Talk:Teen Buzz

message: I edited "The story goes back to 2005, when a British inventor named Howard Stapleton came up with a security device designed to keep teenagers from congregating outside of shops late at night, as well as taking up space and driving away the money-spending customers during the day."  by removing the bold section to make the article more neutral.Ztjank (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should probably be mentioned somewhere in the article that some cheap computer speakers are unable to generate any sounds of that frequency, which may explain why some young people cannot hear the tone. --Mad Max 20:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsorted talk

message: Hey everyone.
There are no links apart from those supporting the claims of the so-called inventor.
There is only a stub for presbycusis - which also contains links to the device.
Finally, rather than focusing on computer speakers, why not ask how such tones could be generated on a cell phone as is alleged.
I smell a hoax.
* dubious sources perhaps, but the tone does work, and has been proven to work all over the world. 67.116.254.222 09:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, the last comment, (above) was made by me, I also took the liberty of deleting an URL, revert if I'm wrong, or discuss here. Reeves 23:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious Sources 

message: Hello there,
I would like to know if anyone else has heard these tones elsewhere.
Personally, since I was less than 10 years old I would hear such noises from electrical devices. Particularly when a television is on "Sleep" mode (i.e. you turned it off with remote control [usually a red LED is on TV to tell you it is in "Sleep" mode]; as opposed to turning it off with button on TV box.); I would hear a nagging noise; and eventually I would have to turn the TV fully off, from the button on the box.
Also, as I was listening to the MP3s in the links section of this article I found that I could hear the  16746hz at my normal speaker volume level, then I had to start turning my volume up for the 17000hz, didn't test above that; but if I moved my head away from where the sound was being projected it would not be heard (so I was perpendicular but off to the side).
from Jawboot. --Jawboot 23:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hearing these tones is not news to me. 

message: The MP3 versions of high pitch sounds are simply misleading. First of all, MP3 encoded with 44100 sampled per second simply cannot encode pitch higher than 22050 Hz. I triple checked the "22.4khz Tone" using GoldWave. Second thing, what you DO mostly hear in those sound files is the MP3 psychoacoustics encoding error, as MP3 encoders reduce inaudible sounds such as high-pitch sounds. I made some examinations, and even with 192kbps, high-pitch sounds are reduces and resampled. Therefore, most MP3 files cannot be used for those tests. – Fuzzy 15:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: what about a WAV file? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.35.254.252 (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WAV files are okay as long as they have the proper frequency. Fuzzy 18:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I had made a bunch of wavs before i read this. Do these wav files have the proper frequency? Link Deo Favente (talk) 22:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "freemosquitoringtones" thing 

message: The article states that the ringtone is in effect "piracy" of the underlying technology.  The claim is, to say the least, unsourced and a matter of opinion (at least until some court rules on the matter).  Claim and related materials should be removed.
As a matter of intellectual property law, it seems to me to be really a stretch to say that his patent on the original product extends to "using a high-pitched tone that adults cannot hear regardless of what the purpose of the use is."  Normally the patent would extend only to the use that he has proposed putting it to.  Basically, he sounds like he's engaged in typical IP bullying.  If anything, he may actually be violating the law by claiming an exclusive right to use of technology developed by someone else (the ringtone is really a separate technology).
:Um I think you're missing the point. He wasn't talking about patent law. Piracy is irrelevant in patent law anyway. It's my understanding that the original ringtones were simply recordings of the mosquito noise. If the mosquito noise was of sufficient creativity that it could be said to be copyrighted by him, then people recording and using the noise without his permission would indeed be violating his copyright. People could of course make their own noises with external software and that would be fine. But any ringtones that originated as recordings of his mosquito noise could potentially be considered pirated. Nil Einne 10:25, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious Intellectual Property Claim 

message: We should merge this article with "The Mosquito" article, they are pretty much the same things, but with different purposes.
:My beleif is that we should make in the "The Mosquito" article a section titled "Ringtone" or something and just move this whole thing into that article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.77.101 (talk) 01:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - both these articles are very similar and a ringtone section should encompass this article within the merged sections. 137.222.214.194 (talk) 14:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed; the great majority this article is contextual background about the Mosquito technology. I'll merge it. --McGeddon (talk) 10:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging