Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Bill Bradshaw <bradshaw@gci.net> wrote:
>> micky wrote:
>>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location
>>> to my ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the
>>> worst, that I break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the
>>> phone is broken or stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's
>>> 6PM and I still haven't texted her to say I'm done, she can see my
>>> phone's location using the simple instructions I found on the web.
>>
>> When I am out alone I always run a track on my GPS (not phone) which
>> I can follow back so I do not get lost because I am 78 years old.
>> If you are really worried you should look at something like a Garmin
>> inReach.
>
> We also have an old (non-phone) GPS (Garmin), which can lay
> 'breadcrumbs' for backtracking. Got us out of a mess in outback
> Australia where there was a maze of non-signposted dirt tracks and our
> maps (paper and offline smartphone ones) failed us.
>
> Two-way (text/SMS) satellite communication like the Garmin InReach is
> of course better, but also more expensive, because of the monthly
> costs for the subscription.
>
> When we're in the boonies of Australia, we have a PLB (Personal
> Locator Beacon). That gives only a signal - not a message - and your
> location to the satellite, but doesn't need a costly subscription.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_position-indicating_radiobeacon#Personal_Locator_Beacon>

I am sending this to you and Andrew. If you do not have cell phone service
how can you send somebody your location and problem?

<Bill>

Bill Bradshaw <bradshaw@gci.net> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Bill Bradshaw <bradshaw@gci.net> wrote:
> >> micky wrote:
> >>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location
> >>> to my ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the
> >>> worst, that I break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the
> >>> phone is broken or stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's
> >>> 6PM and I still haven't texted her to say I'm done, she can see my
> >>> phone's location using the simple instructions I found on the web.
> >>
> >> When I am out alone I always run a track on my GPS (not phone) which
> >> I can follow back so I do not get lost because I am 78 years old.
> >> If you are really worried you should look at something like a Garmin
> >> inReach.
> >
> > We also have an old (non-phone) GPS (Garmin), which can lay
> > 'breadcrumbs' for backtracking. Got us out of a mess in outback
> > Australia where there was a maze of non-signposted dirt tracks and our
> > maps (paper and offline smartphone ones) failed us.
> >
> > Two-way (text/SMS) satellite communication like the Garmin InReach is
> > of course better, but also more expensive, because of the monthly
> > costs for the subscription.
> >
> > When we're in the boonies of Australia, we have a PLB (Personal
> > Locator Beacon). That gives only a signal - not a message - and your
> > location to the satellite, but doesn't need a costly subscription.
> >
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_position-indicating_radiobeacon#Personal_Locator_Beacon>
>
> I am sending this to you and Andrew. If you do not have cell phone service
> how can you send somebody your location and problem?

Huh?

Please (re-)read my response and reference.

As I mentioned, with a PLB you can send a signal - i.e. the fact that
you have a severe problem - and your location. As a result, the
emergency services will come looking for you (they are required to
respond).

And no, as I said, with a PLB you can not send a message, so you can
not tell *which* problem you have, but the signal indicates that you
have a severe problem. I.e. if you trigger the PLB because you're out of
beer, you will get a hefty fine and might have to pay all the expenses
for the bogus rescue operation.

So: A device like the Garmin InReach is more expenswive and has
continuous subscription costs. A PLB is cheaper and has no subscription
costs, but can not send/receive messages. Nothing has only advantages
and no disadvantages and life isn't fair. News at eleven.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 06:49:23 +0200, Jörg Lorenz
<hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

>On 20.05.2024 03:58, knuttle wrote:
>> On 05/19/2024 9:46 PM, micky wrote:
>>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to my
>>> ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst, that I
>>> break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is broken or
>>> stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I still haven't
>>> texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's location using the
>>> simple instructions I found on the web.
>>>
>>> But if she's unable to explain to the police where I am, how do the
>>> police figure it out? Can they see everyone's location just by
>>> knowing their phone number? This would be bad if it were for suspected
>>> criminals and they didn't have a warrant, but if it's to save me, I'd
>>> sort of like for them to know where I am. And I don't want there to be
>>> a lot of time required to enable it each time for each new lost person.
>>>
>>> Or is my friend supposed to somehow send the location information she
>>> can see on her phone to their phone? How?
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, I started doing this last fall, without realizing the plan was
>>> incomplete. Since then the AllTrails app has added the same feature to
>>> its maps. It probably piggybacks on Google maps. I'll know when I try
>>> the two tomorrow. The AllTrails app is fantastic in that you can use
>>> it for free if you have cellular signal where you are walking, and if
>>> you pay for a year, you can download all the maps you'll want to use
>>> (which I think continue to work even after your subscription has
>>> expired) and you can use them without a cell signal. AND, they show
>>> where on the trail you are. The maps zoom in more than google maps do.
>>> I think they'll even tell you when it's time to turn, but that's not
>>> something I'd likely want to use.
>>>
>>> I've come across a couple other non-Google maps that include GPS. I
>>> think the Yorktown battlefield in Virginia was one of them. You really
>>> have to give a lot of credit to the USA government for putting those
>>> satellites up there. Who would even have thunk it that this could work?
>>> OTOH, i've read that the whole thing is a scam, and GPS doesn't really
>>> show where you are. It just sends random locations, and people believe
>>> they are accurate. People are so suggestible. Many have drunk the
>>> kool-aid and they believe in GPS and vaccines. It's sad.

You're pretty funny, Jorg. In another post you complain that this post
is off-topic (even though the first two paragraphs, the important part,
are not), but then below you call knuttle's post, which is entirely
off-topic, "Phantastic!" and you say THX!. You don't seem to know if
you like off-topic posts or not, so I don't see how anyone can use your
standards for anything.

>> If you had Been in the Boy Scouts you would learn to live in the woods
>> without a electronic device of any type. You would learn about mark or
>> finding marks so you could retrace your path. You would learn about
>> finding your direction so you do not get lost.
>>
>> Learn to be in the woods before you go off wandering on a hike depending
>> on your cellphone. Knowledge of the Woods will save your life when your
>> batteries expire.
>
>Phantastic! THX!

