Sonos One / Amazon Alexa smart speaker - Bluetooth Conversion

[Morrisman]

Do you remember in the 70's when they said your library monitored the books you took out to build a profile on you?
Nothing changes, just the technology!
If people want to live in fear they will, you won't be able to use logic to counter it

I have a friend who believes every single piece of conspiracy that has ever been published. Of course he doesn't believe in Covid though, and he knows that face masks can't stop those tiny germs..... And he knows that the vaccine is for either tracking him, or to automatically kill him when Bill Gates and the New World Order decides it's time to cull the population.

I posted this for him.... and I've not heard from him since.

 

[GG1]

Can you explain what you are actually worried about and what information you think that ANYONE is interested in, supposing that your fear was justified? Also, thinking about the logistics and the millions of "listening devices" in the world, how do you imagine that any snippet of valuable information could be gleaned? Why would the "snoops" be interested in you and your conversations enough to want to monitor them?

Yes I can explain - nothing worries me about what information I have and yes nobody would be interested in it.

Does it worry you that governments might use technology to damage their political opponents? If you're not worried - is that because you don't think the technology can be exploited in that way, or because you trust them not to?

 

[ajlelectronics]

Yes I can explain - nothing worries me about what information I have and yes nobody would be interested in it.

Does it worry you that governments might use technology to damage their political opponents? If you're not worried - is that because you don't think the technology can be exploited in that way, or because you trust them not to?

The left do it regularly and have for a long time. It is a fact of life and we just have to be aware of it and counter it. That doesn't seem to have any relevance to what goes on in your dwelling though.

 

[m_c]

The left do it regularly and have for a long time. It is a fact of life and we just have to be aware of it and counter it. That doesn't seem to have any relevance to what goes on in your dwelling though.

I'm all ears as to how "the left" have done so for so long without any major scandals, given the Cambridge Analytica scandal, or are the left so good at it, that they've not been found out yet?

 

[Stupoty]

Here is the current information for Crystal Palace, which transmits RF at similar frequencies to that used for cell services...

The station carried the London regions of BBC One, BBC Two, ITV1 and Channel 4 in analogue, each with an effective radiated power of 1 MW, before digital switchover took place during April 2012, as well as all six digital terrestrial television multiplexes. These had an effective radiated power of 20 kW before switchover and 200 kW after, with considerable beam tilt to the south and east.

Are you saying radio wave exposure at 48Mhz is the same as radio at multi Ghz frequencies ?

Stu

 

[ajlelectronics]

Are you saying radio wave exposure at 48Mhz is the same as radio at multi Ghz frequencies ?

Stu

What does 48MHz have to do with anything? However to answer your question: Yes it is exactly the same.

TV transmitters work in UHF the same as cell sites and 'phones. In fact the group C/D frequencies that are allocated to TV (Mendip Tx etc) have now been cleared to make way for 5G services; that is how closely related they are.

Did you know that visible light is 400-790 THz?

 

[Stupoty]

What does 48MHz have to do with anything? However to answer your question: Yes it is exactly the same. TV transmitters work in UHF the same as cell sites and 'phones. In fact the group C/D frequencies that are allocated to TV (Mendip Tx etc) have now been cleared to make way for 5G services; that is how closely related they are.

Did you know that visible light is 400-790 THz?

My bad analogue tv was on 470-850 Mhz ish

You know that sun light can give you cancer yeah ?

High frequency more peeks per second , more effective energy.

My point is that exposure to radio waves can be bad for your health , laughing this off like it isn't real is potentially dangerous. For example if you were working on a roof with a phone mast on it.

Stu

 

[ajlelectronics]

My bad analogue tv was on 470-850 Mhz ish

That's right and for decades people have lived in the shadow of RF energy from TV transmitters in MegaWatts. I am unaware of any adverse health effects ever reported from RF exposure?

It was possible (maybe still is) to light an unconnected flourescent tube by being near the Droitwich R4 transmitting aerials, just from the RF. Again, no health effects noted to any sentient being.

You know that sun light can give you cancer yeah ?

And the relevance of that is?

High frequency more peeks per second , more effective energy.

