Slashdot Mirror


Verizon To Begin Offering "Text To 911" Service

An anonymous reader writes "In a move that will likely elicit a 'why didn't they implement that sooner?' response, Verizon in the next 12 months will begin implementing a 'text to 911' feature that, as the name implies, will enable users contact 911 operators via text message to report an emergency. The feature will be particularly helpful for the hearing and/or speech impaired, and for folks who find themselves in dangerous situations where making a voice 911 call isn't advisable. Beginning in early 2013, Verizon will start rolling out the feature in various metropolitan areas before progressing to a nationwide rollout soon thereafter. In many respects, this move has been a long time coming, and something the FCC has been championing for a few years."

133 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Indeed! by eepok · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Why didn't they implement that sooner?

    1. Re:Indeed! by TheABomb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because 911 operators need people to communicate with them intelligibly?

      --
      MSIE: The world's most standards-complaint web browser.
    2. Re:Indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not a monopoly, it's an oligopoly. Your statement still applies, though.

    3. Re:Indeed! by Sancho · · Score: 5, Funny

      lol popo omw

    4. Re:Indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see your point, but if you have ever listened to 911 calls you would see that just because it is vocal does not mean it will be intelligible.

    5. Re:Indeed! by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So how are deaf people to do that without this?

    6. Re:Indeed! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Historically, the deaf have made use of TTY relay services(funded by some obscure telco fee or other). If you can find a herd of payphones(increasingly difficult these days), you may see one of the fixed-line units lurking in a drawer-style enclosure under one of the phones.

      With cell phones, you can use a TTY unit connected to the headset jack of a compliant handset, and I assume that some phones support using the built-in text entry capabilities to communicate with a deaf relay.

      (More pragmatically, given the minimal information provided by many 911 callers, and the fact that 911 services include location data, anybody capable of dialing 911 and making some sort of frantic-sounding noise can probably get a fair percentage of the benefits offered...)

    7. Re:Indeed! by Krischi · · Score: 2

      The problem is that we have 6200 public safety answering points in the USA under state and local jurisdiction. Many of these don't have the funds to upgrade their equipment to receive SMS, and for a fair number of them it likely is not possible to get the funds anytime soon. That doesn't leave many options. One of the possibilities that has been raised is to implement an SMS to TTY gateway, with all the limitations that this entails.

    8. Re:Indeed! by Qwertie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It seems to me that another important use case is 911 in remote areas. Your reception may not be good enough for a voice call, but it may still be good enough for a text.

    9. Re:Indeed! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      It is wrong ot view the telecomms as purely private entities. They 100% rely on governmental approval for right of way and wireless spectrum. We should be able to exercise more control over them. They should be treated just like we do electrictiy, gas, water etc. A guaranteed percentage of profit and nothing more.

      --
      Good-bye
    10. Re:Indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's funny how infrastructure gets privatized based entirely on how recent it is.

      Water, sewage, roads, and postal service -- existed since time immemorial, or at least since before the Roman Empire. Today: run directly by the government, more or less competently.

      Electricity and heating gas -- existed for a little over a hundred years. Today: run privately by a government-designated, very tightly regulated monopoly. Anecdotally, I have more complaints with my electric company than the city water bureau.

      Telephone, cable, landline internet -- existed for less than a century. Today: privately-run, less regulated duopoly (at best). Consumer complaints: fairly high.

      Cellular voice/data -- existed for a couple decades. Barely-regulated private kleptocracy; every provider sucks in an individual, unique way.

    11. Re:Indeed! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Anecdotally, I have more complaints with my electric company than the city water bureau.

      Of course. If your water rates skyrocket or it starts tasting bad or the pressure is too low, you're going to vote the Mayor out of office. YOU are the water company's shareholder.

      I'm pretty sure Jesse White got re-elected as Illinois Secretary of State because the lines at the licence bureau are short, the people are friendly, and the process takes little time (as opposed to the convicted felon who held the job before him and who is now in Federal prison).

      If your electricity is out often and your rates are sky high, you have no recourse whatever. You just have to put up with it. It isn't like you can vote the CEO out or switch to another provider.

    12. Re:Indeed! by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      "If your electricity is out often and your rates are sky high, you have no recourse whatever. You just have to put up with it. It isn't like you can vote the CEO out or switch to another provider." Your city council can kick the electric company in the butt.

  2. Great for reports of traffic accidents by crow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now, instead of getting multiple phone calls about a traffic accident, the dispatcher can much more quickly ignore the duplicates.

    This is an ideal way of sending information when you want to report that you saw something that may need their attention, but you personally don't need a response.

    1. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now, instead of getting multiple phone calls about a traffic accident, the dispatcher can much more quickly ignore the duplicates.

      This is an ideal way of sending information when you want to report that you saw something that may need their attention, but you personally don't need a response.

      Yep. Now we can have people texting 911 about accidents caused by texting while driving potentially causing more accidents in the process.

      There's an Xzibit reference in there somewhere...

    2. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by DanTheStone · · Score: 3, Funny

      When you're sitting in stopped traffic due to an accident, there's not much harm in texting.

    3. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm waiting to hear about the new type of multi-accident pile-up.
      911, what's your emergency?
      I was texting 911 about an accident when I had an accident.
      911, what's your emergency?
      I was texting 911 about an accident caused by the guy texting 911 about an accident when I had an accident.
      911, what's your emergency?
      I was texting 911 about an accident caused by the guy texting 911 about an accident caused by the guy texting 911 about an accident when I had an accident.

    4. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      Now, instead of getting multiple phone calls about a traffic accident, the dispatcher can much more quickly ignore the duplicates.

      The average person talks faster than he or she can read. What's more... most of the time when I call a traffic accident in, it goes something like this:
      "911 dispatch, what's your emergency?"
      "Yeah, got a car accident at highway 35 just south of the 17th avenue offramp."
      "Yup, we know about it, Thanks."
      *click*
      Total call time: 15 seconds.

      And my eyes don't leave the road while I'm making that call. On the other hand, having a bunch of people texting while on top of an accident scene is a recipe for disaster... gawkerjams frequently cause additional accidents near the site of the original accident, especially during periods of heavy congestion. People distractedly trying to thumb a message to 911 and then reply when they inevitably make a typo or clarification is requested... is just a public safety nightmare. Texting to 911 may have its uses... for example, during a kidnapping or hostage scenario... but on the road, it's universally stupid.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    5. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Now, instead of getting multiple phone calls about a traffic accident, the dispatcher can much more quickly ignore the duplicates.

      You may want to look into emergency dispatch systems before commenting. First it is not a dispatcher that filters duplicate calls it is the 911 operators. Second, in large systems there can be a large number of 911 operators. The way most systems work is that when a 911 operator takes a call she posts a note on the system for all other operators to see. When a duplicate call comes in it is identified by checking the posted list. It does not matter if the call comes in by test or voive the list still needs to be updated.

      This is an ideal way of sending information when you want to report that you saw something that may need their attention, but you personally don't need a response.

      Anything important enough to use the 911 system is important enough to to have a conversation about. Do you really want thousands of people sending messages to 911 about trivial matters? Also, as in the case of accidents or assault, the caller can be a valuable witness to the incident. Taking a recording as it is happening can be very important. Duplicates are not an issue as the more witnesses the better. This information is lost by using a single text message. By the way, when 911 operators are talking on the phone they typing the information into the system so the dispatches can pass it along to the responders. They can not type a reply to the texter and keep the system updated at the same time.

      Text messages are short. Is the average citizen going to be able to cram all the information needed by 911 into 160 characters. In almost all cases a 911 operator will need more information so a two way conversation is necessary.

      Have you ever tried to type on a touch screen when under stress? I have enough trouble when completely calm.

    6. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by CubicleZombie · · Score: 2

      But it's still illegal.

      --
      :wq
    7. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by no1nose · · Score: 1

      Here in Nevada, they run anti-texting-while-driving commercials about every 15 seconds on television. The car has a custom plate that reads: TXT L8R

    8. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      The average person talks faster than he or she can read.

      Citation needed.
      I ,for one, read much faster that I can talk.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    9. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The average person talks faster than he or she can read.

      You're comparing an output mechanism with an input one.

      And I'm not sure it's true, at least for people who aren't horse racing commentators or auctioneers. It's certainly the case that most people can read a transcript of a lecture or interview in less time than it takes to listen to it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      This is (again in my opinion) the direct result of the police becoming "the" authority figure for most of us.

      Actually, I think the opposite has happened: people have come to distrust authority and government so much, they refrain/refuse to work with the police to catch criminals

      On that point it seems you would have the same result if people believed that it was the job of the police to figure this shit out and they do not want to be involved.
      Again. the police are only good at solving crimes. Not preventing them.
      They are not real good at solving them either. Unless of course the crime is committed against one of them then the world will stop and the perp will be found.
      For us normal citizens the cops will get to it after generating some revenue and taking some kids weed.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    11. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Text to 911 could be useful in the following scenarios

      You have a medical emergency that leaves you unable to speak or hear things
      You are in a location where it is too noisy to hear a phone conversation
      You have been kidnapped etc, and want to call for help without letting your attacker know

    12. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      It's just an option. If speaking on the phone is easier in your current situation, then that's what you do.

      If the average person really does speak faster than they read, that's pretty sad. If I spoke as fast as I read, I'd sound like an auctioneer.

    13. Re:Great for reports of traffic accidents by shiftless · · Score: 1

      911, what's your emergency?
      stack overflow

  3. MMS along with SMS? by crow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They really need to support sending photos.

    1. Re:MMS along with SMS? by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Email > MMS.
      I've yet to use MMS (AFAIK, my current cell phone doesn't support them out-of-the-box, and I never bothered configuring them since I don't know anyone who uses them).

      Email on the other hand, is pretty dominant on smartphones nowadays.

    2. Re:MMS along with SMS? by crashumbc · · Score: 1

      any camera phone for the last 6-8 years has supported MMS, you probably used it a dozen times with out knowing about...

      anyone ever txt you a photo (hint:MMS)
      ever part of a group txt from someone with a iPhone? (hint:MMS)
      ever send a picture? yup MMS
      a lot of older dumb phones actually sent anything over 160 characters as MMS

      it all set-up by default on phones...

    3. Re:MMS along with SMS? by Shatrat · · Score: 2

      911@verizon.com and then forward it based on location of senders handset. It's not rocket surgery.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:MMS along with SMS? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      "accident on 405n @ wilmington"
      "pics or it didn't happen."

    5. Re:MMS along with SMS? by Gib7 · · Score: 1

      How many "I've got an emergency IN MY PANTS!" MMS do you think they'll get before turning that feature off?

    6. Re:MMS along with SMS? by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      any camera phone for the last 6-8 years has supported MMS

      Wrong, one of Nokia's high end smartphones doesn't. If you google a while, you'll find it's a "missing feature". (in particular, it's the one I own, and the first one with a camera I've owned).

      , you probably used it a dozen times with out knowing about...

      anyone ever txt you a photo (hint:MMS)

      Nope, never.

      ever part of a group txt from someone with a iPhone? (hint:MMS)

      Nope, never even heard of group texts.

      ever send a picture? yup MMS

      Nope, I use e-mail when I need to send a photo.

      a lot of older dumb phones actually sent anything over 160 characters as MMS

      it all set-up by default on phones...

      Nope, previous phones I owned were Nokia 1600 and Nokia 1100. They split the text into several SMS.

      The truth is, there's a great deal of people out there who've never used MMS, a great deal who don't even know what it is. It's just on of those things that never gained global popularity, only amongst some groups of people.

  4. Fantastic Reliability by 0racle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its a good thing SMS is guaranteed realtime with guaranteed delivery. I've never had a text show up hours after it was sent while I'm now standing next to the person who sent it. Yep, its a beautiful service, one I'm happy to put my life in the care of.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Fantastic Reliability by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      The point you missed is that when one makes a voice call there is immediate feedback on whether or not the call got through. If it didn't go through one tries again. With text messaging, that feedback is not there. There is no way of knowing whether or not the message got through. It does not matter that text is not a replacement for voice. If the text message does not get through but the sender assumes it does the incident will not be responded to and people can die.

    2. Re:Fantastic Reliability by Jeng · · Score: 1

      During really big emergencies the cell phone networks get clogged, the only thing that you can send out in those circumstances is a text message.

      This is looking to supplement current capabilities, not replace them.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    3. Re:Fantastic Reliability by Desler · · Score: 1

      Yes there is. Pretty much any carrier these days has delivery notification for SMS.

    4. Re:Fantastic Reliability by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      in such situations good luck getting anyone to take care of you - emergency services will be overloaded too.

    5. Re:Fantastic Reliability by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      I used to work at a cell phone company. Text messages use the same channels as voice messages and are of lower priority. If a voice call will not get through then a text message will defiantly not get through.

    6. Re:Fantastic Reliability by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      The issue is the immediacy of feedback. Do you think the following scenario is a good one when dealing with an emergency?
      1. Send text message
      2. Wait 30 seconds for response
      3. Send again
      4. Wait 30 seconds for response
      5. Send again
      6. Wait 30 seconds for response
      7. Send again
      8. Call 911
      9. two hours later get three delivery notifications.
      Text messages can be delayed and repeatedly sending texts is not a good idea.

    7. Re:Fantastic Reliability by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Not to mention on some services (AT&T Y U Suck So Hard?) the amount of delay can border on comedy. I have sent a txt, got no response, actually drove to the person and 45 minutes into a conversation THEN have the txt show up asking if they were there...yeah kinda don't want to trust my life and the lives of my family on something slower to respond than carrier pigeon.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:Fantastic Reliability by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Sometimes hours after the message was sent and read. Not really useful in an emergency.

    9. Re:Fantastic Reliability by Rasperin · · Score: 1

      And a queing algorithm built into the phones and towers alike couldn't be configured to put priority on 911 texts? There may be a very good reason why that texts can take so long to get through (heavy traffic, bad signal, etc).

      --
      WTF Slashdot, why do I have to login 50 times to post?
    10. Re:Fantastic Reliability by shiftless · · Score: 1

      This is what you would do if you were to get a voice call as well.

      Really? You would keep trying for 18 hours, until the text,..er sorry voice call, went through?

    11. Re:Fantastic Reliability by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      Its a good thing SMS is guaranteed realtime with guaranteed delivery. I've never had a text show up hours after it was sent while I'm now standing next to the person who sent it. Yep, its a beautiful service, one I'm happy to put my life in the care of.

      There's nothing technical preventing real-time delivery to emergency services, who are connected via fixed line. The main reason SMS get delayed are (core) network overload between operators and the recipients phone being out of range. None of which applies here.

      As someone else already mentioned. SMS uses the control signaling between the cell and your phone. If the phone could be used at all an SMS will get through, and there are many scenarios where there a call can't be made but an SMS will still manage to get through (the control signal will "reach" further than voice slots typically and congestion will fill the voice slots faster. An emergency call will kick those out though).

      Is it perfect? No you should still probably call in most circumstances, not only will the operator be able to quickly ask follow-up questions, but you also get confirmation that someone has heard you and are one the case. But if you *can't*, (or won't) then an SMS is much better than nothing.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
  5. OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    help sum dood is trying 2 rob teh bankz rotf

  6. New emergency line response... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "What is your OMG?"

  7. Re:Hope Springs Eternal by erroneus · · Score: 4, Funny

    I dno. Les aks'm

  8. Getting details could be a problem by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is an ideal way of sending information when you want to report that you saw something that may need their attention, but you personally don't need a response.

    Presuming you can get sufficient detail in the message to make it useful. 911 Operators typically ask questions for a reason. I can just see a whole bunch of text like "I saw an accident on I-80" with no further detail in the messages. Then the operator may need to call to find out the details.

    1. Re:Getting details could be a problem by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

      This is an ideal way of sending information when you want to report that you saw something that may need their attention, but you personally don't need a response.

      Presuming you can get sufficient detail in the message to make it useful. 911 Operators typically ask questions for a reason. I can just see a whole bunch of text like "I saw an accident on I-80" with no further detail in the messages. Then the operator may need to call to find out the details.

      You mean 911 operators cant find out exactly where your cellphone is and which direction you are traveling any time they want? Even just through getting a text message? But I saw that on CSI like two years ago...

    2. Re:Getting details could be a problem by Splab · · Score: 1

      The standard TAP 3.11, does include som information about your whereabouts, including tower(s?) you are talking to and aproximate location, but no GPS or direction.

      Also, in Europe we have a lot of MVNOs (mobile virtual network operator), they are generally somewhere between 5 minutes and 6 hours behind current events depending on their contract with the network provider.

      So unless the police has some backdoor installed in the land of the free, the 911 operator needs to ask some questions :-)

      tl;dr - CSI isn't real.

    3. Re:Getting details could be a problem by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the same CSI that made a Visual Basic interface to track IP addresses which turned out to be "275.3.9.64".

    4. Re:Getting details could be a problem by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      You mean 911 operators cant find out exactly where your cellphone is and which direction you are traveling any time they want? Even just through getting a text message? But I saw that on CSI like two years ago...

      That might be the reason why it's taken so long to implement. E911 was mandated after 9/11 which basically means every 911 call gets GPS positioning information. Perhaps 911 texts get the same thing - sending a text via 911 grabs current GPS location and sends it out.

      Heck, anothe reason is SMS is only best-effort, and many times can get duplicated or delayed by hours or days. Perhaps 911 texts are also specially handled by the network to ensure immediately delivery.

    5. Re:Getting details could be a problem by darkpixel2k · · Score: 1

      Presuming you can get sufficient detail in the message to make it useful. 911 Operators typically ask questions for a reason. I can just see a whole bunch of text like "I saw an accident on I-80" with no further detail in the messages. Then the operator may need to call to find out the details.

      Don't you mean "I saw an accident on I-8*CRASH*^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcaused a second accident on I-80 by texting and driving"?

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
    6. Re:Getting details could be a problem by Blrfl · · Score: 1

      While I appreciate that September 11 is America's new national pastime, the seeds for E911 were planted long before 2001. I was working on systems to locate phones in 1994.

    7. Re:Getting details could be a problem by JoshRosenbaum · · Score: 3, Informative

      As mentioned below, I think we have Enhanced 9-1-1 (E911). This allows emergency services to access GPS information on the phone if the user calls 911. I would imagine a text would allow the same thing or could send location info in the text.

    8. Re:Getting details could be a problem by LMacG · · Score: 4, Funny

      Looks like this one didn't get over the ...

      (sunglasses)

      sar-chasm.

      YEAHHHHHHHHH

      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    9. Re:Getting details could be a problem by TuringCheck · · Score: 1

      Actually the MVNOs don't have the detailed location information and don't need to. The location is held at the MSCs of the (non-virtual) operator where the subscriber is registered. The MVNO needs only return the MSC - which it has to know else calls won't get through.

      On the other hand the emergency calls are usually having LocationInformation identifying the MSC which would speed up things a little by skipping one (for a call) or two (for a SMS) network queries. Some operators are even sending the LocationInformation for regular calls (I don't understand why...)

    10. Re:Getting details could be a problem by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      or even better "Please run your EPort app and point your devices camera at the incident"

      hmm challenge for you coders write a good E-Report app for your platform of choice

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    11. Re:Getting details could be a problem by no1nose · · Score: 1

      I think I saw that episode too.

    12. Re:Getting details could be a problem by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      On this side of the ocean 911 operators drive porsches.

    13. Re:Getting details could be a problem by Blrfl · · Score: 1

      Except that it wasn't. Both phases of E911 were laid out by FCC rules adopted in 1996. Phase I was required to be in place by 1998. The rules for Phase II underwent minor tweaks in 1999 and 2000 and the first implementations were mandated for October 1, 2001.

    14. Re:Getting details could be a problem by gv250 · · Score: 1

      the first implementations were mandated for October 1, 2001.

      Aha! After 9/11. Like GP said, E911 was mandated to start after 9/11.

    15. Re:Getting details could be a problem by Blrfl · · Score: 1

      Eeeeeyeah. I can play the pedantic game, too. The mandate wasn't made after 9/11.

      This is fun.

    16. Re:Getting details could be a problem by mirix · · Score: 1

      Just phone numbers. '5' is half way on an old crossbar switch, so 555 was reserved for testing... Since it was unroutable, media began using it for fake numbers.

      Which is so they don't have problems like 867-5309. (which is a routable number)

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
  9. The real question is: by Githaron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why hasn't someone created 911 video chat for mobile phones yet. Such a feature could be life saving. Rather than someone having to explain how bad the wounds are and what is happening, they can show the dispatcher and EMTs. The dispatcher can give better advice to the victim or victim's friend and even have quick videos on how to complete the action. Meanwhile, the EMTs can use the video feed to better figure out the best course of action before they get on site. If nothing else, a face is probably more reassuring than just a voice when you have an emergency.

    1. Re:The real question is: by Krischi · · Score: 1

      That will be part of next-generation 9-1-1 services. Check out the NENA i3 specification and standards. But the rollout of next generation 9-1-1 is still 5-10 years in the future at a minimum.

    2. Re:The real question is: by ncttrnl · · Score: 1

      There are a bunch of services like that on the horizon. The issue isn't really providing a "next-gen" service so much as it is doing something useful with that data wherever it gets routed. Even with text messaging, its pretty simple to receive a message and route it to an answering point. The problem is whether the dispatcher on the receiving end can actually see that message and do something with it using whatever software/hardware is powering their workstation. 911 is an intentionally slow moving service because it has to work. When it doesn't work, lives can be lost. This sometimes means new tech, however useful, is held up while everyone slowly plans upgrades to their systems and then validates them and then validates them some more.

    3. Re:The real question is: by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Why hasn't someone created 911 video chat for mobile phones yet.

      1. On freeways/highways during some traffic accidents, you can have more than 30 to 90 people calling 911 to report the same exact accident, thus overwhelming the 911 call center and sometimes the local cell towers also. Having some of those people place video calls would only compound this issue.
      2. Phone cameras are front-facing and back-facing, and for most users that can actually do video chatting, it's far from having become second nature to them yet. For instance, there needs to be plenty of light, the phone camera can't be moving too quickly, and the user needs to know where to point which end of the phone towards, while still being able to talk to it.
      3. Bandwidth issues (not everyone has 4G service/high-speed wifi service, or even a mobile data service, and if even they did, it doesn't work everywhere the same yet)
      4. Hardware issues (even among smartphones that can do video calling over 4G, all those 4G phones are not created equal. Some of those phones are vastly underpowered and will crash when doing video-calling. And the user may even have to pull out the battery and reboot their phone, before they can even make a normal phone call after that.)
      5. Battery issues (video two-way calling is very power hungry, this issue alone could cost some lives if the battery gets depleted before all the most pertinant information gets relayed to the operator).
      6. State and Local governments would have to get involved to make sure the technology worked on their end as well, and those are notorious for being slow to accept/adopt new infrastructure.
      7. And last but not least, 911-video chat could become the new chat roulette where 2 out of every 3 video calls that would get to 911 would be a guy fondling his penis in front of his phone camera.

      Now don't get me wrong, video calling to 911 is coming, but there are still many issues that need to be dealt with before it gets here.

    4. Re:The real question is: by Githaron · · Score: 1

      1. On freeways/highways during some traffic accidents, you can have more than 30 to 90 people calling 911 to report the same exact accident, thus overwhelming the 911 call center and sometimes the local cell towers also. Having some of those people place video calls would only compound this issue.

      I am not sure why anyone would be streaming video to emergency services for a accident unless they were with someone who was hurt by the accident. That said, I guess there wouldn't be anything stopping that from happening.

      2. Phone cameras are front-facing and back-facing, and for most users that can actually do video chatting, it's far from having become second nature to them yet. For instance, there needs to be plenty of light, the phone camera can't be moving too quickly, and the user needs to know where to point which end of the phone towards, while still being able to talk to it.

      I doubt those people would even use the feature.

      3. Bandwidth issues (not everyone has 4G service/high-speed wifi service, or even a mobile data service, and if even they did, it doesn't work everywhere the same yet)

      While there could be bandwidth issues, I would assume the app would monitor the connection and fall back to voice with the option of sending pictures if the network is not fast enough.

      4. Hardware issues (even among smartphones that can do video calling over 4G, all those 4G phones are not created equal. Some of those phones are vastly underpowered and will crash when doing video-calling. And the user may even have to pull out the battery and reboot their phone, before they can even make a normal phone call after that.)

      It is better to have it for those that can use it than to not have it at all. I think the Google market lets the developers restrict downloads to the phones that they support.

