I have watched this string and the temptation to throw in some
reality has finally overcome prudance. (I am so close to an Echelon
Station that I am restricted on my Amateur Radio Activities, but then
like the rest of the population I believe what politicians tell me so this
is untrue and I am paranoid)

> If we're all lucky, the standard will be GPS for the mobile phone
tracking.
> There seems to be no hope of dissuading Big Brother from putting it in the
> field (and making us pay for it), so the best we can hope for is that they
> will settle for a somewhat user-controllable solution.
>
Sorry, that has already been thought of

> Right now, there is a technical debate between a system that uses the time
> delays between arrival of the signal at different cell towers, and having
a
> GPS receiver in each mobile phone.  All the GPS suppliers are salivating
> over the prospect of every cell phone user being forced to buy one of
their
> receivers.  The prospect has also opened their R&D money spigots.  We just
> got preproduction samples of a GPS receiver that's just over 1" square,
and
> that's expected to be "well under $50 in production quantities."  It's
> pretty cool, and I want them for several of my own projects -- it just
> bothers me knowing why it exists.
>
Err, there is no technical debate, both techniques have their strengths and
weaknesses and therefore will be incorporated (eventually when technology
allows (it can be now but the beancounters insist it doesn't make sense))

> The time-of-flight system is technically more difficult to achieve,
> especially in urban canyons, where cell phone signals do things like
> diffracting around the edges of buildings that make for weird multipath
> conditions.  GPS is pretty difficult, too, but it has been solved by a
> number of vendors.  Its weakness is that a GPS receiver needs a pretty
good
> view of the sky.  If you've ever used one, it doesn't work indoors, and
> doesn't even work very well in forested areas.  If you don't want it to
> work, all it takes is a little bit of aluminum foil over the antenna.
>
> So, if we're lucky, the more-easily-circumvented one will prevail.  But
> don't get your hopes up very much, there's already a lot of location
> information just in knowing which cell you're in.  Cells are pretty small,
> especially in urban areas, so just knowing what cell you're in tells them
> within a few blocks where you are.  That works even with the oldest analog
> cellphone technology.
>
> For criminal purposes, it is simplest to steal a cell phone and only use
it
> for a few days.  If you select a tourist, kill them and hide the body, it
> will probably remain useful for a little longer.
>
Why bother, just get a pre-paid fone then ditch it.

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: J.Feldhaar [mailto:j.feldhaar@TELEJET.DE]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 10:11 AM
> > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [OT]:Hmmmmm
> >
> >
> > Werner Soekoe schrieb:
> >
> > > Yes, yes...
> > >
> > > This is a serious problem. Why do you think did they drop selective
> > > availability? SA on GPS's was there to make location
> > readings inaccurate, so
> > > that the USA's enemies couldn't use it against them. Now
> > they dropped it,
> > > because their enemies have found ways around it. Secondly,
> > if you have a car
> > > with a GPS Navigation System that gives your position
> > feedback, they can
> > > find you within 5 meters!!!
> > >
Ah, you are talking of the standard GPS Engine here, a bit more
computing power and 1 foot is achievable, throw a bit more engineering at it
and you can improve on that by at least a factor of 10

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
use mailto:listserv@mitvma.mit.edu?body=SET%20PICList%20DIGEST