Nonsense. Even if so, the body does not absorb the energy, it passes straight through. The only exception is a spot frequency range at around 2.4GHz which excites water molecules. That's how Microwave ovens work. Either side of the spot frequency, there is no effect which is why it is used for wireless internet and the like.

My point is that exposure to radio waves can be bad for your health , laughing this off like it isn't real is potentially dangerous. For example if you were working on a roof with a phone mast on it.

Man made RF has been in use for centuries, since the days of Marconi, at all power levels and frequencies. Natural RF has been all around us since the big bang, at all frequencies and power levels. Radio amateurs and professionals regularly use frequencies in the multi GHz region. Are you aware of the frequency bands that TV satellites use? I am unaware of anyone growing unwanted limbs etc from that?

The only RF based health damage I am aware of is RF burns from copping hold of an HF aerial running hundreds of Watts or pointing a laser at your eyes. However it is a burn like any other, although slightly deeper and you soon learn not to do it again, just like if you were sticking a needle in a power socket.

Something else that you might be interested to look up, is the "Inverse Square Law".

 

[Stupoty]

That's right and for decades people have lived in the shadow of RF energy from TV transmitters in MegaWatts. I am unaware of any adverse health effects ever reported from RF exposure?

It was possible (maybe still is) to light an unconnected flourescent tube by being near the Droitwich R4 transmitting aerials, just from the RF. Again, no health effects noted to any sentient being.




And the relevance of that is?



Nonsense. Even if so, the body does not absorb the energy, it passes straight through. The only exception is a spot frequency range at around 2.4GHz which excites water molecules. That's how Microwave ovens work. Either side of the spot frequency, there is no effect which is why it is used for wireless internet and the like.




Man made RF has been in use for centuries, since the days of Marconi, at all power levels and frequencies. Natural RF has been all around us since the big bang, at all frequencies and power levels. Radio amateurs and professionals regularly use frequencies in the multi GHz region. Are you aware of the frequency bands that TV satellites use? I am unaware of anyone growing unwanted limbs etc from that?

The only RF based health damage I am aware of is RF burns from copping hold of an HF aerial running hundreds of Watts or pointing a laser at your eyes. However it is a burn like any other, although slightly deeper and you soon learn not to do it again, just like if you were sticking a needle in a power socket.

Something else that you might be interested to look up, is the "Inverse Square Law".

Whatever mate , If you think radio weaves can have zero negative affects on the human body then good for you , obviously they set maximum safe limits just for the fun of it.

I particularly like the way you talk , you know like everyone else is a retard.

Stu

 

[voipio]

But each of the greater number of peaks per second are also shorter in duration, so 1W or RF at 100MHz is the same power as 1W of RF at 5GHz.

What does differ vs frequency, is the depth to which the heating effect extends in normal body tissue. At microwave oven frequencies (2.45GHz) the heating depth is about 25mm. For HF ovens, the heating depth is much greater, whilst at 28GHz, which was mooted at one time for 5G (Verizon networks actually do use 28GHz, and there may be others), the human tissue heating depth is around 1-2mm.

 

[ajlelectronics]

But each of the greater number of peaks per second are also shorter in duration, so 1W or RF at 100MHz is the same power as 1W of RF at 5GHz.

What does differ vs frequency, is the depth to which the heating effect extends in normal body tissue. At microwave oven frequencies (2.45GHz) the heating depth is about 25mm. For HF ovens, the heating depth is much greater, whilst at 28GHz, which was mooted at one time for 5G, the human tissue heating depth is around 1-2mm.

Explained a bit more clearly that I did! I am sitting here freezing to death, so I think I will have a short day and go home to warm up with some CQ calls.

 

[voipio]

Some info on mobile phone frequencies used on mobile networks:

https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/cell-phone-networks-and-frequencies-explained

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/202065/5g-guide.pdf

Mobile phones are now widely used, yet there are no emerging patterns of disease, or disorder, consistent with their use. A question for Stupoty - presumably you use a mobile; have you noticed any adverse effects from using it? Are there any friends or family that have noticed anything from using theirs? The only really noticeable effect was that of 2G mobile signals creating a buzzing effect on landline telephone calls, via a rectification inside the telephone of the pulsed TDMA signals adopted for 2G use in the UK. There have been suggestions of specific cancers (e.g. acoustic neuroma) arising from mobile use, but there is no real evidence to link the two, and these cancers remain exceedingly rare.

