GPS Meets PCS 212
The Donald writes: "According to an article at News.com, Sprint PCS will be starting to implement E911 calls in Rhode Island sometime in October. The FCC required that all cell phone providers have an improved E911 system in place by October first. This is the first step in making the E911 a reality, with Sprint being the first major company to actually put a phone on the market that will work with E911; instead of just filing papers with the FCC saying the implementation is just to hard. The Samsung N300 phone will use GPS to track the people down. I like the idea, I just hope the phone will display the GPS information, and there is a way to opt-out for all of the location based advertisements you will get with your GPS enabled phone."
GPS location (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:GPS location (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:GPS location (Score:2)
If that kind of hypothetical scenario keeps you up at night, you can turn on GPS on your cell phone; that's no reason to deprive others of the ability to do so. Personally, if I were worried about my car getting stolen, I'd buy a Lojack or something like it, a system that is actually built for that purpose.
only for 911?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:only for 911?? (Score:2)
Re:only for 911?? (Score:2, Interesting)
The company I work for develops custom Proof of Delivery applications for use with these devices, and having been out with some of the drivers I know the majority of them use cell/radio phones to communicate with their home base. If a normal cell phone had basic GPS functionality in it, we could probably save our clients a decent amount of money.
All we need now is a cell phone with a RIM modem and a GPS. That'd be perfect.
MG+ Link - http://www.symbol.com/products/mobile_computers/m
Re:only for 911?? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Opting out (Score:1, Redundant)
There should also be a way for the user to disable transmission of the GPS information or limit it to 911 calls only.
No opt out -- anti terrorism (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, if they weren't going to continuously log your whereabouts before, they probably will now. After all, we're just using this data retroactively to investigate terrorist attacks.
And they probably are only using the data that way. Today. But what about ten years from now when things are different, but they still have much greater access to things they should not? What about when we're no longer in a war against terrorism? Our government agencies don't have a great track record of not abusing power.
Re:Opting out (Score:2, Funny)
Ads??? (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, now that I've got that out of the way (and probably pushed myself to 10th post as a result) here's a real comment.
Ads. Ads on the phone that *I* pay for. Quite simply, there won't be any. If any company tries to advertise themselves on my phone for which I pay per-minute charges, they'll find themselves on the ugly end of a lawsuit involving the "junk fax" law and some very bloodthirsty lawyers.
If you want to advertise to my phone, then someone else will be paying my damned monthly charges. Otherwise, beware.
As an aside, I've been around long enough to see that advertisers have pushed the boundaries far enough that the pushing back we see now is an inevitable result of what's been going on for the last two decades. The end result is that we're not going to stand for much in the way of blatant advertising in anything we buy, do, or watch. All that means is that the advertisers will become sneakier.
Re:Ads??? (Score:1)
Re:Ads??? (Score:2)
We'll see how it all pans out.
Re:Ads??? (Score:2, Informative)
thousands [sprintpcs.com], five [verizon.com], what [attwireless.com]'s the [worldcom.com] difference [cingular.com]?
No, seriously... I realize there are at least two (and possibly as many as four) other providers that cover more than ten square miles with something resembling recent technology.
Good thing The Market has provided us with all these choices, eh?
Re:Ads??? (Score:1)
You're probably paying per-minute charges only on voice calls and data connections that you initiate. I've never heard of a network provider charging for anything that's pushed to your phone without your OK, like SMS, email, or whatever else comes down the radio pipe.
That's where the "first minute free on incoming calls" clause that seems to be ubiquitous - gives the customer a chance to opt-out of the airtime charges.
First minute free is NOT ubiquitous in the US (Score:3, Informative)
It's my understanding that common practice in Europe (and Japan?) is no charge for incoming calls. It sure ain't so here. I figure they are going to get a certain price per minute, whether they double the Tx charge or have separate Tx and Rx charges. BUT, again as I understand it, Eurpoean practice is that land lines charge by the minute too, so there's no big discrepancy. In the US, however, local landline calls are unlimited with the basic monthly plan, so a landline call to a cell phone makes it hard to charge the Tx end. There is NO WAY the US regulatory bodies would allow Tx surcharges for landline calls to cellphones. Customers would howl bloody murder!