See? You like off-topic stuff. People should remember that when you
complain about somethiung the next time.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 07:47:51 +0200, Jörg Lorenz
<hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

>On 20.05.2024 07:11, micky wrote:
>> In comp.mobile.android, on Sun, 19 May 2024 21:58:37 -0400, knuttle
>> <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/19/2024 9:46 PM, micky wrote:
>>>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to my
>>>> ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst, that I
>>>> break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is broken or
>>>> stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I still haven't
>>>> texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's location using the
>>>> simple instructions I found on the web.
>>>>
>>>> But if she's unable to explain to the police where I am, how do the
>>>> police figure it out? Can they see everyone's location just by
>>>> knowing their phone number? This would be bad if it were for suspected
>>>> criminals and they didn't have a warrant, but if it's to save me, I'd
>>>> sort of like for them to know where I am. And I don't want there to be
>>>> a lot of time required to enable it each time for each new lost person.
>>>>
>>>> Or is my friend supposed to somehow send the location information she
>>>> can see on her phone to their phone? How?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BTW, I started doing this last fall, without realizing the plan was
>>>> incomplete. Since then the AllTrails app has added the same feature to
>>>> its maps. It probably piggybacks on Google maps. I'll know when I try
>>>> the two tomorrow. The AllTrails app is fantastic in that you can use
>>>> it for free if you have cellular signal where you are walking, and if
>>>> you pay for a year, you can download all the maps you'll want to use
>>>> (which I think continue to work even after your subscription has
>>>> expired) and you can use them without a cell signal. AND, they show
>>>> where on the trail you are. The maps zoom in more than google maps do.
>>>> I think they'll even tell you when it's time to turn, but that's not
>>>> something I'd likely want to use.
>>>>
>>>> I've come across a couple other non-Google maps that include GPS. I
>>>> think the Yorktown battlefield in Virginia was one of them. You really
>>>> have to give a lot of credit to the USA government for putting those
>>>> satellites up there. Who would even have thunk it that this could work?
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, i've read that the whole thing is a scam, and GPS doesn't really
>>>> show where you are. It just sends random locations, and people believe
>>>> they are accurate. People are so suggestible. Many have drunk the
>>>> kool-aid and they believe in GPS and vaccines. It's sad.
>>
>>> If you had Been in the Boy Scouts you would learn to live in the woods
>>> without a electronic device of any type. You would learn about mark or
>>> finding marks so you could retrace your path. You would learn about
>>> finding your direction so you do not get lost.
>>>
>>> Learn to be in the woods before you go off wandering on a hike depending
>>> on your cellphone. Knowledge of the Woods will save your life when your
>>> batteries expire.
>>
>> I presume you're kidding, but just in case, I'll answer as if you
>> weren't.
>>
>> I've been hiking in the woods alone since I was 6 years old. I never
>> get lost, I especially like hikes with only deer trails or no trails at
>> all. For example I led a hike through the Crownsville Hospital forest
>> years before it opened to the public. As well as the Rocky Gorge
>> Reservoir, which still has no trails at all. When I camp, I rarely use
>> a tent and on one occasion, I camped without a sleeping bag and slept
>> totally without clothes (and that was in a campground!) I've spent the
>> night atop Mt. Katahdin, even though it was against the rules. (wanted
>> to watch the sun rise.)
>>
>> And I eat my meat raw.
>>
>> I know all about blazed trails, but I don't limit myself to them. OTOH,
>> I don't want my half-day hike to last an extra hour because I miss a
>> turn.
>>
>> Do you hike alone? On weekdays when you are likely the only person
>> there? When I was 60, I wasn't concerned about this but at age 77, I
>> know it's possible I'll break a leg or have a heart attack, and it's
>> foolish not to take a phone. In case I'm unconscious or my phone is
>> broken, it's foolish not to take advantage of the tech marvels of the
>> age, so that if I don't come back when I plan to, a friend can send
>> someone to look for me, rather than my lying there all night (possibly
>> in the rain). But I guess you're a real man and dying alone in the
>> woods won't bother you.
>
>Even more *OT*. Has nothing to do with Android.

How come you praised knuttle when his post was entirely off-topic

>And this is not therapy group for nutty hikers.

I think knuttle is a lot more knutty. Not counting you, of course.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 18:38:25 -0000 (UTC), Chris
<ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

>micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>> In comp.mobile.android, on Sun, 19 May 2024 21:58:37 -0400, knuttle
>> <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/19/2024 9:46 PM, micky wrote:
>>>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to my
>>>> ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst, that I
>>>> break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is broken or
>>>> stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I still haven't
>>>> texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's location using the
>>>> simple instructions I found on the web.
>>>>
>>>> But if she's unable to explain to the police where I am, how do the
>>>> police figure it out? Can they see everyone's location just by
>>>> knowing their phone number? This would be bad if it were for suspected
>>>> criminals and they didn't have a warrant, but if it's to save me, I'd
>>>> sort of like for them to know where I am. And I don't want there to be
>>>> a lot of time required to enable it each time for each new lost person.
>>>>
>>>> Or is my friend supposed to somehow send the location information she
>>>> can see on her phone to their phone? How?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BTW, I started doing this last fall, without realizing the plan was
>>>> incomplete. Since then the AllTrails app has added the same feature to
>>>> its maps. It probably piggybacks on Google maps. I'll know when I try
>>>> the two tomorrow. The AllTrails app is fantastic in that you can use
>>>> it for free if you have cellular signal where you are walking, and if
>>>> you pay for a year, you can download all the maps you'll want to use
>>>> (which I think continue to work even after your subscription has
>>>> expired) and you can use them without a cell signal. AND, they show
>>>> where on the trail you are. The maps zoom in more than google maps do.
>>>> I think they'll even tell you when it's time to turn, but that's not
>>>> something I'd likely want to use.
>>>>
>>>> I've come across a couple other non-Google maps that include GPS. I
>>>> think the Yorktown battlefield in Virginia was one of them. You really
>>>> have to give a lot of credit to the USA government for putting those
>>>> satellites up there. Who would even have thunk it that this could work?
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, i've read that the whole thing is a scam, and GPS doesn't really
>>>> show where you are. It just sends random locations, and people believe
>>>> they are accurate. People are so suggestible. Many have drunk the
>>>> kool-aid and they believe in GPS and vaccines. It's sad.
>>
>>> If you had Been in the Boy Scouts you would learn to live in the woods
>>> without a electronic device of any type. You would learn about mark or
>>> finding marks so you could retrace your path. You would learn about
>>> finding your direction so you do not get lost.
>>>
>>> Learn to be in the woods before you go off wandering on a hike depending
>>> on your cellphone. Knowledge of the Woods will save your life when your
>>> batteries expire.
>>
>> I presume you're kidding, but just in case, I'll answer as if you
>> weren't.
>>
>> I've been hiking in the woods alone since I was 6 years old.
>
>Then you should know that before you head off to tell someone your route
>and approximate time you will be done by. Then if you're not back by the
>time you said you would be that person can alert mountain rescue.

I thought it was clear from my post that I did all that.

>This has always been the case with no need for technology.

No, the post revolved around knowing with some precision where I was,
not just somewhere, anywhere, on a 2 to 10 miles trail, so that on a
loop trail rescuers can go clockwise or counter-clockwise from the trail
head, whichever is quicker. Or with yesterday's trai that went from one
road to another 3 miles away and then via another route back to the
first road, they can start at whichever road is closer to the person
being rescued.

