NESSAholics.com
Other Topics => Completely Off-Topic => Topic started by: divasteph on August 31, 2004, 11:36:22 am
-
who has t-mobile?
i need someone to call me while i drive
and i have free mobile to mobile on t-mobile
-
lucky.
I have verizon that in network thing.
-
Need a driving buddy? I'll get on a greyhound and meet you in New Mexico. (and you think I'm kidding)
tylor
-
ha ha - no i need phone buddies ---
you can all call me after 9pm --- pacific time - 12am eastern - etc
tylor, let, and nicole have my number --- so um -- get it from them - because well - i am out - talk to you all in a few days!
xoxo
-
hmm... i think i have your number written down somewhere, you gave it to me in december, if thats the same number...
-
(http://www.mybiopro.com/productImages/BookCellPhoneHazard.jpg)
(http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/common/customer-reviews/stars-5-0.gif) Can you hear me now? April 21, 2002
Reviewer: Adam Jewell (Pittsburgh, PA USA)
Cell phones have become an integral part of American (and increasingly the world) society. They are ubiquitous in the business world and day-to-day life activities. The authors discuss in detail the risks associated with cell phones, particularly those of the digital variety. They tell the all to common tale of industry PR "spin" vs. public safety and common sense. While it may not be correct to state that cell phones cause brain cancer, the preliminary indications and not heart warming.
Thus far clinical studies have shown:
1) Cell phone radiation penetrates deep into the developing brains of children.
2) Cell phone radiation results in chromosomal damage to blood exposed to wireless phone radio waves. There is a link between chromosome damage and brain cancer.
3) Cell phone radiation breaks down the blood brain barrier. Think of the blood brain barrier as an immune system for the brain. As it breaks down, other environmental toxins more easily enter the brain and cause damage.
4) A number of studies showed a statistically significant correlation between brain cancer deaths and cell phone use.
5) Cell phone radiation can cause pacemakers to malfunction is they (pacemakers) are not properly insulated from cell phones that are within 6 inches of the pacemaker.
The above are based on elaborate human, animal, and laboratory experiments that examine the effects of cell phone radiation. The experiments in the book focus primarily on cell phone use - when the phone is near the head. If cell phone radiation is able to penetrate the human skull, the effects may be even more dramatic on soft tissue such as reproductive organs that may be continuously exposed to radiation by a phone carried in a pants pocket.
Based on the scientific evidence in the book you should avoid using a cell phone or being around one to be perfectly safe. Since that is not likely, the following precautions can be taken:
1) Despite the aggressive marketing practices of the industry towards children, keep cell phones out of the hands of your kids, they are particularly susceptible to the radiation generated by cell phones.
2) Use a hands free model and keep the phone away from your body.
3) If you put the phone up to your ear, point the antenna away from you.
4) If you have one of those cool little phones with a built in antenna, the whole phone is an antenna and you are getting a heavier dose of radiation. GET A HEADSET OR A DIFFERENT PHONE.
5) A cell phone has to pump out more radiation when the signal strength is low, try not to use the phone unless the signal strength is near 100%.
Initial studies show a clear link between cell phone radiation (especially associated with digital phones) and adverse health effects. In the next 10 to 20 years the effects will become apparent with the general public serving as the test subjects. Tread carefully on those wireless stocks over the long term, and take precautions today so you don't become a statistic. Many thanks to Dr. Carlo and Martin Schram for timely well written book packed with critical info for all wireless customers.
(http://www.sonymusic.com.au/au/images/myhomepage/myphoto/cadenus.jpg)
Peace
Aaron
-
haha, thanks aaron. If I don't die early from becoming 500 pounds from eating mcdonalds, I will most definitly die early from using my cell phone :lol:
-
Just as 'SuperSize Me' made McDonalds take a serious look at itself 8O and
make significant changes in their responsibily to public health as corporate
citizens feeding millions of Americans each day :wink: a Michael Moore Doco on
the subject of the Cell Phones and their adverse health effects would take
the best efforts of Motorola's PR Firm counter-measures to war game it 8)
(http://www.sonymusic.com.au/au/images/myhomepage/myphoto/cadenus.jpg) (http://www.electric-words.com/cell/abstracts/comments/roti-comments.html)
-
1) Cell phone radiation penetrates deep into the developing brains of children.
EM radiation at such levels has never been linked to cancer. The only studies that have linked EM radiation to higher cancer levels have been found to have flawed methodology.
2) Cell phone radiation results in chromosomal damage to blood exposed to wireless phone radio waves. There is a link between chromosome damage and brain cancer.
