Drive-Smart Defender2 laser jammer bypasses blinder patent?!

Printable View

03-23-2006, 05:37 AM
JTW

Drive-Smart Defender2 laser jammer bypasses blinder patent?!

Jim did a great job of posting the blinder patent on another thread. Basically the blinder patent states it uses a look up table of the different pulse paterns to use when it encounters a laser gun detected and registered on the software. Drive-Smart claims they don't need to use a look up table at all, thus a generic jamming code isn't even needed because they'll be able to jam any gun by real fly time. This is quite the engineering marvel if Drive-Smart can actually achieve this, but who knows? Drive-Smart is brand new to the laser jammer areana.

The beef:
If Blinders patent is solely based on the software of a look up table and if Drive-smart doesn't use one that basically makes a total loophole around the blinder patent right?

What are you thoughts guys?

JTW
03-23-2006, 06:48 AM
amoney

I would agree.
03-23-2006, 07:21 AM
ronsc1985

My thoughts are if laser jammers get to be prevalent there is a very easy way for gun manufacturers to foil the currentr discussed jammer methods be they table lookup or so called on the fly.

Simply put it would be easy for any gun manufacturer to implement random pulse output spacing. If they do this there is nothing to learn or lookup. When the jammer sends pulses back outside the window when a pulse should be returned the gun would know it is being jammed. A good analogy is the frequency skipping methods used in military communication equipment. For all I know the laser designators in the military equipment use a similar technique. Random number generation in a simple microprocessor has been done for a long, long time. Unless you can somehow know the seed number to start the process you cannot determine the number sequence on the fly. You can do it by after the fact analysis but this is not very useful out on the highway.

In any event it is easy to do and all this talk about whether a particular jammer can defeat all future guns is just that talk.

Can some other form of jammer defeat a random pulse spacing gun without the gun knowing it is being jammed? Probably but not using the methods currently being discussed.
03-23-2006, 07:31 AM
Rottman

Quote:

Originally Posted by amoney

I would agree.

Me too JTW. GOD I hope that's true.....
03-23-2006, 07:35 AM
drive-smart

Patents and look up tables

This question really applies to AL/POO Park as they use a look up table.
I think no one will comment as revealing all your IP and technology secrets is not really the most sensible thing to do is it?
One thing our system is totally software upgradeable so it can be used for loads of different purposes and its also up to the end user what software they run on it.
03-23-2006, 07:43 AM
jimbonzzz

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronsc1985

My thoughts are if laser jammers get to be prevalent there is a very easy way for gun manufacturers to foil the currentr discussed jammer methods be they table lookup or so called on the fly.

Simply put it would be easy for any gun manufacturer to implement random pulse output spacing. If they do this there is nothing to learn or lookup. When the jammer sends pulses back outside the window when a pulse should be returned the gun would know it is being jammed. A good analogy is the frequency skipping methods used in military communication equipment. For all I know the laser designators in the military equipment use a similar technique. Random number generation in a simple microprocessor has been done for a long, long time. Unless you can somehow know the seed number to start the process you cannot determine the number sequence on the fly. You can do it by after the fact analysis but this is not very useful out on the highway.

In any event it is easy to do and all this talk about whether a particular jammer can defeat all future guns is just that talk.

Can some other form of jammer defeat a random pulse spacing gun without the gun knowing it is being jammed? Probably but not using the methods currently being discussed.

The only technique that I can think of that would jam such a method would be to use a 2+ MHz pulse rate, similar to the Lidatek LE-10/LE850. That way in theory there's always a jamming pulse received at the gun between the time the gun's pulse is sent out, but before it is reflected back.

Jim
03-23-2006, 07:46 AM
jimbonzzz

Re: Drive-Smart Defender2 laser jammer bypasses blinder pate

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTW

The beef:
If Blinders patent is solely based on the software of a look up table and if Drive-smart doesn't use one that basically makes a total loophole around the blinder patent right?