Or, especially relevant yesterday when much of the trail on a hill near
a river, even the path itself sloped to the side, if the person has
rolled down a hill off the trail, so the rescuers don't walk right by
him.

>If you want to depend on fallible technology - requires battery, wifi, gps,

Only GPS and battery, and I have plenty of battery and GPS is exceedinly
reliable. There was no cell signal on 90% of the trail, and certainly
no wifi.

But I challenge your use of "depend on". You missed the part that I had
told my friend where I was going on and how long it would take me. The
technology part is a supplement, so that they will be find me faster.

I don't know what someone on an Android group would have against using
technology.

>to work - then you share live location. You still need to pre-arrange with
>someone to notify the authorities if you're not back when you said you
>would be.

Yes, of course.
>
>If you can't trust your ex to be able to read a map for the police then ask
>someone else.

I've thought about calling 311 to find out what the police do in this
situation, but I think I know the ansewr. If a child is missing, I'm
sure they go to the parents' home and look at the phone themselves. And
that's probably what they would do for a hiker too, at least if the
friend with his location is fairly nearby. I'll cover technical
possibilities in another post.
>
>A non-map based option is WhatThreeWords. See if you can suit your needs.
>The system has covered the whole planet surface in a grid of 3x3m squares
>each defined by a unique combination of three words e.g.
>The White House
>
>///metals.rated.purely
>https://w3w.co/metals.rated.purely
>
>It is ideal for giving directions where there's no points of reference.
>
>> I never
>> get lost,
>
>No-one does. Until they do.

knuttle assumed with no basis that I was likely to get lost. You seem
to think it's the problem too. What I said would be a problem was a
broken leg or being unconscious, nothing to do with being lost.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 20:34:36 -0400, knuttle
<keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 05/20/2024 5:35 PM, Andrew wrote:
>> knuttle wrote on Mon, 20 May 2024 16:00:46 -0400 :
>>
>>> On 05/20/2024 2:38 PM, Chris wrote:
>>>> I presume you're kidding, but just in case, I'll answer as if you
>>>> weren't.
>>> No I was not kidding. Today people have put their whole lives in a
>>> cellphone. They depend on it to maintain their financial records, their
>>> shopping list. They use it to find the places they go. They feel they
>>> do not need to know basic, because they think the can use
>>> google/siri/etc when ever they need information. I sometime wonder if
>>> they need to google to tie their shoes.
>>>
>>> I think it is a recipe for disaster. They are depending for everything
>>> in their lives based on being able to access a cell tower. Hurricane,
>>> tornado, earthquake and the cell system being significantly interrupted,
>>> they will be helpless.
>>
>> Well, to be fair, cellphones make people safer, and, in fact, cellphones
>> are one reason traffic safety has steadily improved year after year after
>> year since traffic accident rates steadily went down while cellphone
>> ownership rates skyrocketed (contrary to the myth by most morons out there
>> that cellphone use while driving raises the accident rate).
>>
>> None of those morons who claim that have ever looked at the accident rates.
>>
>> In addition to the SOS apps, Satellite communications and HAM radio
>> previously discussed in this group (assuming a broken leg, for example),
>> for the OP, there's a free geofence app on iOS & Android which will alert
>> anyone he wants to alert the instant his phone goes into our out of the
>> area (of course, it needs to have cellular coverage at sending time).
>>
>> https://www.iamherezone.com/ by SyncIt
>> "This app allows users to send pre-generated messages based on
>> their geofence location area, thus informing other users when
>> they enter or leave a geographical area. The user defines the
>> geographical area by drawing it on the map. The app supports
>> SMS messaging, WhatsApp, email, and push notifications."
>>
>> 1. Draw a zone (on OpenStreetMap)
>> 2. Write your text message
>> 3. Select recipients
>>
>> Create multiple zones
>> Store multiple recipients
>> Send default and customized messages
>> Setup recurring and one-time messages
>> Add icon and color to each zone
>>
>> iOS:
>> https://apps.apple.com/us/app/im-here-zone/id1452495641
>> Android:
>> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.syncitgroup.android.iamhere
>This is another statistic.
>In the past 50 years the government has mandated 100's of safety devices
>on automobiles. Each device was to reduce traffic accidents because it
>would reduce death by 10%.

I don't believe that anyone ever said that each of the safety devices
developed for cars would reduce the death rate by 10%. For one thing
it's ridicilous to expect, and no one would claim, that each device
would be of the same value as each of the others. Seat belts are
probably higher than 10% and some devices are 1% or less.

We learned in the 50's that car makers were very slow in implement most
safety measures unless forced to by law.
>
>SO assume there were 100 devices added each reducing the traffic
>accidents. accidents reduced 10% for each device, and 100 device, means
>there are no traffic accidents on cars that had all of those devices
>implemented.
>
>(if there were 100 lost lives, after the 1st device there were 90 death,
>after the 2nd 81, the 3rd 73, and so on until 100 devices )
>
>So much for the published statistics on the lives saved by each new
>device added to the car, it means nothing in the real world.

Since it was never claimed, of course all this multiplication means
nothing

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 06:47:20 +0200, Jörg Lorenz
<hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

>On 20.05.2024 03:46, micky wrote:
>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to my
>> ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst, that I
>> break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is broken or
>> stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I still haven't
>> texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's location using the
>> simple instructions I found on the web.
>
>*OT*

Of course it's on topic. (and far, far more than knuttle's post that you
praised.) Google maps is an Android app that everyone has, and how to
relay to the police what the maps app says about a missing person's
location is a question about more than the maps app. It's about Android
usage in general.

I think the only current way to do this would be to take a screen shot,
or several at different levels of zoom, and send that to some police
number that accepts email. I think I've heard that 911 will accept
emails at least in parts of the country/world, but if it won't, the
police will give you a number that will.

How to take a screenshot and then find the file or the file name and how
to "share" that with the police is another set of Android questions.

My friend is one county away from where I live, so I think the easiest
thing in my case would be to send the Carroll County or state police to
her home and look at the map there. If someone used a friend 1000 miles
away, when a friend is missing, it would then be worth learning how to
take and email screenshots.

Or one could borrow another cellphone and photograph the screen of the
first one and send that picture.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 10:06:34 -0800, "Bill
Bradshaw" <bradshaw@gci.net> wrote:

>micky wrote:
>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to
>> my ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst,
>> that I break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is
>> broken or stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I
>> still haven't texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's
>> location using the simple instructions I found on the web.
>
>When I am out alone I always run a track on my GPS (not phone) which I can
>follow back so I do not get lost because I am 78 years old. If you are
>really worried you should look at something like a Garmin inReach.

