Anybody installed this yet?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
50 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
On 8/23/2013 11:12 AM, jetjock wrote:

> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>> Daniel wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>>
>>>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer somewhere
>>>>> along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a browser
>>>>> option?
>>>>>
>>>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate highway.
>>>> Way over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that is
>>>> busily photographing every license plate of every car that passes by.
>>>> Is there any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>>>
>>> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car that
>>> could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to measure car
>>> speeds.
>>>
>>
>> Sure! I've had one for years, though I don't use it much anymore. The
>> older I get, the slower I go...  now that I've become a
>> septuagenarian. :-)
>>
>>
>>> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>>> but ....!!
>>>
>>
>> Oh, absolutely, it saved me lots of money and points over the years.
>> Lots!
>>
>> But there is no *camera* detector of which I am aware.
>>
>>
>>
> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.
I think he means the red light cameras.  I don't know how the determine
who is moving, and when, but would bet on lasers.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Beauregard T. Shagnasty
In reply to this post by jetjock
jetjock wrote:

> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>Daniel wrote:
>>>Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>>>Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer
>>>>>somewhere along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a
>>>>>browser option?
>>>>
>>>>An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate highway.
>>>>Way over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that
>>>>is busily photographing every license plate of every car that passes
>>>>by. Is there any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>>
>>>I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car
>>>that could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to
>>>measure car speeds.
>>
>>Sure! I've had one for years, though I don't use it much anymore. The
>>older I get, the slower I go...  now that I've become a septuagenarian.
>>:-)
>>  
>>>Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>>>but ....!!
>>>
>>Oh, absolutely, it saved me lots of money and points over the years.
>>Lots!
>>
>>But there is no *camera* detector of which I am aware.
>
> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.

Keeping with the nature of this thread, the cameras I was talking about
are the ones that monitor your whereabouts and your personal data .. just
like the NSA sniffing. These cameras don't use radar/laser but instead
photograph your license plate and instantly know who owns the car and
where you are.

We have them here in New York State and many LEOs have their cars so
equipped. There's a screen on their dashboard that instantly flashes up a
warning when they detect cars with late/overdue registration, stolen, etc.
There is no way to warn you that one is coming.

The speed cameras don't necessarily need radar/laser. They can measure how
far and fast you've traveled between two points and calculate your speed.
In England, there are series of cameras that measure your (license) over a
long stretch of highway and calculate your *average* speed.

--
   -bts
   -This space for rent, but the price is high
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

The Real Bev
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 08/23/2013 04:23 AM, Daniel wrote:

> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>
>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer somewhere
>>> along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a browser option?
>>
>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate highway. Way
>> over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that is busily
>> photographing every license plate of every car that passes by. Is there
>> any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>
> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car that
> could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to measure car
> speeds.
>
> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
> but ....!!

A friend who frequently makes 300-mile freeway trips swears by his.
Don't know the brand, but if it's important I can find out.  Long ago
(198x) a different friend could tell me what kind of radar signal was
being generated by the sound of the beeps and the appearance of the
lights.

--
Cheers, Bev
-----------------------------------------
There's something wrong with my keyboard.
Whenever I type x I get x.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
On 8/23/2013 12:05 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> jetjock wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Daniel wrote:
>>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer
>>>>>> somewhere along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a
>>>>>> browser option?
>>>>>
>>>>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate highway.
>>>>> Way over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that
>>>>> is busily photographing every license plate of every car that passes
>>>>> by. Is there any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>>>
>>>> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car
>>>> that could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to
>>>> measure car speeds.
>>>
>>> Sure! I've had one for years, though I don't use it much anymore. The
>>> older I get, the slower I go...  now that I've become a septuagenarian.
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>>>> but ....!!
>>>>
>>> Oh, absolutely, it saved me lots of money and points over the years.
>>> Lots!
>>>
>>> But there is no *camera* detector of which I am aware.
>>
>> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
>> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
>> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.
>
> Keeping with the nature of this thread, the cameras I was talking about
> are the ones that monitor your whereabouts and your personal data .. just
> like the NSA sniffing. These cameras don't use radar/laser but instead
> photograph your license plate and instantly know who owns the car and
> where you are.
>
> We have them here in New York State and many LEOs have their cars so
> equipped. There's a screen on their dashboard that instantly flashes up a
> warning when they detect cars with late/overdue registration, stolen, etc.
> There is no way to warn you that one is coming.
>
> The speed cameras don't necessarily need radar/laser. They can measure how
> far and fast you've traveled between two points and calculate your speed.
> In England, there are series of cameras that measure your (license) over a
> long stretch of highway and calculate your *average* speed.
>
Locally, the license plate camera are used in place of toll plazas.  Use
the toll road, and you get mailed a bill.  To save trouble, the local
ones only send a bill if you use a toll road more than once a year.
This way people passing through aren't asked to pay.


