digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Airborne Internet Might Bring Turbulence

hosted.ap.org — Seat 17D is yapping endlessly on an Internet phone call. Seat 16F is flaming Seat 16D with expletive-laden chats. Seat 16E is too busy surfing porn sites to care. Seat 17C just wants to sleep.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • allaboutdatiki, on 12/26/2007, -8/+34I kinda like being disconnected when I'm in the air ... gives me time to focus on other things or on nothing at all ...
    • sponeil, on 12/26/2007, -7/+3You may not want to give away your age like that. This is Digg, after all. ;-)
      • renegade334, on 12/26/2007, -2/+3I'm EIGHTEEN and I agree. It's not like i'm in any sort of stressful environment (I just finished school, and have a part-time job) It's just that times to sit back and think about nothing are getting rarer and rarer. I COULD just lie on my bed and do it, but i find myself reaching for the laptop and going on digg, or watching shows I just downloaded. The only times I have to do nothing is:
        In the car
        On the toilet
        or In the shower (which i can't do much of anymore because of water restrictions here in melbourne.
        /Rant
      • Dustmuffins, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1"This is Digg"

        The only part of that comment that made sense.
    • Dross, on 12/26/2007, -1/+5As do I. I don't know if is the forced relaxation that allows other thoughts to come through, or the lack of oxygen. But I do some of my best thinking in the air.
      But given the lousy cramped seating it is difficult to anything else. I can't use my laptop.
    • williamdyer, on 12/26/2007, -3/+7You realize this is a propaganda piece placed by the airlines to reinforce the idea they should control what passengers do on the Internet.
    • secleinteer, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1That doesn't mean that other people don't want to use the internet while on airplanes either. Why does everyone have a problem with internet on airplanes because they "like" not having it? You're not _forced_ to use it.
      And it's not like other people are going to be bothering you any more than usual by using it. People are doing plenty of other bothersome things on airplanes, and they use the internet in plenty of other places off airplanes where it may bother you. I don't see why people consider this particular combination of airplanes and internet to be so deadly to their peace.
    • Virgule, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1being focused on "nothing" is still focussing on something...
      /nerd
  • DeskFlyer, on 12/26/2007, -2/+28Mr. Striker, the passengers are getting worse. You must land soon.
  • roguedragon, on 12/26/2007, -5/+55So does this mean that playing as a terrorist in Counterstrike at 40k feet is out of the question?
    • .Steven, on 12/26/2007, -2/+11Not sure why someone dugg you down. Just make sure you don't bring a pie on board!
    • sotopheavy, on 12/27/2007, -0/+1If we're going to have internet on a plane you should only be able to access it through a built in seatback touch screen. There must be no speakers or microphone, just a headphone plug (and mouse/keyboard plug). Ban non headphone speakers and allow airline to provide them if the passenger doesn't have any. It also needs privacy flaps around the screen so nobody sees your screen but you. Airline is a private company so they could filter certain traffic if they chose like porn.
  • askjoe, on 12/26/2007, -11/+27Big...Bad....Idea.....the people I sit next to on flight are already annoying enough......imagine sitting next to the guy skyping his girlfriend, downloading crappy techno music one bad track after another, while looking at porn. Give me a break. We need to disconnect every once and a while.
    • squirrel83, on 12/26/2007, -3/+2You pay for what you get . . .
      • dark_helmet, on 12/26/2007, -1/+3You mean 'you get what you pay for'
    • theshiz892, on 12/26/2007, -4/+12Nobody is forcing you to look at or especially focus on another persons laptop, thats their business and privacy and you should respect that.

      Loud phone calls and people listening to music without headphones though truly is annoying.

      Flights are long and boring, and not everyone is going to pass out for hours. However someone like you can apparently and should just ignore other people passing the time alternatively.
      • williamdyer, on 12/26/2007, -2/+7They could be looking at pornos they have on their laptop now. Has that really happened to you? To anyone?

        These are scare stories to make you obey. Don't obey the propaganda.
      • Ajajadude, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Bring a movie or two along. Or a book. Take some pills. People truly are annoying enough on the plane, let alone on the ground, why should I have to deal with some douche with a case of ADD?

        I fly all the time and used to fly quite regularly back and forth between Florida and California while I was going to school and all I needed was a book, my iPod and/or my laptop to watch a movie or two and I was all set. My parents are consistently flying around the world and were quite content with a book and whatever crap the airline was showing on tv.