Re:First minute free is NOT ubiquitous in the US (Score:2)
In Sweden, there are providers that give you money when you receive a mobile call. This has really boosted the mobile phone usage in some groups.
Re:First minute free is NOT ubiquitous in the US (Score:4, Insightful)
At one extreme you can pay a fairly high monthly rental (many tens of uk£) and get a large number of "free" (ie inclusive" minutes) - with extra minutes getting billed at a very low rate.
At the other extreme you can have a tariff with "no contract", no monthly fee, no minimum spend, calls paid for in advance - and expensive calls.
In between there are a large number of different plans.
Generally calls are charged to the nearest second - but with a minimum charge - typically 1 miute. Some networks and tariffs have a very brief "free" period - something like two or four seconds. The idea is you don't get charged if you get answered by voicemail and don't want to leave a message.
Incoming calls are always free for the person receiving the call. Expensive for the person making the call - but OFTEL are controlling this and forcing charges down - and have been for some time.
Sometimes you have to pay for retreiving voicemails, frequently this is free.
Receiving SMS is free - but sending can be free or can be charged for.
Network to Network calls can be hugely expensive - but OFTEL have just stamped on our mobile companies and are forcing them to reduce their charges.
We have number portability - which means that if you change network (or tariff) you can take your number with you. This does cause problems because you are charged according to the network which receives the call - but portability means you can't determine which network you are dialling from the number dialled.
Getting the right tariff can be tricky - but if you get it right the total cost can be very low. I currently pay £20 per phone per month - and get free voicemail, Calls I make when I am within about 5 miles of where I live are about £0.02 / minute billed by the second with a 1 minute minimum. Calls I make when I am outside this area are £0.09 / minute, billed by the second and with a free £16 included in the rental.
Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:4, Interesting)
I was 1.5 blocks from my apartment in Brooklyn when the guy grabbed my left arm and pressed a knife into my ribs.
As I reached into my right back pocket to get my wallet, my arm was pressing against my phone (Sprint PCS). It would have been very easy to activate some sort of panic button.
He only took about $60, but what if I were getting the shit kicked out of me, or raped, or whatever...
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:2)
Of course, if you keep your keypad locked, then your are SOL.
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:2)
You need to tie those nouns and verbs together, buddy.
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:2)
My Nokia 8290 has a key combination that you can hit while it's locked to have it call 911. Press 0, then 8. That makes a 08 show up on my phone, then pressing the send button calls 911. I found that out accidently when I first got it, but I canceled it before it actually opened a line.
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:1)
http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/Archive/2000/
A panic button would be all the worse. Maybe charge people $100 for any false alarms.
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:1)
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:3, Insightful)
Prevention might work. Deterrence might work (i.e., arm yourself, unpopular in some circles but effective). But no button can bring the cops to your side in anything less then five minutes... and usually much more then that.
Real life story for why not to do that... (Score:3, Informative)
911 gets a call from a cell phone. They answer, and all they hear is a constant loud roar. After a minute or so of not being able to communicate, the line is dropped. The call comes in again, 5 to 10 minutes later. The same roar, yet no communication with anyone. The 911 operator gets curious, and makes a few calls. The line drops. Yet another call, minutes later, same roar, no human. A unit is deployed to find where this signal is coming from. Strangely enough the signal was traced to the Pontiac Silverdome (in Michigan, over 60,000+ seating).
They traced the signal to a man who was watching a Detroit Lions game. The man was quite large, probably a little too large for the seat that was given to him. Anyways, his cell phone was pressing up against the arm rest of the seat, and pushing the emergency button every time he shifted. This story is true, and there are several of these stories in existance if you take the time to talk to 911 operators.
This is the reason that cell phones now rarely have 911 buttons. This is also the reason most phones will now come with a "keyguard" function that ignores all button pushes until a certain key combination is pressed. It's just not feasible, with how easily buttons can be pushed in a pocket, on a belt, or in a purse. Cell phones may be good for many things, just not this.
