4 ms·
That seems reasonable to me, but I don't think that was the OPs proposition ( arrest the user ). Ban on a plane is fairly strong, but a lot more reasonable. At
by A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
That seems reasonable to me, but I don't think that was the OPs proposition ( arrest the user ). Ban on a plane is fairly strong, but a lot more reasonable. At least compared to blank ban on electronics that included gameboys and walkmen, this one makes sense.
- vlovich123 3y agoIt’s only facially reasonable to people not familiar enough with RF on a plane. This isn’t in the right radio bands to interfere with anything to do with the safe operation of a plane and it’s using off the shelf radio chips and firmware that would have the appropriate channel switching when they detect a sensitive communication (no different from the stuff the WiFi chip in your laptop and phone are doing when connected to the plane’s WiFi). People were rightly concerned (even if overly conservative and in practice it would be ok) about 3g + planes but since 4g it’s been a solved problem and WiFi has been doing coex with radar channels for forever and if if I recall correctly Bluetooth is too low power to really cause a problem. And to reiterate, flipper zero afaik is using the same off the shelf radio hardware and firmware that would be found in any other product so it wouldn’t be any more dangerous to plane functioning than those products. I really am confused by the FUD being leveled at flipper zero and where it’s coming from.