Red blood cells, in general, do not carry DNA.
3) Cell phone radiation breaks down the blood brain barrier. Think of the blood brain barrier as an immune system for the brain. As it breaks down, other environmental toxins more easily enter the brain and cause damage.
That means absolutely nothing. It's nonsense. WTF?!
4) A number of studies showed a statistically significant correlation between brain cancer deaths and cell phone use.
Cite one. Oh wait, they don't exist. Well, ones without flawed methodology.
5) Cell phone radiation can cause pacemakers to malfunction is they (pacemakers) are not properly insulated from cell phones that are within 6 inches of the pacemaker.
Nope. If a pacemaker were to malfunction because of cell phone use, I'd say the EEs who designed it really sucked. So far, nobody has been able to prove anything about cell phones causing sensitive medical equipment to malfunction. Many hospitals are evaluating their no cell phone policies and finding that the entire thing is an elaborate urban legend.
The above are based on elaborate human, animal, and laboratory experiments that examine the effects of cell phone radiation. The experiments in the book focus primarily on cell phone use - when the phone is near the head. If cell phone radiation is able to penetrate the human skull, the effects may be even more dramatic on soft tissue such as reproductive organs that may be continuously exposed to radiation by a phone carried in a pants pocket.
EM waves penetrate the body, among other things. If EM waves didn't penetrate things, you would have to have line of sight with the cell tower. This still doesn't say anything about the effects of said radiation.
2) Use a hands free model and keep the phone away from your body.
If you're worried about EM radiation pentrating the brain, using hands free sets is the worst thing you can do. The thing acts as an antenna and focuses EM radiation into your head.
Initial studies show a clear link between cell phone radiation (especially associated with digital phones) and adverse health effects.
Digital standards throw out much less EM radiation than the old analog ones. If EM radiation at these frequencies is harmful, analog phones should be the ones to worry about. Analog phones can put out up to 10 W, and generally put out about 3 W. GSM phones put out 2 W at max, and typically run at 600 mW.
Never mind that there is no clear link between these two things...
-
^ amen brother
-
*puts phone into air tight jar*
there :lol: that should do it
-
I'll try and call you soon Steph when i by a phone card. Haha remember when I called you and you were at Taco Bell or something.
That was a very cool time 8)
-
Will, the blood brain barrier is actually a part of neural anatomy. It's basically a system of astrocytes that keep particles out of the brain.
-
Will, the blood brain barrier is actually a part of neural anatomy. It's basically a system of astrocytes that keep particles out of the brain.
Trust her, she's a doctor.
-
I have a little badge that says "Trust Me I am A Scientist" *offers Trisha*
8)
-
I have a little badge that says "Trust Me I am A Scientist" *offers Trisha*
8)
*watches mad scientist movies*
*while munching popcorn, looks up at you*
*goes back to watching movie*
tylor
-
Speaking of cell phones, anyone have NEXTEL? I now have a NEXTEL issued from work. It has the whole direct connect thing but I don't know anyone (except everyone at work) who has it.
I still say Sprint rules, PCS to PCS. Especially when all your favorite people have it too. 8)
-
5) Cell phone radiation can cause pacemakers to malfunction is they (pacemakers) are not properly insulated from cell phones that are within 6 inches of the pacemaker.
Nope. If a pacemaker were to malfunction because of cell phone use, I'd say the EEs who designed it really sucked. So far, nobody has been able to prove anything about cell phones causing sensitive medical equipment to malfunction...
(http://www.mybiopro.com/productImages/BookCellPhoneHazard.jpg)
During the early years of the WTR program, we looked at solving the pace
-maker interference problem as not only an important acomplishment for
public health, but also the model for how the WTR program was supposed
to work.
Namely: Through our surveillance effort, we had identified a potential problem
of interference that could seriously affect patients who use cell phones.
We went to the responsible government authorities and notified them of the
problem. They asked us for help in the science and we obliged. The research
we oversaw was focused and served to identify the scope of the interference
problem and offered long- and short-term solutions. We had the government's
endorsement of our recommendations. The cell phone industry and the pace
-maker industry were both very much involved and cooperative by the end.
In effect, the problem was solved.
(http://www.sonymusic.com.au/au/images/myhomepage/myphoto/cadenus.jpg)
Peace
Aaron
-
After much thought, I am writing this letter to you, personally, to ask your
assistance in solving what I believe is an emerging and serious problem
concerning wireless phones. I write this letter in the interest of the more
than 80 million wireless phone users in the United States and the more than
200 million worldwide. But I also write this letter in the interest of your
industry, a critical part of our social and economic infrastructure.
