You tell that to my boss when I can’t get our servers up and running again, because some idiot has decided to use an illegal device because he has no social skills whatsoever. Our servers not up = the company not making any money.
As long as this “perspective” agrees with your view of things, right? It couldn’t be at all possible that your view of “perspective” is skewed?
I’ll agree with that.
Also true. I’m not laboring under the illusion that everybody who’s screwing with their phone in a movie theater is taking an important call or sending a vital email; it’s just that a movie doesn’t justify jamming everyone’s phone. (On the other hand, are there phone-free theaters? That’s a concept I could see taking off.) The rest of it is a failure in manners.
Forget medical emergencies. How about this call?:
“Which stop is it again?”
Or
“I’m almost there. Can you pick me up?”
Or
“We’re stuck in traffic. I’m going to be a little late.”
Of course those are not long, blabby conversations. They are short and necessary.
The issue with this bozo isn’t that he jammed cell phones. The issue is that signal jammers and Faraday cages don’t distinguish between the cell phones of rude assholes, it’s that they jam or block all wireless signals, regardless of whether they’re supposed to be there or not. The concern with “Eric” is that he disabled (or could have disabled; I’m not clear on whether that happened or not) the bus’s radio, which meant that the driver would not be able to communicate with Septa. And that’s bad ju-ju; if there had been an emergency, the driver would have been cut off.
That’s why these devices are illegal in the first place. It’s not so that Dr. Important can get calls from the hospital (although, because of privacy considerations, every doctor or health professional I know [and I know a lot] won’t take those calls publicly in the first place, so it’s generally non-issue anyway). It’s so that wireless systems that are supposed to be there aren’t blocked.
So yeah, this guy is a total wanker who could have put his fellow passengers in danger. I’m just as annoyed by rude people as anyone else, but at the same time, I’d rather be put out by a little rudeness than losing necessary signals. Eric can go screw himself.
this jammer could interfere with data collection and control of utility systems within some unknown range of where he went.
wireless systems for data, voice and control in buildings nearby could be interfered with.
It’s society, not a goddamned card game. Little inconveniences bump up against each other all the time and you just have to live with it. We make appropriate rules where needed; a loud conversation in a library is not allowed, but on a bus, which is noisy as all hell, it’s accepted. If you don’t like it, become a hermit.
It’s called public transportation for a reason; when you ride it, you will find the public there. The public is loud. Suck it up or buy a car.
I don’t care if people are talking on their cell phones, as long as they aren’t YELLING into their cell phones. But somebody always is. The other day I was walking my dog and I could hear one guy’s side of the conversation from a block away,
In a movie, absolutely yes, but nobody should be talking during the movie.* On a bus, talking is allowed, and I don’t consider it rude to ignore your seatmate, a random stranger, in favor of conversing with, say, your sister, about dinner next weekend.
Just DON’T YELL.
This guy who used a jammer also disabled people who were texting, right? How was THAT bothering him?
*I don’t have a problem in a library as long as people are using their library voices. Bookstore, grocery store, etc. I only object if the person is standing at the cashier’s, jabbering away instead of paying and getting out of the way so the next person can have their turn.
Eh, you’re probably right, there’s a lot of those…
I guess I’ll amend my support for this guy. I still think he should have done it, but I wouldn’t want it widespread. Having a single guy going around doing this is probably going to cause a lot less damage than everyone doing it.
Okay, if not a movie, how about a university classroom? As for a phone-free theatre, how about a big sign at the entrance (before you buy your ticket) telling people that this is a cellphone jammed area - if you want to take a call, this isn’t the theatre for you?
That argument cuts both ways; people should be aware that they are affecting other people, and not be rampant assholes. If they keep on being assholes in public, there should be consequences. (Yes, I’m aware that there are a lot of “shoulds” in that idea, and the “shoulds” don’t match up with the reality.)
Exactly.
The people supporting Mr. Jammer only think it cuts one way.
No, I’m not seeing that as a good idea. I don’t think it’s a good idea to belittle students by taking away their ability to make a decision, and in a sense that cuts to the core of this issue. I get very annoyed when people get on their phones and act like assholes, but I also object to being denied the ability to use my own phone because other people are stupid.
Like I said, I can imagine that taking off as a specialty market where it’s part of the marketing of movie theater (as opposed to springing it on the customers when they get there.) Speaking personally - not that I’ve seen a lot of movies in theaters lately - no, I’m not going to pay extra to have my phone jammed. Movies here already cost an arm and a leg.
I think you’re right; I think that is the core of this issue. Too many people are making the wrong decisions when it is left up to them, and will probably end up with the decision being taken away from everyone because so many people refuse to do the right thing.
I’d prefer he cut the passive-aggressive approach, get up, and simply ask the person to tone it down. I’m sure if they’re being that obnoxious, other passengers would agree. It’s both legal and more directly addresses the problem, without disrupting others.
The way he is acting, it’s as if he pays a higher fare or pays the phone bill of the person(s) he is disrupting. By extension, it’s also tampering with the service being provided by the respective carrier, so I’m sure they aren’t happy about that, either.
As a single Mom who needs to be available any time the school might call - I’d be enraged. This guy has no right to prevent my child’s caretakers from reaching me should the need arise.
Can I ask you, in all seriousness, what can you do from a bus over the phone? The only thing I can imagine that would help is if your kid is allergic and the school calls you to find out what medicines they can or cannot give him. Other than that, isn’t telling you irrelevant to the care that can be provided if an emergency comes up?
I’m not a parent, but as I’ve always looked at it, I can’t help anyone over the phone, I’d rather not know, let the doctors do what they have to and tell me at the end of the day. I’d just be getting in their way acting all panicky.
I’m not sure what you are envisioning exactly, but I don’t think we’re ever going to see cell phone jammers in cars or a lot of public places, for example. It’s too onerous and intrusive, and in some cases probably not that hard to defeat.
If you could selectively jam the obnoxious people, I would be all for it.
But some people seem to be able to use their phones inoffensively, even for short, discreet voice conversations.
Me, I text with my wife, check facebook, and use the SDMB. Interfere with that and I’ll fecking twat you one. (Or at least nod in approval as you’re fined into penury and/or thrown into the dungiest of dungeons.)
Get off at the next stop and head back toward the school/hospital, for one thing. Give permission for medical treatment to begin for another. Start calling the medical insurance company to speed up admitance when they arrive at the hospital. . . talk to my child and let her know, Mommy’s on the way. . .
It doesn’t matter what it is though, if they have an emergency, and can’t reach me, they have to call CPS. And that would be BAD.
What you’re forgetting, or just didn’t know, is that parents or legal guardians have to make decisions on behalf of their minor children, and they have to give permission to treat. For example, the sprog’s school nurse has my permission to call his pediatrician or an ambulance, but I still have to give consent for the pediatrician or the ER doctor to treat him. Even if I’m on the bus, I can still do that by phone and sign the paperwork when I get there. And most important, I can be kept informed about what’s going on so there isn’t a lot of wasted time when I do get there.
And before you write me (and TruCelt) off as hysterical parents, being reachable can literally be a matter of life and death. Some years back, I was working as a contractor for a company that had a no-cell policy. The sprog got very, very sick at daycare and couldn’t get a hold of me because I didn’t have a phone on my desk and the person who answered the phone said that she had no idea who I was. The daycare finally got a hold of my mother-in-law, who sent me an e-mail to my company address (why we had e-mail addresses but no access to a telephone is beyond me). I had to use the pay phone to call my mother-in-law to tell her to take him to the ER, where I would meet them. It was two hours between the time the daycare first tried to call me and the time I got to the hospital. By this time, the sprog was running a temp of around 103 and rising, and he was not doing well. Had I been directly reachable, I could have been there in 30 minutes versus two hours. I went out and got a pager the next day; if the company didn’t like it, too damn bad. My son’s – or any human being’s – life is worth more than your peace and quiet.