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

J. P. Gilliver (John)
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
In message <[hidden email]>, Ron Hunter
<[hidden email]> writes:
>On 8/23/2013 6:23 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>
>>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer somewhere
>>>> along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a browser option?

[No (-:]

>>>
>>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate highway.
>>> Way
>>> over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that is
>>> busily
>>> photographing every license plate of every car that passes by. Is there
>>> any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>
>> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car that
>> could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to measure car
>> speeds.

Those worked by detecting the active signals sent out by the police
"guns"; those work by sending out a signal that bounced off your car,
and when the bounced signal was received back at the gun, its difference
in frequency would tell them the speed of what it bounced off. Such
detectors are (or were - I don't know) illegal to use _for that purpose_
in the UK, I think. The type that work by entirely passive means -
usually, two ANPR cameras a set distance apart and connected - can't be
detected in this way.
>>
>> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>> but ....!!
>>
>If one habitually speeds, then it might, assuming that he got a warning
>before the police got a reading, and slowed down.
>
If some film - I think it was Cannonball Run with Burt Reynolds - can be
believed, yes. (Cop and young apprentice knew they were coming, and were
setting up on a bridge - young apprentice turns on radar gun ready,
before cop can say "no!" - but it's too late, BR and friend detected it,
and by the time they got to the bridge, were travelling at exactly 55
...) Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the detector
in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.

(Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for underspeeding
...)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

...Every morning is the dawn of a new error...
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

J. P. Gilliver (John)
In reply to this post by David E. Ross-3
In message <[hidden email]>, David E. Ross
<[hidden email]> writes:
[]
>By the way, worldtruth.tv is a domain registered in the island nation of
>Tuvalu through a registration proxy that hides the actual owner.
[]
And a nice little earner that has been for Tuvalu! The registration, I
mean, not the hiding (I don't know if the hiding applies to all who use
a .tv domain). Can't speak for worldtruth, but most .tv domains I come
across are just television channels (or similar) who have registered
them for the obvious reason.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

...Every morning is the dawn of a new error...
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> jetjock wrote:

<Snip>

>> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
>> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
>> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.
>
> Keeping with the nature of this thread, the cameras I was talking about
> are the ones that monitor your whereabouts and your personal data .. just
> like the NSA sniffing. These cameras don't use radar/laser but instead
> photograph your license plate and instantly know who owns the car and
> where you are.
>
> We have them here in New York State and many LEOs have their cars so
> equipped. There's a screen on their dashboard that instantly flashes up a
> warning when they detect cars with late/overdue registration, stolen, etc.
> There is no way to warn you that one is coming.
>
> The speed cameras don't necessarily need radar/laser. They can measure how
> far and fast you've traveled between two points and calculate your speed.
> In England, there are series of cameras that measure your (license) over a
> long stretch of highway and calculate your *average* speed.

We have these sort of cameras on our major highways, supposedly to keep
a check on our long haul truckies, to ensure they are taking their
required rest breaks.

I suppose as technology improves, car drivers will/are also be/being
checked.

