3 ms·

Won't work, not for stopping leaks. Moreover, by asking people to put their phone under a lock, the venue implies that they view every attendee as a thief. Tha

by eps 11y ago

Won't work, not for stopping leaks. Moreover, by asking people to put their phone under a lock, the venue implies that they view every attendee as a thief. That sure as hell won't go down well with some and they will find a way to record and post to YouTube purely out of spite.

toyg 11y ago
That might be, but it changes the game for security guards. You go from "17,000 people trying to film" to "a few dozen troublemakers trying to film", which is actually manageable.
- ceejayoz 11y ago
  Now it's 17,000 people you have to try and get your anti-cellphone device back from. Given that they have some sort of proximity sensor and powered lock, they can't afford to lose hundreds/thousands a night to people who forget to turn them in.
  - toyg 11y ago
    At scale (which is what you have very quickly, considering each shows brings huge numbers), those sensors get cheap enough that you just factor them in even at 0% return rates. They won't cost more than $20 each; put half the cost on tickets and half on losses and you're good. To operations the size of Chappelle's, good-quality leaked video is worth millions. Besides, why would they lose so many? Like 3d glasses, the novelty goes away very quickly.
j2kun 11y ago
We already assume every airline customer is a terrorist, so this isn't that big of a stretch.
tptacek 11y ago
As the article says, Mumford & Sons and Hannibal Burress have already been using the system. It should be easy for you to show that people have leaked videos from shows where the pouches were used.
- coldtea 11y ago
  That would only prove that it haven't happened yet, not that it can't happen, and with the motivations the parent describes.
iamsohungry 11y ago
As a viewer of live shows, if this decreases my chance of having my view blocked by some asshole who has decided to view the whole show through a grainy 3x5in window instead of experiencing life, I'm all for it. When I go to this sort of thing, I try not to bring my phone anyway.

by eps 11y ago

toyg 11y ago

That might be, but it changes the game for security guards. You go from "17,000 people trying to film" to "a few dozen troublemakers trying to film", which is actually manageable.

ceejayoz 11y ago
Now it's 17,000 people you have to try and get your anti-cellphone device back from. Given that they have some sort of proximity sensor and powered lock, they can't afford to lose hundreds/thousands a night to people who forget to turn them in.
- toyg 11y ago
  At scale (which is what you have very quickly, considering each shows brings huge numbers), those sensors get cheap enough that you just factor them in even at 0% return rates. They won't cost more than $20 each; put half the cost on tickets and half on losses and you're good. To operations the size of Chappelle's, good-quality leaked video is worth millions. Besides, why would they lose so many? Like 3d glasses, the novelty goes away very quickly.

j2kun 11y ago

We already assume every airline customer is a terrorist, so this isn't that big of a stretch.

tptacek 11y ago

As the article says, Mumford & Sons and Hannibal Burress have already been using the system. It should be easy for you to show that people have leaked videos from shows where the pouches were used.

coldtea 11y ago
That would only prove that it haven't happened yet, not that it can't happen, and with the motivations the parent describes.

iamsohungry 11y ago

As a viewer of live shows, if this decreases my chance of having my view blocked by some asshole who has decided to view the whole show through a grainy 3x5in window instead of experiencing life, I'm all for it. When I go to this sort of thing, I try not to bring my phone anyway.