In article <8589.256A1EC3@stjhmc.fidonet.org>, Jim.Grubs@f1.n234.z1.fidonet.org (Jim Grubs) writes:
> > Right on. Was he trying to say that I don't have the right to listen
> > to E&M radiation that somebody has SENT RIGHT THROUGH MY LIVING ROOM?!
>
> Listen to the "radiation" all you want. It's the message content I'm
> concerned about. But enough of this. We have all stated our obviously
> irreconcilable views. You're snoops and I'm a fuddy duddy for not
> approving your bad manners.
Aren't the ill-mannered ones those who are beaming this energy through my
house?
The police want to send a secret message to one of their drug operatives
in Santa Cruz, California, so to get the message to their man, they fire
up the Civil Defense bullhorns and broadcast their secret message all over
the city.
Their man gets the message. Unfortunately so do many of the other people
who happen to be in Santa Cruz at the time. The police are concerned as
their message was not intended for the ears of the public, yet somehow
it ended up in the hands of private citizens. The police don't seek a
technological solution as that would cost them money. Instead, they
lobby the legislature to pass laws that would define "intercepting"
announcements made via bullhorns as "criminal eavesdropping."
In an attempt to prevent these "criminal eavesdroppers" from jeopardizing
police operations, the legislature passes a law that requires everyone
(save for the police, of course) to wear earmuffs.
Trey Garlough
Computation Center, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712
trey@emx.CC.UTEXAS.EDU (internet) (512-471-3241)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 89 08:15:34 MST
From: bobw@biocat.chem.usu.edu (Bob Wood)
Subject: INFO-HAMS Digest V89 #916
Keith, you may drop me from direct distribution. I now have a USENET feed
direct to this computer. Thanks. Bob, WA7MXZ
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 89 15:21:55 GMT
From: sun-barr!newstop!east!hienergy!jimv@apple.com (Jim Vienneau - CSD Program Manager)
Subject: Military aircraft callsigns...Eugene Balinski
Can we pleeeease take this discussion to somewhere else? Alt.flame perhaps?
This discussion is going nowhere fast and taking up lots of bandwidth doing
it!
Jim Vienneau - KC1OU
Sun Microsystems - Billerica, MA
sun!suneast!jimv
(508)671-0372
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 89 15:00:27 GMT
From: tellab5!jcj@uunet.uu.net (jcj)
Subject: Scanners?
I'm in the market for a hand-held digital scanner. I
recently saw an ad for a Cobra SR-10 for about $125 and
I was wondering if anyone had any experience with this one
or its brothers. Thanks. (I'm most interested in air/rail
freq's.)
--
att!tellab5!jcj
"It's a thought! It's just a thought!" ~Charlie Manson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 89 10:49:03 EST
From: bill gunshannon <702WFG%SCRVMSYS.BITNET@CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject: scanners and privacy (was Military callsigns)
>From: dube@cpdvax.csc.ti.com (DUBE TODD)
>Subject: military call signs.........etc.
>
> then we should get concerned about our use of cordless phones. Anyone
>can park
> in front of your home and receive/record all your personal conversation that
> you
>care to "dump" into the public domain and do whatever he/she pleases with it;
>possibly resulting in some embarrassment to you and your family. As someone
> mentioned, it's like overhearing a conversation in any public gathering.
>We can't have it both ways. Think about it.
> Regards,
> Dube Todd
Anyone who uses a cordless phone and thinks that nobody else can hear
it is a fool. I don't monitor anything but the ham bands (because I
don't really care about the rest), but I have frequently heard cordless
phones at the bottom of 6 meters while tuning around. I have on
occasion stopped long enough to hear where they were from. I have picked
up cordless phone transmissions from as far away as 8 miles over rather
mountainous terrain. What makes it even worse is I have compared the
sensitivity of my scanner and my 6 meter rig and the scanner was better.
I hardly think anyone needs to park in front of your house to listen.
Just for the sake of showing how little the public really knows about
the technology they use on a day to day basis, I once overheard the
beginning of a conversation between 2 family members that started with:
"Don't tell this to anybody......" While every scanner freak within a
8 mile radius listened in!!!!!
KB3YV
bill gunshannon
702WFG@SCRVMSYS.BITNET
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 89 15:40:38 GMT
From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!harris.cis.ksu.edu!mac@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Myron A. Calhoun)
Subject: The "right to receive"
In article <18285@bellcore.bellcore.com> karn@ka9q.bellcore.com (Phil Karn) writes:
>A law, like the ECPA, that prohibits the passive reception of radio signals
>is unenforceable outside a police state. Perhaps even in one; the Soviet
>Union and China have not been thoroughly successful in their attempts to
>stop their citizens from listening to western radio broadcasts.
A Hungarian electrical engineer was a graduate student of mine a few
years ago. As a bright young student in his native country, he changed
the local oscillator on a broadcast receiver to listen out of the
"approved" bands AND GOT CAUGHT AND WAS FINED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT!
So at least one police state is/was looking for such activity.
IMHO the reason I feel free to listen to anything that enters my home
is based on the old cliche "Your freedom ends where my nose begins."
The original meaning probably was something like "In this country you
have the right to do anything you want, but your right does not allow
you to hit me in the face." More current interpretations may include
"You do not have the right to blow your cigarette smoke in my face!"
And in the sense of My Humble Opinion I say that if someone voluntarily
and of his/her own freewill "gives" something to me and "delivers" it
to the inside of my home (which is even further than UPS delivers!),
then it is mine to do with as I please.
(Note that the words "voluntarily" and "of his/her own freewill" that
I used above differentiate between radio waves which come into my
house and an automobile that might accidentally crash into my house;
I do NOT think I have the right to take the hubcaps from such an
automobile (but I do expect to get recompense for the damage to my
house from the automobile's driver and/or his/her insurance company).
--Myron (the proud owner of a brand new PRO-2005!)
