SDS

Well, alot is going on w/ phones these days. If you have a real old one - 49 MHz. Then it doesn't. If you had a fancy 900 Mhz purchased back in the day. It might. If you have 2.4 Ghz or 5.8 Ghz - then there is a good chance it does unless you bought the least expensive models. The new wave is DECT 6.0. It is a global standard that kicks ass in clarity and range and it doesn't share the frequencies with other appliances (wireless networks), so interference is not an issue. Data is encrypted, but I'm not sure how well. A quick search doesn't yield any vulnerabilities to date.

It's ok. If the comments were directed about the front page then they are spot on (or at least his opinion is the same as mine). Refreshing the front page is long over due. Like 4 years overdue. As for the board, I think it looks pretty good, but there is always room for improvement.

This is not true. I posted the info above. If your phone has spread spectrum, then it is very, very difficult to eavesdrop. If someone is listening to you over DSS - you got serious @%@#$ issues because you are talking about equipment sophisticated enough for terrorists or NSA ops. The quick and dirty about DSS is that you are broadcasting over many, many frequencies AT THE SAME TIME. So, someone with a scanner can't listen to you because there isn't one frequency to tune in to. They would need to know all the frequencies you are broadcasting on, the code pattern, and then be able to take all the info in real time and reconstruct it all to listen in. It ain't happening to any average joe on the street.

Digital security codes One of the first measures made possible by the invention of digital technology was security coding. Every time a handset with this feature is placed into a base unit, one of up to 100,000 digital codes is randomly assigned. This code is then continually transmitted during calls. In order to communicate, a handset and a base unit must have this code. Digital security codes do not prevent scanners from picking up your calls. The codes merely prevent eavesdropping by other people with similar handsets and make it impossible for them to use your phone line to make their own calls. Spread Spectrum Technology (SST) Since binary code is being transmitted (as opposed to analog pulses), digital signals make call interception more difficult. However, eavesdropping is still possible. To further protect cordless privacy, spread spectrum technology was invented. SST disassembles a voice signal, "spreads" it over several channels during transmission, and then reassembles it back into its original form. It is almost impossible for people to reassemble an SST signal on their own. And in addition to better security, since the FCC permits SST phones to use higher output wattage than traditional cordless phones, SST phones deliver better range. Higher frequencies Most inexpensive radio scanners—the ones you typically find in electronics stores and/or your local discount drugstore—cannot access frequencies above 512 MHz. However, if eavesdroppers are willing to spend a little more money, they can listen in on a 900 MHz frequency, and beyond. On the other hand, even the pricier scanners can't cover the 2.4 GHz frequencies used by the newest, most advanced cordless phones. http://www.marcusball.com/opinion/telecom/...ss_security.htm

Are you talking about TBD or the message board? I think the message board look is fine, but I agree - the design of TBD is old and tired. I have planned on having it refreshed for years now, but the road to hell and good intentions and all that.... Of course, that doesn't mean it would change to being cluttered, but it is a very tired look. I do hope to get it changed this offseason. Now, if I could just find someone in MD who has a PC that I can hook up our failed drive to (and install linux recovery software) we'll be on our way....

anyway, I should have mentioned that spread spectrum is what you need on your phone.

google the title of the thread... http://www.phonelosers.org/cordless.html

why by definition? Everyone is adding players, so presumably no one is getting worse by definition. The only way I see a team actually failing a priori is doing something like Ditka did for Ricky Williams. No college player is worth that many picks...

but therein lies the beauty of it all. Obviously Hardy is our go to guy and that is where the defense will concentrate their efforts. Having multiple threats like Lynch and Hardy open up a tackle-eligible play for a guy like Bell with good hands, but is lining up to block.

you forgot the quotes around "guy"...

Former basketball player turned OT? 6'6"? This guy is going to line up on goal line situations and receive at least 2 TD's this season...

" The Panthers had the best seventh round, landing a pass rusher in Taylor and two blockers in Bernadeau and Schwartz." The best 7th round...

For someone who does an awful lot of complaining about others and their idiocy, I question why over the course of 8-10 years you haven't been able to grasp the concept of how public message boards work... Seriously, 10 years later you pull out "signal to noise ratio of this place"? Here's a little task for you while you badger people for their resumes. Click on your name and go to your profile. Click on the link that shows all of your posts. Read through them then calculate YOUR personal "signal to noise ratio" and get back to us... Then we can discuss your signal and compare that to other poster's noise...

Other than Peters, can anyone ever think of a time these projects work out? I can't. Dan Brandenburg anyone?

really? That would be an absolutely incredible feat.

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

Do you need to to do this EVERY PICK????? [This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

yikes - you punched him?

Lonnie Johnson? Bobby Something or other in the 4th about 6 years ago....

Post reaction here...

So, you think a rookie WR taken in the 2nd round is going to mean how many wins for us?

all this fuss because "conference" was repeated twice?

Care to actually give an example? BTW, it is called "cut and paste".

wrong thread.

I dunno. The 1st image I saw of him was on ESPN dropping an easy pick 6... Oh well. Not the greatest 1st impression.