h a l f b a k e r y
Like you could do any better.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
This idea would take advantage of the fact that any cellphone that's turned on can be located within 50 feet using current technology. It would work something like this.
Suppose your car breaks down and you've already called a road service company that said they'd be there in the typical hour or
so. In the meantime another car pulls over and out jumps one or more suspicious-looking characters. You dial 922 which then sends a special ringtone to every active cellphone within 100 yards or so. The pre-recorded message it sent would say something like - 'Possible danger. Please notice everything.'
Or suppose you're walking through a park and you come across a couple that's having a loud argument which looks like it might turn violent at any minute. You dial 933 which sends a different ringtone to every cellphone in the area with the message - 'Domestic quarrel. Please notice everything.' Hopefully it would draw enough eyewitnesses to keep the situation from turning violent.
After discussing this idea with a couple of other people we ended up with a split decision over its usefulness. Some said they'd never dial one of the numbers because it would be more likely to draw negative people to the scene than it would be to draw positive people. Others thought more positive people would show up. Personally I fall into the latter group, thinking it would act more like a mobile Neighborhood Watch Committee than an all-call for nutcases.
Locating cell phones
http://www.911dispa.../phaseII_first.html
[longshot9999, Jul 05 2006]
[link]
|
| |
Hoax calls might be a problem.... |
|
| |
You could send the message to all phones within 100 yards, or to the nearest 10 phones whatever the distance, if there aren't 10 phones within 100 yards, possibly - thus assuring that even in semi-deserted areas the *nearest* help could be summoned. |
|
| |
If people are concerned about nusiance calls, make an opt-out system. But definately opt-out, not opt-in. |
|
| |
Hoax calls should be traceable back to the phone. |
|
| |
I don't know that phones are able to be located that well. But it could use a walkie-talkie function--the phone transmits, and any phone that gets the signal at a strength over some mininum . . .. |
|
| |
Bun for creativity and for wanting to use technology to help. |
|
| |
9992221 - I've dropped a contact - please look down while you walk |
|
| |
One could use this to send positive and life-affirming messages as well! And ads! |
|
| |
I can imagine how horrible it would be to walk through a city and have the shopkeepers sending "sale" messages from behind the counter to everyone in 50 feet. However, having said that, "nearby advertisements" would be an interesting way for advertisers to offer free cell phone service in exchange for annoying ads via phone. |
|
| |
The moment this service gets used for advertising you'll see subscription rates plummet, thus voiding the initial intent. Now that I think of it a bit more, is this not analogous to "push" technology? |
|
| |
The messages themselves are pre-recorded and tied to the specific number dialed. For example, if 933 sends the message 'Domestic quarrel, please notice everything' then that's the message it will always send. It will never say 'Get a dollar off on a Big Joes Pizza'. |
|
| |
Hoax calls would be treated the same way fake 911 calls are treated. |
|
| |
this would only work in metropolian areas,
in which the cells are small. in rural areas,
a single cell might cover several square
miles. for use of a flash mob, you get a
bun. |
|
| |
tcarson - If Verizon's method works then rural areas will use a network-based approach to locating phones while cities will use GPS-enabled phones. They haven't got it down to 50 feet yet but there's hope.
See link. |
|
| |
aren't you kind of mixed up about that
[longshot]? i would think that gps
would be used in rural areas. |
|
| |
current tracking methods using mobile
phones involve determining which cell
the phone is connected to and then
extrapolating from that. each cell is
serviced by an individual cell tower,
which are fairly close together in
metropolian areas, but farther apart by
quite a bit in more rural areas. |
|
| |
So, how would you test for hoaxes? Really, there was a man & woman arguing, but they just got on a train & left. Really. Who's going spend time & have the authority to verify and then fine the pranksters? |
|
| |
Nice thought, but people would just grow accustomed to ignoring these like car alarms. |
|
| |
//Get a dollar off on a Big Joes Pizza// Is that a medium or a large...? [gets hungry and goes to raid the fridge] |
|
| |
This flash mob idea has nothing to do with what I thought it would. |
|
| |
<Interesting aside> People in Australia have been calling 911, for emergency help. It doesn't work, as our emergency number here is 000, and the international code is 112. |
|
| |
[norm] the areas that still have barn
raisings are mainly amish, so they won't
have mobiles. |
|
| |
tcarson - At first glance it does seem like the methods are reversed but when you look at their reasoning it makes sense. A network-based approach wouldn't work well in cities because there's too much noise and too many obstructions for triangulation to be effective, whereas it would have a better chance of pinpointing the source where those things are missing. |
|
| |
sophocles - You wouldn't necessarily have to identify an individual hoax. Pattern recognition software would let you identify phones that are making a suspiciously high number of 922, 933, etc... calls. The punishment could simply be an automatic block placed on incomming calls from that phone to the number that's being abused. |
|
| |
Another thing: If you get a few "933" calls around the same time, you could figure that the incident is somewhere between them, increasing accuracy of who you then call. |
|
| |
Well, I voted against. The first to do so, so far. I think the idea might be feasible. However, I think a ringing phone is a sudden distraction on the road or highway. I think all cell phones should be off in the car. I think if you can flash a 3 digit code on a cell phone, you can dial 911. In the highway scenario described in support of the proposition, while the stranded person is talking into the phone, the people who seem intimidating will see that. |
|
| |
Corona - It's true, a ringing phone is a distraction when you're driving. I hate it when it happens to me but I'd be willing to put up with it if I thought it might help someone. There wouldn't be a distraction issue from the ringing phone in other situations. |
|
| |
As far as the highway scenario goes, if you wanted intimidating people to see you on the phone you'd have to stay on it constantly (which the 911 service wouldn't appreciate if you were just waiting for a tow), or at least pretend you were on it (which wouldn't help you at all if you really were attacked). Of course you could always call a friend (if you could reach them) and describe the intimidators to them if they appeared but you'd probably miss some significant details due to stress that a passerby might not miss. And the intimidators might not be as deterred as they would be if they knew a hundred pairs of eyes were on them. |
|
| |
....the intimidators' cell phones ring too... They know you are scared of them. They might like that. Interesting. |
|
| |
You could include a cameraphone snap to help people figure out what's going on (or to figure out what happened when they find your body, I guess). |
|
| |