Since 1993, I have headed the WTR surveillance and research program
funded by the wireless industry. The goal of WTR has always been to indentify
and solve any problems concerning consumers' health that could arise from
the use of these phones. This past February, at the annual convention of
the CTIA, I met with the full board of that organisation to brief them on some
surprising findings from our work. I do not recall if you were there personally,
but my understanding is that all segments of the indusrty were represented.
At that briefing, I explained that the well-conducted scientific studies that
WTR was overseeing indicated that the question of wireless phone safety
had become confused.
Specifically, I reported to you that:
the rate of death from brain cancer among handheld phone users was higher
than the rate of brain cancer deaths among those who used non-handheld
phones that were away from their head;
the risk of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumor of the auditory nerve that is
well in the range of the radiation coming from a phone's antenna, was 50%
higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or more;
moreover, that the relationship between the amount of cell phone use and
this tumor appeared to follow a dose-response curve;
the risk of neuro-epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than
doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone usres as
compared to people who did not use cell phones;
there appeared to be some correlation between brain tumors occurring on the
right side of the head and use of the phone on the right side of the head;
labratory studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone's antenna
to cause functional genetic damage were definately positive, and were
following a dose-response relationship.
I also indicated that while our overall study of brain cancer did not find a
correlation with cell phone use, the vast majority of the tumors that were
studied were well out of range of the radiation that one would expect from
a cell phone's antenna. Because of that distance, the finding of no effect
was questionable. Such misclassification of of radiation exposure would tend
to dilute any real effect that may have been present. In addition, I reported
to you that the genetic damage studies we conducted to look at the ability
of radiation from the phones to break DNA were negative, but that the
positive finding of functional DNA damage could be more important, perhaps
indicating a problem that is not dependant on DNA breakage, and that these
inconsistencies needed to be clarified. I reported that while non of these
finding alone were evidece of a definative health hazard from wireless phones,
the pattern of potential health effects evidenced by different types of studies,
from different labratories, and by different investigators raised serious questions.
Following my presentation, I heard by voive vote of those present, a pledge
to "do the right thing in following up these findings" and a commitment of the
necessary funds.
When I took on the responsibility of doing this wrk for the you, I pledged 5
years. I was asked to continue on through the end of a sixth year, and agreed.
My tenure is now completed. My presentation to you and the CTIA board in
February was not an effort to lengthen my tenure at WTR, nor to lengthen
the tenure of WTR itself. I was simply doing my job of letting you know what
we found and what needed to be done following from our findings. I made
this expressly clear during my presentation to you and in many subsequent
conversations with members of your industry and the media.
Today, I sit here extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps
have not been taken by the wireless industry to protect consumers during
this time of uncertainty about safety. The steps I am referring to specifically
followed from the WTR and have been recommended repeatedly in public
fora by me and other experts from around the world. As I prepare to move
away from the wireless phone issue and into a different public health direction,
I am concerned that the wireless industry is missing a valuable oppotunity
by dealing with these public health concerns through politics, creating illusions
that more research over the next several years helps consumers today,
and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety. The better
choice by the wirelesss industry would be to implement measured steps
aimed at true consumer protection.
Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored
the scientific findings suggesting potential health effects, have repeatedly and
falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including
children, and have created an illusion of responsible follow up by calling for
and supporting more research. The most important measures of consumer
protection are missing: complete and honest factual information to allow
informed judgement by consumers about assumption of risk; the direct
tracking and monitoring of what happens to consumers who use wireless
phones; and, the monitoring of changes in technology that could impact
health.
I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of
the industry to conscript the FCC, the FDA and The World Health Organization
with them in following a non-effectual course that will result in a regulatory
and consumer backlash.
As an industry, you will have to deal with the fallout from all of your choices,
good and bad, in the long term. But in the short term, I would like your help
in effectuating an important public health intervention today.
The question of wireless phone safety is unclear. Therefore, from a public
health perspective, it is critical for consumers to have the information they
need to make an informed judgement about how much of this unknown risk
they wish to assume in their use of wireless phones. Informing consumers
openly and honestly about what is known and not-known about health risks
is not liability laden - it is evidence that your industry is being responsible,
and doing all it can to assure safe use of its products. The current popular
backlash we are witnessing against the tobacco industry is derived in part
from the perceived dishonesty on the part of that industry in not being
forthright about health effects. I urge you not to repeat that mistake.