Last I heard, it was DriveSmart's intent to also use a lookup table too:

http://www.radardetector.net/viewtop...r=asc&start=60

Quote:

Originally Posted by drive-smart

We also have a look up table that we will release not long after the Defender2 is available.
The users can then update the Defender2 to do either Pulse link or look up table or both.
This is why we have worked hard to develop a software upgradeable system,Power out put can easily be adjusted as well as the power supply is all controlled via software its easy to run from 0.1-10 amps with our system.Although 10amps is really not recommend. :lol:
03-23-2006, 08:50 AM
JTW

Re: Patents and look up tables

Quote:

Originally Posted by drive-smart

This question really applies to AL/POO Park as they use a look up table.
I think no one will comment as revealing all your IP and technology secrets is not really the most sensible thing to do is it?
One thing our system is totally software upgradeable so it can be used for loads of different purposes and its also up to the end user what software they run on it.

Can you seriously grow up Neil and act like a respectable manufacturer JUST ONCE? It's called Pro Park, not Poo park you moron.
03-23-2006, 08:56 AM
drive-smart

Poo park

This was already a name users were calling it already on previous posts.
Did you see the post from FLYBOY earlier?

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYBOY!!!!!

Yes, Roy has received the first batch of STi's and has already shipped them out.

As for my AL 6.5, it arrived today.

When I opened it, I immediately noticed a few things:

(1) The box had its seal broken
(2) There was no mounting bracket in the box
(3) The junction box had the cutouts for the connections cut quite amateurishly, I could do better with a jigsaw!!!!!
(4) The cable sheathing ends on the outside of the junction box leaving wiring exposed to the naked eye
(5) There was no serial # on the unit, only on the carton
(6) The packaging for International shipping was woeful and the unit was scratched from rubbing on the carton

I immediately telephoned the U.K. dealer with my [i]EXTREME DISAPPOINTMENT[i] and they agreed to a full refund upon return of the LPP, Thank you for accepting responsibility K300.

As such, I will now wait for the GOL testing and see which Jammer comes up No.1

As I have learnt with my years of growing old (but not UP :lol: ), you can't always have a win, but, when you do win it makes the disappointments worth it.

Oh well, just have to wait for my toys to arrive from Roy.

Really was a poo park for him.LOL :lol:
We did not start that name!LOL :lol:
ffs people take things much to seriously on here lighten up Chris you seem a bit tense today.
03-23-2006, 09:13 AM
drive-smart

Patents

On a more serious note,I think patents are for people who do not innovate or want to stifle innovation.
And a lot of the time its very easy to get round someones patent/s.
03-23-2006, 09:58 AM
JTW

Re: Poo park

Quote:

Originally Posted by drive-smart

This was already a name users were calling it already on previous posts.
Did you see the post from FLYBOY earlier?

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYBOY!!!!!

Yes, Roy has received the first batch of STi's and has already shipped them out.

As for my AL 6.5, it arrived today.

When I opened it, I immediately noticed a few things:

(1) The box had its seal broken
(2) There was no mounting bracket in the box
(3) The junction box had the cutouts for the connections cut quite amateurishly, I could do better with a jigsaw!!!!!
(4) The cable sheathing ends on the outside of the junction box leaving wiring exposed to the naked eye
(5) There was no serial # on the unit, only on the carton
(6) The packaging for International shipping was woeful and the unit was scratched from rubbing on the carton

I immediately telephoned the U.K. dealer with my [i]EXTREME DISAPPOINTMENT[i] and they agreed to a full refund upon return of the LPP, Thank you for accepting responsibility K300.

As such, I will now wait for the GOL testing and see which Jammer comes up No.1

As I have learnt with my years of growing old (but not UP :lol: ), you can't always have a win, but, when you do win it makes the disappointments worth it.

Oh well, just have to wait for my toys to arrive from Roy.