        People need to suck it up and learn to relax. If they can't handle a few hours or so without the internet or their cell phones, they have some serious problems.
      • sotopheavy, on 12/27/2007, -0/+1I'd rather have internet access on the screens on the back of the seats. No speakers, no microphone, no camera. You can plug in headphones and a mouse and keyboard, but screen is touchscreen so you don't need them. This plus privacy flaps around the monitor to promote privacy and minimizes annoyances.
    • roosterjm2k2, on 12/26/2007, -1/+3So your comfort is more important than theirs?

      As a comedian, Jon Reeps said... "Your privacy is invading my public"
    • jsmu, on 12/27/2007, -0/+0No, asswipe, the basic principle of manners is that the ***** who's annoying OTHERS by DOING something gets prohibited from doing it. Dogs, cigarettes, etc, etc, ad infinitum. Oh, sorry, that was Latin and I know you don't even read English.
  • Internetish, on 12/26/2007, -10/+5Taking your girlfriend with you in an airplane's bathroom brings turbulence !!
    • yowhat2002, on 12/26/2007, -0/+20Taking someone elses girlfriend into the airplanes bathroom would bring more.
  • plbland, on 12/26/2007, -9/+13I personally start twitching when I'm disconnected. More access the better IMO.
    • actorboy, on 12/26/2007, -5/+5They call that addiction. I know it all too well. But staying fixed is not really the solution.
    • jsmu, on 12/27/2007, -0/+0Try sedatives. Try barbiturates. Try a padded cell. keep your connectivity to yourself.
  • theshiz892, on 12/26/2007, -9/+4Isn't things like this what the FCC is actually for?
  • squirrel83, on 12/26/2007, -12/+5who cares you pay for what you get. . . If you want more privacy or quiet get a first class suite. . . *****!! It has come a long way to get internet in the plane dont down it biatch . . .
    • Coven, on 12/26/2007, -3/+8Dugg down for use of the word "biatch"
    • jamesLankford, on 12/26/2007, -2/+0well, if you want internet service, then maybe you should pay to get it in first class
      • mvisa, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Exactly. Or the screens in front should allow a keyboard with access to msn messenger, yahoo and aim or something.
    • jsmu, on 12/27/2007, -0/+0can't read, can't spell, can't think. What can you do? Anything?
  • buddamus, on 12/26/2007, -0/+12I love digg at high altitudes
  • saralk, on 12/26/2007, -2/+2I think they should have quiet periods, for example blocking all phone calls for night time flights.
    • Bootes, on 12/26/2007, -1/+1Except for when you're on the runway there should be no phone calls ever. However, people should be free to quietly use the internet in any way that doesn't make noise during the flight.
  • betterth, on 12/26/2007, -2/+23Man how annoying. People are letting the one bad cookie justify their decision to down an entire new prospect? Retarded. Just because you're too connected and don't know how to turn of your blackberries and/or cellphones for some rest and relaxation doesn't mean the rest of us are so terminally connected that we seek ***** airplanes to escape from everyday life.

    Some of us just want to ***** post comments on digg while flying.

    Is that too much to ask for??
    • LoveWidescreen, on 12/26/2007, -2/+2Yes. Is your life REALLY so dependent on technology that you can't put the computer down and read a f**king BOOK for a few hours?
      • Travelsonic, on 12/26/2007, -2/+1Not everybody sleeps or reads during a flight, some people do other productive things, others do those things with the reading/sleeping. Why should they do what YOU want them to do? I say GET OVER IT and just enjoy the flight.
        • Ajajadude, on 12/26/2007, -1/+2How can I enjoy a flight if some douche is pounding away at his keyboard for 3-5 hours or listening to music really, really loudly? If you need the internet to be productive either get your boss to charter you a private jet. There's no reason you need to be productive at 30,000 feet unless you're a business person. Even then, it's a great excuse to not do work for a few hours.
          • Travelsonic, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1How do you KNOW somebody will be POUDING (methinks he would rather not break his keyboard) in an obnoxious manor to begin with?

            Some people like being productive, it isn't your call to make for them.
    • billbillbilly, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2was bad cookie some attempt at a pun?
  • wifigod, on 12/26/2007, -1/+19I personally don't think it's as bad as this article states. For starters, you wouldn't be able to make any kind of phone calls and/or play any real-time multiplayer games. The latency (beaming up to the satellite and back) would be far too long for anything time-sensitive like that.
    As for the porn thing, that could easily be blocked with some sort of proxy software. Yeah, it might block some legitimate sites, but hey, you're getting internet in the air. It's their network (inside the plane that is), and they can do whatever they want with it.
    Also, with the 'expletive chat' comment, ummm don't stare at the other person's screen? It's called common courtesy, I wouldn't want people staring at my emails while I was reading them, would you?
    While all of these are listed in the article, I figured I'd reiterate them here. Most users don't even RTFA before they start ranting and raving, welcome to Digg.
    • bsl4doc, on 12/26/2007, -3/+2wall of text cries you for 567 damage!

