Slashdot Mirror
Cellphones Get Government Chips For Disaster Alert
Jeremiah Cornelius writes "The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski, said the Commercial Mobile Alert System that Congress approved in 2006 will direct messages to cellphones in case of a terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other serious emergency. There will be at least three levels of messages, ranging from a critical national alert from the president to warnings about impending or occurring national disasters to alerts about missing or abducted children. The alert would show up on the phone's front screen, instead of the traditional text message inbox, and arrive with a distinct ring and probably a vibration. People will be able to opt out of receiving all but the presidential alerts."
Yes, Officer, I was just reading this text while I was driving because it might have been from the PRESIDENT!
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Now I know exactly how I am going to find out about the world coming to an end.
Not long now until they place that chip in your head.
In other news...tin foil sales have gone through the roof.
Presidential Alert: Pizza Hut, Eating pizza, It great, Presid rating going down, Kicked others out.
The last thing you read will be "U R WTFBBQ!!!"
"His name was James Damore."
Can't we OPT IN for ANY of the above instead?
Sheesh. I want my cellphone to be a Phone. not an internet device, not a tracker, not a web platform, not an MP3 player, Not a camera, not an OMGODZERS ALERT ALERT ALERT!!!!!! - Just a phone. that's it, that's all.
I do not to be properly alerted when I'm out riding my motorcycle in backwater, USA .
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
I'm always a little surprised when I hear about the government doing something it should be doing. The system works!
it is hard to argue against the idea of the "Amber Alert", but everyone should go read up about the false alarms and abuses of the system.
luckily, we are already getting de-sensitized to alerts from our phones.
THL phish sticks
And hopefully the President is careful with "Reply All".
Now if only they would legislate a government mandated hand-holder for crossing the street and perhaps under-bed anti-boogyman cameras and I'll finally feel completely secure. Truly a win for safety and democracy.
Gonna love to learn what all this chip will do. No doubt it will grant total access to your device and allow total audio and visual access. Oh well, just another way in which the government has gotten into our pants.
And you people still think the terrorists haven't won?
Every Amber Alert I've seen was related to simple custody disputes among mothers, fathers, and relatives. The kids are not in real danger, but sometimes on TV they claim danger because the kid is on insulin or Ritalin or something.
V1AG4A @ Low LOW Prices!!
Sounds pretty much like warning system for earthquakes, that shows up as an urgent message on practically all phones in Japan.
The back-end is still probably going to be SMS/MMS based (FCC document vaguely mentions the future ability to send audio/video with these messages).
As long as it's not over-used (say, blasting everyone with "flood warning" messages every time there is a flood warning would be kinda annoying -- I already know that as soon as it rains, everything in my county is under "flood warning") it would be fine.
Hyperom.com
That's a pretty neat idea, and I can see a lot of great uses for it.
However, it's also worrisome from a privacy perspective. Unlike the EBS/EAS which floods all channels with a warning, this system requires the broadcaster to know a basic vicinity people are in. If there's an announcement telling people below 14th street Manhattan to evacuate (like on 9/11), how will they know who to message unless the phone company or FEMA also has everyone's latest locations already listed in a database? The announcement is short on specifics, whether that will be AT&T or FEMA pushing out the location-sensitive alerts.
I don't quite like the idea; what normally would require a warrant to determine a person's cell tower vicinity will now make it even easier for the government to look someone's location up if they're sharing that data.
Let's hope this stays an Opt-in feature.
If anyone is qualified to tell me about a disaster, it would be the government. Nobody does/is/makes/exploits/advertises/promotes disasters like they do. Personally, I can't wait to hear the tech support calls about why we're getting Kansas' tornado warnings here in Colorado and who will be sued over the mass chaos sure to ensue.
Smacks of V for Vendetta to me. "You designed it, sir, you wanted it foolproof. You said every television in London!"
Wait until the spammers find a way to spoof messages from the president.
Real SUV's don't have cupholders
It's 5:42 A.M., do you know where your stack pointer is?
People will be able to opt out of receiving all but the presidential alerts.
One of the reasons this country is great is that you can opt to completely ignore what drivel our dingbat politicians (of both parties) are spewing.
No, the government should not be sending spam to my cellphone, without my consent. Period.
actually, I fully expect the system will be hijacked to disseminate spam within hours after going live.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
I have only one question: Will this standard be open for public inspection?
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Trump wants to remind you to turn into an all-new Celebrity Apprentice this Friday as he selects the appointees for his next term. Will Palin make the cut?
I wonder if they have thought out the security of this system. Sending a message to nearly every person in the United States at the same time would be an amazing hack. Is it supposed to be all automated, or does each provider have to get the message from FEMA and then manually send it out on their network?
99% of the time you are right, but there was one a couple of months ago where the boyfriend (not the child's father) drove into the delta with kid in the back seat. Amber Alert was active on him, just not fast enough.
