Microwave brain scrambler?

Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:21 pm   

On 3/12/2010 10:46 AM, AZ Nomad wrote:

(...)


How could that be? Who is the 'nailer'?


Are you seriously suggesting that a lawyer or judge would voluntarily
snuff out their career by prosecuting a case against their owners?

Nonsense.


But this is *so* much more elegant!
Not only can the manager disable robbers, he can
use the system on honest employees and customers as well.
The entertainment is endless because it is completely
undetectable.

The old guy on table #4. Just as he lifts his coffee cup, zap
him and he pours hot coffee all over his shirt! He gets up,
and attempts to get to the bathroom, zap him again so he hits
his head on the counter and soils himself at the same time.

I don't think you grasp the hilarious possibilities here.

There isn't any evidence it was ever used, other than the recollection
of the victim. Who is going to believe him (or her for that matter)?

I don't understand your 'anti-business' position at all.


Thanks, AZ


--Winston

Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:40 pm   

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:21:34 -0800, Winston <Winston_at_bigbrother.net> wrote:

simple matter that most of the time there isn't a burgler in presence
of the infernal machine. Rat chews through a control line and sets
the thing off. Drunk employee goes into the manager's office and
plays around. Owner mistakes friend of cashier.

It doesn't matter. If you put a shotgun in the ceiling on remote
control, you're playing a very dangerous game.

Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:11 pm   

On 3/12/2010 12:40 PM, AZ Nomad wrote:

Only the owner and installer are aware the transmitter exists at all.
They aren't about to zap themselves with it.


So, who cares? In either case, there is no evidence, no foul
no crime.


There would be no crime because no judge would ever prosecute.

He places judgment against say, "Allied Domestic Sandwich", he knows it's
all over for him. Finito. No more robes. Venality is not stupidity.


Be serious. This machine is completely undetectable.
Anyone who knows of it's existence will remain piously quiet about it.
That is what they are paid to do.

This country was built by people who believed in the sanctity
and grace of big business. Let's not backslide here.

Thanks, AZ

--Winston

Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:27 pm   

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:11:45 -0800, Winston <Winston_at_bigbrother.net> wrote:

You're insane.

Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:40 pm   

On 3/12/2010 11:23 AM, Dave Platt wrote:

(...)


1) The transmitter is not immediately deadly. Eventually, perhaps.
By then, there's even less evidence that it was ever used.

2) I was not talking about individuals or small business owners
for whom the law applies and is generally enforced. I was talking
about a completely different business scale, for whom the law
does not apply and is not enforced. Two completely different
situations.


See section #2 above. The transmitter wouldn't be used by people
who are subject to law. Only subsidiaries of Big Business for
whom there is no risk of prosecution attached.


No evidence, no crime perpetrated by an un-prosecutable.

That is a bad corner to be playing in.

"Sorry, thanks for the info but you are deluded to think
we would ever do such a thing."


Attempted murder is permissible and a valid management technique,
if you are a large enough corporation. It just does not get
investigated.

It is not considered to be as serious as your parking ticket.


No, the robber would only 'collapse' if he was off - balance
when zapped. He would remain standing otherwise.
Blind and deaf, with a vacant expression on his face,
but still standing.


No collapses. Just frozen with temporary blindness and deafness.
See, we are overwhelming a very complicated system with
a bunch of 'nonsense data'. It is a 'Denial Of Service'
attack, with the brain as a target instead of a computer.


Yes but a powerless 'somebody'. Who cares? The cops? The courts?

Seriously. No authority is going to give a flying guacamole even if
a witness were brave enough to risk being called 'delusional'.

(I do admit that it's a matter of time before a technically hip LEO
gets zapped by one of these transmitters. Then we will see some
very nuanced criticism, which will also not be detected, prosecuted
or reported.)


In application, yes. The crime didn't occur unless a judge said
it did, yes? Hey, 'suspect' all you want because the judge will
say *anything* the corporation wants him to say. I do admit that
this gives the courts pretty good leverage. The bad news is that
such leverage will result in more generous contributions, but not
an improvement in behavior on the part of the corporation.


Of course it would be small and easy to hide. Pick a frequency that
beams well using a <12" diameter parabola yet still easily penetrates
through a couple inches of cranium to deposit 1 mW/ cm^2 in the brain
over a distance of say 20 feet.
Pretty cheap and easy with suspended ceilings being as ubiquitous as
they are.


Back up here, please. Your scenario posits three individuals who
wake up from an artificially - induced frozen, unconscious state.
They are dazed and confused but regain full use of their senses and
muscles within a couple minutes. One of them is on the ground being
cuffed by security; #2 is dabbing at some coffee he spilled on his
shirt. #3 is wondering if it was apparent that she fell asleep during
#2's monologue.

No evidence that anything out of the ordinary happened.

No 'Crime Scene' tape. No nothing.


With whom? Not the courts, not the cops. Just who is the source
of this Trouble?


The manager is an employee of a Large Corporation. He cannot be touched,
even if the cops were inclined to arrest. They won't be because
there is no evidence any crime occurred and no budget and even
less motivation to develop the expertise to detect this kind of thing.


