11–20 of 61 posts
While this does describe a real problem that we want to address, article reads like surveillance propaganda. I think it reads that way because of strong implication that cell phone technology is bad because it does not allow authorities to obtain quick geolocation fix on a cell phone.
Rather than a single number to call, show me the resources available in my local area, in realtime -- distances to a level I/II trauma facility, hazmat, fire, police, tactical, etc. (some of this might be restricted for security reasons, but "infinite" resources like a police hq or hospital wouldn't be).
I specifically want to be able to report a traffic accident in e.g. Pleasanton and get connected directly to CHP, rather than going through local PD first.
Voice is great, but I'd also like to get updates on ETA, and the ability to send more accurate information to the first responders than goes through 911 dispatchers -- specifically, the person on scene should see exactly what is being sent to the first responders to check it for accuracy. (maybe not so much in security/police, but in fire/medical) Sending photos and essentially a map could be really helpful.
The easiest commercial market is probably regulated-industry safety professionals (power plants, chemical plants, etc.) which have unique needs. One option might be deploying it within radius of these facilities to the general public so they can get updates on things like gas releases or accidents.
The longer the travel time between first responders and victims, the more useful this would be. In Palo Alto, you're going to get police/fire/medical quite quickly. In a poor city like Detroit, calls get triaged, and in actually remote areas, even more so -- yet, people often do have smartphones and at least 3G now.
It would also be a big win in markets where private ambulances and other options exist (i.e. most of Asia); knowing that you can get a private ambulance for $30, or take a taxi for $10, or wait 2h for state services, would be really useful.
You can't easily query those location details quickly.
While this does describe a real problem that we want to address, article reads like surveillance propaganda. I think it reads that way because of strong implication that cell phone technology is bad because it does not allow authorities to obtain quick geolocation fix on a cell phone.
How can the cell companies share data with the NSA against the wishes of their customers, yet not share information with 911 which is clearly in the best interests of the customer?
I just don't get it. Do corporations really don't give a shit about whether people live and die?
Is anyone working on something better than signal strength triangulation for cell tower based positioning? It seems crazy to me that we can get accuracy of a few meters using weak signals from satellites in space, while the strong signals from nearby cell towers give you only kilometer level accuracy.
First, cell towers do better than mere signal strength triangulation -- they use signal arrival time and round-trip time to get a pretty good fix on a phone's location. Not nearly as good as GPS, but reasonably good.
Second, smartphones have GPS receivers, and some of those allow the GPS position to accompany the outgoing call. That's much better, but it sometimes requires that the call be placed outdoors.
I think in the future, all cell phones will have GPS, and a few other improvements will come along to allow much better positioning.
Smartphones should have an emergency button. Pressing the button should automatically call 911 (or 112) and speaking using a Text-To-Speech TTS software (Siri, etc.) the name of the phone owner and the GPS coordinate, street address, etc.
This technology is already built in e.g. Ford cars (using Nuance/Microsoft speech technology, using automatic Bluetooth to call via the phone) - at the same time as the airbag goes off the car calls the emergency number and speaks.
And there are a number of (smart)phones that have an inbuilt emergency button that calls or SMS a predefined (but editable) number (like relatives).
While this does describe a real problem that we want to address, article reads like surveillance propaganda. I think it reads that way because of strong implication that cell phone technology is bad because it does not allow authorities to obtain quick geolocation fix on a cell phone.
That's just fundamental. It's not surveillance state stuff.
At one time, this problem was limited to a smaller population of cellphone users. Most people in one of these horrible car accident situations, etc didn't have access to a cellphone, so they just died.
Now, landlines are a thing of the past, so calls from office buildings, homes, etc are coming in without actionable information.
Obviously, the problem is not the technology, it's an antiquated government. A government that is run by bureaucrats, that don't know how to properly leverage technology, especially satellite technology.
While this does describe a real problem that we want to address, article reads like surveillance propaganda. I think it reads that way because of strong implication that cell phone technology is bad because it does not allow authorities to obtain quick geolocation fix on a cell phone.
Any argument that may tangentially, hypothetically help enable surveillance, with that being very far from the aim, along with only being possible in a terrible implementation, is not automatically surveillance propaganda.