      5. Battery issues (video two-way calling is very power hungry, this issue alone could cost some lives if the battery gets depleted before all the most pertinant information gets relayed to the operator).

      The app could monitor the battery and fallback to voice with the option of sending pictures if the battery falls below a certain threshold.

      7. And last but not least, 911-video chat could become the new chat roulette where 2 out of every 3 video calls that would get to 911 would be a guy fondling his penis in front of his phone camera.

      Considering the amount of data the emergency center would be receiving automatically by the app, if 2 out of 3 emergency video calls were naked pranks, 2 out of 3 emergency video callers would be arrested and/or fined. I am sure such a problem would end fairly quickly.

  10. Future sample message by Scareduck · · Score: 4, Funny

    As suggested by a Facebook friend, Jordan Elliot:

    "OMG! thrs lik sum GUY ty 2 brake into my house! DAFUQ!?!? LOL PLS HLP!!!"

    --

    Dog is my co-pilot.

    1. Re:Future sample message by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      As suggested by a Facebook friend, Jordan Elliot:

      "OMG! thrs lik sum GUY ty 2 brake into my house! DAFUQ!?!? LOL PLS HLP!!!"

      Facebook? I thought for sure I saw that posed on Chuck Grassley's twitter feed...

    2. Re:Future sample message by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I shudder to think of the future additions to the "famous last words" listings.

  11. How much like E911 will this be? by jcrb · · Score: 2

    Will they be able to make the phone only talk/text to the 911 operator till they release the "line"?

    Or perhaps turn on the audio, i.e. you text "I can't talk there is a burglar in my house", and they can turn on the phone/video and listen?

    I suppose they could also make it take your picture to cut down on prank calls, otherwise how do they stop people saying "someone texted it in when I put the phone down" (yes they can cover the camera, but you know they will think of the feature)

    Or turn on the video so you can show the 911 operator what is happening... which would be a cool feature for voice 911 calls as well.

    I for one welcome our new smart phone overlords.

    --
    -jon
    1. Re:How much like E911 will this be? by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      You know, anyone can pick up your phone and make the phone call as well. And it's a bit faster too.

      I'd avoid leaving the phone unattended close to people willing to make prank calls to 911 on your behalf, for a start.

    2. Re:How much like E911 will this be? by jcrb · · Score: 1

      You didn't read what I wrote. I wasn't talking about someone other than the phone's owner making prank 911 txts, I was talking about the phone's owner making the prank txt and *claiming* it wasn't them to get out of trouble, because there would be no recording of their voice.

      --
      -jon
    3. Re:How much like E911 will this be? by Loosifur · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea, but that only works if you use a phone with a forward-facing camera on a system that supports simultaneous voice and data transmission. Also, the flash might be an issue from a not-being-seen-by-ax-wielding-lunatic perspective.

      --
      This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
  12. How about real-time picture delivery? by davidwr · · Score: 2

    How about a feature that lets you send pictures, videos, and live-camera feed to 911?

    Of course you'll need both the phone and the 911 call center to have this ability.

    In the interim, how about making a smartphone app that does all of this:
    * call your local 911 by voice and/or send a text
    * determine if the 911 call center has the ability to receive images or files, and if so, allow the phone user to send them
    * determine if the 911 call center has the ability to receive live camera feeds, and if so, allow the phone user to turn the camera on

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  13. Re:Hope Springs Eternal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    User: theres a hijacker on the plane
    Cop: Don't you mean "there's"?
    User: thats what your worried about? cant you send help?
    Cop: I'm sorry, sir. I can't help you.

  14. I can see it now... by NitzJaaron · · Score: 1

    "OMG WTF im on fyre omg omg halp! were's my bffs da popo!" I feel terrible for the EMS operators...

  15. This is stupid. by Theoden · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a firefighter/aemt, we already get multiple, redundant calls with no information because the caller is "driving by the scene and thought you should know." So now we'll get a text message with no way for the operator to try and pull more information from the caller.

    "omg im dying plz help"

    So we dispatch two ALS ambulance crews, an engine company and local first responders to find some idiot who broke his toe.

    0_o

    1. Re:This is stupid. by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      If you really are dying, you're probably not going to be able to send text messages very well.