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:2)
Re:Idea after being mugged last year... (Score:2)
The good and the bad of it (Score:4, Insightful)
The downside to this, of course, as we at
I would like this technology if it can be turned off when desired, even if it's only out of principle. I don't like having a choice taken from me, even if it is "for my own good."
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:2)
Ugh... (Score:2)
Of course you don't need a cellphone. You don't need a home phone, a credit card, or a bank account. You don't need a car, electricity or mail-order shopping. There are lots of things you don't have to have...
On the other hand, why can't we have those things along with the guarantee that they won't be used in ways that aren't in our best interests? I dislike the "you don't have to have..." argument, because it seems like over time it pushes you closer and closer to a broken-down cabin in Montana.
What sort of things will we have to give up ten years from now in order to guarantee anonymity and privacy? Will they all be optional, or will life without that set of things become increasingly unpleasant?
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:1)
You won't be traceable when your phone is turned off, or if you leave the damn thing at home in the first place.
I don't own a personal phone, 'cause I don't *want* to be reachable 24/7 -- why anyone would want to be hung on a tether like that escapes me.
Considering that cell phone users have volunteered for the shackle, I don't quite understand what they fear in GPS.
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:2)
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:1)
I understand there are good reasons to use cell phones; if, for instance, I was a young person with family responsibilities, sure, I'd need that lifeline.
But I think the level of paranoia we are seeing in the posts on this subject is unwarranted by legislation that merely asks for E911 systems to be better equipped to locate the origin of calls.
The idea that phone manufacturers, many of them based outside of this country, are in collaboration with the telcoms and with our government to spy on personal phone users, strikes me as a fever-dream born out of resentment for our high-tech chains.
I would not be surprised if, at some point in the future, localized advertising is offered as a means to offset phone costs. At that time, those who value their privacy will "just say no."
But I don't think our government's recently-empowered kick for keeping tabs on everybody, all the time, has as yet infiltrated the telecom infrastructure.
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:2, Insightful)
Used for call outs... (Score:1, Redundant)
to be very nice and since I keep it off I keep my privacy as well
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:2)
I'm not sure I understand this. Are the untraceable calls a problem because emergency personnel can't locate the caller to help him/her... Or are they a problem because lots of untraceable prank calls are coming in?
Presuming it's the former, there's a very simple solution that does not involve letting Big Brother in on all of my movements. When I make a 911 call, the phone transmits my GPS location. When I call someone else, it doesn't. Perhaps I could even opt-in on the "always transmit my location" option. Everybody's happy, right? The fact that this solution doesn't seem to be what's going to be implemented is what makes me nervous-- I can't see any good reason why any other solution would be adopted.
On the other hand, if the problem is nasty people phoning in bomb threats (which I doubt is what you're talking about), there are still payphones for such people to use. The two zillion bomb threats that have been phoned in in the NYC area should be proof enough of that...
Re:The good and the bad of it (Score:2)
And they already know exactly where the payphone is. I suppose they could even be made with a hardwired geo-location in them to make it easier to tie into this new system. How is that a better choice (for anonymity) than a cell phone?
I don't see the relevance to bomb threats or whatever though - I can go into a supermarket, buy a pay-as-you-go phone for less than 100 UKP, use it once and bin it, or just give it to someone, it's not tied to me in any way, AFAIK. If I were the sort of person that might make bomb threats, it concievable I might not be averse to braking the law, and could therefore waive the 100 UKP cost of the phone too.
However, unless there is a cop or similar at or near the payphone, the effect is the same - you know where someone was 10 minutes ago by the time you get there.
GPS already calculates your speed. But ... (Score:1)
Hell, they could even SMS you your ticket. And charge the fine to your phone bill.
:)
OR your wife could use the GPS in your phone to verify that you ARE working late in your office and not someplace else.
OR your boss to check you are sick at home and not at the beach.
That is the best thing about technology, the possibilities to get screwed with it are endless.
