What Walkie Talkie Is Best For A Cruise?

Yes, two-way radios DO work on cruise ships. However, because the same channels tend to be a bit overused, passengers can expect a fair amount of chatter and signal interference when using their radios.

Here’s some advice from a Woot.com user,

“I suppose the two way radios/walkie talkies would be the best option. But, how important is being in constant communication with the rest of your family anyway? A ship, while large, isn't huge. If you know the general area where people will be, you could walk over and find them. Preset arranged meeting times and places would work as well. People were able to get along fairly well without being able to directly communicate with each other at every moment of the day”.

So, aside from the option of setting pre-arranged meeting times, a radio isn’t a terrible idea, especially if you have kids. Many people reading this might simply ask why they can’t use their mobile phones. That is a very good question, after all...

If you’re going on a cruise this summer (or anytime, really), you need to be aware that your mobile phone is going to cause some problems.

 



Many cruise passengers are unaware and/or totally ill prepared for this fact and the cruise companies themselves are at least partly to blame for the lack of information in this area.

So, will your mobile phone work at sea? To answer this, let’s take a look at the following excerpt from the website ‘Cellular Abroad.com...

“The answer is most often always “You can subscribe to our cruise line cell phone network.” What they won’t tell you is the rates you will be paying. You certainly won’t be able to find them online, and to get a proper answer, you’ll have to call the cruise line to get a full break down of what they charge for access to their cell networks. As a company that sets their own international calling rates for the Talk Abroad SIM Card, we can see the cruise ship networks in our list, and it does not look good. If you subscribe to their network, you’ll be paying anything from $4 ~ $8 per minute, depending on your location and who you are calling. Don’t forget also that they’ll be charging you for receiving inbound calls”.

As we’ll soon see, taking a mobile phone on a cruise can represent a logistical nightmare. At the same time, however, many of us feel naked without a phone?

More problems are presented in the form of scheduled stops (although these can also represent opportunities for a higher â€" and cheaper â€" level of connectivity). To return to Cellular Abroad,

“If the ship is close to the coastline, and has multiple port of call stops, you’ll typically be able to get a terrestrial signal from the nearest land cell phone tower â€" up to a mile from the coast. It’s highly unlikely that you will be connected with 3G speed signals, as evidenced in my previous blog, you will need to have a low-wave 3G frequency like 800 or 900 Mhz â€" frequencies not typically associated with phones manufactured for North American consumers. So what can be done? You can rent an international cell phone that works in port, and a short way out to sea. If you really must stay connected on your boat, get in touch with your cruise travel agency and request information about the on-board cell phone rates and subscription fees”. 

So, using mobile phones on a cruise is both difficult and supremely costly, but arranging a meeting time is also likely to cause more than a few headaches. Two way radios have their problems, but may in fact be the best way to keep in contact, depending, of course, on how important a factor this is for you.

SOURCES:

http://www.cellularabroad.com/blog/do-cell-phones-work-on-cruise-ships-2

http://www.cruisereviews.com/forum/royal-caribbean-cruise-line/12108-we-lose-our-children-regularly-do-two-way-radios-work-onboard.html#b

http://deals.woot.com/questions/details/83b01dc9-9318-4de4-9a2b-f16c18761de7/whats-the-best-way-to-communicate-with-others-on-a-cruise-ship

What is Lateral Communication?

The term ‘lateral communication’ can actually mean (at least) two different things.

In the natural world, lateral communication occurs whenever a group of animals appear to exhibit a collective intelligence. For example, when a flock of birds turns at the exact same time, remaining in perfect formation, this is lateral communication. Other examples include shoals of fish acting in perfect synch, or the movements of ant colonies.

In the business world, however, the term ‘lateral communication’ denotes something else entirely. In modern business, lateral communication is all to do with hierarchy. An example of here occurs when two workers on the same level discuss ideas (e.g. a manager talking to a manager). Its opposite term, ‘diagonal communication’, occurs when communication is initiated between different levels of hierarchy (e.g. talking to your boss’ boss, or your boss talking to you).