This reminds me of the abandoned chromium mine at Soldiers Delight**,
not far from here. There is a string running from the entrance into the
mine, left by someone who wanted to find his way out. Unfortunately the
mine has been flooded when I've been there.

**Used to be the biggest producer of chromium in the world, back when
there was little use of chromium.

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]

> Of course it's on topic. (and far, far more than knuttle's post that you
> praised.) Google maps is an Android app that everyone has, and how to
> relay to the police what the maps app says about a missing person's
> location is a question about more than the maps app. It's about Android
> usage in general.
>
> I think the only current way to do this would be to take a screen shot,
> or several at different levels of zoom, and send that to some police
> number that accepts email. I think I've heard that 911 will accept
> emails at least in parts of the country/world, but if it won't, the
> police will give you a number that will.
>
> How to take a screenshot and then find the file or the file name and how
> to "share" that with the police is another set of Android questions.
>
> My friend is one county away from where I live, so I think the easiest
> thing in my case would be to send the Carroll County or state police to
> her home and look at the map there. If someone used a friend 1000 miles
> away, when a friend is missing, it would then be worth learning how to
> take and email screenshots.
>
> Or one could borrow another cellphone and photograph the screen of the
> first one and send that picture.

I assume you use the location sharing feature of Google Maps.

Assuming your ex-girlfriend knows how to use Google Maps, she can see
your last known location. She can 'pin' that location by long-pressing
it and then she can 'Share' (see bottom of screen) that location by any
of the available sharing methods, i.e. SMS, email, instant messaging
(WhatsApp), etc., etc..

The sharing goes via the Google Maps URL [1] of the location. Sadly, I do
not see a method to share the actual coordinates, which would be better.
Also see Chris' earlier reference to WhatThreeWords.

BTW, do *not* use a screenshot if the above methods are available. The
screenshot might not contain enough of the surroundings to pinpoint the
location and even if it does, it's uneccessarily hard to determine the
actual coordinates (within some reasonable accuracy).

If your ex-girlfriend does not know how to use Google Maps, it's best
if she goes to the police or they come to her, and take it from there.

[1] Example: <https://maps.app.goo.gl/2TpN5LggxDJNQN7F6> (which is The
White House).

Am 21.05.24 um 19:44 schrieb micky:
> In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 06:49:23 +0200, Jörg Lorenz
> <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> On 20.05.2024 03:58, knuttle wrote:
>>> On 05/19/2024 9:46 PM, micky wrote:
>>>> Going hiking tomorrow. Finally realized I was sending my location to my
>>>> ex-GF, but I hadn't told her how to see it. Assuming the worst, that I
>>>> break my leg and can't get off the trail, but the phone is broken or
>>>> stolen, and assuming she actually notices it's 6PM and I still haven't
>>>> texted her to say I'm done, she can see my phone's location using the
>>>> simple instructions I found on the web.
>>>>
>>>> But if she's unable to explain to the police where I am, how do the
>>>> police figure it out? Can they see everyone's location just by
>>>> knowing their phone number? This would be bad if it were for suspected
>>>> criminals and they didn't have a warrant, but if it's to save me, I'd
>>>> sort of like for them to know where I am. And I don't want there to be
>>>> a lot of time required to enable it each time for each new lost person.
>>>>
>>>> Or is my friend supposed to somehow send the location information she
>>>> can see on her phone to their phone? How?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BTW, I started doing this last fall, without realizing the plan was
>>>> incomplete. Since then the AllTrails app has added the same feature to
>>>> its maps. It probably piggybacks on Google maps. I'll know when I try
>>>> the two tomorrow. The AllTrails app is fantastic in that you can use
>>>> it for free if you have cellular signal where you are walking, and if
>>>> you pay for a year, you can download all the maps you'll want to use
>>>> (which I think continue to work even after your subscription has
>>>> expired) and you can use them without a cell signal. AND, they show
>>>> where on the trail you are. The maps zoom in more than google maps do.
>>>> I think they'll even tell you when it's time to turn, but that's not
>>>> something I'd likely want to use.
>>>>
>>>> I've come across a couple other non-Google maps that include GPS. I
>>>> think the Yorktown battlefield in Virginia was one of them. You really
>>>> have to give a lot of credit to the USA government for putting those
>>>> satellites up there. Who would even have thunk it that this could work?
>>>> OTOH, i've read that the whole thing is a scam, and GPS doesn't really
>>>> show where you are. It just sends random locations, and people believe
>>>> they are accurate. People are so suggestible. Many have drunk the
>>>> kool-aid and they believe in GPS and vaccines. It's sad.
>
> You're pretty funny, Jorg. In another post you complain that this post
> is off-topic (even though the first two paragraphs, the important part,
> are not), but then below you call knuttle's post, which is entirely
> off-topic, "Phantastic!" and you say THX!. You don't seem to know if
> you like off-topic posts or not, so I don't see how anyone can use your
> standards for anything.
>
>>> If you had Been in the Boy Scouts you would learn to live in the woods
>>> without a electronic device of any type. You would learn about mark or
>>> finding marks so you could retrace your path. You would learn about
>>> finding your direction so you do not get lost.
>>>
>>> Learn to be in the woods before you go off wandering on a hike depending
>>> on your cellphone. Knowledge of the Woods will save your life when your
>>> batteries expire.
>>
>> Phantastic! THX!
>
> See? You like off-topic stuff. People should remember that when you
> complain about somethiung the next time.

Like almost always: *You do not get the message*.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

In comp.mobile.android, on 21 May 2024 19:19:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

>micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>[...]
>
>> Of course it's on topic. (and far, far more than knuttle's post that you
>> praised.) Google maps is an Android app that everyone has, and how to
>> relay to the police what the maps app says about a missing person's
>> location is a question about more than the maps app. It's about Android
>> usage in general.
>>
>> I think the only current way to do this would be to take a screen shot,
>> or several at different levels of zoom, and send that to some police
>> number that accepts email. I think I've heard that 911 will accept
>> emails at least in parts of the country/world, but if it won't, the
>> police will give you a number that will.
>>
>> How to take a screenshot and then find the file or the file name and how
>> to "share" that with the police is another set of Android questions.
>>
>> My friend is one county away from where I live, so I think the easiest
>> thing in my case would be to send the Carroll County or state police to
>> her home and look at the map there. If someone used a friend 1000 miles
>> away, when a friend is missing, it would then be worth learning how to
>> take and email screenshots.
>>
>> Or one could borrow another cellphone and photograph the screen of the
>> first one and send that picture.
>
> I assume you use the location sharing feature of Google Maps.

Yes.**
>
> Assuming your ex-girlfriend knows how to use Google Maps, she can see
>your last known location. She can 'pin' that location by long-pressing
>it and then she can 'Share' (see bottom of screen) that location by any
>of the available sharing methods, i.e. SMS, email, instant messaging
>(WhatsApp), etc., etc..

Aha, this is just the sort of answer I was looking for! This sounds
great. Almost worth getting stuck on the trail to try it out. (FWIW,
I've never been on the receiving end of location sharing.)

BTW, location sharing itself used to be much like this, specifically,
long-pressing one's own location. When I tried last month to show it
to another friend, it didn't work, and it turns out they had changed the
instructions. Now the instructions are to tap your atavar or initial in
the upper right corner of the map and then tap Location Sharing. It's
conceivable to me that if you are giving the method by memory, that the
current instructions for it have also changed. But it's easy enough to
remember both methods.

> The sharing goes via the Google Maps URL [1] of the location. Sadly, I do
>not see a method to share the actual coordinates, which would be better.
>Also see Chris' earlier reference to WhatThreeWords.
>
> BTW, do *not* use a screenshot if the above methods are available. The
>screenshot might not contain enough of the surroundings to pinpoint the
>location and even if it does, it's uneccessarily hard to determine the
>actual coordinates (within some reasonable accuracy).

Not only that. the AllTrails map showed my location and it zigzagged
near the trail I was supposed to take, even though I was almost always
right on the trail I was supposed to take. I think this was because GPS
is not perfect
>
> If your ex-girlfriend does not know how to use Google Maps, it's best

She does. She even uses it. She just doesn't know which direction is
north and which is south. She has to go by landmarks. At least that's
what she says. (I've tried telling that A is south of B and she says she
doesn't understand, so i have to say it's closer to downtown. She knows
where downtown is.) But she's ahead of me on a lot of phone stuff. I
think she knows a lot more than she admits, but when I say that, she's
silent, neither confirming nor denying.

>if she goes to the police or they come to her, and take it from there.
>
>[1] Example: <https://maps.app.goo.gl/2TpN5LggxDJNQN7F6> (which is The
>White House).

Google has its own location notation/sysem, in this case
VXX7+39 Washington, District of Columbia
That is, the VXX&+39 part. That's unrelated to WhatThreeWords, right?

**(I mentioned that AllTrails also had location sharing (that might
just piggyback on Google***), but it didn't offer it to me yesterday
like it had the night before. Not sure why, but I didn't go looking for
it and so I didn't test it like I wanted to. Ah, here it is. It's
called Live Share, and it didn't work yesteday, I suppose, becaues I had
no cell signal on the trail. I had sent the ext about google's before I
started.)

***No, not Google. It ssems to send your friend a link to an AllTrails
page, and I suppose AllTrails can know your current location as well as
google does even though iiuc it won't when you have no cellular signal.

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 08:06:37 -0400, Newyana2
<newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>On 5/19/2024 9:58 PM, knuttle wrote:
>
>> If you had Been in the Boy Scouts you would learn to live in the woods
>> without a electronic device of any type.  You would learn about mark or
>> finding marks so you could retrace your path.  You would learn about
>> finding your direction so you do not get lost.
>>
>> Learn to be in the woods before you go off wandering on a hike depending
>> on your cellphone.  Knowledge of the Woods will save your life when your
>> batteries expire.
>
> Also of note is that Micky's sample scenario starts
>with him having his cellphone either broken or stolen.

Yeah, it was silly to include "stolen". If someone steals my phone
maybe they can track down the thief and he can tell the police where he
left me lying in the woods. OTOH, I don't think getting my phone
stolen while hiking is much of a risk.

If the phone is broken, I think it continues to show the last location
when it worked.

>He then goes on to enjoy a high-tech trail map and expects
>the police to find him via GPS, presumably because his
>cellphone number alone always shows where he is.
>
> I think that the way it turns out is that Micky's ex
>figures out the GPS and helps the police track down the
>criminal who stole Micky's cellphone. She ends up a hero.
>Meanwhile, Micky has a broken leg. He's stuck on the
>trail, bending the ear of a weary grizzly bear who's trying
>desperately to find an excuse to leave. "Whoa! Sorry Micky.
>I think I just saw a salmon walk by. Gotta go!"

Could be.

> But Micky
>does finally get saved, because an alien spaceship on
>patrol in those woods happens to notice that Micky's
>cellphone number has been stopped on a trail for hours
>without moving. In the end it all ends well. Micky is awarded
>an honorary Eagle Scout medal and gets a lucrative contract
>working as a translator at Area 51....
>
> Don't miss Season 2 of Micky Gets By, when Micky struggles
>with humidity possibly affecting his computer and takes his
>emergency to 9 newsgroups. It's non-stop action.

LOL

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 06:34:38 -0000 (UTC), Andrew
<andrew@spam.net> wrote:

>micky wrote on Mon, 20 May 2024 01:11:51 -0400 :
>
>> Or is my friend supposed to somehow send the location information she
>> can see on her phone to their phone? How?
>
>There are many solutions to the problem you posited above, one of which is
>that Andy Burns in a recent thread mentioned a US carrier that will switch
>to satellite communications if there isn't any cellular connection.
>
>However, if you have a cellular connection, we've discussed on this
>newsgroup many times the typical SOS apps which will send your latitude &
>longitude (and even a map with your pre-prepared text if you like) to
>anyone listed as your emergency contact.
>
>Offhand, one is SOS Alert where you press a homescreen button to send a
>pre-prepared SOS message & your GPS location to up to 5 contacts).
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.main.contacts.smsmanager>
>
>Another one which requires more button presses but which is more useful in
>day-to-day hiking situations is this app which sends the GPS by SMS.
> *GPS to SMS* - location sharing by Tralchonok Labs
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ru.perm.trubnikov.gps2sms>
> <https://github.com/tral/GPS2SMS>
> <https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-2-2-gps-to-sms-location-sharing.2994187/>
>
>Of course, you have to be alive for that to happen, and you need cellular
>signal,

I was alive, but I didn't have a cell signal 80% of the time.

>although if you're still ambulatory, it will send when you
>eventually move into a cellular coverage area.
>
>If you don't have a cellular connection, that's why I keep a HAM radio in
>my pack when I'm on off trail hikes in the mountains.

I was a little surprised how close I was to the road when the cell
signal ended (and it was closer than that because I was listenning to
webradio and that is spooled for up to 10 minutes worth.)

But I guess cells are not very big.

And 5G cells are even smaller. When 5G is well-established, won't they
still have to keep 4G to reach into the woods, mountains, and deserts as
far as it goes now?

Bill Bradshaw wrote on Tue, 21 May 2024 08:49:15 -0800 :

> If you do not have cell phone service
> how can you send somebody your location and problem?

Please re-read what I wrote (and what Frank wrote) where we took into
account that problem, in various ways - because we understood the problem
set and, as a result of that understanding, we kindly provided the OP with
a variety of purposefully helpful workarounds.

Newyana2 wrote on Tue, 21 May 2024 12:34:16 -0400 :

>> Many people believe in myths, but very few question them, and even fewer
>> ask why there is no solid evidence in the government record for them.
>>
>
> I told you why... if it's even true. Cellphone use is not
> typically something that's investigated and cellphone users
> are not likely to offer the information.

Science is weirder than the religious myths people make up.

Doesn't matter since the measurement I'm informing you of which is
extremely reliable is the accident rate for every state for every year,
which is accurately compiled by the US Census Bureau and which has been
accurately compiled since the 1920's - so it's not skewed data.

You simply look at those accident rates during the years just prior to the
skyrocketing cellphone ownership rates and during those years and after.

There is no effect.

That's just a fact.

You hold on to your religious argument that it "must" be there, which is
fine since most people believe in these myths - but it's religion.

Not science.

The science shows the accident rate is wholly unaffected (it just steadily
goes down in all fifty states over all those years).

Once you accept the data - then you'll realize why it is so.
But you're not ready for the why yet.

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]

> Not only that. the AllTrails map showed my location and it zigzagged
> near the trail I was supposed to take, even though I was almost always
> right on the trail I was supposed to take. I think this was because GPS
> is not perfect

Was this in a tree covered area or/and with overcast weather? Both
tend to weaken the GPS signal, which is already a very weak signal to
start with. (Imagine the satellites transmitting from some 20,000km
(12,500mi) above the earth to your smartphone.)

Moral: Get out of the woods and only hike on a sunny day! :-)

[...]

In comp.mobile.android, on 22 May 2024 13:39:35 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

>micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>[...]
>
>> Not only that. the AllTrails map showed my location and it zigzagged
>> near the trail I was supposed to take, even though I was almost always
>> right on the trail I was supposed to take. I think this was because GPS
>> is not perfect
>
> Was this in a tree covered area or/and with overcast weather? Both

Yes, both of those.

>tend to weaken the GPS signal, which is already a very weak signal to
>start with. (Imagine the satellites transmitting from some 20,000km
>(12,500mi) above the earth to your smartphone.)

But it isn't the strength of the signal that matters, it's the time
delay iirc. Does Going through clouds and leaves delay the signal?

> Moral: Get out of the woods and only hike on a sunny day! :-)
>
>[...]

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, on 22 May 2024 13:39:35 GMT, Frank Slootweg
> <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> >micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
> >[...]
> >
> >> Not only that. the AllTrails map showed my location and it zigzagged
> >> near the trail I was supposed to take, even though I was almost always
> >> right on the trail I was supposed to take. I think this was because GPS
> >> is not perfect
> >
> > Was this in a tree covered area or/and with overcast weather? Both
>
> Yes, both of those.
>
> >tend to weaken the GPS signal, which is already a very weak signal to
> >start with. (Imagine the satellites transmitting from some 20,000km
> >(12,500mi) above the earth to your smartphone.)
>
> But it isn't the strength of the signal that matters, it's the time
> delay iirc. Does Going through clouds and leaves delay the signal?

The signal strength does matter, because if it's too low, the
smartphone can't pick it up. I.e. similar to a 'cell' signal, if it's
too weak, you won't get a connection.

In my experience, both with 'real' GPSs - i.e. dedicated devices - and
smartphones, trees and clouds are the main problems for getting a fix.

Indoors is also a problem, but it's not often needed in such
circumstances. In a vehicle, it's mostly not a problem, because of the
amount of glass. I even successfully used it in a normal commercial
airplane. (The plane didn't have a screen showing its current position,
etc., so I took my tablet, fired up OsmAnd+ and held the tablet somewhat
close to the window.)

> > Moral: Get out of the woods and only hike on a sunny day! :-)
> >
> >[...]

Frank Slootweg wrote on 22 May 2024 15:28:22 GMT :

> I even successfully used it in a normal commercial
> airplane.

Agree my Samsung's GPS also works just fine in the windows seat of a
commercial airplane.

What I do, when I hike, is send periodic texts, which magically work even
without cellular signal, if you're ambulatory and if you eventually get to
an area that has cellular signal - because they're queued up by the phone.

*GPS to SMS* - location sharing by Tralchonok Labs
free, ad free, gsf free, 3.6 star, 787 reviews, 100K+ Downloads
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ru.perm.trubnikov.gps2sms>
<https://github.com/tral/GPS2SMS>
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-2-2-gps-to-sms-location-sharing.2994187/>

Andrew wrote:
> Bill Bradshaw wrote on Tue, 21 May 2024 08:49:15 -0800 :
>
>> If you do not have cell phone service
>> how can you send somebody your location and problem?
>
> Please re-read what I wrote (and what Frank wrote) where we took into
> account that problem, in various ways - because we understood the
> problem set and, as a result of that understanding, we kindly
> provided the OP with a variety of purposefully helpful workarounds.

They just found the body of a solo climber that fell on Denali several days
ago by following his inReach track.

<Bill>

In comp.mobile.android, on 22 May 2024 15:28:22 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

>micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>> In comp.mobile.android, on 22 May 2024 13:39:35 GMT, Frank Slootweg
>> <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>> >[...]
>> >
>> >> Not only that. the AllTrails map showed my location and it zigzagged
>> >> near the trail I was supposed to take, even though I was almost always
>> >> right on the trail I was supposed to take. I think this was because GPS
>> >> is not perfect
>> >
>> > Was this in a tree covered area or/and with overcast weather? Both
>>
>> Yes, both of those.
>>
>> >tend to weaken the GPS signal, which is already a very weak signal to
>> >start with. (Imagine the satellites transmitting from some 20,000km
>> >(12,500mi) above the earth to your smartphone.)
>>
>> But it isn't the strength of the signal that matters, it's the time
>> delay iirc. Does Going through clouds and leaves delay the signal?
>
> The signal strength does matter, because if it's too low, the
>smartphone can't pick it up. I.e. similar to a 'cell' signal, if it's
>too weak, you won't get a connection.
>
> In my experience, both with 'real' GPSs - i.e. dedicated devices - and
>smartphones, trees and clouds are the main problems for getting a fix.

There were definitely loads of trees and clouds.
>
> Indoors is also a problem, but it's not often needed in such
>circumstances.

Usually I know where I am when I'm indoors. Especially in buildings
that don't move.

> In a vehicle, it's mostly not a problem, because of the
>amount of glass. I even successfully used it in a normal commercial
>airplane.

