[82346] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: London incidents
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Tue Jul 12 21:26:12 2005
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Mark Foster <blakjak@blakjak.net>,
"Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:11:09 EDT."
<200507122211.j6CMBANM030410@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:25:43 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
In message <200507122211.j6CMBANM030410@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>, Valdis.Kletni
eks@vt.edu writes:
>
>--==_Exmh_1121206268_8796P
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:26:33 +1200, Mark Foster said:
>
>> "Using phone company records, researchers assessed phone use immediately
>> before the crash.
>> They found a third of calls in the 10 minutes before the crash were made on
>> cellphones.
>
>And the *other* 2/3rd of the calls were made on what, exactly?
>
>A land line just before departure, followed by a crash less than 10 minutes in
>to
>the drive? (This would tie in well with the "agitated by the phone call" theor
>y
>advanced by JC Dill...)
>
Sure, but there have been other studies *on simulators* that show
similar effects: it's the call, not the handset, that causes the
problem.
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
