# let's not forget in this maelstrom there are A LOT of people including young kids (that often arrive at least initially unaccompanied) that come on weekends and special days/nights only and don't follow the lists...<br>
# they will have no idea what's going on...<br># some are coming from other cities...<br><br>end comments<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 5:10 PM, jim <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
I think it's okay that the upstairs door is locked but<br>
the elevator is (theoretically) accessible. Only the<br>
intrepid will try the elevator, and there's some chance<br>
that the elevator won't work at the time the intrepid bad<br>
personage tries to use it. Overall the scheme has a pretty<br>
good filtering affect of keeping drunks and incompetents<br>
more nearly at bay.<br>
The idea isn't perfect, but it seems an improvement over<br>
the way things are. Maybe at some future time we could deal<br>
with elevator access and control (e.g. locked doors on the<br>
roomlet where the trash and elevator are).<br>
<br>
One angle we should consider with respect to the street-<br>
facing door is our downstairs neighbors: don't want to lock<br>
them out.<br>
(Another angle is community geekiness unintentionally<br>
excludes those who are not technically equipped to use the<br>
particular chosen technology; another is that the more<br>
complex, the greater the risk of failure; another is the<br>
more homebrewable, the greater the risk of our hacking<br>
ourselves out of access on a regular basis...).<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, 2012-02-09 at 15:43 -0800, Tom wrote:<br>
> Any system that relies on the security of the upstairs door faces the<br>
> problem the the elevator goes from outside that door to inside that<br>
> door.<br>
><br>
> I very much like Kelly's proposal. I don' t think that we should aim<br>
> to remove the buzzer entirely, just make it's use sufficiently rare<br>
> that folks are skeptical and quizzical when letting people in. This<br>
> might extend to use of the camera, or even talking to people that are<br>
> let in.<br>
><br>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:28 PM, jim <<a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> Anything that involves software is unlikely to<br>
> be KISS-compliant.<br>
> I like the idea that the upstairs door is always<br>
> locked and whoever's on the inside must let the<br>
> outside person in. It's not perfect, but it's not<br>
> the enemy of the good, either.<br>
> Some last person leaving the space empty? Oh,<br>
> well; next person's gotta wait for someone who's got<br>
> a key. Unlikely to wait longer than for a muni bus.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Thu, 2012-02-09 at 13:24 -0800, Kelly wrote:<br>
> > I am getting together a group, rooted in the social<br>
> engineering group,<br>
> > to implement a doorcode system modeled after the system at<br>
> Essex hot<br>
> > tub in Berkeley. They have a large set of virally<br>
> distributed codes.<br>
> > Community regulars often have several codes. When there is a<br>
> problem<br>
> > night, all codes used that night are disabled.<br>
> ><br>
> > I would welcome help on this project. There should be a bit<br>
> more<br>
> > description of it in the notes from this week's meeting.<br>
> Probably get<br>
> > on the social engineering mailing list if you want to keep<br>
> up on<br>
> > progress.<br>
> ><br>
> > I figure hard key use would remain the same. Doorcodes would<br>
> replace<br>
> > the buzzer and would provide temporary access that people<br>
> can<br>
> > comfortably distribute freely. I think there will still be<br>
> some issues<br>
> > to work out, but I think it will address several of our<br>
> problems.<br>
> > Right now the big question is whether we can spread codes<br>
> widely<br>
> > enough to remove the doorbell entirely. That's my hope.<br>
> ><br>
> > -Kelly<br>
> ><br>
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:15, Casey Callendrello<br>
> <<a href="mailto:c1@caseyc.net">c1@caseyc.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> > > Oh, this is such an awesome idea. Indoors, a keypad is<br>
> easy. Alternatively,<br>
> > > we could hook up that A-key switch...<br>
> > ><br>
> > > -c.<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > On 2/9/2012 9:57 AM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > What about a code being required in order to operate the<br>
> buzzer from the<br>
> > > inside, ie you need to know a code to let other people in?<br>
> > ><br>
> > > <a href="http://mediumreality.com" target="_blank">mediumreality.com</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > > On Feb 8, 2012 12:45 PM, "Jonathan Lassoff"<br>
> <<a href="mailto:jof@thejof.com">jof@thejof.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:43 PM, girlgeek<br>
> <<a href="mailto:girlgeek@wt.net">girlgeek@wt.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> > >> > A variant on this suggestion:<br>
> > >> > If an unknown person hits the buzzer, instead of<br>
> someone having to go<br>
> > >> > downstairs, they can be let up and greeted at the hall<br>
> door with another<br>
> > >> > locked door and doorbell. They can then be vetted<br>
> upstairs. I'm lazy.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> That would make great use of our way-awesome porthole<br>
> window.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Why did the lock on the top-of-stairs door ever get taken<br>
> off?<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> --j<br>
> > >> _______________________________________________<br>
> > >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > >> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> > >><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> > ><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> > ><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> ><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>