      You use a potion of paragraph format and regain 999 up!
  • getsmartin, on 12/26/2007, -6/+1I can't imagine being so addicted to being "connected" that I couldn't give it a rest for three or four hours. I'd actually favor flying airlines "sans" net connection.
    • bjs3171, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1it's really more of a work thing. flights are a time people don't have to respond to work related emails. with internet on the phone, that excuse not to answer emails is gone.
  • BradMajors, on 12/26/2007, -9/+5Since passengers have shown they are not adult enough to know when it is and when it is not appropriate to fully recline their seat, I think it is necessary to treat the passengers as children and enforce rules on appropriate internet access on planes.
    • CaptA, on 12/26/2007, -1/+7BradMajors,

      What are you smoking? It’s a fact that it's not fine Cuban cigars! With all due respect - your comment shows precisely why you are part of the "problem" in/of America. The comment also reflects a childish naïveté of a confused understanding of parent-child relationship. The TSA, its progenitor, the U.S. government-thugatarians are not your friends! The government doesn't give a whim about you, your security or your ideas... How about the word, “CONTROL?” The ONLY concerns of the U.S. government deals with making sure that you remain a "slave" and that your pocket is “picked” on a regular basis – with or without your permission! I could go on, but I'd like to think you have part of the picture of “truth” by now... Regards, Capt. A., Waterford, Ireland
      • livefreeorleave, on 12/26/2007, -0/+5" ... that you remain a "slave" and that your pocket is “picked” on a regular basis – with or without your permission!"

        Hey Capt. A. - I just read that sentence - and started laughing - till I cried!! I sure am glad not to reside in the American jurisdiction anymore! And just to think that at one time I thought that America was the only place worth living... Even that thought keeps me roaring in laughter!

        Long live the “Confoederatio Helvetica!”

        Fisk,
        Torchman
    • mvisa, on 12/26/2007, -2/+2I agree, try sitting on a 10+ hour flight with someone reclining their chair onto your legs. There is already a lack of legroom. argh
  • ChristBehemoth, on 12/26/2007, -0/+3internet or no internet .. like sucks for 32C
  • neutrino15, on 12/26/2007, -3/+5I usually hate filtering of any kind.. But this is ok for me. Its **their** airplane, **their** seat, and **their** customer next to me. I would not expect to, nor want to do or have others be doing inappropriate things. I would also not mind if they blocked (or slowed) downloads. Planes will not have as much bandwidth as my ISP does, so the argument of "using up bandwidth" really does hold water.
    I would suggest, tho, making bandwidth on a pay per MB basis over a certain "normal" amount. This would deter people from torrenting while not "blocking" them altogether.
    And c'mon... Who would surf porn on a plane?!
    • Bootes, on 12/26/2007, -1/+3If it's possible, there's someone that'll do it.
    • EbilPhish, on 12/26/2007, -1/+5It's also **your** money, you used to pay for **your** overpriced ticket, so **your** body can be crammed into a tiny space to increase profit vs fuel.

      In addition you probably have to pay extra for the internet itself. why wouldn't they want to utilize another way to bleed money from customers.

      You could use exactly the same argument for regular ISPs, its **their** phone lines, **their** routers after all, and **their** paying the bandwidth bills, so why shouldn't they block bittorrent, porn, their competitors websites, messages that are anti their company, messages that are anti their partners company, message that they are paid to block by other companies or the government.

      I wouldn't want people looking at porn on the airplane, or in public place anyway but its no different if someone took a porno magazine on board, if someone looking at inappropriate material then they would get asked by the stewardess to stop reguardless of if they are looking at porn on a laptop or magazine.

      Porn censorship is ineffective anyway, you either have to make a huge list of all the porn sites (there are too many to make this possible) or filter out words (which you can get many false positives on). Then you can just use Tor/encrypted proxies to get around it. I wouldn't want random forum posts to be blocked because people are using language that get picked up by porn filters as possible being linked to porn.

      Plus it doesn't stop people predownloading porn anyway.
      • GreyICE, on 12/26/2007, -1/+1I dunno, because running a bunch of signals through copper/fiber optic is cheap as *****, while bouncing those signals off an object orbiting the earth is not quite so easily done? That's why I could support traffic filtering for planes on large downloads. I agree a pay per MB plan makes sense - your base plan includes a certain number of MB (say, 300 or something, more than enough for normal browsing) and you're alerted when you approach that number. When you cross, more fees.

