addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

The Cleveland Freethinkers Message Board The Cleveland Freethinkers Discussion Forum General Discussions › What's wrong with Faraday cages?

What's wrong with Faraday cages?

Rafiq M.
Bogor, ID
Post #: 824
From BBC News Magazine

Who, What, Why: How do you stop mobiles in concerts?

The Master of the Queen's Music insists that using mobiles during concerts is an "act of vandalism" and has called for people who use mobile phones during concerts to be fined. How do you stop them?

The technology does exist to cut out mobile phone signals altogether, by forming a Faraday shield, or an enclosure made of conducting material. However, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006 forbids the "use of any apparatus, whether or not wireless telegraphy apparatus, for the purpose of interfering with any wireless telegraphy" anywhere within the UK.


It is also illegal in the US? I have often thought that the simplest and most effective way of stopping eejuts' mobile phones in lectures and concerts was to build a Faraday cage around them. You can have a prominent notice above the doors saying
Mobile phones and other telecommunication devices will not operate in this area.

The law should be amended to allow this. As David Mellor says:

    The problem is not just mobile phones going off, it's checking them as well. Most of these people are totally insignificant and the idea that the world turns on them reading their messages is ridiculous.

Cleveland, OH
Post #: 551
I think I’ve heard of such blockage in the US, although I got the feeling it was some kind of jamming signal rather than a cage.

I definitely want to have the freedom to choose movies/performances without phone interruption! Two ideas that might help the idea:

1. Have a couple large areas of the cage able to slide open and closed, so that the practice could be introduced as certain specific showings being phone-free, rather than committing the venue to be that way full-time. (A jamming signal that can be turned off would work equally well, if that exists.)

2. Loan certain professionals, like doctors or event security, a microcell that either plugs into the seat or runs on battery, for emergency communication. All you’d need is a cell antenna outside the cage, a wired network connection that passes through the cage, a WiFi or similar signal from that, which exists only inside the cage, and a microcell that connects to that network. The microcells you can buy at the store cover a whole house and run on your conventional home network, so it sounds simple to do this. Only it need not be nearly as powerful as a home microcell: a range of a couple feet should be enough to serve one person. I don’t know how this would work with a jamming signal (if such a thing does exist) but maybe the microcell could be powerful enough to overcome it at short range.
A former member
Post #: 10
I don't think anyone should be able to use any type of communication at any paid for event. It's ripping off the performer. smile
Peter S.
user 20704391
Akron, OH
Post #: 4
The only thing wrong with Faraday cages is that in the US it's illegal to interfere with radio communication. Some prisons would like to jam cell phone signals, but without changes in federal law they can't.
Rafiq M.
Bogor, ID
Post #: 887
That is the whole point about democracy. We can ask questions about the law and get it changed, updated or refined. The supremacy of the law should never mean that it is inviolate. To say something is against the law is not the same as saying that it is wrong.

The patina of age should not give authority to our law but the consensus that it is, all things considered, right for the good governance and well being of our society.

That applies just as much to the Bill of Rights. Two hundred year old phraseology and concepts need refining too. We must never treat the Constitution or any law as a species of holy writ. The First Amendment is a brilliant piece of jurisprudence – a shining example to the world, yet it too needs to be refined and clarified. The Second Amendment, on the other hand, is a delusional bit of dangerous nonsense that was outdated long ago.

We must, of course, resist the incursion of any form of religious dogma into public or private law. If a two hundred year old Bill of Rights requires constant argument and interpretation because of its lack of modern clarity and relevance, how much more so are fossilised "divine" codes of two thousand and fourteen hundred years old?
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy