Using ebook readers on aeroplanes?

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by John F

That sounds backward to me? Text (an email) should take up very "little" data, where as digitized voice should take up a "large" amount of data?

Text is small, small it goes out in a burst because it's all there and ready to go when you click send. But we're not just talking about text anymore because most phones capable of sending emails can also send pictures and do other things.

A single voice is actually a very small load on the system. The fidelity isn't really very high, and even someone talking leaves lots of dead space so the bandwith requirements aren't high, say something in the 5kbps range (I surfed around but couldn't really find any real numbers, sorry).

[DawnFalcon]

Post removed.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by HamsterRage

A single voice is actually a very small load on the system. The fidelity isn't really very high, and even someone talking leaves lots of dead space so the bandwith requirements aren't high, say something in the 5kbps range (I surfed around but couldn't really find any real numbers, sorry).

A variety of speech codecs have been / are used in cellphones, but, for example, GSM Enhanced Full Rate uses 12.2 kbit/s.

/JB

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Reasons to turn it off:

• When you bought the ticket you agreed to the airline's terms and conditions, which include obeying the cabin crew's instructions.
• It's courteous and polite to the cabin crew who are just doing their jobs.
• It's considerate towards your fellow passengers, who may be worried by your use of the device.
• While it *may* be safe to continue using the device, or just put it into sleep mode, you can't be sure of this. You may think you know, but you don't. This is a deeply technical area and layman's gut-feel doesn't work.

Reasons not to turn it off:

• A selfish desire to avoid a couple of minutes without reading.

Take your pick.

/JB

This about sums it up nicely.

Also add to the second list:
Wanting to do the opposite for the sake of not conforming

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by BenLee

Whatever gets me to the other side of the world ALIVE I'm in favor for. But then again, I don't fly as often as some people. I would imagine those who fly every week would either get annoyed or used to all these little security measures.

A bit pedantic, but this has nothing to do with security. This is a safety measure.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by BenLee

Also add to the second list:
Wanting to do the opposite for the sake of not conforming

Good point - I suspect this reason is actually very common.

/JB

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

A bit pedantic, but this has nothing to do with security. This is a safety measure.

se·cu·ri·ty (s-kyr-t)
n. pl. se·cu·ri·ties
1. Freedom from risk or danger; safety.

Yes, I meant safety. I was hoping people would get the general idea of what I'm saying and not have to carefully select every word on a web forum.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by jbjb

While it *may* be safe to continue using the device, or just put it into sleep mode, you can't be sure of this. You may think you know, but you don't. This is a deeply technical area and layman's gut-feel doesn't work.

This is the one that really matters.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Also, please prove that having it on at ANY time in the flight isn't a risk

It's much lower risk because takeoff/landing are the most dangerous/critical times in a flight. Having an instrument give a false reading while cruising at 30,000 feet is a lot different than having an instrument give a false reading while trying to land.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by BenLee

Yes, I meant safety. I was hoping people would get the general idea of what I'm saying and not have to carefully select every word on a web forum.

I understand, and didn't mean it that way. I just want to make sure others understand (which seems to be a point of confusion) that we're not talking about TSA or "security theater" in the sense of protecting us from terrorists.

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by afa

I'm not sure I follow. I can see why people feel that the rule about switching electronic devices off is unnecessary, but I don't see that as something that in any way "detracts" from safety. It doesn't. You can argue that it doesn't add value (or adds minimal value) but it certainly doesn't diminish security.

All I'm saying is that when you have a rule that people "know" is silly, then they'll quietly work to thwart it (ie: just put the device in the seat pocket without turning it off) which means that the rule system is actually encouraging people to pick and choose which rules they'll follow.

The point being that having people pick and choose which rules they want to follow can't do anything other than decrease safety in the long run.

[DawnFalcon]

Post removed: I am no longer interested in engaging with them.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HamsterRage

All I'm saying is that when you have a rule that people "know" is silly, then they'll quietly work to thwart it

It's a perception problem, certainly. People "think" the rule is silly. The question is, how do you convince them that they're not as smart as they think they are.

[whitearrow]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Reasons to turn it off:[LIST][*]When you bought the ticket you agreed to the airline's terms and conditions, which include obeying the cabin crew's instructions.[*]It's courteous and polite to the cabin crew who are just doing their jobs.[*]It's considerate towards your fellow passengers, who may be worried by your use of the device.

Just to be clear, I never said that I *used* the device rather than turned it off. I said I often simply left the Kindle (already in my bag, in the case of takeoff) in sleep mode, rather than poke about to find it, attempt to shut it down, and store it again. I bring a magazine to read during takeoff and landing. I've never had my Kindle out before or after the time for using electronic devices. My argument is simply that if not removing the battery from my watch or iPod nano isn't required for safety, that keeping the Kindle in sleep mode as opposed to "off" poses no more risk. I do completely shut down my laptop and my phone, which actually use power even while "sleeping."

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's a perception problem, certainly. People "think" the rule is silly. The question is, how do you convince them that they're not as smart as they think they are.

In general, you can't convince them - it's known as the Dunning-Kruger effect.

/JB