From Wikipedia:

“The term lateral communication can be used interchangeably as horizontal communication. In his text entitled “Organizational Communication,” Michael J. Papa defines horizontal communication as “the flow of messages across functional areas at a given level of an organization” (Papa and Daniels 55). With this system people at the same level are permitted “to communicate directly without going through several levels of organization” (Papa and Daniels 55). Given this elasticity, members within an organization have an easier time with “problem solving, information sharing across different work groups, and task coordination between departments or project teams” (Papa and Daniels 56). The use of lateral or horizontal communication in the workplace “can also enhance morale and afford a means for resolving conflicts (Koehler et al., 1981) (Papa and Daniels 56).”

The pawns, on the other hand, can only converse one space at a time and only in one direction. Oh wait; I’m getting confused again!

I hope that helps you, Sarah-Jane. I am unsure as to which definition you were looking for, so I focussed on both. If you have any follow-up questions, drop me a line the usual way and I’ll try to get back to you as soon as I can.

you can get the original piece here

Jack The Ripper: Case Closed (Again)?

A new book published this month promises to provide a long-awaited conclusion to the age old riddle of ‘The Whitechapel Murders’, a series of gruesome slayings that took place between September and October of 1888. The killer, famously known as ‘Jack The Ripper’ was never apprehended and his (or her!) true identity was never uncovered...

However, according to amateur detective Russell Edwards, the most famous murder case of all time has now been conclusively solved.

Mr. Edwards has spent 14 years establishing his theory and is convinced that it is watertight. “We have definitively solved the mystery of who Jack The Ripper was,” he told the press.

However, his claims are very far from being either accepted by historians or agreed upon by science...

Since ‘The Ripper’ murdered at least five prostitutes (some experts argue that there were more victims and that the slayings continued unabated until 1891), a large number of historians, amateur detectives and interested parties have indulged in this so-called ‘Ripperology’ â€" and a number of theories as to the identity of the killer have been put forward as a result.

The list of suspects named over the years is a long one. It includes celebrities like ‘Alice in Wonderland’ author Lewis Carroll, Queen Victoria’s physician William Gull, the painter Walter Sickert and even Queen Victoria’s son, Prince Albert Victor. More serious scholars tend to look towards less prominent and sensationalistic theories, however.

Regular Ripper suspects include Scottish abortion doctor and convicted murderer Thomas Neill Cream, who allegedly confessed to the killings as he was about to be hanged (although he was in prison at the time of the murders), Irish-American conman Francis Tumblety, who was arrested on charges connected to the killings, Polish born Seweryn Klosowski, who murdered three of his wives by poisoning and James Kelly, who murdered his own wife in a manner similar to a Ripper killing, escaped Broadmoor asylum early in 1888 (and who may even have committed similar murders in the United States) amongst many others.

Because so many competing theories abound, something special is required to truly make an impact on the subject, or add anything new to the long running discussion. Concordantly, Edwards’ theory involves an element that is guaranteed to add an air of legitimacy to any investigation, DNA.

According to Russell Edwards, the true identity of Jack The Ripper was Aaron Kosminski, a Polish Jew who lived in the area at the time of the murders and died in an asylum in 1919.



Kosminski immigrated to the UK in the 1880’s and worked as a hairdresser before being committed.

In 1891, (the time when some theorists suggest that the killings ceased) Kosminski was admitted to an insane asylum, probably suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. Kosminski was extremely mentally ill, having been incarcerated twice for insane behaviour. He refused to bathe, would only eat discarded food and suffered from auditory hallucinations; he was also probably a compulsive masturbator.

Russell Edward’s book, ‘Naming Jack The Ripper’ focuses on DNA evidence taken from a shawl that supposedly belonged to victim Catherine Eddowes, who was murdered by Jack The Ripper in September of 1888. He claims to have isolated traces of Kosminski’s DNA from the grisly garment.

The shawl, which was apparently stained with Eddowes’ blood, was allegedly taken from the crime scene by acting sergeant Amos Simpson, who intended it to be a gift for his wife. When his wife (understandably) refused the ghastly, unwashed present, it was stored away and became something of a ghoulish family heirloom.

Unfortunately for Edwards, Mr. Simpson was never documented as being anywhere near the crime scene, which does damage his account somewhat. Furthermore, Scotland Yard’s Crime Museum refused to display the Eddowes shawl in their Jack The Ripper exhibit because they do not consider it to be an authentic piece of evidence.