Witht the same phone I've tried it in several airplanes. First time or
two, didn't work at all. Then worked in two planes. Then didn't work.
Always window seat. Havent' figured out the difference yet. The first
time, when it didn't work was flying from JFK in NY to BWI Baltimore.
Over the water, I guess, but that relates to cellular data, not GPS. (I
would normally drive but this was the 2nd leg of a flight.)

>(The plane didn't have a screen showing its current position,
>etc., so I took my tablet, fired up OsmAnd+ and held the tablet somewhat
>close to the window.)
>
>> > Moral: Get out of the woods and only hike on a sunny day! :-)
>> >
>> >[...]

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 21:35:50 -0000 (UTC), Andrew
<andrew@spam.net> wrote:

>knuttle wrote on Mon, 20 May 2024 16:00:46 -0400 :
>
>> On 05/20/2024 2:38 PM, Chris wrote:
>>> I presume you're kidding, but just in case, I'll answer as if you
>>> weren't.
>> No I was not kidding. Today people have put their whole lives in a
>> cellphone. They depend on it to maintain their financial records, their
>> shopping list. They use it to find the places they go. They feel they
>> do not need to know basic, because they think the can use
>> google/siri/etc when ever they need information. I sometime wonder if
>> they need to google to tie their shoes.
>>
>> I think it is a recipe for disaster. They are depending for everything
>> in their lives based on being able to access a cell tower. Hurricane,
>> tornado, earthquake and the cell system being significantly interrupted,
>> they will be helpless.
>
>Well, to be fair, cellphones make people safer, and, in fact, cellphones
>are one reason traffic safety has steadily improved year after year after
>year since traffic accident rates steadily went down while cellphone
>ownership rates skyrocketed (contrary to the myth by most morons out there
>that cellphone use while driving raises the accident rate).

Are you saying that no one texts or reads texts or articles on their
cellphone while driving? And that that isn't dangerous? that it
doesnt' cause accidents?
>
>None of those morons who claim that have ever looked at the accident rates.

How do you know that?

There are dozens of factors that have an effect on the accident rate.

>In addition to the SOS apps, Satellite communications and HAM radio
>previously discussed in this group (assuming a broken leg, for example),
>for the OP, there's a free geofence app on iOS & Android which will alert
>anyone he wants to alert the instant his phone goes into our out of the
>area (of course, it needs to have cellular coverage at sending time).

The fact that cellphones are helpful, and can call the police or an
ambulance better than having no phone*** can does not mean that at other
times cellphones are the danger. Right?

***But those tasks only start after there is an accident and/or only
after the car has stopped.

>https://www.iamherezone.com/ by SyncIt
> "This app allows users to send pre-generated messages based on
> their geofence location area, thus informing other users when
> they enter or leave a geographical area. The user defines the
> geographical area by drawing it on the map. The app supports
> SMS messaging, WhatsApp, email, and push notifications."
>
> 1. Draw a zone (on OpenStreetMap)
> 2. Write your text message
> 3. Select recipients
>
> Create multiple zones
> Store multiple recipients
> Send default and customized messages
> Setup recurring and one-time messages
> Add icon and color to each zone
>
>iOS:
> https://apps.apple.com/us/app/im-here-zone/id1452495641
>Android:
> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.syncitgroup.android.iamhere

micky wrote on Wed, 22 May 2024 20:52:26 -0400 :

> Are you saying that no one texts or reads texts or articles on their
> cellphone while driving? And that that isn't dangerous? that it
> doesnt' cause accidents?

Thanks for asking. It's only fools who don't question common myths.
I'm a scientist. My words below are written very clearly around facts.

I'm saying we covered this many times where the US Census Bureau has been
publishing *ACCURATE* accident-rate statistics for all fifty (48 at the
start) states since the 1920s, and their data on accident rates for each
and every one of the fifty states show NO ADVERSE EFFECT WHATSOEVER on the
accident rate for any state and for all states in the periods before
cellphones, during cellphone ownership skyrocketing, and afterward.

The accident rate is slowly going down; but it certainly didn't go up
*That's just a fact.*

Only fools dispute facts (that's why they're fools).

>>
>>None of those morons who claim that have ever looked at the accident rates.
>
> How do you know that?
> There are dozens of factors that have an effect on the accident rate.

Nay, thousands. We covered this.

We covered that the NHTSA focused on and listed distractions, where in the
top 10 distractions were cellphone use while driving (understandably so).

There were and are *always* distractions while driving, where cellphones
merely moved one of those old top ten distractions to position number 11.

>>In addition to the SOS apps, Satellite communications and HAM radio
>>previously discussed in this group (assuming a broken leg, for example),
>>for the OP, there's a free geofence app on iOS & Android which will alert
>>anyone he wants to alert the instant his phone goes into our out of the
>>area (of course, it needs to have cellular coverage at sending time).
>
> The fact that cellphones are helpful, and can call the police or an
> ambulance better than having no phone*** can does not mean that at other
> times cellphones are the danger. Right?

What you have here is a fact. The accident rate is unchanged.
What you need to figure out is why.

The fact is simple (as only fools dispute facts).
The why isn't so simple - but there are reasons why.

But until you agree with the fact, you have no business working on the why.
You should just look up the old threads which contained the URLs.

I'm tired of digging them up because this is old news that cellphones never
changed the accident rate in the United States (or Australia, by the way).

> ***But those tasks only start after there is an accident and/or only
> after the car has stopped.

There's a reason I spoke about accident rates.
a. First off, they're normalized by miles driven
b. Which itself is a complicated function of very many things
c. And secondly, you can't have injuries without accidents first

So injuries (including fatalities) are a second-order effect.

If we don't know the first order effects, we have no business discussing
second-order effects (which also knock your socks off if you knew them).

In summary, every moron on the planet believes that cellphones increased
accident rates - because they're morons - and because three entities take
anecdotal evidence (that accidents occur) and blow them up out of
proportion.
1. Personal injury lawyers (who benefit from the lawsuits)
2. Insurance companies (who benefit from raising rates)
3. Police (who benefit from ticketing)

Try to find a cite please that is NOT from one of those three that shows
reliable data before, during & after cellphone ownership skyrocketing
rates, regarding the accident rate in the United States.

And yet when you look for the accident rates from the US Census Bureau (who
keeps good data) - they didn't go up. They just steadily went down in the
United States in the reliable records (which have been kept since the 1920s
and are the best there is).

Secondly, cellphones certainly are a distraction - no doubt about it. The
NHTSA listed the top ten distractions and cellphones kicked one of them off
the list and replaced them (which should give you a hint as to why the
accident rate remained unchanged - but nobody is ready for the real science
yet).

Thirdly, any talk about injuries/fatalities is premature because that's a
second-order effect. First you have to understand the first-order issues.