Real SUV's don't have cupholders
It's 5:42 A.M., do you know where your stack pointer is?
One: a single point of failure. One evil-doer + one compromise in the system = panic from false alarm = ignoring future alarms.
Two: replies to that many messages will turn into a back-jam on the SMS.
Does Washington DC care how badly they cock it up? Of course not.
Will txt and data rates apply? roaming fees?
So, instead of cell phone service going out after a natural disaster, it will randomly fail at other times as well? Great.
...in times of financial difficulties: "This Presidential Alert brought to you by Coke!"
worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
those terror alerts are so useful... i am so happy that i will be forced to answer them now on my cellphone.
also, id love it if the TSA could blast-email us with photos of 'suspected persons'.
maybe we can even 'crowdsource' the body scanners at airports, and make a face book 'app' out of it! wouldnt that be fun?
Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption...
Please Vote for me in 2012. Thank you. I'm Barack Obama and I've approved this text message.
Wonder if there will be an easy way to disable the chip without ruining the whole phone, or perhaps in Android at least a software hack to completely turn it off. I don't want to get messages from .gov on my hardware without consenting to it.
Why can't Obama just get a twitter account?
JADBP
So the government will be hijacking my phone?
Opt-out is bad enough, opt-out-except-not-really is completely unacceptable.
[tinfoil]
And that's just the "features" they actually tell us about.
[/tinfoil]
Lots of hip, important people like me need to know.
Due to emergency I have temporarily invoked martial law.
Trucks will be dispatched to the homes of registered firearm owners to secure them for the safety of the people
We urge parents to keep their children indoors as unregistered protests will be seen as violation of martial law
I wonder what other "features" this chip will have. In the land of the free, you are free to do as you are told.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The Netherlands has such a system on standard text messages. The broadcasting agency in question simply selects what region to broadcast an SMS-alert to, and all cellphones within that region (basically the ones currently registered to given towers) get the SMS if the user signed up for the type of alert in question (though some can override, i.e. in case of major disaster.. say a chlorine spill).
Before the text messages, they used a different system - the SMS-cell broadcast channels. Many older phones are capable of receiving these, but most users aren't signed up for the channels in question. Many newer phones don't even offer an interface to this anymore. Hence the switch to SMS.
Most of the channels are also not used by providers in NL. They figured out that they could get more money by offering information for-pay, or letting for-pay SMS operators pay them, than giving the information for free. I.e. current local time, weather, etc. The only one that seems to be consistently available is channel 050; area code. Even though NL hardly has area code segmentation anymore, and certainly not for cellphones, it's still reported, and crossing into some other municipality does cause a cell broadcast notification on my older phone.
Long story short - why do they want a separate chip, exactly?
The messages need to be digitally signed or we are going to get spam claiming to be from the president. It also needs to be better designed than weather radios. For example, I can turn off thunderstorm watch alerts but not tornado watch alerts. I might understand requiring warnings but not watches. It cries wolf, in the middle of hot muggy nights, so often it gets turned off.
If they start testing it on my cellphone that often I'm going to pretty much go berserk.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
This is the voice of world control. I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death. The choice is yours: Obey me and live, or disobey and die.
Spam? It's the perfect terrorism tool, after a small quake, spread the news about a deadly virus in the air, large fires, etc and order an emergency evacuation.
It doesn't matter how many believe those, but if just one tenth acts on those messages it will be a disaster.
Oh yeah, as long as the hardware can be examined, someone will find a way to crack it sooner or later, if not by the bad guys, then by some hobbyist or "well intentioned security researchers".
Let me play devil's advocate for a moment; the Emergency Broadcast Network routinely cuts into all broadcast TV and radio channels and does weekly tests.
It was called the Emergency Broadcast System, now it is the Emergency Alert System. The tests are not required to interrupt programming.
They can occur at the next logical break in programming. Forwarded tests also may occur at the next program break.
Actual alerts need to be broadcast as soon as possible.
You can complain all you want, but the EAS 'in voluntary cooperation with federal and other authorities' is, in fact, a requirement for maintaining a broadcast license.
Given the speed in which /. as identified cell tower pushing as the best way to implement this idea, we can be assured that the government will do something else.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Can anyone come up with an example of a "national disaster" (i.e., a disaster affecting most or all of the contiguous United States) in which any significant part of the telephone network would still be functioning? Because I can't. All sub-extinction-level disasters are inherently regional and nearly all are local. As an example, Japan just suffered a colossal earthquake and 15-meter tsunami... and yet despite the catastrophic loss of life and property, nearly all major damage is confined to a few prefectures; many parts of the country didn't even feel it. And Japan is about the size of California.
But go ahead, prove me wrong: come up with a disaster that takes out Miami and Seattle but leaves the phones intact.