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130418192405

or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.20 Build identifier: 20130709211044
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

<Snip>

Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the detector
> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>
> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for underspeeding ...)

As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130418192405

or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.20 Build identifier: 20130709211044
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

J. P. Gilliver (John)
In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
<[hidden email]> writes:

>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
><Snip>
>
>Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the detector
>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>
>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for underspeeding ...)
>
>As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>
That's what I said (-:!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Gravity is a myth; the Earth sucks.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Daniel-257
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
> <[hidden email]> writes:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the detector
>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>
>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>> underspeeding ...)
>>
>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>
> That's what I said (-:!

The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
car is not being detected by Police, yet!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130418192405

or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.20 Build identifier: 20130709211044
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 8/24/2013 6:28 AM, Daniel wrote:

> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> jetjock wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>>> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
>>> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
>>> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.
>>
>> Keeping with the nature of this thread, the cameras I was talking about
>> are the ones that monitor your whereabouts and your personal data .. just
>> like the NSA sniffing. These cameras don't use radar/laser but instead
>> photograph your license plate and instantly know who owns the car and
>> where you are.
>>
>> We have them here in New York State and many LEOs have their cars so
>> equipped. There's a screen on their dashboard that instantly flashes up a
>> warning when they detect cars with late/overdue registration, stolen,
>> etc.
>> There is no way to warn you that one is coming.
>>
>> The speed cameras don't necessarily need radar/laser. They can measure
>> how
>> far and fast you've traveled between two points and calculate your speed.
>> In England, there are series of cameras that measure your (license)
>> over a
>> long stretch of highway and calculate your *average* speed.
>
> We have these sort of cameras on our major highways, supposedly to keep
> a check on our long haul truckies, to ensure they are taking their
> required rest breaks.
>
> I suppose as technology improves, car drivers will/are also be/being
> checked.
>
Within cities, there are dozens, even hundreds of traffic cameras.  The
resolution you see on the cameras online is not ever close to what the
dept. transportation guys get.  They watch intersections, overpasses,
and trouble spots for accidents to that they can respond quickly.  Who
is to say what other use they may make, now or in the future, of this
information.  Local police have cameras that snap images of license
plates, and report the time, and position (GPS), for each plate scanned,
even if they don't come back stolen, or wanted.  Some have rules about
how long the data can be kept, some don't.
Basically, if you are out of your house, you don't have any presumption
of privacy any more.  The UK already routinely scans faces on the street
looking for wanted people using facial recognition systems.
Many police helicopters are equipped with FLIR, and light amplification
systems that can tell how many people are in your house, where they are,
and how large they are.
Scary, isn't it?

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

J. P. Gilliver (John)
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
<[hidden email]> writes:

>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
>> <[hidden email]> writes:
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the detector
>>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>>
>>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>>> underspeeding ...)
>>>
>>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>>
>> That's what I said (-:!
>
>The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
>detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
>further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
>car is not being detected by Police, yet!!
>
OK, yes, what I wrote could well be read that way, especially as you
snipped my bit about the film Cannonball Run (I think it was).

Basically, the detector in the car only has to detect a signal that is
actually beamed at it, whereas the one in the gun has to detect one that
has been reflected back (and from something not designed to _be_ a
reflector). As such, the car one can detect from a lot further back,
even if they're using similar detectors (as they may well be).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

the best thing to do in your garden at this time of year is to just sit in it
and enjoy it - Monty Don, July 2013
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 8/24/2013 9:00 AM, Daniel wrote:

> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
>> <[hidden email]> writes:
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the
>>>> detector
>>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>>
>>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>>> underspeeding ...)
>>>
>>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>>
>> That's what I said (-:!
>
> The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
> detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
> further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
> car is not being detected by Police, yet!!
>
It is much simpler, and more effective, to just drive the speed limit....