And lastly, even I, a trained scientist, *would have thought* that
cellphones must be such a distraction that even I (a trained scientist)
would have thought they certainly would have raised the accident rate.

And yet, when I looked, I found out that they didn't.
And then I looked for why.

Where the why turned out to be obvious - once you realize there have always
been top ten distractions while driving - and where cellphones merely
swapped one of them and pushed another into position 11.

But nobody is ready for the why until they look at the facts.
Google it. We've discussed this many times on this very newsgroup.

The links are in those threads (I'm not bothering to look them up for you).

In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 23 May 2024 02:05:48 -0000 (UTC), Andrew
<andrew@spam.net> wrote:

>micky wrote on Wed, 22 May 2024 20:52:26 -0400 :
>
>> Are you saying that no one texts or reads texts or articles on their
>> cellphone while driving? And that that isn't dangerous? that it
>> doesnt' cause accidents?

There are three questions above and afaict you didn't answer any of
them. Maybe somewhere in your text you have answers, but I didn't see
them, so do me a favor and answer each of the 3 questiosn above.

I'll fully phrase them individually, and add one:

Are you saying that no one texts or reads texts or articles on their
cellphone while driving?

Are you saying no one does anything on his cell phone that take takes
his attention away from his driving?

If you agree that they do do things that take their attention, are you
saying it's not dangerous?

Are you saying it doens't cause accidents?

>Thanks for asking. It's only fools who don't question common myths.
>I'm a scientist. My words below are written very clearly around facts.
>
>I'm saying we covered this many times where the US Census Bureau has been
>publishing *ACCURATE* accident-rate statistics for all fifty (48 at the

You said this already and I don't find it of value, because lots of
things can make the accident rate go down, while cell phones could still
be a danger. That's why I want you to answer each of the 4 questions
at the top.

>start) states since the 1920s, and their data on accident rates for each
>and every one of the fifty states show NO ADVERSE EFFECT WHATSOEVER on the
>accident rate for any state and for all states in the periods before
>cellphones, during cellphone ownership skyrocketing, and afterward.
>
>The accident rate is slowly going down; but it certainly didn't go up
> *That's just a fact.*
>
>Only fools dispute facts (that's why they're fools).
>
>>>
>>>None of those morons who claim that have ever looked at the accident rates.
>>
>> How do you know that?
>> There are dozens of factors that have an effect on the accident rate.
>
>Nay, thousands. We covered this.
>
>We covered that the NHTSA focused on and listed distractions, where in the
>top 10 distractions were cellphone use while driving (understandably so).
>
>There were and are *always* distractions while driving, where cellphones
>merely moved one of those old top ten distractions to position number 11.
>
>>>In addition to the SOS apps, Satellite communications and HAM radio
>>>previously discussed in this group (assuming a broken leg, for example),
>>>for the OP, there's a free geofence app on iOS & Android which will alert
>>>anyone he wants to alert the instant his phone goes into our out of the
>>>area (of course, it needs to have cellular coverage at sending time).
>>
>> The fact that cellphones are helpful, and can call the police or an
>> ambulance better than having no phone*** can does not mean that at other
>> times cellphones are the danger. Right?
>
>What you have here is a fact. The accident rate is unchanged.
>What you need to figure out is why.

I just want to figure out what you're saying.

>The fact is simple (as only fools dispute facts).
>The why isn't so simple - but there are reasons why.
>
>But until you agree with the fact, you have no business working on the why.

I'm not working on the why; I'm not working on any fact. I'm only
asking what you are saying.

>You should just look up the old threads which contained the URLs.
>
>I'm tired of digging them up because this is old news that cellphones never

You don't have to dig them up, because they will not answser the
questions I asked.

No comments on the rest of your post.

>changed the accident rate in the United States (or Australia, by the way).
>
>> ***But those tasks only start after there is an accident and/or only
>> after the car has stopped.
>
>There's a reason I spoke about accident rates.
>a. First off, they're normalized by miles driven
>b. Which itself is a complicated function of very many things
>c. And secondly, you can't have injuries without accidents first
>
>So injuries (including fatalities) are a second-order effect.
>
>If we don't know the first order effects, we have no business discussing
>second-order effects (which also knock your socks off if you knew them).
>
>In summary, every moron on the planet believes that cellphones increased
>accident rates - because they're morons - and because three entities take
>anecdotal evidence (that accidents occur) and blow them up out of
>proportion.
>1. Personal injury lawyers (who benefit from the lawsuits)
>2. Insurance companies (who benefit from raising rates)
>3. Police (who benefit from ticketing)
>
>Try to find a cite please that is NOT from one of those three that shows
>reliable data before, during & after cellphone ownership skyrocketing
>rates, regarding the accident rate in the United States.
>
>And yet when you look for the accident rates from the US Census Bureau (who
>keeps good data) - they didn't go up. They just steadily went down in the
>United States in the reliable records (which have been kept since the 1920s
>and are the best there is).
>
>Secondly, cellphones certainly are a distraction - no doubt about it. The
>NHTSA listed the top ten distractions and cellphones kicked one of them off
>the list and replaced them (which should give you a hint as to why the
>accident rate remained unchanged - but nobody is ready for the real science
>yet).
>
>Thirdly, any talk about injuries/fatalities is premature because that's a
>second-order effect. First you have to understand the first-order issues.
>
>And lastly, even I, a trained scientist, *would have thought* that
>cellphones must be such a distraction that even I (a trained scientist)
>would have thought they certainly would have raised the accident rate.
>
>And yet, when I looked, I found out that they didn't.
>And then I looked for why.
>
>Where the why turned out to be obvious - once you realize there have always
>been top ten distractions while driving - and where cellphones merely
>swapped one of them and pushed another into position 11.
>
>But nobody is ready for the why until they look at the facts.
>Google it. We've discussed this many times on this very newsgroup.
>
>The links are in those threads (I'm not bothering to look them up for you).

In comp.mobile.android, on Mon, 20 May 2024 18:38:25 -0000 (UTC), Chris
<ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>A non-map based option is WhatThreeWords. See if you can suit your needs.

I looked at it quite a bit and it woudln't be suitable for me. I don't
have any way to generate the 3 words while I'm hiking, and every 10 feet
I'd need another set of 3 words. Plus there is no relationship between
the words for one location and the adjacent locations.

Plus if I could generate the words, my friend would not know what they
mean, and I doubt the local police would understand them either. So how
could they rescue me?

However, it's definitely interesting

>The system has covered the whole planet surface in a grid of 3x3m squares
>each defined by a unique combination of three words e.g.
>The White House
>
>///metals.rated.purely
>https://w3w.co/metals.rated.purely
>
>It is ideal for giving directions where there's no points of reference.