---
T
Not quite the first.. (Score:5, Informative)
During the FCC mandate for Phase I - which most carriers still have not fully deployed was based on cellsite/sector / some other general location. For Phase II E-911 the requirement is a PDE. As there are literally hundreds of ways to get this information (GPS handsets are only one). Under the TCS solution for Phase II we query a "pluggable" PDE for the location information - so the only time that anyone gets your specific location information is only when it is needed (as in during a 911 call). The only real difference with the Sprint solution is that they have brought the PDE functionality in-house.
Just to try to help clarify...
Re:Not quite the first.. (Score:2)
Define "needed". Today John Ashcroft is again [yahoo.com] asking Congress to please approve his "Liberty Revocation Act", which among other civil rights takeaways will eliminate that pesky requirement to get court approval for all wiretaps (once he has the right to tap one of your phones, he wants that to cover every phone you now use, ever did use, or may ever possibly use in the future. which means if he's after me he can tap your phone without a court order just because he thinks I might call you).
What happens when the Justice Department asks Sprint PCS or Verizon or AT&T Wireless or any of the others to please give them a direct feed from your cellphone's GPS so they can crack another terrorist ring. Perhaps the terrorist ring that blew up the WTC. Perhaps the terrorist ring that's attempting to scratch-build garage door openers in violation of the SSSCA [slashdot.org]. Does that sound "needed" to YOU? If so, go right ahead and carry an E911 cell phone.
I'll keep my pre-E911 phone as long as I can, but the minute they tell me I must buy an E911-enabled phone is the minute I drop my service altogether and go back to pagers and payphones.
Re:Not quite the first.. (Score:2)
However with technologies like TruePosition, and Snaptrack's WARN services, Grayson, and Lucent's SS7 PDE technologies you are able to get within a few meters with currently implemented technologies. Hell even the mandate for Phase I (cellsite/sector) is VERY accurate in densely covered (metro) areas.
I see your point though, write your congress-people
Thanks!
E911 is very important (Score:4, Insightful)
lots of things are "very important" (Score:2)
E911 service could have been addressed by the market: you are worried about it, you want the feature, you buy a GPS-enhanced cell phone that transmits your location using a simple audio code. I think consumers would not have gone for it.
The fact that E911 service was legislated and made a requirementand the fact that phone companies didn't fight it harder suggests to me that it isn't about saving a few lives, it's a combination of a desire by law enforcement to be able to track mobile phone users as part of crime fighting, and a desire of phone companies and advertisers to locate users and stolen phones.
Is GPS necessary? (Score:3, Insightful)
Hopefully, though, they won't use this to 'magically' close the store early on the day my bill is due, because they traced my calls and found out I am heading their way....
Re:Is GPS necessary? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is GPS necessary? (Score:1)
Having worked at a wireless company (RIM), on this exact problem, I know first hand that it sounds simple, but once you factor in the real world, and the inherant flaws with wireless communication, you very quickly find out that it is next to impossible to implement in a major urban environment.
In an ideal situation, lets say that the phone is latched onto cell A, with 90% signal strength, Cell B is at 40%, and cell C is at 30%. Clearly using simple mathematics and a geographical map of the area you can figure out where the phone is. But add a building in between Cell A and the phone, and the location is still the same, but the signal strength may be down to only 60%... Move over 2 feet, get a clear veiw of Cell A again, and your back to 90% (and now imagine this with hundreds of buildings all over the place)... It would be way too difficult to map out every area of every possible position in just the urban centers of the US to make this work. I don't buy this companies claims...
Re:Is GPS necessary? (Score:2)
well, do the math (Score:2)
Re:Is GPS necessary? (Score:2)
Apparently he had it coming... [darwinawards.com]
If there is not going to be abuse of this... (Score:1)
Re:If there is not going to be abuse of this... (Score:1)
Laudable goal, but I have one question:
How do you define abuse? Remember, this would be a law, so you have to cover every example.
Re:If there is not going to be abuse of this... (Score:2)
How do I define abuse? Let me count the ways...
How's that? Probably need a lawyer to clean it up a bit, debug it, performance tune it, etc.
Why not cell triangulation? (Score:1, Interesting)
A more reliable solution should include triangulation from cell phone towers, and then a 'lookup' to provide Global Position coordinates.