When the Eddowes shawl came up for auction in 2007, Edwards (who was inspired to become an investigator by the 2001 movie ‘From Hell’ starring Johnny Depp), pounced on the opportunity and purchased it, apparently undeterred by the fact that it does not appear on the inventory of the crime scene and equally undeterred by the proliferation of Ripper forgeries (including a diary) that have supposedly been ‘unearthed’ (and subsequently sold) over the years.

“Here I am with the shawl and possibly the evidence to solve the most unsolvable murder in English criminal history. But where do I start? That was the big question”. Said Edwards, who fortuitously opened The ‘Official’, Jack The Ripper Store (and associated walking tours) in London’s East End this July...

The author enlisted the aid of Jari Louhelainen, a molecular biologist at Liverpool John Moores University, who began testing the blood stained shawl for traces of Jack The Ripper’s DNA...

For his part, Edwards was able to track down living descendents of both Eddowes and Kosminski (but, crucially, no other suspects/victims) and found traces of semen that were a 100% match for Kosminski.

Sadly, Louhelainen’s methodology has not been published in any kind of peer-reviewed scientific journal, which means that the pair’s claims, whilst certainly attention grabbing, are far from scientific certainty. Even if they are accurate, they only demonstrate that somebody of Kosminski’s family line (he had three brothers) had secreted onto the shawl.

Skeptics include Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, the man who invented the DNA fingerprint technique, who told The Independent that Edward’s theory was “an interesting but remarkable claim that needs to be subjected to peer review, with detailed analysis of the provenance of the shawl and the nature of the claimed DNA match with the perpetrator’s descendants and its power of discrimination; no actual evidence has yet been provided”.

In addition, even if the DNA has not been contaminated, either in the laboratory or at some other time (which seems unlikely given how many people have handled the shawl over its 120-year history), it is hardly conclusive proof of Kosminski’s guilt. The evidence would merely suggest a sexual liaison between Eddowes, a known prostitute, and Kosminski, a sexual compulsive, on or around the night that Eddowes was murdered...

On top of all that, the evidence linking an expensive shawl to a prostitute (who was so poor at the time of her death that records show her pawning her shoes) is circumstantial at best.

Mr. Edwards has posed for photographs with the shawl, each time handling it without gloves or any kind of specialist clothing. He is not the only person to have done so in the garment’s long history. Others include the descendents of Catherine Eddowes...

It is also worth noting that, in 2002, author Patricia Cornwell published a book called ‘Portrait of a Killer: Jack The Ripper â€" Case Closed’, in which she claimed to have analyzed DNA evidence taken from one of the killer’s famous notes and ‘matched it’ to that of the painter Walter Sickert. Once again, the evidence on display was dubious and far from compelling or definitive.

It seems, then, that Mr. Edwards confident boast, “only non-believers that want to perpetuate the myth will doubt. This is it now - we have unmasked him." is premature to say the least.

How do you use a spy earpiece?

First of all, you need to place the loop around your neck, making sure that it is well concealed by your clothes (wearing a hoodie is usually a good option â€" although, given the average weather in your location we’d likely advise against it!). If you’re using your spy earpiece with a watch or eyeglasses instead of a loop, then you need to put on the watch/glasses (obviously).

Next, you need to insert the battery into the earpiece itself. NOTE â€" if the battery is slightly out of place, this can (and often does) negatively affect the sound quality; so do make sure that you test it thoroughly before going out.

Now, place the earpiece into your ear. According to Osanellona at Hubpages, you will probably want to get hold of a cotton bud first...

“You should remember that you always have to clean ear canals beforehand. Otherwise, the spy earpiece filter will choke up with earwax and sound will deteriorate significantly. In the worst case the spy earpiece will fail to work”.

Finally, you make a call. Put your mobile into your pocket (making sure that it is locked, so you don’t accidentally hang up or something). If all has gone according to plan, a covert communications link is now in place. Enjoy.

If this isn’t working, we’ll now troubleshoot two common problems...