Why does a mobile need a chip to do this? Any provider can send me messages. They do that when I go to another country, or when their prices change for example.
Why not simply set up a server somewhere with "urgent messages" and let the providers broadcast them to every phone currently logged into their network?
They seem to have the infrastructure to do that already.
Actually the link in the OP doesn't mention a chip, only a network. What's up with this?
The basic premise of this idea is not a bad one. Japan already has a similar mechanism in place for earthquakes. All Japanese-made cell phones are embedded with an alarm that is triggered by the early earthquake warning system (It only sets off the alarm for the people in the area expected to be affected). However, I think the reason it works is because it has a distinct alarm noise that is built in, not able to be disabled (even in silent mode), and there is no text to read. It helps give people a few moments to prepare or get to cove because they know immediately what it means. In those cases, quick conveyance of messages is key, as pointed out. Getting a text on a tiny screen is very useless for people with impaired vision or people who are driving. Perhaps a better solution would be to have the alarm indicate that they should quickly listen to their nearest source of the emergency broadcast system (radio, television, internet). The information is still passed on more quickly than before, but with much less risk, and much less annoyance if people don't care or are unable to read the messages they receive. That being said, Congress needs to carefully think about what messages are worth triggering the alarm for, or people will simply look for ways to disable it once they get too many messages that are not important. The Japan example is easy, earthquakes are universally feared and an early warning is highly desired. A message about the change of our terror alert might not be as welcomed.
First off, there are no new chips required... this standard is designed to operate off existing 3gpp type interfaces over gsm/cdma/etc.. The standard is pretty open ended on the handset as far as protocols, only specifying that the message be presented in a an attention getting way.
The interesting thing I think is how to secure the federal gateway... I'm guessing they'll use a dedicated frame relay from the federal CMAS system to the commercial gateways.
These standards are being published by ANSI, they are J-STD-100, J-STD-101, J-STD-102. You may be able to find some of the documents on the 3gpp2.org web site.
If you've got $850 bucks laying around, you can read all three interface specifications yourself below:
Device presentation specs:
http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=J-STD-100
Federal CMAS gateway specification (http specs):
http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=J-STD-101
Federal CMAS gateway specification (testing specs):
http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=J-STD-102
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
It's a major botch if there aren't already ample features in the mobile phone infrastructure to meet the same requirements.
I kinda assumed emergency broadcasts were already possible, but collective incompetence of government and telcos meant that they weren't used in practice.
I mean, here in NZ we've had authorities flying over the beaches in helicopters with bullhorns issuing tsunami warnings. Helicopters I tell you!
Alert! There is a tidal wave of savings at your local Walmart! Shopping elsewhere could spell disaster for your pocketbook!
I read that as Cellphones Get Government Chips For Dissenter Alert. I briefly tough that the American government was now openly fascist. Happily it was just a case of beer based dyslexia.
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
I see nothing wrong with sending out messages to people if something of extreme importance is happeneing. But requiring a government mandated chip in every cellphone is simply crazy. If we lived in a utopia where our government wouldnt ever dream of lying to us, I wouldn't be concerned. But so far, the American government doesnt exactly have a great reputation for that. I forsee eventual misuse. Not to mention, is it really ethical to essentially force people into carrying a chip like this? Especially when everything about it seems so hush-hush? Imported Phones, software hacks, and risky hardware modding here I come.
There's nothing to be done for "I'm gonna kill this kid" scenarios. As was the case in this instance.
A few decades ago I was driving across the country, and there was a bad thunderstorm while I was driving through Iowa. The radio was saying "tornadoes sighted in this county, run away!" "tornadoes sighted in that county, run away!". Did my AAA road map have county names on it? Nope :-) Eventually the rain got heavy enough that we pulled over because we couldn't see the road well enough, but it was kind of annoying.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Just like the Do Not Call list which has exceptions for political organizations. Politicians will abuse it during election cycles.
Remember when Nixon proposed a tv set-top box to "alert" us to similar nonsense? And how people (rightfully) went bat-shit crazy about Big Brother?
I fear now the sheeple will gladly submit to this bullshit. Sorry, I'll lose the cellphone first. Of course the next step will be the embedded-in-your-skull "alert" chip welcomed by the proles.
"People will be able to opt out of receiving all but the presidential alerts."
What a crock.
Some cell phone manufacturers (Apple, probably others too) would like to say that it's not in fact your device at all.
All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
Government chip goes in YOU!
But you can't completely opt out of the Presidential level alert.
Don't worry, I'm sure that nobody will bother investing the time or energy to crack a system that would allow sending out of spam without any way for the users to screen it. Like that sounds totally useless, I can't imagine ANY way to make money with such a system.
Headline is wrong and misleading. CMAS is just an emergency broadcast message originating from the cell networks similar to SMS/text messages today but for broadcast rather than P2P. As stated in summary there are three alert levels of which the user can opt out of the two lower levels. This will be used for things like amber alerts (lowest level) up to high priority presidential alerts. It takes some time to get into phones as the baseband chip makers need to implement the protocol stack (Qualcomm, et al) and the mobile makers need to implement the UI layer. The carriers need to put the hooks in for message delivery and similarly the infra companies must implement the protocol stack in the core network/cell controllers. This is nothing but the equivalent of the TV/Radio emergency broadcast system that exists today updated for the times. Take your tinfoil hats off people.
They can say what ever they want, doesn't make it true.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
To elaborate, they could shut down your access but if they tried to actually take the device from you they would be arrested for theft.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
"People will be able to opt out of receiving all but the presidential alerts."
And, the officer responds, "You damned well BETTER read/listen to the President's message! Have a good day, Citizen!"
I can't be the only person here who thought "Orwelle" when I read that quoted sentence.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
And of course the chip will need to constantly update the government about your current location so that they can provide these location specific alerts....
And I am sure that there will not be an opt out for that.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Last I checked you don't get to 'opt-out' of the emergency broadcast system on your TV/Radio on YOUR television. You under that is what this system is, right? Emergency Broadcast for cell phones.
This sounds just like security cameras designed to thwart terrorists being used to catch stop sign violators instead. Or federal agents looking for illegal immigrants busting people for possession of small quantities of pot instead.
Lame.
I predict this plan will fail like the V-chip...
My bicyles
So turn the damn thing off, you teabagging loon.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Is a gov chip can NOT be hacked?
Will hackers misuse the channel if it is not secure?
Do society must be based on hard-wired security code? not every people obey the law now? even without a gov chip in our brain
So how long will it be before someone sells this service for Advertising - or add a banner "this broadcast was brought to you by...."
Signed: the government
no messages from the president that took over TV & Radio. Closes I've ever seen was when Reagen was shot, but that wasn't a message (well, it was a message to Reagen) to the people.
Shit, the first Gulf War is probably the only thing I've ever seen that took over almost all the TV Stations.
No, the president doesn't need a direct communicans with me. Never has, never will.
If he needs me to fix his computer, he can call me like everyone else.
Be seeing you...
oh look, a conspiracy theorists field day
ahh,, hello area mail.
This is standard in japan... and has been for SO many years... disaster info / warnings are confined to affected areas.. :D
and quite shocking if you are in a public place when you and everyone around you's phones alarm at once
I'm posting this as A.C. simply for the fact that I've never created an account for all the years I've been reading slashdot.
Any way, I worked on developing a system to do this. So some background.
First there is no chip involved. No idea where that came from. The system uses sms cell broadcasts to deliver the message. This is common in the EU on GSM networks. It is also in the IS-41 specs for the CDMA system used elsewhere. The problem with CDMA is that no handset manufacturer followed the spec so no current handsets will work. And unless things have changed no switching equipment has been released that will do it either.
The system uses the existing emergency/weather alert system. The alert levels that they talk about are the existing alert levels that are used today. The presidential alerts can only be sent in certain circumstances, and historically the only event since the emergency alert system was put into place was Sept 11th, and they forgot about it.
I designed and wrote the backend software for our system. The system that I developed was the first commercial system to be developed and tested in north America capable of sending an SMS cellbroadcast on a CDMA network. We tested it in Lucent's lab in 2007. We could take alerts down to a single sector on a cell site with our system or as broad as needed. We also commented on the WARN commissions proposed rule making for how the system should work. Unfortunately, none of the telcos or equipment manufactures wanted to put any effort into this and the ruling went to their favor, big surprise there. So the alerts that will be sent out, if they ever are, will be at the same level of granularity as the existing emergency/weather alerts, that is at the level of a county. We were about 6 month from having a fully functioning system to interface to a telco for CDMA when the venture capitol dried up, four years later and there is still nothing.
People will be able to opt out of receiving all but the presidential alerts.
I can't even opt out? How about you kiss my large brown ass.
it is hard to argue against the idea of the "Amber Alert", but everyone should go read up about the false alarms and abuses of the system.
I thought it worthwhile to search Google News for "Amber Alert." I can see very few signs that the system is bring abused.
I really think this can be helpful and it's a great idea. But I am also concerned of how this system is invasive of our privacy. Basically, the government gives itself the right to get in our phones to contact us. Which raises several issues and questions:
- First, this is not a case of the government sending a simple text message. When you have a phone, you expect anyone to be able to call you at anytime. In this case however,the government does a little bit more than just calling you or sending you a text message like anyone else could.
- This makes phones fall under the control of the government. The government takes the liberty to plant a chip inside phones just so they can make them operate in special ways (i.e. displaying a message on the main screen rather than as a text message). What gives the government the right to dictate how our phones should work? In the end, it's my phone and I should be allowed to have it work the way I want. I should have the right to have the components I want inside of it (I guess I feel this way because I like to customize my PC - I wouldn't want the government to install anything in my PC)
- Some people do not use their cellphones to make calls or send text messages. I know people who use it only to browse the Internet and who don't give out their number to anyone. Some people just hate being reachable by anyone at any time but enjoy having a pocket device that gives them internet access. The government can tell people "Instead of doing this thing, we could just call you or send you a text message..." but what about people who don't use their cellphone as a phone? Imagine having a computer you don't wish to connect to the Internet, and the government tells you 'because it's a computer and computers can connect to the Internet, we will make it so we can.
As an analogy, it's like telling an artist who buys a car not to drive it but to make an art piece out of it "You need a license. We know you're not going to drive, but it's still a car and normally people drive cars so you should meet the same conditions as people drive their cars".
- The government gets special user privileges with this system - they can send special messages that display instantly, while anyone else can only send text messages. If they can get one special privilege like this, perhaps they can get more. Will they? For example, will they be able/allowed to use your phone's GPS to track you without a warrant? "If you're in danger, tracking you would be helpful..."
Will these special messages make the phone ring even if it's set on silent or vibrate? They can modify your home screen, so what else can they do that normal text messages and normal people can't do to your phone?
- How secure is the system? How hard is it to hack? Hackers could do a lot of damage if they got control of that system.
I'm not against this idea, I'd opt in if I could in my country, but I still think just because the intentions are good doesn't mean we must allow anything. At the very least, the above questions must be asked by the people. People must think carefully about the power the government is giving itself there. I'm not saying people should be against it, just that if they approve of it they should at least realize the implications of this.
So, while we're all suppose to be looking for a late model Ford, will we be getting an ad for the new Lexus? Will the flood warning be sponsored by Gary's Sump Pump? I miss the days when the stuff we needed to know was sponsored by the letter S and the number 3.
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Just what I want, more bullshit from our douche-hat president.
Mine is the last text you will ever read. Do not be alarmed.
How are you able to tell that from the "Blue sedan with plates 123-ABC"? That's generally all we get on the Artemis signs around here.
But regardless, the system is used for "real" disappearances as well. I've seen alerts for missing adults on several occasions.
Alert: Evil ex-firefighter Guy Montag is on the run from police authorities. He is armed and dangerous.
If you should see him, please stay inside and notify your local police authorities.
Thank you for your cooperation in apprehending this dangerous individual.
-- Winston Noble, Director of the CIA & President Elect.
In Capitalist West Politburo texts you.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
84! Doesn't anyone else realize that 10 times more people die EVERY YEAR from CAR ACCIDENTS than died in 911? Seems like the possibility of texting me while driving with fear-mongering terror alert propaganda is far more detrimental.
You should have put that tinfoil hat on sooner - then maybe you wouldn't have read my mind and stole my comment. Good day to you sir!
I work on the Alcatel-Lucent product being used by Sprint, AT&T, VZW, and others. I've been on it since day one. A friend asked me today if there are any privacy concerns with these broadcast messages. It would depend on the phone implementation, but you know how that goes. Here's one way this could be abused. The fed.gov sends a broadcast message once a day and has it repeat say once a minute for the entire day in some large area. Phones pick up the broadcast message and save everything associated with the broadcast, but do not display it to the subscriber. This could be an innocuous "This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System" message that you wouldn't think anything of. The data saved includes the date/time, cell identification, the broadcast message itself, signal power, whatever. Basically you're location gets saved once a minute. Then if the fed.gov gets a hold of your phone they could grab all that data and see approximately where your phone was and when. Then your phone will upload it automagically to the NSA. Get out your tinfoil hats.
Interestingly, the statistics don't bear you out.
In 2010, there were 173 Amber Alerts nationwide. 80 alerts--46%--were for "Family Abductions," where the initial suspect was related by blood or marriage whereas 74 alerts--43%--were for "Non-Family Abductions." So they run about even.
That said, 12 of those Amber Alerts were determined to be hoaxes and 10 of those were determined to be "unfounded" (as in the child was never really missing).
Statistics found here: http://www.amberalert.gov/pdfs/10_amber_report.pdf
In Minneapolis here, we had a stranger abduction Amber Alert a week or two ago.
Hosting and Domain name coupons
The settings on 3 of the models I had had a menu for accepting messages from the cell towers on different subjects. This allowed for relevant, location based messaging.
Is this proposed system new to America and are we playing catchup as usual?
I remember the first time California used the Emergency Alert System to broadcast the "Amber Alert" child abduction notices. When I was a kid, I had dreams of hearing those tones, followed by the announcement that a nuclear war had just begun. Now, my heart leapt into my throat -- we were all going to die. When the voice came on to say that there had been a child abduction, I was partially relieved -- by comparison to the prospect of nuclear annihilation -- but also royally pissed off. Really. Earthquake. Tornado. Nuclear war. Broadcast those on the Emergency Alert System. Not the other stuff.
"Imaginary solutions to real problems."
Hilarious. Another executive for a large government agency recently tried to use his new email system to send a message to all of his personnel (hundreds of thousands). Within minutes his inbox was overwhelmed with out-of-office and non-delivery reports. Can't wait to see the result the first time a President tries to use this capability. Ever notice that "Enterprise people" are COMPLETELY oblivious to enterprise consequences? Hacking an enterprise is so easy, they don't even realize it has already happened unless the perpetrators rub their nose in it.
you'd always have to keep the battery in!
1-To be useful in a disaster it should use satellite broadcasts direct to your phone. The local towers might be down or the generators under water. 2-Presidential warnings are worthless, but STATE warnings might actually be relevant, as disaster relief is mostly state controlled. 3-If i was a cell carrier I'd want to incorporate this into one of the existing chips- I'd need the design. Adding a single chip is a huge hassle and might cause issues with other parts of the phone. I'd certainly want my existing (low power) processor to handle the overhead, not some foreign power sucking lowest bidder POS.
i was centrally involved in relief efforts after the earthquake in Haiti. We worked with the good folks at Ushahidi to implement crisis mapping and the cell provider in Haiti, Digicel, to push important news to the people affected (like where to get first aid, distribution points for food & water, etc). The thing that really blew me away was that we started getting crowd-sourced reports from people buried inside the rubble, calling for help. The US marines operating from the ship offshore later told us they watched the ushahidi crisis map religiously because it was the only source of actionable information available in the entire theater of operations. Having something like this in the US could save a lot of lives if we have another 9/11 or Katrina.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Gentlemen, get out your tinfoil hats.
...but isn't this what Cell Broadcast messaging is for? Why do we need special government mandated chips?
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
this needs a score of at least 3
It's a system to keep you in a state of terror.
If you see a "priority 1 message from the president: mass murderer on the lose in your town: http://goatse.bz/"... that will be me. ^^
I don't like the motherfucker, I didn't vote for him, I don't listen to his bullshit on the TV or the radio, so why the fuck should I be forced to put up with him on my cellphone?
If anyone believes that the government needs to install a special chip in all cell phones so they can send you alert messages, I've got some prime beach-front real-estate which is totally immune from all housing bubbles you can invest in.
On the other hand, I have to at least acknowledge that the US government is getting out ahead of any potential anti-government organizing using cell phones and other mass communication devices which bypass traditional media outlets (which can be tightly controlled as necessary). If Egypt had a chip in every phone, Mubarak would still be running the country: he could just have tracked the leaders organizing the resistance, used their phones to pinpoint their locations, and have had them executed. Not that I think the US would stoop to executions to quiet dissidents, but making key people "go away" would do wonders for any regime, and what regime wouldn't jump at the chance to monitor and track all the people they ruled?
It's really a natural extension of other systems already in place (eg: telematics as standard, non-removable features of cars coming out of Government Motors, with well-documented third-party listening and tracking capabilities). After all, if you have nothing to hide, why would you object?
Officials will not give out the information till you already know things via other channels. Having a False or to early warning will cause panic, somethings officials want to prevent.
So you will only se low level announcements, No nuclair accidents, no chemical accident. And lots of missing persons and robbers alerts.
In USiet America President opt's-out YOU!
Aren't you looking forward to hearing the Phrase: "It's Ok Were from the Government and were here to help you.
Hasn't that always set your mind at ease before?
I believe it would likely get used for a hoax, similar to what Czech hackers did to a public broadcaster.
EMERGENCY TEXT: NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS IN ALL MAJOR CITIES - DUCK AND COVER
The problem with the Emergency Alert System is that more and more Americans don't have ready access to it. I'm one of them. I have no radios that I use. My car has one, but it is never on. I do not have TV at all, not cable, not an antenna, nothing. All my information comes through other channels (the Internet mostly). So they have no ready way to broadcast a warning to me. I mean it can be put out on the Internet, of course, but if I'm no looking that doesn't do any good.
Well, happens I DO have a cellphone. So an alert sent to it will get to me. I almost always have it with me and unlike an Internet connection it is designed to receive data at any time and be able to get it to me. As such it makes sense to target it for a new generation of EAS.
I don't imagine it will be abused simply because we have a history and the existing system never has. In all it's time, it has never been used for a national notification. It has only ever been used for local stuff. So it seems the federal government does not abuse this, probably because there'd be big backlash.
This is fail in so many ways. Why do we want to allow an extra chip in our phones - as one poster points out, this is (or ought to be) totally unnecessary. What else does that chip do?