(http://www.sonymusic.com.au/au/images/myhomepage/myphoto/cadenus.jpg)
-
3) If you put the phone up to your ear, point the antenna away from you.
And just how would you talk on a phone if the antenna were pointed towards you??? :?
-
My cell phone is the devil.
-
My cell phone is from cingular...I'm switching to another carrier in March....Anyone know of a carrier with good signals? Cingular is horrible!
-
Verizon?
-
My cell phone is from cingular...I'm switching to another carrier in March....Anyone know of a carrier with good signals? Cingular is horrible!
i have cingular too, and it really sucks but it does a good enough job here in connecticut. my mom has verizon and really likes it, so maybe that would work? t-mobile also supposedly is really cheap and has good reception.
anyone have a cool ringtone? mine is the jackson five hahaha :-)
-
I have the actual songs from "Ordinary Day" and "Pretty Baby." 8)
-
My cell phone is from cingular...I'm switching to another carrier in March....Anyone know of a carrier with good signals? Cingular is horrible!
verizon is good especially if you get a tri-mode phone. gimme your # when you get it lol
-
My cell phone is from cingular...I'm switching to another carrier in March....Anyone know of a carrier with good signals? Cingular is horrible!
i have cingular too, and it really sucks but it does a good enough job here in connecticut. my mom has verizon and really likes it, so maybe that would work? t-mobile also supposedly is really cheap and has good reception.
anyone have a cool ringtone? mine is the jackson five hahaha :-)
I have ATM that I made myself from the mp3 and uploaded. I also have heaven by los lonely boys and don't know why.
-
anyone have a cool ringtone? mine is the jackson five hahaha :-)
I have various ringtones depending on who calls...
Ocean Avenue, Yellowcard
Sway & 1000 Miles, Vanessa Carlton
My Tourniquet, Evanescence
Lying from You, Linkin park
Fighting bg music from Sailor Moon
Scooby doo theme song
-
most cell phones have plans that average $40 a month, screw that, I dont talk that much to make it worth it.
I got one of the cell phones where you use pre-paid cards, no plan. Just pay for what you use. Its basically just for emergancies and such anyway.
Plus it gets good reception on AT&T Wireless network. So it works for me.
-
most cell phones have plans that average $40 a month, screw that, I dont talk that much to make it worth it.
I got one of the cell phones where you use pre-paid cards, no plan. Just pay for what you use. Its basically just for emergancies and such anyway.
Plus it gets good reception on AT&T Wireless network. So it works for me.
True dat. I am like you, but I had to get a phone because I got tired of using phone cards, and all of the people I talk to are long distance :oops:
-
I use my phone for home/work/on the go. So that way I don't have 3 diff numbers to remember.
-
I just got a new (to me) phone Wednesday afternoon. It's so cool! It's a Motorola v.60i (T) clamshell phone.
No, it's not colour. No, it's not GSM. No, it doesn't have a web browser. No, it doesn't have polyphonic or MP3 ringtones. And no, it can't go in the kitchen and make me a sandwich, either. (On that point, I do envy some of you people! :razz:
But here's what it can do: It can store up to 500 numbers and emails (I currently have 95 stored), has Voice Dial, has a datebook, does SMS text messaging, can play customized ringtones, has programmable menu shortcuts, has a full-function calculator, and three games (Blackjack, Falling Numbers (my favourite), and Video Poker), and can record up to two minutes of Voice Notes.
Very much like the v.120 i used to have, but it seems to get a better signal, it's smaller (when closed), and has easier-to-push buttons, an extendable antenna, and a blue screen instead of green.
I found it on eBay and only paid $40 (about $60 NZ, Can, Aus; £30 UK), including shipping. It belonged to a man in Alabama who had a lot of medical centre numbers programmed into it. I don't know if he was a doctor or what, but it had over 200 hours on it when I got it. Even still, it's in really good shape for the use it's had.
I love it, and I can't stop playing Falling Numbers on it! I think it would be cool if they came out with a Falling Letters, too, where you push the number that has the letter on it, e.g. "6" for either M, N, or O. But anyway, that's my new great phone.
Here's a pic on the Internet of an almost identical phone: (http://www.phonecycle.com/phones/Images/motorolav60il.jpg)
By the way, my service is with AT&T (now part of Cingular (which is no use to me)), which has been improving lately. I used to hate them, tho, and that's part of why I needed a new phone. (I tore my old one up getting mad at it. :x )
-
my phone just died...it fell in water.. end of a shitty day... lol.
Its old though, like... a nokia 5120. 8O
Whats a good, cheap model?