If there are any lingering problems with the earpiece, then they are likely to be caused by either the battery (which may not be in place properly, or simply may need changing altogether) or the phone itself. When you do remove the battery, it is advised that you be very careful indeed. Once again, from Osanellona,

Do All Walkie Talkies Work Together

Mobile technology has greatly improved over the past years. However, cell phones have some inadequacy at some point. They are reliably dependent on network coverage and tend to fail in areas with poor or limited coverage. On the other hand, walkie talkies beat them to this. Do all walkie talkies work together? This is a question being asked by many users or those planning to acquire such devices. To answer this question, one will have to understand how the device works. You have to know the basics involved in operating the device. They are wireless radios that can be easily carried around. One has to understand the technology and the modalities associated with the workings of the walkie talkies. This is the best way to answer the question.

These are battery powered transceivers (it can send and receive a radio message). They operate on half-duplex channels. This implies that one walkie talkie, on a single channel can transmit one signal at a time though many devices will be able to receive that signal. The radios are primarily designed for short-range communication and transmit signals directly to each other.

All walkie talkies have similar basic components that include a microphone, speaker, antenna, battery and the PTT button. All these features combine to make communication successful. These devices are designed to operate on particular radio frequencies. The United States has designated different frequencies to meet users’ needs. The public are allowed to use the Family Radio Service (FRS) and the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). The GMRS or FRS radios operate on the 460MHz range. The government has also set a side frequencies (the Business Band) that corporates can use (it ranges from 450 to 470MHz). Law enforcing agencies such as the police also have their own frequency so that there is no interference from public users. This is helps the agency to prevent their channels from overlapping with those of public users.

As already discussed above, the GMRS and FRS, frequencies are designated for public use. These channels overlap at particular frequencies even though radios that use such channels have several distinct differences.

The FRS radios have a fixed antenna. They are not quite powerful as their power is limited to about 0.5 watts. These features make their use limited to a small area. They are better suited to personal use as they only operate on the FRS bands.

The GMRS radios are more powerful and have a power of about 5 watts. They can also use repeaters to enhance their radio signals and thus boost their range.

There are many hybrid radios now that can be able to operate on both channels. However, only licensed operators are allowed to use the GMRS channel. This is because the GMRS walkie talkies are powerful enough to cause more interference.

Europe has restricted walkie talkies to PMR446 frequencies or those at just around 440MHz. It is illegal to use a radio operating on the PMR466 frequency on the GMRS or FRS channel. Therefore, if you are travelling from Europe to America, it is very important to make sure that your radio operates on the required frequency to avoid getting in trouble with the law.

From the discussion above, it is clear to see that their operation is restricted only by the frequency of the signal and not the brand. When one uses walkie talkies of the same brand, they are least likely to experience problems in signal transmission and reception as they are more similar in operation. However, this does not mean those using different brands will not communicate.

These radios are all about sending and receiving signals. Therefore, signals sent from one radio at a certain frequency can be received by another radio in that range.

What makes these gadgets stand out from cell phones is their simplicity. One does not need to dial any number to call, all you need to do is to push the PTT button when either reaching out to transmit or receiving a transmission. This applies regardless of the brand one has as they all have similar features as discussed earlier.

In conclusion, in more than one word, the evidence suggests that type of brand does not matter. Therefore, do all walkie talkies work together? Yes, they do.

VTech Innolab: The Kids Are Alright

Last night I found myself in the grip of a nightmare. In my dream, a Woman dressed like a Victorian widow was drowning me under a sheet of thick, impenetrable ice. Before that, I’d had a series of other nightmares involving a fire, a group of shadow-like stick figures slashing me with long nails and an attack by large tanks aimed at either shooting me or squashing me, whichever came first.

However, in a lucid state of dreaming, I was able to call on a ‘Dream Guardian’ of sorts, who furnished me with a magical suit of armour that allowed me to beat all of the challenges. I ‘burst’ the spindly shadow-men with a blast of light, I doused the fire with water, and I disabled the tanks with a single punch.

Yep, imagination isa powerful thing.

That’s what worries me about tablets for kids. When I was a little boy, we played Sega Mega Drive, but I also had a leftover 70’s Pocket Simon that I adored. Mostly however, it was playing with toys that allowed me to foster and develop the natural imagination that I now use every day in my other life as a contemporary fiction writer.

I immersed myself in comics, books and ghost stories and, in the process, found a career path that felt right to me (although, looking back, I probably should have paid attention in maths and been a banker).