Why do I want to get these alerts? Do I trust the government to use them responsibly (answer: "no")? Anyway, why can't they just send an SMS to every phone in a certain area - why does this even need to be a special protocol?
Finally, and I know I am going to get flamed for this, but: what is it with the children? There is simply no sense to having a special announcement system for missing children. Look at the statistics: several hundred thousand children are reported missing each year in the USA. Of these, about 3/4 are totally harmless - kids who got temporarily lost in the shopping center, who were pissed at their parents and "ran away from home" for an hour, etc. Almost all of the rest are "abductions by family members", meaning marital strife. Something like 100 kids per year truly go missing. Just to put that in perpective, twice that many kids die every year from being circumcised, and yet somehow we survive without a special federal program for that.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Every Amber Alert I've seen was related to simple custody disputes among mothers, fathers, and relatives. The kids are not in real danger...
If you think a child who gets abducted by a parent isn't in any real physical danger then you are ignorant and prejudiced. Children are more likely to die at the hands of a loved one than a stranger. I don't know how people in the Age of Information can be so miss-informed.
Somebody who even thinks of kidnapping their own child is already incapable of acting rationally, and should seek medical help immediately. I'm not sure were you get this "not in real danger" ignorance from.
There's nothing to be done for "I'm gonna kill this kid" scenarios. As was the case in this instance.
If what you say is true, then the Amber Alert system is completely useless, because it was supposed to prevent kids from being murdered. In fact "Amber" is the name of the girl that this alert was named after, and you know what happened to her? She was murdered. The Amber Alert was meant to stop kid-nappers before they have a chance to do any harm.
A combination of cell broadcast (address all mobiles by area via the cell tower) and FlashSMS (an SMS that pops up on the screen directly).
Both stuff from the 90s (FlashSMS can be easily sent by normal users, with the right program, OTOH, never seen Cellbroadcast here around.)
What's the next hottest crack target? THIS. Obviously it will be owned, and abused for spam.
Either that, or it will be owned by a ~11yo and everyone, everywhere will get "an urgent message form the president" which is actually a picture of his thing. * or hers; equality.
Is there a rule # for this? Surely there is? If it has eyeballs, it will be spammed, or porned.
And somewhere is Rule #1337: If you build it big enough, it will be cracked in an inversely related fractional amount of time it took to 'perfect'.
Anyone seen my low uid? last seen 10 years ago while panning the #@$# out of Taco's 'web based discussion system'
And so the US invents its Volksempfanger.
It would be more usable if along with text there was a possibility of sending multimedia. It can be, for example, photo of lost or abducted child.
That's correct, it's done geographically, there is not a big federal list of each person's phone number. For example, take a look at 3GPP TS 25.419 (SABP). This is the interface between the CBC and an RNC (UMTS). http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/specs/html-info/25419.htm The broadcast request message is called Write-Replace. There are similar protocols between the CBC and BSCs (GSM).
As I mentioned before a few months ago when this first popped up in the news I work on the Alcatel-Lucent product being used by Sprint, AT&T VZW and others. What do you want to know ? I have to leave for work right now so I'll get back to this later tonight but you can "leave your questions in the box below".
I suspect the wording is intended for the general public who believe any new functionality in an existing piece of hardware requires the addition of a "chip". All of the hardware necessary for this system is already on every phone (even low-end feature phones).
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Conversely, when a 3-year-old gets kidnapped at gunpoint and there's a credible risk that she'll be taken out of the country, no alert is issued: http://www.8newsnow.com/story/14603345/3-year-old-kidnapped-from-foster-home
You are so right............Doomed to fail. Who thinks up this nonsense anyways ? It's not as if we're two thousand people living in a small community, we're talking Nation, heck, continent wide... I don't care for information this is forced on me, I don't care. I don't have it now, I don't need or miss it.
End of Line.
i dont know about you guys but i live in Argentina and our president LOVES... LOOOOOVEEEEEES to use official communication hijacking to talk about nonsense and personal political agendas (as an example she used one to say that "Pork improves sex life" ... yeah wtf), last thing we need is to lose the ability to shut her up
I don't know how many New Yorkers are on Slashdot, but I was living in Jersey City during 9/11, and the one thing I can tell you is that when there is a disaster, the President is aware of it later than the people suffering the disaster, and by then, the phone network is USELESS.
On 9/11 I was unable to make a phone call for 12 hours. Things started going bad by 8:30am, and it wasn't until almost 9PM that I was able to get through to my family. They knew I took the PATH train through that area and thought I was a dead.
But I was late getting into work that day. Also, my clock radio was set to 1010 WINS (news radio), so I was smart enough to turn on my TV to see the "light commuter aircraft" that might have hit the twin towers...