-
depends on what you want... I think that the nokia 3200, which I have (and I believe nerea also mentioned she has) is awesome. It has a camera, voice recorder, plus lots of other weird cool stuff, like a flashlight. And I don't mean the screen lights up real bright, there is an actual flashlight built in which turns on when you press a button. And I only got it because it was the cheapest camera phone I saw, because thats what I wanted.
-
I really want the nokia 3200!
Im stuck with the 3310 8O
-
my phone is an extention of me ...
I don't know what i'd do without it.
I has an organiser and a calender a to do list and everything.
I love my phone.
I swear I could be genetically modified to incl. it as a part of my hand because it's just always there!!!
A window to the world.
I have a 7210, but soon will get the upgrade flip 7000 series ...
7270 I think ...
don't know what i'd do with my ohone!!
-
don't know what i'd do with my ohone!!
Eh?
It's hard to separate me from my phone, too. :)
-
NZ cinemas may jam mobile phones
14:00 AEST Sat Apr 30 2005
New Zealand cinema owners may use mobile phone jamming technology to stop mid-movie calls, text messaging - and mobile phone rage among patrons.
The national Motion Pictures Exhibitors Association said it's studying the legality of using mobile phone jammers because of the disruption from the phones during movie screenings.
Association spokesman Duncan Mackenzie said the jammers could be used in the 200-member group's cinemas round the country.
Mobile phones in cinemas were a "huge disruption" to moviegoers, Mackenzie said.
"Even texting creates so much light and it's unfair to expect that people should have to put up with it," he said.
The worst offenders he saw were middle aged women who answered their phones in cinemas and continued conversations, getting aggravated if asked to turn their mobile phones off or leave, he said.
Mackenzie said "mobile phone rage" between patrons sometimes turned nasty.
He had to defuse one incident when a man threatened to hit two foreign students sitting on opposite sides of the cinema who were texting each other.
While many felt teenagers were the worst offenders, Mackenzie said they were the most cooperative about turning phones off.
If jammers were introduced, people on call for emergencies could leave their mobile phones or pagers at the reception desk, he said.
(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/img/logo_aap.jpg)
-
NZ cinemas may jam mobile phones
14:00 AEST Sat Apr 30 2005
New Zealand cinema owners may use mobile phone jamming technology to stop mid-movie calls, text messaging - and mobile phone rage among patrons.
The national Motion Pictures Exhibitors Association said it's studying the legality of using mobile phone jammers because of the disruption from the phones during movie screenings.
Association spokesman Duncan Mackenzie said the jammers could be used in the 200-member group's cinemas round the country.
Mobile phones in cinemas were a "huge disruption" to moviegoers, Mackenzie said.
"Even texting creates so much light and it's unfair to expect that people should have to put up with it," he said.
The worst offenders he saw were middle aged women who answered their phones in cinemas and continued conversations, getting aggravated if asked to turn their mobile phones off or leave, he said.
Mackenzie said "mobile phone rage" between patrons sometimes turned nasty.
He had to defuse one incident when a man threatened to hit two foreign students sitting on opposite sides of the cinema who were texting each other.
While many felt teenagers were the worst offenders, Mackenzie said they were the most cooperative about turning phones off.
If jammers were introduced, people on call for emergencies could leave their mobile phones or pagers at the reception desk, he said.
(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/img/logo_aap.jpg)
I agree 100% with all that! It gets soooo annoying here when people don't have any consideration for people watching the movie and they'll just sit there through most of the movie and have a full conversation!!! :evil:
-
(http://worldtrip.iwebland.com/GIFs/OZ/CD1228102.jpg)
The hopping kangaroo phone call is here
11:55 AEST Thu May 26 2005
Mobile phones could soon start ringing in the most isolated areas of outback Australia, thanks to a new cutting-edge technology in which calls will hop like a kangaroo.
Scientists in Central Australia's Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) are developing the system, based on a phone network which does not require cost-prohibitive fixed infrastructure throughout the vast outback.
CRC chief executive officer Mark Stafford-Smith said the network would act like a kangaroo - with calls hopping from one mobile handset to another until they reach the intended recipient.
Dr Stafford-Smith said the "roo-call" project would revolutionise communication and life in Australia's desert regions.
"It's a fresh example of Australian inventiveness in overcoming the challenges of distance and isolated living, in the tradition of the School of the Air and the Royal Flying Doctor Service," Dr Stafford-Smith said in a statement.
"Around 48 per cent of remote communities in inland Australia still don't have a basic phone service - and this way we can provide them with one."