As for the RF exposure limits, RF engineers generally think that these (ICNIRP) limits are extremely/overly conservative, and higher exposure levels are likely to be safe. The main dangers from RF exposure are likely to come from the ability to cause interference to electronics devices, rather than humans. Think self-driving cars, and fly-by-wire aircraft. Both modes of transport have to comply with strict limits on their immunity to interference.

 

[GG1]

The left do it regularly and have for a long time. It is a fact of life and we just have to be aware of it and counter it. That doesn't seem to have any relevance to what goes on in your dwelling though.

So we are basically in agreement - we're aware that it is a risk and should counter it. How do you think we should do that?

I certainly don't know, other than doing what I do - ie, being a little less accepting and a little more sceptical of the technology we allow into our homes.

 

[ajlelectronics]

So we are basically in agreement - we're aware that it is a risk and should counter it. How do you think we should do that?

I certainly don't know, other than doing what I do - ie, being a little less accepting and a little more sceptical of the technology we allow into our homes.

It's a bit like weapons though. They are used to oppress and murder our opponents, yet one large nation at least, feels that every home should have one.

 

[GG1]

Some info on mobile phone frequencies used on mobile networks:

https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/cell-phone-networks-and-frequencies-explained

Mobile phones are now widely used, yet there are no emerging patterns of disease, or disorder, consistent with their use. A question for Stupoty - presumably you use a mobile; have you noticed any adverse effects from using it? Are there any friends or family that have noticed anything from using theirs? The only really noticeable effect was that of 2G mobile signals creating a buzzing effect on landline telephone calls, via a rectification inside the telephone of the pulsed TDMA signals adopted for 2G use in the UK. There have been suggestions of specific cancers (e.g. acoustic neuroma) arising from mobile use, but there is no real evidence to link the two.

As for the RF exposure limits, RF engineers generally think that these (ICNIRP) limits are extremely/overly conservative, and higher exposure levels are likely to be safe. The main dangers from RF exposure are likely to come from the ability to cause interference to electronics devices, rather than humans. Think self-driving cars, and fly-by-wire aircraft. Both modes of transport have to comply with strict limits on their immunity to interference.

Not sure how this ended up down the RF rabbit hole - but yes I think we've been living in an RF soup for long enough for patterns to emerge, which haven't.

Someone mentioned microchips in vaccines also - it's not so much a question of are they doing it, but which operating system is onboard those chips they use to control us? When doing a basic task I increasingly find myself slowing down and having to restart it, so my guess is Windows.

 

[GG1]

It's a bit like weapons though. They are used to oppress and murder our opponents, yet one large nation at least, feels that every home should have one.

Very much so, can keep us safe and happy or end up in the wrong hands, then not so much.

 

[Morrisman]

We all know that 5g caused Covid, but how many of us were aware that.....

 

[GG1]

I'm all ears as to how "the left" have done so for so long without any major scandals, given the Cambridge Analytica scandal, or are the left so good at it, that they've not been found out yet?

Even if you take the absolute worst of the allegations in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, that was nothing compared to what the DNC supporting US security services have been doing in more recent years.

But yes, the left don't have a monopoly on abusing or attempting to abuse whatever tools they can get their hands on. The tools get more powerful as does the draw to abuse them. Personally I don't think it's a left or right thing, it's a particular set of people we need to be wary of - and it's not the numpties we actually vote for, of whatever political colour.

 

[ajlelectronics]

. Personally I don't think it's a left or right thing, it's a particular set of people we need to be wary of - and it's not the numpties we actually vote for, of whatever political colour.

Agreed. "Yes Prime Minister" was actually a fly on the wall documentary, not a sitcom. Even the Baroness declared it to be a factual program.

Program? Programme? I can never remember which is which!

 

[minimutly]

There was a time we were told that the normal household tv could actually watch us, as we were watching it....

Isn't that how they make gogglebox?