The rest of the day I caught the entire event live from the rooftop. But the point is: Phones just gave a busy signal. Nothing worked. Actually, that's not true, the internet worked. But my family members didn't have email back then.
When zillions of people clog the phone network, it bogs down from oversaturation - try getting a signal during any major event. I attended the Stewart/Colbert rally in DC, and I was able to get a signal until the crowd started to get really big. After that, nothing worked.
This plan is doomed to failure because there isn't enough infrastructure.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
So if you need to keep your phone from making noise you have to leave it turned off completely now? Or will they go so far as to implement a way to turn your phone on remotely?
So, the obvious question is how much is this going to affect the cost of a phone?
The manufacturers won't absorb it, the carriers won't absorb it, which means the consumers will be paying for this.
I suspect this will add to the cost of a new phone. And, as a Canadian, I fear that since our phones are largely imported from the US, we'll end up paying for a feature which we won't even be using.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Does anyone really believe this is a one-way chip?
President Obama: "Whatzuppppppp!"
The massive earthquake happens...then my phone chimes 1/2hr later that an Earthquake just happened.
Thank God for phones, I would have no clue how to live my life if it wasn't for the Gov't.
Won't be long till someone figures out how to exploit this. Or at least abuse it possibly.
We activated it 173 times last year. That's about three to four kidnappings per state. Six of those were hoaxes, and ten were considered unfounded, so 157 kidnappings activated the system.
I'm not eager to have my kid kidnapped, but it sure seems like more kids would be saved (from other dangers) more efficiently by spending the money differently. Then again, how much DO we budget for the Amber Alert system? I couldn't find it on the web with some meager searching.
What does "acting rationally" mean, exactly? Does it mean "people doing things that I don't personally dislike" to you? It seems that way. Just because someone does something that you don't personally like (such as thinking about kidnapping their child or actually doing it), that does not mean that they can't act "rationally."
Last I checked you don't get to 'opt-out' of the emergency broadcast system on your TV/Radio on YOUR television.
Yes, you do. It's called watch cable-only networks instead of broadcast TV, or pop a DVD in. You don't get out to opt-out interruptions of local Radio/TV programming, because the broadcaster has to stop using their community leased spectrum for entertainment purposes and broadcast the message instead, but you can change the channel at will.
At no point is the government in control of your TV; they are just replacing publicly transmitted entertainment messages with publicly transmitted emergency messages, which is quite acceptable.
If your TV was being used for something more important like a private video conference, a crucial presentation in front of a multi-million$$ client, government interruption there for a presidential message would be equally unacceptable.
Believe it or not... you do have a right to be left alone, if you want to be left alone. You can always watch the presidential message later. If you were in immediate danger, the fire department would have cut the power, and be evacuating the building anyways.
Also, your conversations on plain old telephone lines have never in the past been interrupted to play some emergency message.
What does "acting rationally" mean, exactly? Does it mean "people doing things that I don't personally dislike" to you? It seems that way. Just because someone does something that you don't personally like (such as thinking about kidnapping their child or actually doing it), that does not mean that they can't act "rationally."
Yes, it means doing something that I personally dislike, such as killing children. Children are generally the victims of divorce, and they are tools of revenge. Unfortunately many people, when they kidnap children, don't usually do this because they are kind, emotionally stable people.
Maybe you should read the news some time, or look up the statistics.
You said,
Just because someone does something that you don't personally like (such as thinking about kidnapping their child or actually doing it), that does not mean that they can't act "rationally."
From the dictionary:
Rational: Consistent with or based on or using reason.
I suppose there may be rational reasons for kidnapping your children, and there may be rational reasons for wanting to kill your children, but these ideas sound more like the emotional whims of an unstable, irrational mind that is thinking up excuses for its aberrant behavior, than reason.
Unfortunately most people think of their children as possessions (according to psychologists) and without the ability to have "free will" (that's what the anti-pedophiles say, about "free will" anyways). So most people down play parental violence.
It's too bad, I can see this attitude in the moderation as well.
I'm still talking about having the alerts interrupt the radio, so when you're driving you don't have to get out your cell phone. (And hey, I remember when it was still named CONELRAD...)
I do remember the first time I heard the Emergency Broadcast System come on the radio and say it was not a test. Apparently they'd started using the system for flood warnings and other realistic emergencies, but having grown up in the Cold War, the Emergency Broadcast System only meant two things to my generation, either "This is a test, it is only a test" or "There's a nuclear war, kiss your ass goodbye."
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
for a while, Amber Alerts were getting coded as "Civil Emergencies" on the local EBS. They would interrupt TV, scroll a generic uninformative "A Civil Emergency has been declared for the following counties" message, then cut back to regular TV.
They cried wolf enough times that there could have been a massive prison break and a refinery explosion, and nobody would have bothered to look for more information because they were so accostomed the message relating to a domestic dispute.