Re:Why not cell triangulation? (Score:4, Informative)
GPS advantages/disadvantages:
+ precise
+ works great outdoors
- extra cost, extra weight, extra bulk (another antenna), less battery life
- doesn't work indoors or in cars
Triangulation advantages/disadvantages:
+ low cost
+ phones remain the same size/weight/battery life (triangulation can be mostly done in infrastructure)
- generally less precise
- in urban environments, multipath interference and distortion caused by buildings is a problem
- in rural environments, you're lucky to get a signal from one tower, much less 3!, so it doesn't work too well.
Note that the GPS implemntation doesn't need to be a full one-- some of the processing smarts can be located in the cell towers. Unfortuantly, this doesn't buy you much as the radio section is still the major size and power draw.
Re:Why not cell triangulation? (Score:2)
Re:Why not cell triangulation? (Score:2)
They're trying to solve other problems. Correlate your location with other data. Anti terrorism, today. Other uses tomorrow. You got in this taxicab at 9:07 AM. See? Your gps coordinates match the cab's coordinates for 39 minutes. Then you used a pay phone at 27th and Crawford -- specifically, the third phone booth from the end. At that exact time, the phone records show you made a call to your mistress. Nine minutes later, she went to the bank, the 2nd teller window, and withdrew $200,000 in small bills. Photographic bank records coroborate this. Then 13 minutes later, she went to see a woman she is sleeping with, that you don't know about, who lives at 119 Somewhere St., and gave her half the money. etc., etc. [Filling in remainder of story, left as exercise for slashdot trolls.]
If they were just worried about "normal" emergiencies, such as fire, traffic accident, shooting, etc., 100 foot accuracy would be fine.
Re:Why not cell triangulation? (Score:1)
GPS + PCS, Garmin GPS Phone with RealTime Map (Score:3, Informative)
Garmin had their gps phone a couple of years ago.
When you put in an emergency call it would send
your coordinates along with it.
It was nifty, i almost got one for my birthday.
If you're looking for a link here it is..
http://www.garmin.com/products/navTalk/
Re:GPS + PCS, Garmin GPS Phone with RealTime Map (Score:1)
I should add the facts that:
You could send your coordinates to anyone and show up on a map.
It was really cool.
You could get pc software that would allow you to see your friend's
location, velocity and other things in real time on a map.
How very convenient (Score:3, Funny)
Am I the only one to find the idea of mixing a wireless communication device and a very precise position locator undesirable ?
Re:How very convenient (Score:1)
Having chosen to carry one, however, it's up to you to take responsibility for knowing what the phone's capabilities are, and how to turn them off.
Always-on GPS is not required by the law (at least not yet, and I doubt if ever), only locator services for E911. If your phone is doing more than that, change phones.
You own personal transponder (Score:2)
Also, though it's not as good as triangulation, tracking you down to a within a relatively small radius is even easier, since your phone is only communicating with one base station at a time.
I imagine that most modern pagers (the ones with a transmitter so you never miss pages) could be used like this too.
Spooky, huh? I've always wondered why E911/GPS couldn't just be implemented by upgrading the cell switches to do auto-triangulation. This gets rid of any GPS antenna issues.
Re:You own personal transponder (Score:2)
-Mars
Re:You own personal transponder (Score:2)
However, GPS, unlike triangulation, requires that the phone be trusted: One could potentially tamper with the hardware to cause it to consistently report an incorrect location. This isn't really possible against techniques like triangulation.
GPS Coverage (Score:4, Informative)
911 service can also be screwed up by PBX systems. I know of several cases where someone called 911 and the ambulance responded to the company headquarters building, where the PBX was located, instead of the building where the emergency occurred.
Re:GPS Coverage (Score:1)
Re:GPS Coverage (Score:4, Informative)
I think digital PRI trunks can pass this information as well. When an emergency call is made, switch translations are read to find all sorts of useful information about your location. i.e. campus building, room number, office number, wiring jack number or whatever is programmed.
This information then shows on the screen of the 911 call center person that gets the call, so that office 911 calls can be routed properly. Hope that helps, that is what I learned in my Avaya training. Woohoo.
-Pat
Can you say "targeted" virueses? (Score:3, Insightful)
Just like adds that can now be targeted at you based on where you are (thanks to the GPS enabled phones), there is something else that is also inevitable. Think about "targeted" viruses.
Those "smart" viruses would scare me more than those dull adds.
Performance of gps phone / Privacy protection (Score:4, Informative)
On their site, they have a spiel about privacy protection [snaptrack.com]. Here's a quote:
Of course, who knows if this will be respected by the OEM's who implement the snaptrack technology in the phones. There's always the tin-foil-over-the-gps-antenna solution... maybe those people with the tin foil hats are on to something!
Can't wait... (Score:2, Interesting)
Next Killer App: Track your kid! (Score:1)
Now Sue's father knows exactly when she's at J.RandomPlaya's house, or at school for that matter.
I don't think teenagers will carry cell phones any more. Either that or their parents will force them to.
Jamming the GPS unit (Score:1, Insightful)
Another big brother checking in. (Score:5, Insightful)
I work for SignalSoft Corp (http://www.signalsoftcorp.com) on their Wireless 911 product (http://www.signalsoftcorp.com/products/911/911.h
I see good and bad in all this. The good is that the E911 service is probably very useful. And in benign applications, cell phone tracking is not necessarily terrible. The bad is that I'm pretty sure that sooner or later, this technology WILL be abused. We attempt to build safeguards into our software to prevent abuse (http://www.signalsoftcorp.com/newsroom/pressrele
So, here's the scoop. If you are worried that you are worth tracking by powerful government agencies or very, very rich people, do one of two things: A) don't carry a cell phone or, B) take the battery out of your cell phone. B) is not foolproof, but it should be good enough until cell phone manufacturers are required by law to include a small backup battery in the guts of a cell phone large enough to run a GPS receiver. Fortunatly, current batteries are very bulky and expensive, and including a nonremovable secondary one in cell phones big enough to run a GPS receiver is likely to be many years in coming.
Second, push for privacy legislation. I don't know the laws governing cell phone tracking, but I bet they're a lot laxer than they should be. A court order (like a search warrant) should be necessary for any government agency to track the cell phone of any US citizen. If this is currently the case, great. If not... let's get a bill like this passed post-haste.
-Anonymous Coward who doesn't want to lose his job right now.
Would be OK, if known and optional (Score:2)
Some half measures may include: leaving the cell phone home; unplugging the battery; trading out phones with my wife and friends.
Legislation will be difficult here. No one needs a freaking cell phone, much less one with GPS, so complaints will be lost on the general public. Right now, people are willing to give up their credit reports (periodically, not just as a check on purchase!) and social security number to get one of these gadgets. It may be possible to force providers to behave in return for spectrum rights, but we see how well public service laws have done in TV and radio. Elements of the government itself have an interest in tracking people, and they have the upper hand right now. They will be getting a big helping hand from big corps like On Star. What a nightmare.
The reality is that this does not really help people find you when you need it. Think about it. If you are aware of your problem, you can call for help and tell where you are. If you are not and no one knows that your are in trouble, who's going to bother to look for you? Your wife? Hopefully, she knows where you were going and help will be on the way anyway. In practical terms, very little extra security is gained for a massive loss of privacy. I could live with that if I could turn it off.
GPS's don't like urban environments (Score:1)
Does PCS *need* GPS for positional data? (Score:3, Interesting)
Due to the very precise time division multiplexing used with GSM, the distance you are from the base station you are currently subscribed can be gleaned down to a metre. If they can force your phone to switch to 2 other cells after an emergency call, they could probably pin point you without GPS. With the hidden Network menus in Motorolla StarTac GSM and Nokia phones, you can see how far you are from the base station in metres.
Re:Does PCS *need* GPS for positional data? (Score:3, Informative)
112 will get you the authorities in every country with a GSM network. North America's 911 is 999 in England, for example, but 112 will get you there no matter where you are.
Handy little number to know...
Re:Does PCS *need* GPS for positional data? (Score:3, Informative)
Due to the very precise time division multiplexing used with GSM, the distance you are from the base station you are currently subscribed can be gleaned down to a metre.