The FCC does not care. Who is going to enforce that law?


As long as the target is customer, a waitress or a bad guy, who cares?
There's no evidence. No crime to investigate.

Here is a real opportunity for some enterprising company to make several
tons of money. Not a competitor in sight and plenty of powerful,
very well financed companies with which to become Very Friendly.

Cha-Ching!

--Winston

Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:43 pm   

On 3/12/2010 1:27 PM, AZ Nomad wrote:

(...)


Innocence is expensive, AZ

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject.

--Winston

Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:57 pm   

On 3/12/2010 10:29 AM, osr_at_uakron.edu wrote:

That is 1 mW/cm^2 within the brain.
Obviously there are efficiency losses on the way from MOPA
to the target, but yes, there is a reproducible physiological effect.


Nope.


The reason I asked was to get new knowledge, for which I am grateful.


The effect exists.


The minimum frequency for which the effect is seen was at 147 MHz,
amplitude modulated at a continuous 16 Hz, not frequency modulated
at 20Hz - 20 KHz or amplitude modulated at 50Hz ~12KHz.

Thanks for your thoughts, Steve.


--Winston

Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:14 am   

On 3/11/2010 8:59 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

(...)


Dish is concealed above the suspended ceiling, for example.
There is no evidence it exists. (Did I mention that?)


No, the lawyer for the perp has no idea the transmitter exists.
He has a crack head insisting that he was dazed for a moment,
as if that were an unusual occurrence. :)

The lawyer for the perp is more than fully occupied.


Yes. But the money goes to campaign contributions, not the perp's lawyer
and certainly not the perp.

--Winston

Sat Mar 13, 2010 4:27 am   

On 12/03/2010 22:40, Winston wrote:


And this is in the same world where McDonalds gets sued by a customer
who spills hot coffee on herself?

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

Sat Mar 13, 2010 4:33 am   

On 12/03/2010 23:14, Winston wrote:

And it is secretly manufactured and secretly installed and nobody knows
its there except the BigMac employees, who are, of course, utterly loyal
and would never rat out their beloved management.


And the manager can tell who's the crackhead just by looking eh?
Of course, it would never be used on a customer who's just pissed at the
poor service. Remember, it would only take one mistake.


Lawyers are *never* fully occupied - that's why there are so many of them.


Tell that to those who have sued such businesses on ludicrously trivial
grounds, and won.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

"Liebeck's attorneys argued that McDonald's coffee was "defective",
claiming that it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury
than coffee served at any other place. Moreover, McDonald's had refused
several prior opportunities to settle for less than the $640,000
ultimately awarded."

Of course, maybe you can sell this device to big restaurant chains in
Uzbekistan where political prisoners get boiled alive. No biggie there...

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:30 am   

On 3/12/2010 7:33 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

(...)


A few key employees, yes.


Talking about that would be a career ender.
Not just a job ender. Loyalty is not as strong a motivator as fear.
Besides, who would listen to a disgruntled employee talk about
their wild fantasy? :)


In our scenario, the crackhead was the one swinging the gun around and
demanding money. Yes, I think the manager could pick him out.


It'll be used on customers who are respectful, optimistic good tippers.
It'll be used on folks behind the counter. Everybody except the
manager will get a dose. It's a very egalitarian design.


Tell that to the public defender assigned to our pistol waving perp.

(...)


Hot coffee is evidence. Photographs of burned skin are evidence.
The transmitter will leave no evidence. No evidence, no crime.


No need. There is a huge market here in the U.S.

Thank you for your thoughts, Dirk.

--Winston

Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:39 am   

On 3/12/2010 7:27 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

Other patrons had complained of the 'overheated' coffee in the past.
One assumes that there were photographs of burned skin.
Depositions were taken.
These are evidence that support the theory that someone was harmed.

The transmitter is the ultimate in plausible deniabilty.
Any complainant is bound to be labeled a kook, because people will
be unaware that the transmitter is being used on them.

No evidence of crime means no crime could have been committed.

Thanks for your thoughts, Dirk.



--Winston

Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:43 am   

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:40:12 -0600, AZ Nomad <aznomad.3_at_PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote:


You missed the important text, this "Winston" finds personal amusement
to be superior to any law or tort repercussions. Please respond
to this "Winston" accordingly.

Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:02 am   

On 3/12/2010 9:43 PM, JosephKK wrote:

(...)


The amusement will exist. There will be no legal repercussions.
There will be no evidence, no incriminating depositions.
No police reports. People will be harmed by other people but no
crime will be committed by definition because engineering has long
since left the law behind in at least two critical ways.

Something that exists is superior to something that does not
exist in a sense that it can easily enter popular discussion.
We discuss amusing things every day.

No one is likely to talk about a lawsuit that never took place
and never can take place.

In that sense, I agree with you.


Thanks for your input, JosephKK.

--Winston

Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:37 am   

On 13/03/2010 05:30, Winston wrote:

No corporation would come within a mile of it.
Even speculative law suits would bankrupt the company.
And *thousands* of people would know about the device.
Even the design of the A-bomb could not be kept secret.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show