        It just makes sense, to make the idea cost-efficient and workable.
    • billbillbilly, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2personally i dont care what they limit the connection to, because i know i can get around it :p
  • AnotherBrian, on 12/26/2007, -1/+4I don't get the deal with blocking porn sites. I'm sure the average laptop's hard drive already contains more GB of porn than can be downloaded during the flight.
  • micrmcdonald, on 12/26/2007, -2/+0Enabling this technology on the plane was only a matter of time. I don't think it is the worse idea particularly in cases of emergency. However, I am afraid of how disturbing our flight neighbors might become. I suspect bored teenagers flying coast-to-coast might be the real benefactors and perhaps a few slime balls looking for girlie sites. I guess the other side of the argument could be that the most innovative thoughts can be recorded while sitting 33k feet up. Who knows...I would vote for censorship indeed for this. We have to protect the babies and the fools.
  • DickyT83, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2The title makes it sound like a disease.
  • fsweep, on 12/26/2007, -2/+0Lufthansa had this in their 747s--- and yes, I was Skyping (I had an entire row to myself). They discontinued it--- reportedly because the equipment was too heavy and the ROI with the added fuel wasn't looking so good.
    • EphemeralFox, on 12/26/2007, -0/+3Actually it was discontinued because Boeing Connexion stopped providing the service.
      • fsweep, on 01/31/2008, -0/+0"In June 26, 2006 it became public that Boeing was exploring selling or shutting down Connexion By Boeing, having failed to attract sufficient customers. [7] The lack of sufficient customers was speculated to be a direct result of the U.S. domestic carriers pulling from agreements with Connexion after 9/11. While the European market thrived on the service, no U.S. domestic carriers were able to justify the $500,000 per plane investment and the weight cost of the additional hardware."

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connexion_by_Boeing
  • ritapluto, on 12/26/2007, -1/+2i don't see the problem, being online is mostly a quiet activity, and i'm sure public shaming will prevent people from having long skype conversations. hell, i don't converse with my family when they are sitting next to me on an airplane.
  • felchdonkey, on 12/26/2007, -2/+1This is one place where I consider blocking sites and services totally appropriate. I'm connected nearly all the time on the ground, and I can certainly survive without DoubleViking or 4chan while I'm in the air. And there's no frickin' WAY I want people using skype.
  • yabos, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2Do you see THAT many people looking at porn in public places right now? I don't see how a plane would be any different. People do have some self control and won't look at porn while there's lots of people around them. There's probably some creepy people that would do it at the back of the plane when everyone was sleeping but they could just do that anyways with their pre-downloaded porn if they wanted to.
  • kurtwinter, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2No need for luddite attitudes. This is no different than internet on a train. Keep your conversations down, your headsets in, and allow WoW players to quietly quest their way through their flights.
    • jsmu, on 12/27/2007, -0/+0No need for imbecility. This is completely different in every way than internet on a train. Ever occur to you that on a train one can get up and walk around? Why should we be further subjected to YOUR rudeness and incivility? Try reading a book, if you know what one is?
  • crazysamz, on 12/26/2007, -4/+2WHAT!!! No more wi-fi on planes because of these assholes!!! Now my Ipod touch is worthless, I'll never find wi-fi to actually use anything on it!!! ***** steve jobs, why didn't u do what the kindle did, offer free ev-do but on at&T!!
    (LOL, i'm just kidding, I don't even have an ipod touch, I'm a Zune user!!)
  • Fortytwoo, on 12/26/2007, -0/+4clearly this is a case of 'everyone on the internet is a moron, with the exception of myself, of course'
  • PURDooM, on 12/26/2007, -0/+2I stopped trusting what the article said when it said "Wifi handsets use less bandwidth then their laptop cousins". Its the same protocol, why would it be less bandwidth?
  • mvisa, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Does anyone realize what this means?!
    Plane journeys used to be a time to relax and now its another excuse for companies to give their employees MORE WORK. Also can you imagine some ass speaking as loud as possible on his mobile so that everyone can hear his conversation. I hate this 'always have to be connected' attitude!
  • Rooker156, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Do airlines still give out those little eye shades? I would say one of those and a pair of ear-plugs and your good. I like being connected, it allows me to get more work done in what would be considered dead time, and maybe get more time to enjoy the vacation that I need a bit more.
  • digjam, on 12/26/2007, -2/+1so does that mean that mhd atta would use google maps to get the directions to WTC? I would say no internet access on planes!
  • nicepants, on 12/26/2007, -0/+12 words...in-ear earphones. Never again will I be disturbed by a crying baby, a chatty neighbor, or those pesky safety briefings. (And something tells me in-flight internet won't be a problem, either)
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.