Live data from Hacker News

Emergency SOS via satellite

apple.com

81–90 of 479 posts

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#81
post #4

As someone who grew up in the era before mobile phones, it truly is strange to see devices that do roughly everything Captain Kirk's communicator could do. But in my lifetime, and available to average people.

I find it amusing that Star Trek didn't anticipate communicators or tricorders having a flashlight function like our phones do. When they need lights, they either carry special-purpose ones or shoot a rock with a phaser to make it glow. Generously, maybe someone did think of it, but it would have been too difficult to make a prop with a bright enough light source.

I use my phone's flashlight a good bit, it is very useful. That said, if I was going on some away mission where lighting was going to be questionable, I'd probably bring some kind of dedicated lighting equipment like a flashlight.

My flashlights have adjustable beams. They throw out many times more light than my phone's flashlight. Using the dedicated flashlight gives a way better lighting experience than using my phone's flashlight. But it is like cameras, the best flashlight is the one on you.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#82
Really impressed how Apple is leaning into unregulated “safety” features. Fall detection for grandma, crash detection for drivers, now this for adventurers. When you’re doing as well as Apple is, small reasons for consumers to buy keep adding up over the competition.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#83
post #29
post #4

As someone who grew up in the era before mobile phones, it truly is strange to see devices that do roughly everything Captain Kirk's communicator could do. But in my lifetime, and available to average people.

Growing up during proliferation of mobile devices but in financially-limited circumstances, there are certain things that I’ve relegated to “not for me” because of an imprinted cost. Getting a smartphone and paying a recurring fee for data (when I was perfectly capable) was still a major point of hesitation for me. Satellite-based communication devices remains as one of the self-imposed unobtaniums.

An amateur radio license, a $30 handheld radio, and another $30 of PVC and wires will get you into space communications.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#85
post #20

No one here has mentioned this here, surprisingly, but the UX on this feature is absolutely incredible. Clear, thoughtful, helpful, and deeply integrated with user services. It almost makes me _want_ to get into trouble, just to be able to use this service!

There’s a demo mode in the settings fortunately

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that’s the GPS point. Make this more casually available and folks are likely to more casually use it. The problem for the teams isn’t necessarily finding the party, we’ve had these beacons for years. Rather they have to climb into the mountains in the first place to solve what could have, ostensibly, been readily prevented. Thus taxing a limited resource even further. What should temper that is now there perhaps…

Actually, in many places in the United States, SAR calls don't cost you anything. Usually it's the ambulance / helicopter ride. But even then, there are helicopter operators (like the U.S. military, which responds to many SAR calls where I live) that don't charge.

At least in Germany I know that the perspective on this is that you never want someone to even think about taking cost into consideration when they decide to make an emergency call.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#87
post #4

As someone who grew up in the era before mobile phones, it truly is strange to see devices that do roughly everything Captain Kirk's communicator could do. But in my lifetime, and available to average people.

I find it amusing that Star Trek didn't anticipate communicators or tricorders having a flashlight function like our phones do. When they need lights, they either carry special-purpose ones or shoot a rock with a phaser to make it glow. Generously, maybe someone did think of it, but it would have been too difficult to make a prop with a bright enough light source.

Honestly if I could shoot a rock with a phaser to make it glow, I wouldn't bother with a flash light either.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#88
post #27

From the article: > A text compression algorithm was also developed to reduce the average size of messages by 300 percent I don't think that's how percentages work.

Also, a 75% reduction (which I assume was meant by their 300 percent) is not that impressive when it comes to text compression. I'd guess that should be easily reachable with zstd by just creating a pre-shared dictionary generated from a bunch of typical emergency messages. Especially when those messages are partially auto-generated by a wizard-style questionnaire and will thus adhere to a previously-known structure and contain a lot of known elements and words.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#90
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only assume that you have never been to the western U. S. or anywhere at all in Canada much north of the 49th parallel. It can be quite barren, and even if one had a need to stick a cell tower in the North Cascades mountains, it won't cover everything. Hell, I go trail running on local mountains (Cougar/Squak/Tiger, for Seattle locals) that are within visual distance of a decent-sized city, and there are still…

>Those folks, if they have any sense, have a dedicated device, as you state. You'd be shocked at the number of people who carry their beacon, probe, shovel, etc but not an InReach or Spot device. With that said, most groups have at least one and are playing the odds game that it won't be them that has an issue and can't access it.

There's probably a difference between one-time purchases and committing to a subscription service (on a device that is also more expensive). If I did a lot of remote solo hiking, I'd probably feel I needed to spring for it, but I haven't as things stand.
Post reply on HN