Really was a poo park for him.LOL :lol:
We did not start that name!LOL :lol:
ffs people take things much to seriously on here lighten up Chris you seem a bit tense today.

Is Flyboy another one of your user ID's Neil? You're always saying how your jammer jams on the fly. That is your catch phrase. Now the only user to give a bad rep on Anti-laser(besides your other user ID's) has the name flyboy. If you're going to make up more user ID's at least get a little more creative :wink:
03-23-2006, 10:06 AM
drive-smart

Flyboy

Yes your spot on there!NOT! :lol:
03-23-2006, 02:02 PM
ronsc1985

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbonzzz

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronsc1985

My thoughts are if laser jammers get to be prevalent there is a very easy way for gun manufacturers to foil the currentr discussed jammer methods be they table lookup or so called on the fly.

Simply put it would be easy for any gun manufacturer to implement random pulse output spacing. If they do this there is nothing to learn or lookup. When the jammer sends pulses back outside the window when a pulse should be returned the gun would know it is being jammed. A good analogy is the frequency skipping methods used in military communication equipment. For all I know the laser designators in the military equipment use a similar technique. Random number generation in a simple microprocessor has been done for a long, long time. Unless you can somehow know the seed number to start the process you cannot determine the number sequence on the fly. You can do it by after the fact analysis but this is not very useful out on the highway.

In any event it is easy to do and all this talk about whether a particular jammer can defeat all future guns is just that talk.

Can some other form of jammer defeat a random pulse spacing gun without the gun knowing it is being jammed? Probably but not using the methods currently being discussed.

The only technique that I can think of that would jam such a method would be to use a 2+ MHz pulse rate, similar to the Lidatek LE-10/LE850. That way in theory there's always a jamming pulse received at the gun between the time the gun's pulse is sent out, but before it is reflected back.

Jim

True one could jam using this method but the fact that the gun is being jammed would be readily apparent at the gun by simply counting how many return pulses are being received. The only question about all this is if it is worth the extra expense in gun manufacture and if the LEO community would pay for it. Without widespread use of jammers in cars I doubt if doing this is cost effective however cost effective is usually not in the government vocabulary.
03-23-2006, 03:17 PM
stalker

Jim,

Drive smart said they will release the jammer with a lookup table if the user prefers, they can supply a jammer with on the fly jamming and if the user wants a lookup table they can just download the table to the unit themselves via the upgrade software from home.

I think this is what they mean by releasing a jammer with a lookup table (aswell)

Guys, cant we just have 1 thread that doesnt result in mudslinging :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
03-23-2006, 08:27 PM
yaks1974

Quote:

JTW :-Is Flyboy another one of your user ID's Neil?

No, FLYBOY is a legitimate member and has no association with Drive-Smart.
03-23-2006, 08:52 PM
411

In the whole Usa =

can't anybody build a multiple head jammer using simultaneously 2 of the main scheme ?

Is it just a zero-possibility ?
03-23-2006, 09:42 PM
stalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by yaks1974

Quote:

JTW :-Is Flyboy another one of your user ID's Neil?

No, FLYBOY is a legitimate member and has no association with Drive-Smart.

Ill second that! He is an individual no associated with anyone.
03-23-2006, 10:11 PM
JTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by yaks1974

Quote:

JTW :-Is Flyboy another one of your user ID's Neil?

No, FLYBOY is a legitimate member and has no association with Drive-Smart.

I was really just joking around with neil on that because I don't have any proof of it, but at the same time how would you know flyboy isn't controlled by drive-smart? How can you prove this?
03-23-2006, 10:13 PM
stalker

F88K me, you are so paranoid :roll: :roll: :roll:
03-23-2006, 10:20 PM
JTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by stalker

F88K me, you are so paranoid :roll: :roll: :roll:

Right because it would be soooo out of the ordinary if drive-smart had yet another ID. Like it hasn't happened before Stalker :shock: Seriously though I'm not really saying Flyboy is positively Drive-smart. I'm not really going to make up crap I can't back up. Neil prides himself on having english humor, so I'm sure he'll love it :wink:
03-23-2006, 11:07 PM
yaks1974

Quote:

JTW :-I was really just joking around with neil on that because I don't have any proof of it, but at the same time how would you know flyboy isn't controlled by drive-smart? How can you prove this?

