Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Emergency SOS via satellite

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 479 posts

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#351

Post by dghlsakjg »

googlryas wrote: post #331
yurishimo wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God forbid the US become a civilized nation and offer a real competitive national healthcare options. I live in one of the more expensive European nations when it comes to healthcare. €100~/mo with a €400~ deductible per year. Worst case scenario, I spend €1600/yr on healthcare.

How much do you pay when you factor in the taxes you also pay into the system? If one gym had a yearly fee of $40 and then cost $1 every time you went, and another gym had a $8 yearly fee and cost $15 everytime you went, it wouldn't make sense to compare them merely on the per-visit costs. Just to short circuit, I'm not trying to defend the American healthcare system. American healthcare is horrible on average compar…

In Canada my income tax rate is about on par with what I would pay in the states. If I lived in California my taxes would be higher.

Our sales taxes are a little higher than a lot of the states, though.

I’ll take that over the amount of money and time the US healthcare system siphoned off of me when I was healthy.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#352

Post by Johnny555 »

willcipriano wrote: post #291
Johnny555 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does InReach require a monthly cost? Yeah, the cheapest plan is $14.95/mo ($11.95/mo if you pay for 12 months) and includes 10 "free" text's, $0.50/text after that. I wish they had a non-cost plan (or maybe $10/year) plus $5/text or something like that for use in an emergency. I have an InReach, but haven't used it for an emergency (yet), I've sent a few texts to friends/family while outside of cellular coverage sinc…

You can turn it off in the off-season making the annual cost not quite monthly * 12

My problem is I don't really have an off-season, nearly all year round I go on at least one hike a month that's outside of cell coverage (not too hard around here), which is why I got the InReach in the first place.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#353

Post by fastaguy88 »

macNchz wrote: post #332
dave78 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Subjects needing rescue are still usually hesitant to call for rescue and usually try to self extricate Someone with the knowledge and foresight to bring along a Garmin or PLB or something probably has a decent understanding of what it means to use it - waking people up and deploying expensive assets - and because of that I can see why they'd probably hesitate (it surely would trigger my "I don't want to be a bothe…

That decision making process is a key part of what's taught in a wilderness medicine course: assessing the situation at hand and deciding whether it's necessary to evacuate for a higher level of care, and if so, whether you need a rapid evac like a helicopter, or can walk or be carried out with fewer resources. https://blog.nols.edu/2018/02/20/stay-or-go-infographic I do tend to agree that this has a pretty good chan…

At least those people probably need to be rescued. The more annoying examples are people who are not lost or in danger, but just decided they were tired and did not want to walk back out.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#355

Post by dghlsakjg »

pests wrote: post #277
MarkMarine wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my buddies does S&R in Marin county, they get called for people getting lost 300 yards off trail that were going for a walk CONSTANTLY. Just people out for a walk, no cell coverage. They never have gear with them. My friend said this a game changer.

I notice we have a lot of SAR people in this thread so question for everyone: Is it wrong to call for help when you are lost only 300 yards off trail like you said? I would be embarrassed - but is anyone going to be upset?

SAR here in BC Canada vastly prefer that you call at the first hint of trouble, even if you don’t think you necessarily need help.

They would much rather be on alert and be stood down, or assist someone over the phone who called early and is easy to find and help. The problem is that many people wait until conditions deteriorate or they are much more lost.

Sending a team of a few people to go out and call your name along a trail during the day in clear weather is easy. Sending a team of people to find a hypothermic or injured person at night and extract them is an order of magnitude more involved and risky.

In other words, no one will be upset if you call out of caution.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#356

Post by tsimionescu »

jadams5 wrote: post #348
robbiep wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a doctor, the proliferation of apple (and other) watch ECGs has done nothing positive but lead to a massive proliferation of severe health anxiety. Go take a look at /r/askdocs for anyone curious - dozens of apple and Samsung ECG questions, people sure they’re about to die. They have nothing. I remain entirely unconvinced that putting ‘more’ health information at increased temporal frequency to consumers leads to…

As a counterpoint, my cardiologist suggested I get an Apple watch so I could keep a better eye on things and send him any questionable ECGs. At least some doctors seem to think there are positives.

The very important point is that you probably have a known heart condition, if your doctor recommended this. The problem with many of these devices is false positives.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#357

Post by kube-system »

kawfey wrote: post #305

As a ham radio evangelist, I'm slightly sad that our radio service has become a bit more irrelevant as a backcountry backup or emergency comms solution, thanks to this, the SPOT/inreach messager, and general LEO satellite broadband internet access, but more happy that it's here, since these systems are FAR more accessible, reliable, and easy to use for SOS or way-off-grid general communications. Ham radio still has i…

Ham's greatest advantage is also its greatest weakness: being strictly non-commercial.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#358

Post by tsimionescu »

dagmx wrote: post #339
robbiep wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a doctor, the proliferation of apple (and other) watch ECGs has done nothing positive but lead to a massive proliferation of severe health anxiety. Go take a look at /r/askdocs for anyone curious - dozens of apple and Samsung ECG questions, people sure they’re about to die. They have nothing. I remain entirely unconvinced that putting ‘more’ health information at increased temporal frequency to consumers leads to…

How do you reconcile your views on “nothing positive” when there are multiple reported accounts of it leading to early diagnosis events for serious issues?

It can be easily reconciled if there are far more instances of false positives than true positives.

Remember that a 99% accuracy for a condition that 0.1% of the population has still means 10 false positives for each 1 early diagnosis.

I don't what the numbers are for the conditions that the Apple Watch can detect, just discussing the general principle. Whether it's more useful or more harmful depends crucially on the real numbers.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#359

Post by jrnichols »

fragmede wrote: post #311
jrnichols wrote: post #280

I'm a Paramedic in Northern California and am VERY happy about this feature. Even in some of our SF Bay Area counties, we have a lot of windy mountain roads with no cell service at all. Our portable radios don't even work up in the hills. To have an iPhone be able to send GPS location to the public safety access point is fabulous. Our dispatchers can at least drop a pin on a map and we can route to that location ours…

> Even in some of our SF Bay Area counties Even? no (and you'd probably know better than me) but as a fellow bay area person, there are tons and tons and tons of roads and places that aren't covered by cell service, just go into the mountains a little bit. and then you also have to ask which cell carrier everybody has. there's a real digital divide once you get out of the city and the towns that surround it

right, that's pretty much what I said. We have A LOT of space that has no cell reception at all.

We don't have to ask about which carrier, though. That information will come through automatically along with the subscriber's information. Even a cell phone with no active plan can still dial 911, regardless of carrier or model.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#360

Post by kube-system »

lxgr wrote: post #232
bmicraft wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing the only thing limiting it is integration with existing services

Integrating with local SAR services is one issue, but Globalstar's coverage is another (contrary to its name, it's not actually global, since it requires satellites to have both mobile devices and at least one earth station in view at all times).

And regulatory approval for transmitting on those frequencies in that specific locale.
Post reply on HN