The University of Wollongong's Mehran Abolhasan said the multi-hop, ad-hoc networks used a new cutting-edge technology.
Each mobile phone unit would serve as a carrier in an "ever-moving" network, with only a few fixed transmission points.
"Multi-hop ad-hoc networks are mainly made up of end-user nodes, or mobile handsets," Dr Abolhasan said.
"These form a cooperative network that routes and transports traffic between participating nodes wherever they are, within range.
"As the range of each node is limited, it may take several hops, from one node to another, for a call to reach its intended destination or to connect to the national communication network.
"Clever software manages the calls through this dynamic network and picks the best route - or set of hops - without phone users even being aware of it.
"All they have to do is leave their mobile handsets switched on."
Dr Abolhasan said scientists were currently designing the network, which will be trialled from July.
If the trial is successful, the system is expected to take a number of years to establish.
(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/img/logo_aap.jpg)
-
Brilliant! :D
-
NZ cinemas may jam mobile phones
14:00 AEST Sat Apr 30 2005
New Zealand cinema owners may use mobile phone jamming technology to stop mid-movie calls, text messaging - and mobile phone rage among patrons.
The national Motion Pictures Exhibitors Association said it's studying the legality of using mobile phone jammers because of the disruption from the phones during movie screenings.
Association spokesman Duncan Mackenzie said the jammers could be used in the 200-member group's cinemas round the country.
Mobile phones in cinemas were a "huge disruption" to moviegoers, Mackenzie said.
"Even texting creates so much light and it's unfair to expect that people should have to put up with it," he said.
The worst offenders he saw were middle aged women who answered their phones in cinemas and continued conversations, getting aggravated if asked to turn their mobile phones off or leave, he said.
Mackenzie said "mobile phone rage" between patrons sometimes turned nasty.
He had to defuse one incident when a man threatened to hit two foreign students sitting on opposite sides of the cinema who were texting each other.
While many felt teenagers were the worst offenders, Mackenzie said they were the most cooperative about turning phones off.
If jammers were introduced, people on call for emergencies could leave their mobile phones or pagers at the reception desk, he said.
(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/img/logo_aap.jpg)
It's just as legal for me to create a device that would introduce stray RF energy into their sound system and screw up everything as it is for them to jam cell phones by transmitting harmful interference. That is to say, it's not legal at all in any country with a spectrum regulation authority. It's vigilantism.
The problem is a social one. Kick people out who use cells. They'll get the picture.
-
Recently my Kyocera Rave died a slow and painful death. I loved that phone... it had a flashlight on it too.....
last June, I dropped it into a puddle... after that, the backlight wouldn't stay off so I had to select no backlight and therefore, couldn't see anything in the dark... then in November I dropped it on the floor and cracked the faceplate and the number pad, and then it started turning itself off right in the middle of calls... so I had to get a new one. It's the newest Nokia I think.... not a flip phone or anything... And I miss my old one. I couldn't replace it because my Alltel store wasn't selling them anymore, and the only new phone I could get for cheaper or as cheap as the replacement price was the new one.
-
I've been thinking about upgrading my 3315 :? but I'll also be up for a new Bio
Pro Harmonisation chip... :idea: Maybe when I go on my next interstate holiday 8)
-
I'm gonna drag this thread back up to announce what AT&T/Cingular is doing for me. :D As many of you know, Cingular bought out AT&T Wireless several months ago, and now finally the process of phasing out AT&T's TDMA technology is in full swing (notwithstanding the fact that Cingular's GSM coverage isn't completely rolled out yet). And here am I with a phone that badly needs to be replaced and 7 months left in the contract. What? You no longer make TDMA phones? $180? (And that's for the cheapest Nokia of which they still have a few lying around.)
Of course, I was given the option of upgrading to a Cingular GSM phone. Great! But one problem: I'm not going to be too specific, but on the map below, I live in the fourth-largest white area in the state of Tennessee.
(http://onlinestore2.cingular.com/images/Maps/Southeast/Tennessee/home_map_tn_4_04.gif)
Simply put, that's not gonna work. (And it didn't. They gave me 30 days to try it risk-free, and I only needed an hour and a half before I was on my way back with my phone for a refund.)
Two months go by, and heavy use finally got the best of this old AT&T phone, almost to the point to being unusable. (The battery won't even charge unless I put it in another phone, and three or four of the buttons don't work.) That's when I got an idea in my head and called 611. I went 'round and 'round with some woman for a half-hour before asking for her supervisor, who called me at home to discuss the situation for well over an hour before taking it to his supervisors.