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
> <[hidden email]> writes:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
>>> <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <Snip>
>>>>
>>>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the
>>>>> detector
>>>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>>>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>>>> underspeeding ...)
>>>>
>>>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>>>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>>>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>>>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>>>
>>> That's what I said (-:!
>>
>> The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
>> detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
>> further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
>> car is not being detected by Police, yet!!
>>
> OK, yes, what I wrote could well be read that way, especially as you
> snipped my bit about the film Cannonball Run (I think it was).
>
> Basically, the detector in the car only has to detect a signal that is
> actually beamed at it, whereas the one in the gun has to detect one that
> has been reflected back (and from something not designed to _be_ a
> reflector). As such, the car one can detect from a lot further back,
> even if they're using similar detectors (as they may well be).

Good to see we are in agreement, then, John! :-)

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130418192405

or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.20 Build identifier: 20130709211044
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:

> On 8/24/2013 9:00 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
>>> <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <Snip>
>>>>
>>>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the
>>>>> detector
>>>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the distance
>>>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>>>> underspeeding ...)
>>>>
>>>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>>>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>>>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>>>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>>>
>>> That's what I said (-:!
>>
>> The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
>> detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
>> further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
>> car is not being detected by Police, yet!!
>>
> It is much simpler, and more effective, to just drive the speed limit....

Gotta get your buzzes somehow, Ron! ;-)

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130418192405

or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.20 Build identifier: 20130709211044
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Anybody installed this yet?

jetjock
In reply to this post by The Real Bev
The Real Bev wrote:

> On 08/23/2013 04:23 AM, Daniel wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>
>>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer somewhere
>>>> along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a browser
>>>> option?
>>>
>>>
>>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate
>>> highway. Way
>>> over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that is
>>> busily
>>> photographing every license plate of every car that passes by. Is there
>>> any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>
>>
>> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car that
>> could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to measure car
>> speeds.
>>
>> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>> but ....!!
>
>
> A friend who frequently makes 300-mile freeway trips swears by his.
> Don't know the brand, but if it's important I can find out.  Long ago
> (198x) a different friend could tell me what kind of radar signal was
> being generated by the sound of the beeps and the appearance of the
> lights.
>
My old Escort detectors were like that. Now the newer versions (Passport
by Escort) actually have LEDs that say "X-band", "K-band, "Laser" etc.
No longer any doubt. X-band is practically obsolete, so the cops have
taken their old units and placed them on overpasses and other structures
to fool speeders with detectors into slowing down! Works for stragers
passing through, but the locals get very familiar with their locations.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
pop
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Anybody installed this yet?

pop
jetjock said the following on 8/24/2013 10:20 AM:
> The Real Bev wrote:
>

>> A friend who frequently makes 300-mile freeway trips swears by his.
>> Don't know the brand, but if it's important I can find out.  Long ago
>> (198x) a different friend could tell me what kind of radar signal was
>> being generated by the sound of the beeps and the appearance of the
>> lights.
>>
> My old Escort detectors were like that. Now the newer versions (Passport
> by Escort) actually have LEDs that say "X-band", "K-band, "Laser" etc.
> No longer any doubt. X-band is practically obsolete, so the cops have
> taken their old units and placed them on overpasses and other structures
> to fool speeders with detectors into slowing down! Works for stragers
> passing through, but the locals get very familiar with their locations.

A "Laser" warning is useless - it only can detect it when it is pointed
at you - by then, it's too late... they've already got your speed!

pop->Mark
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Mr. Ed
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 8/24/2013 7:28 AM Daniel submitted the following:

> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> jetjock wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>>> As I understant the technology, the cameras use radar (or laser) to
>>> measure speeds which your (& my) radar detector would pick up. The
>>> camera is only triggered if one is speeding.
>>
>> Keeping with the nature of this thread, the cameras I was talking about
>> are the ones that monitor your whereabouts and your personal data .. just
>> like the NSA sniffing. These cameras don't use radar/laser but instead
>> photograph your license plate and instantly know who owns the car and
>> where you are.
>>
>> We have them here in New York State and many LEOs have their cars so
>> equipped. There's a screen on their dashboard that instantly flashes up a
>> warning when they detect cars with late/overdue registration, stolen,
>> etc.
>> There is no way to warn you that one is coming.
>>
>> The speed cameras don't necessarily need radar/laser. They can measure
>> how
>> far and fast you've traveled between two points and calculate your speed.
>> In England, there are series of cameras that measure your (license)
>> over a
>> long stretch of highway and calculate your *average* speed.
>
> We have these sort of cameras on our major highways, supposedly to keep
> a check on our long haul truckies, to ensure they are taking their
> required rest breaks.
>
> I suppose as technology improves, car drivers will/are also be/being
> checked.
>
And don't forget those E-Z pass transponders you have attached to your
windshield.  They are not only detected at toll gates, but many other
places on highways.  One way to detect speed of flowing traffic or even
to determine where YOU are if police or FBI are looking for YOU and they
know you have a little box on your windshield.

Not using them for speed violations yet AFAIK.

--
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"      Mister Ed
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 8/24/2013 10:18 AM, Daniel wrote:

> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 8/24/2013 9:00 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> In message <[hidden email]>, Daniel
>>>> <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <Snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Technically, it is likely: the gun has to detect a signal that has
>>>>>> travelled the distance between it and the car twice, after being
>>>>>> reflected from a surface not shaped as a reflector, whereas the
>>>>>> detector
>>>>>> in the car only has to detect a signal that has travelled the
>>>>>> distance
>>>>>> once, and is moreover actually beamed at it, so many times stronger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Not likely to bother me: I'm more likely to be done for
>>>>>> underspeeding ...)
>>>>>
>>>>> As I understand the detectors, they operated on a much lower level
>>>>> signal than the Police actually used to determine the targeted cars
>>>>> speed, so your detector was telling you that radar was being used
>>>>> somewhere up ahead, so you could slow down before you got pinged!
>>>>>
>>>> That's what I said (-:!
>>>
>>> The way I read what you typed above, you are talking about a car being
>>> detected by the police, on the other hand I am talking about a much
>>> further off car detecting the the Police are some distance ahead. "My"
>>> car is not being detected by Police, yet!!
>>>
>> It is much simpler, and more effective, to just drive the speed limit....
>
> Gotta get your buzzes somehow, Ron! ;-)
>
I prefer to get where I am going, as fast, safe, and un-ticketed as
possible.
That's how I get my buzz.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Anybody installed this yet?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by jetjock
On 8/24/2013 10:20 AM, jetjock wrote:

> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> On 08/23/2013 04:23 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty replied to hisself:
>>>>
>>>>> Sure, why not?  Do you think there is any way a pipe-sniffer somewhere
>>>>> along a path of Internet traffic could be detected by a browser
>>>>> option?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An analogy:  you are driving your car along a busy interstate
>>>> highway. Way
>>>> over there in the corner of that overpass is a small camera that is
>>>> busily
>>>> photographing every license plate of every car that passes by. Is there
>>>> any way your car could tell you that was happening?
>>>
>>>
>>> I seem to recall, years ago, you could install a device in your car that
>>> could warn you if Police were using Radar/Laser/whatever to measure car
>>> speeds.
>>>
>>> Don't know if they actually saved the driver any money/licence points,
>>> but ....!!
>>
>>
>> A friend who frequently makes 300-mile freeway trips swears by his.
>> Don't know the brand, but if it's important I can find out.  Long ago
>> (198x) a different friend could tell me what kind of radar signal was
>> being generated by the sound of the beeps and the appearance of the
>> lights.
>>
> My old Escort detectors were like that. Now the newer versions (Passport
> by Escort) actually have LEDs that say "X-band", "K-band, "Laser" etc.
> No longer any doubt. X-band is practically obsolete, so the cops have
> taken their old units and placed them on overpasses and other structures
> to fool speeders with detectors into slowing down! Works for stragers
> passing through, but the locals get very familiar with their locations.
Maybe they should park near the 'decoys', and use laser detectors to
catch the locals..  Grin.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
123