LED signage and panic
1 Feb 2007 11:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysengrinJust a few comments, since everybody is talking it to death :
(1) Yes, they shouldn't have been placed on public property. That's called littering at best, and they were certainly illegally placed advertising materials. Thumbs down - though some were apparently placed with permission on private property.
(2) "Assistant Attorney General John Grossman called the light boards 'bomblike' devices and said that if they had been explosive they could have damaged infrastructure and transportation in the city." Having seen up-close photos of the LED signs, they are "bomblike" in the same way that a aluminum drink can is "bomblike". The first one that was reported - yes, it should be treated carefully. An odd electronic device left unattended is suspicious. That the signs - with many bright LEDs - could be placed and left in place for two weeks or more says something about lax security, if Grossman is being serious about "bomblike." And the "if they had been explosive" comment? Well, that chewing gum somebody left on a support pillar also "could have damaged infrastructure and transportation in the city" - if it was plastique. It sounds more like someone is overreacting.
(3) Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said "It had a very sinister appearance. It had a battery behind it, and wires." See above comment about abandoned electronic devices - but sinister? Maybe it was the cartoon character flipping the bird that did it.
(4) We've just shown that all you need to close down a major American city is a few dollars worth of electronics and existing paranoia. No explosives actually needed. Boston should be embarrassed. Note that Philadelphia also sent a bomb squad out for the *first* reported sign in their city, but they didn't continue to do so for each one - and it barely made the news. That's the difference between a reasonable reaction and panic.
Judge Paul K. Leary seemed skeptical of the state's case [charging terrorist actions to the two men who placed the signs], telling Grossman that the law requires that people must intend to create a panic to be charged with placing hoax devices. This case, the judge said, seemed to involve two men who relatives say were paid to place unorthodox advertisements throughout the city.
EDIT: Philadelphia City managing director Pedro Ramos apparently decided to jump on the paranoia bandwagon: "These are the devices. They're electronic boards with transistors, wires, batteries, and tape. They can inspire fear." This was delivered at a local store which had given permission for one of the LED signs to be displayed on-site.
EDIT (also): Now the Boston police commissioner(right term?) is suggesting that the calls about the LED signs did not come from concerned citizens, but possibly as part of the ad campaign (didn't happen in any other city). The first one was found by a transport worker.
(1) Yes, they shouldn't have been placed on public property. That's called littering at best, and they were certainly illegally placed advertising materials. Thumbs down - though some were apparently placed with permission on private property.
(2) "Assistant Attorney General John Grossman called the light boards 'bomblike' devices and said that if they had been explosive they could have damaged infrastructure and transportation in the city." Having seen up-close photos of the LED signs, they are "bomblike" in the same way that a aluminum drink can is "bomblike". The first one that was reported - yes, it should be treated carefully. An odd electronic device left unattended is suspicious. That the signs - with many bright LEDs - could be placed and left in place for two weeks or more says something about lax security, if Grossman is being serious about "bomblike." And the "if they had been explosive" comment? Well, that chewing gum somebody left on a support pillar also "could have damaged infrastructure and transportation in the city" - if it was plastique. It sounds more like someone is overreacting.
(3) Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said "It had a very sinister appearance. It had a battery behind it, and wires." See above comment about abandoned electronic devices - but sinister? Maybe it was the cartoon character flipping the bird that did it.
(4) We've just shown that all you need to close down a major American city is a few dollars worth of electronics and existing paranoia. No explosives actually needed. Boston should be embarrassed. Note that Philadelphia also sent a bomb squad out for the *first* reported sign in their city, but they didn't continue to do so for each one - and it barely made the news. That's the difference between a reasonable reaction and panic.
Judge Paul K. Leary seemed skeptical of the state's case [charging terrorist actions to the two men who placed the signs], telling Grossman that the law requires that people must intend to create a panic to be charged with placing hoax devices. This case, the judge said, seemed to involve two men who relatives say were paid to place unorthodox advertisements throughout the city.
EDIT: Philadelphia City managing director Pedro Ramos apparently decided to jump on the paranoia bandwagon: "These are the devices. They're electronic boards with transistors, wires, batteries, and tape. They can inspire fear." This was delivered at a local store which had given permission for one of the LED signs to be displayed on-site.
EDIT (also): Now the Boston police commissioner(right term?) is suggesting that the calls about the LED signs did not come from concerned citizens, but possibly as part of the ad campaign (didn't happen in any other city). The first one was found by a transport worker.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-01 07:26 pm (UTC)What, really? Explosives could have damaged infrastructure and transportation? No shit, Sherlock! :)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-01 08:51 pm (UTC)I'm getting tired of all these false alarms now (and I really hope I'm not the only one, but I probably am, and am going to get screamed at for it), because you know one day something is going to happen and nobody is going to pay any attention to it. :/
(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-02 03:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-02 06:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-02-04 06:03 am (UTC)