I actually know FLYBOY personally, I work with him everyday.

How do you know that i'm not controlled by drivesmart?

You'll just have to look up mine and Fly's posting history and read what we have written and decide for yourself.
03-23-2006, 11:56 PM
drive-smart

Multiple head jammer

Quote:

Originally Posted by 411

In the whole Usa =

can't anybody build a multiple head jammer using simultaneously 2 of the main scheme ?

Is it just a zero-possibility ?

Its interesting why we are the first manufacturer to take this route,It could be to do with cost as the Defender2 is not cheap to build. :lol:
Also its amazing why we are the only manufacturer making any posts on the forum,Everyone else is very very quiet.
03-23-2006, 11:58 PM
drive-smart

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by stalker

F88K me, you are so paranoid :roll: :roll: :roll:

Right because it would be soooo out of the ordinary if drive-smart had yet another ID. Like it hasn't happened before Stalker :shock: Seriously though I'm not really saying Flyboy is positively Drive-smart. I'm not really going to make up crap I can't back up. Neil prides himself on having english humor, so I'm sure he'll love it :wink:

Chris you are going to end up with some serious Egg on your face watch!LOL :lol:
Or a good old English egg and flouring is what you could do with!LOL :lol:
You mean out of the Ordinary if some one from Poo park or AL had another user ID?LOL :lol:
03-24-2006, 01:31 AM
FLYBOY!!!!!

JTW, now I don't know you personally but seriously, I think you are just a little bit paranoid when it comes to DS.

Mate, I live in AU, have never spoken to anyone from AL or DS except by email when I was inquiring about Jammers, because I really had no clue as to which unit to buy.

My unfortunate experience with my LPP is, I believe the only one posted on detector.net, so maybe this was a one-off thing. I have no ill feeling about any company (except RMR :lol: ), all I would like is the best unit that I can possibly get at the best possible price.

By the way, I think Roy can confirm I am genuine as I had orders placed with him before I even knew about this site (I actually found the link on his site after I had ordered my STi) and just before I ordered the LPP, I had already placed an order with him for a M20 but I cancelled because I need something that jams the UltraLyte and doesn't throw up error codes.

Oh and check out all of my posts, do they look like someone who is well informed about RDs and other stuff?

I'm here to learn about this stuff and maybe in the process, get a discount from Roy for any other things I want to get. I say from Roy because he is one person that I know I can trust.

I agree with questioning manufacturers about their products and grilling them if they have 'twisted the truth' but I reckon we should also wait until DS releases his product, then after GOL do their tests and pull one apart to see whats inside, then maybe it will be time to attack his statements, and, JTW, in your case attack the man behind those statements.
03-24-2006, 06:59 PM
JTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by drive-smart

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by stalker

F88K me, you are so paranoid :roll: :roll: :roll:

Right because it would be soooo out of the ordinary if drive-smart had yet another ID. Like it hasn't happened before Stalker :shock: Seriously though I'm not really saying Flyboy is positively Drive-smart. I'm not really going to make up crap I can't back up. Neil prides himself on having english humor, so I'm sure he'll love it :wink:

Chris you are going to end up with some serious Egg on your face watch!LOL :lol:
Or a good old English egg and flouring is what you could do with!LOL :lol:
You mean out of the Ordinary if some one from Poo park or AL had another user ID?LOL :lol:

I should watch out eh. I wouldn't want to get the same respect on this board that you've already earned :wink:

For FlyBoy I never said it was a fact Drive-Smart controlled you. Almost got me their. Almost :wink: