rude". The above is (at a minimum) assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder.

I've had the same thing happen with a full-sized big-rig, so it's not just motocycles in Jeopardy... (there's an idea for a ringtone!)

---

.

Hello, from Albany, CA!...

[snip]

Of course, people then throw the "good for emergencies" argument at me. You know, I'm more of a fan of disaster preparation and prevention. The world would be a much better place if everybody embraced the suffering in their lives rather than throw all their money at faceless cell phone corporations just to indirectly quell their (usually unfounded) fears. Anyway the world is overpopulated - when disaster strikes, I'd rather evolution chooses people who survived on their own merit rather than ones who called for help on their cell phone.

- Matt

They're really good to have if you break down on an Interstate, miles from Nowhere, AZ - when you want the help to get there b4 you run out of fluids!

(particularly if your business requires you to run many "miles from nowhere" type trips on the Interstates)

---

.

Hello, from Albany, CA!...

Being a motorcyclist, I can't count the inumerable times where drivers have been talking on their cell phones,...

Same here.
I ride a motorcycle for my work (3-6 hours a day). 9 times out of 10 when i'm almost killed it's by some brain dead idiot too busy using their phone to bother taking a look around them while they're driving.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

when disaster strikes, I'd rather evolution chooses people who survived on their own merit rather than ones who called for help on their cell phone.

- Matt

Admitting to being a Social Darwinist?

I don't know about you, but I have to say that I'm in favour of 'interventions' such as medical technology (and similar) that has allowed me and others to remain in the gene pool, giving me and others the opportunity to positively contribute to human society - how successful I've been remains to be seen (I'm not dead yet and so I haven't quite finished).

---

Join TeamACC

Sometimes I think we are alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we are not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.