He called me back two days later to give me the results of his meeting. While he could give me a steal on a new AT&T phone, he could make no promises of the service I would receive, especially as the old TDMA technology is being phased out and not being repaired as it slowly fails across the country. The other option was that I could cancel my contract at the end of this billing month without penalty and take my business to another provider.
I had to contain my excitement over the phone, but I opted for cancellation, to which the senior customer rep expressed his regrets but thanked me for doing business with AT&T and Cingular. Since then, I have been shopping around and though I found the best deal with Alltel, they could not provide me a local phone number, so I'm going with the more expensive Verizon because of their equipment, their dedication to their reliable CDMA network (arguably a superior technology to GSM), and previous experience I have had with them.
I've picked out a phone, the Motorola v.65p (I've always been a Motorola person) and a plan (which includes unlimited Nights & Weekends, Mobile-to-Mobile, and Push-to-Talk (within the VzW network)), and on August 3, 2005, it'll be out with the old and in with the new! :D
(http://www.inside-handy.de/img/handies/390_g.jpg)(http://www.mountainwireless.com/image/ac_no_roam3.jpg)
-
I have a little badge that says "Trust Me I am A Scientist" *offers Trisha*
8)
LMAO.
I don't get nearly enough calls to worry about cancer from my phone.
:D
-
I have a little badge that says "Trust Me I am A Scientist" *offers Trisha*
8)
LMAO.
I don't get nearly enough calls to worry about cancer from my phone.
:D
My favorite part in my new phone's manual is in the back in the FDA Consumer information:
Do hands-free kits for wireless phones reduce
risks from exposure to RF emissions?
Since there are no known risks from exposure to RF emissions from
wireless phones, there is no reason to believe that hands-free kits reduce
risks.
Is there just no such thing as common sense anymore? :?
-
I have a little badge that says "Trust Me I am A Scientist" *offers Trisha*
8)
LMAO.
I don't get nearly enough calls to worry about cancer from my phone.
:D
My favorite part in my new phone's manual is in the back in the FDA Consumer information:
Do hands-free kits for wireless phones reduce
risks from exposure to RF emissions?
Since there are no known risks from exposure to RF emissions from
wireless phones, there is no reason to believe that hands-free kits reduce
risks.
Is there just no such thing as common sense anymore? :?
LMAO obviously not.
Just goes to show all the idiots who are buying cell phones.
*shakes head*
-
An Australian gap-year student was cleared by a jury yesterday of causing chaos at Stansted airport with a hoax bomb scare, but she left court with a £15,000 bill for legal costs.
Angela Sceats, 19, from Sydney, was accused of trying to a delay a flight to Ireland which she was in danger of missing by getting a friend to ring 999 and say that there was a bomb on the plane.
The jury at Chelmsford crown court took only half an hour to accept her explanation that her request was part of a series of "stupid joke messages" texted to Angela Foster, a fellow "gapper", because she was feeling bored on the train to the airport.
"It was an extremely bad joke made in bad taste, but it was never supposed to go farther than us two," said Ms Sceats, who was working as a waitress in London at the time of the incident in November. She spent 10 days on remand in Holloway jail after three flights to Dublin were delayed and security staff considered closing Stansted.
Ms Sceats was charged with intentionally making a false communication with the deliberate aim of delaying the Ryanair flight. But she told the court: "I never even knew that Angela took the text seriously until I got to the airport and I was on the phone to her and even then I didn't really believe that she had called the police.
"She was sending me joke texts and this text was sent to her as a joke. I don't understand how she could have believed that this was a serious text message. Where did she think I got this information?"
Ms Sceats' message - "Call the police and say there is a bomb on board" - was shown to the jury, but Ms Foster, who has gone back to Australia, did not return to give evidence. The jury was told that she had immediately rung 999 from her flat in Islington, north London, after getting the text.
John Kelsey-Fry QC, for Ms Sceats, told the court after the verdict that it would be "manifestly unfair" if she had to pay her legal costs after being cleared. But the judge, Recorder Rex Bryan, disagreed on the grounds that the joke had caused disruption and fear. He said: "Had Ms Sceats been convicted she would have gone straight to prison. This sort of offence is strongly disapproved of by the public. To send a text message saying there is a bomb on an aircraft is to invite prosecution.
"The result was a waste of public resources and inconvenience, not to say fear, at Stansted airport. In this case the public should not be ordered to pay these costs."