I really, really, really doubt this. The whole of Europe is trying to find out how to position yourself with mobile phones to get down to one metre precision. The solution of just using GSM with the cells information and distance information gets you in about 400 metres accuracy (depending of the density of cells etc.). Combine it with GPS, you can try to get it to 10 metres in ideal situations. Of course GPS doesn't help you much in cities like New York with their high buildings blocking the satellites signal and having multi path effects.
So, if this is really true, tell your telco to come to Europe and earn shit loads (actually Vodaphone is British)... Don't believe everything that companies say.
But will 911 work from Sprint phones? (Score:3, Informative)
Freeway-side phones in Californa are even worse. Not only do they put you on hold, I once stopped at one to report an accident i'd witnessed and got a message indicating that the phone had been disconnected.
no gps for me, thanks (Score:2)
Max
We can find you, anywhere, anytime. (Score:3, Insightful)
But they're only going to use it to find people making 911 calls. Right. Absolutely.
Re:We can find you, anywhere, anytime. (Score:2, Informative)
Faraday strikes back.
Re:We can find you, anywhere, anytime. (Score:2)
Triangulating position (Score:2, Interesting)
You can also make use of it by sending a textmessage and in about 30 seconds time you'll get a message back giving your coordinates. No more getting lost in the woods!
Here's a message I got back when getting my position at home:
PARAINEN (town)
Skräbböle (part of town)
22.16'55'' E,
60.17'11'' N
No ICBM's please!
Linus
I'm not sure I trust Sprint with info like that (Score:3, Informative)
GPS even with power OFF? (Score:2)
Of course, you couldn't receive calls, but you can't with it off, either.
At least off means off, dammit.
SPCS Cell location- not GPS but still useful (Score:3, Interesting)
##33284 (scroll down to SAVE)
select SERVICE SCREEN and hit Scroll all the way down to the bottom of the
debug screen.
Last two lines are labeled LT and LG- those are
the lat/lng of the cell your phone is talking to.
Don't know how accurate it is; the cell my phone
picks up at home is (according to these numbers)
in the middle of the Detroit River.
Someone at the FCC... (Score:2)
... may not understand that GPS has pretty crappy accuracy when you're down in the middle of a downtown area surrounded by tall buildings. GPS signal availability (L-band requires direct SV-to-user line-of-sight) and severe multipath reception problems made it fairly useless in the downtown canyons. I remember tests done in city environments where the receiver could get fooled into providing a position solution that it was a considerable distance from its true location; all because of the reflected signals one finds in cities. Or did someone rewrite the laws of physics since I've been out of the GPS arena?
All this does is provide someone with a false sense of security that the police will know where you are when you call. I wonder how many times we'll hear about the police showing up on the wrong side of Central Park when responding to a mugging? Or that the call came from 1000 feet over the river, etc.?
Re:GPS and Cell phones? (Score:4, Interesting)
Perhaps the new Verizon/Disney/AOL/U.S.Justice.Dept will handle the entire issue by adding the fine to your monthly bill!
Re:GPS and Cell phones? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:GPS and Cell phones? (Score:2, Informative)
Stupid yes but as long (Score:2)
Re:GPS and Cell phones? (Score:1)
It's probably more like this:
Your Cell phone GPS has recorded that you are falling off a building at 90 MPH. We have alerted the local law enforcement of your violation of our EULA. Your warranty has been voided. Thank you for using Sprint PCS ~Goodbye
<Dial Tone>
Re:GPS and Cell phones? (Score:2)
They'll just make some really incredibly cool device that will require an implant to use. Whether or not you get it is up to you, but you'll be left out of the 'information age' if you don't.
Then let marketing get 'hold of it, and you'll get the implant voluntarily. That's how things work these days.
Re:They know where you are at all times ... (Score:2)
It's off if I yank the damn battery out! :)
Well, they already exist... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Here's a GPS tip for you paranoid freaks. (Score:2)
Re:Here's a GPS tip for you paranoid freaks. (Score:2)
Re:Spoof (Score:2)
How about...
What are you doing at [Insert female acquaintence]'s house? For the past 3 hours?