Today’s kids, growing up with tablet PCs, video games and blockbuster movies, may not have as much need for an imagination, or at least, that’s what sometimes bothers me. I worry that kids who grow up with ‘interactive literature’ at their disposal, might become deathly bored with ‘grown up’ literature when they come of age, and that they might even grow to reject the printed word outright. Not only does ‘Crime & Punishment’ not have pictures, but the only options for playable mini games would have to be desperately macabre.

Pedantic and repetitive explanations don’t necessarily teach children to use computers, either. Anybody can do anything if they have someone telling them over and over again how to do it. So, with more and more interactive toys and less and less cause to take up a cardboard box and ‘just add wonder’, it is easy to play a prophet of doom to a predicted generation of mindless kids, most of whom don’t know how to actually be kids anymore.

However, in my capacity as a tech reviewer, I’ve found considerable cause to hope for better. After extensively reviewing the latest crop of kid’s tablet PCs, I’ve actually found them to be, potentially, an exceptionally useful learning tool. In fact, provided that they are used as part of a ‘balanced diet’ (that also includes traditional picture books, regular play and stimulating creative exercises), a children’s tablet can be a really enriching product.

With literally hundreds of apps available for cheap download, kids tablets can offer anything from reading and writing programs, to maths, elementary science and even foreign languages. The sheer variety available on tablets like the VTech Innolab or the Leapfrog LeapPad is actually amazing. Some of these tablets (such as the LeapPad) even have specially designed operating systems that give children a basic introduction to the underpinnings of MAC OS, Windows, or Android.

In fact, there’s a lot to be said for interactive activities being better than more enriching than ‘passive’ activities like watching TV. Of course, there will be those parents who don’t take the time to use the tablets with their children, but those parents are no different from those who use the TV as an all-purpose babysitter or those parents who never make the time to read to their children.



However, if you want your child to gain a basic grasp of computers and have access to an array of interactive learning facilities, then I can honestly say that you could do a lot worse than getting a kid’s tablet.

In moderation a children’s tablet can be a passport to excitement, adventure and a high degree of preschool learning. Remember though, I said moderation. Drawing, writing, reading and traditional play are still very much number one in my opinion.

After all, without a little imagination, the adult world can be one nightmare after another.

Mars Rover Spots UFO...Or Does It?

After much global speculation, NASA has at last put out an official statement regarding the true identity of the ‘white spot’ or ‘UFO’ seen on Mars by the Curiosity Rover on June 20th.

...Sadly, the UFO in question turned out to be only as extraterrestrial as a camera glitch.

Interviewed by The Huffington Post, Justin Maki, the main camera operator for the rover, said, "This is a hot pixel that has been around since we started using the Right Navcam (...) In the thousands of images we've received from Curiosity, we see ones with bright spots nearly every week, these can be caused by cosmic-ray hits or sunlight glinting from rock surfaces, as the most likely explanations."

As any photographer will tell you, ‘hot pixels’ sometimes occur during long exposure shots. Such glitches are usually caused by the camera’s sensors momentarily overheating (although they pose no danger to the camera equipment itself).

Amateur photographers occasionally mistake hot pixels for paranormal phenomena as well. In fact, the ghost website ‘Photographing The Paranormal.com’ actually has a section on these little buggers. It warns potential ghost hunters that,

“A perfectly symmetric small red dot in your picture is probably nothing paranormal, especially if it is at the same spot in most of your pictures. That’s actually called a hot pixel, if you spot one, don’t call the press!”

Older astronomy enthusiasts will no doubt be reminded of the discovery of the ‘Martian face’, a famous image captured by NASA’s Viking 1 orbiter in 1976.

Various theorists hurried to suggest that the ‘face’ was evidence of a long-lost Martian civilization (complete with ‘pyramids’ and everything), but it was actually just a large formation, captured by the relatively low-resolution cameras of the 1970’s, that looked a bit like a face.

Modern images, of course, reveal nothing so grand. The ‘Martian Face’ fiasco is now seen as an example of paraeidolia, a psychological phenomenon that sees people finding recognizable patterns in otherwise random sounds and images, examples of which include The Man in the Moon, Rorschach tests and those times when people see the faces of religious figures in ordinary household objects.

So it seems that there was no reason for us to get excited after all (except that pictures of Mars are unassailably cool).

...Of course, the conspiracy nutters are never going to buy it, but hey, what can you do?