Ms Sceats has the right of appeal, but she said after the hearing: "I just want to put this behind me. I've maintained from the moment of my arrest that this incident was an unfortunate misunderstanding. I would never intentionally cause a security alert."
Martin Wainwright
Thursday August 4, 2005
(http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/site_furniture/2001/01/03/uknews128.gif)
-
An Australian gap-year student was cleared by a jury yesterday of causing chaos at Stansted airport with a hoax bomb scare, but she left court with a £15,000 bill for legal costs.
Angela Sceats, 19, from Sydney, was accused of trying to a delay a flight to Ireland which she was in danger of missing by getting a friend to ring 999 and say that there was a bomb on the plane.
The jury at Chelmsford crown court took only half an hour to accept her explanation that her request was part of a series of "stupid joke messages" texted to Angela Foster, a fellow "gapper", because she was feeling bored on the train to the airport.
"It was an extremely bad joke made in bad taste, but it was never supposed to go farther than us two," said Ms Sceats, who was working as a waitress in London at the time of the incident in November. She spent 10 days on remand in Holloway jail after three flights to Dublin were delayed and security staff considered closing Stansted.
Ms Sceats was charged with intentionally making a false communication with the deliberate aim of delaying the Ryanair flight. But she told the court: "I never even knew that Angela took the text seriously until I got to the airport and I was on the phone to her and even then I didn't really believe that she had called the police.
"She was sending me joke texts and this text was sent to her as a joke. I don't understand how she could have believed that this was a serious text message. Where did she think I got this information?"
Ms Sceats' message - "Call the police and say there is a bomb on board" - was shown to the jury, but Ms Foster, who has gone back to Australia, did not return to give evidence. The jury was told that she had immediately rung 999 from her flat in Islington, north London, after getting the text.
John Kelsey-Fry QC, for Ms Sceats, told the court after the verdict that it would be "manifestly unfair" if she had to pay her legal costs after being cleared. But the judge, Recorder Rex Bryan, disagreed on the grounds that the joke had caused disruption and fear. He said: "Had Ms Sceats been convicted she would have gone straight to prison. This sort of offence is strongly disapproved of by the public. To send a text message saying there is a bomb on an aircraft is to invite prosecution.
"The result was a waste of public resources and inconvenience, not to say fear, at Stansted airport. In this case the public should not be ordered to pay these costs."
Ms Sceats has the right of appeal, but she said after the hearing: "I just want to put this behind me. I've maintained from the moment of my arrest that this incident was an unfortunate misunderstanding. I would never intentionally cause a security alert."
Martin Wainwright
Thursday August 4, 2005
(http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/site_furniture/2001/01/03/uknews128.gif)
Can't say I pity her.
I mean,
They have signs EVERYFECKINGWHERE saying not to joke about such matters,
And even still you just SHOULDN'T
Because behind every joke there IS some truth.
Not saying she'd actually go do it or anything,
But if you can joke and laugh about a serious subject like that,
Then it means you're okeay and comfortable with it.
And that's when things start to get dangerous.
=\
Then again...
15,000 pounds??
That's like... 22,500$!!!!
Eeep.
I wouldn't wanna pay that.
Bet she never jokes about shyt like that ever again...
-
Farmers' mobiles can open gates remotely
07:20 AEST Thu Aug 25 2005
Australian farmers could soon be using their mobile phone or the internet to open the farm gate from anywhere in the world.
Technology developed at the University of New England in NSW will enable farmers to remotely control and monitor livestock movement by using their mobile phone or the internet.
It will also eventually allow them to monitor and control the farm gate and water trough levels.
Currently, the system has been developed to allow in-built alarm systems in the farm gate and water trough to send an automatic mobile phone text message if an unannounced visitor opens the gate or the water levels fall too low.
The program, developed by the Institute of Rural Futures (IRF) in conjunction with Telstra, may be expanded in the future to include remote-controlled weighing devices for individual animals.
IRF spokesman Brendan Doyle said farmers would save time and money under the system, which is on trial at a farm near Walcha, in northern NSW.
"Farmers can use the system for security surveillance as well as for stock monitoring," Mr Doyle said.
"It will be particularly useful for farmers working several properties at once, and for those who also have a job in town.
"It will save them travel time, as well as fuel costs and other expenses."
He said the internet made it possible for the technology to be controlled from virtually anywhere in the world.
In Australia, the system could also be controlled through Telstra's CDMA mobile phone network.
Mr Doyle said the system differed from other technology available because it was not based on the radio network.
He said it was expected that the technology would be available to buy within 12 months.
(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/img/logo_aap.jpg)