    2. Re:This is stupid. by Jahava · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you really are dying, you're probably not going to be able to send text messages very well.

      If you really are dying, you'll probably call 911 instead of text. If you're in a situation where you can't call but can somehow text, then you're probably pretty glad that they enabled texting.

      There are plenty of circumstances where texting is advantageous to calling, such as:

      • For the speech/hearing impaired
      • When you're in a situation where an instigator would react negatively to hearing your voice
      • When you want to covertly contact the authorities

      Additionaly, FTFA, they can send text and photos, which opens the doors to a whole new type of information that can be sent to 911.

      I'm guessing the reason this isn't as easy as enabling text subscriptions for '911' is because they are adding a lot of other features. Texts to 911 will likely also provide the responder with detailed location and subscription information. I suspect they'll also have an infrastructure in place to correlate calls, texts, and photos from the same number together into one session.

      This change looks like a huge improvement over the current situation, and I suspect that it will both save and improve many peoples' lives.

      It's also the first legitimate use for texting ;)

    3. Re:This is stupid. by Krischi · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, people get hurt or die because they are unable to make a voice call to 9-1-1. The deaf, hard of hearing, and speech impaired are in a situation right now where they effectively have no access to 9-1-1 - almost no one uses TTYs anymore, and on wireless these TTYs do not work well anyway.

    4. Re:This is stupid. by icebrain · · Score: 1

      Indeed (another FF here). A fender-bender becomes "rollover with injuries and entrapment", at some random point along thirty miles of interstate. A controlled burn 20 miles away becomes a shopping center on fire. Or my favorite, the heat sensor alarm activation at a medical office that went out as a patient with a "burning sensation" in his arm. Fortunately, that was just a false alarm (bad sensor).

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  16. Soon... by wmspider · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fire - exclamation mark - fire - exclamation mark - help me - exclamation mark. Looking forward to hearing from you. Yours truly, ...

    1. Re:Soon... by zethreal · · Score: 1

      I really wish I had mod points for this...

    2. Re:Soon... by fermion · · Score: 1

      Was anyone else thinking about the IT Crowd episode where Moss emails the fire department. I think the reason not to have texting to 911 is that real time synchronous communication is best for emergencies.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    3. Re:Soon... by keytoe · · Score: 1

      Four! I mean Five! I mean FIRE!

  17. good idea by AxemRed · · Score: 2

    This would be ideal for certain situations where you need to contact the police but where it would be ill-advised to draw attention to yourself by making a phone call.

    1. Re:good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This, right here, is the problem with a populace who are educated my movies and TV... "but what if masked henchmen take us captive and threaten to shoot anyone who uses their cell to make a call (text is ok)"... these are definitely the situations you should be preparing for. They are very common it happens everytime you put on a movie! ...There is a real world you left behind long ago, right around the time you got your first cable subscription...

    2. Re:good idea by Loosifur · · Score: 2

      Virginia Tech. Columbine. 9/11. There are three examples off the top of my head where people would have been able to text emergency services without revealing their location to a lunatic on a rampage. In the latter example, as a matter of fact, people were using text messages to tell people on the ground about the hijacking. It's not a perfect solution, but it's silly to suggest that it's unrealistic to imagine feasible emergency situations where the ability to contact emergency service providers silently would be beneficial. Shit, any home invasion or robbery would be a perfect time to text from the relative safety of your bedroom rather than alerting intruders to your presence and putting yourself at risk by talking to an operator. I don't get why that's difficult to wrap your head around, frankly.

      --
      This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
  18. Put your phone on silent by oddjob1244 · · Score: 1

    folks who find themselves in dangerous situations

    I wonder if those folks will remember to put their phone on silent before sending a text message to 911, in the heat of the moment. Otherwise the reply message might attract some unwanted attention.

  19. is it free? and will it work with txting blocked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have blocked txting as I do not want to pay for incoming span txts

    now this 100% free or will you pay $0.10-$0.25 per txt each way?

  20. Re:is it free? and will it work with txting blocke by jcrb · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You need to contact 911 and you are worried about $0.25 txt charges?

    Perhaps you aren't clear on the concept of a "true emergency".

    --
    -jon
  21. Torn by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    On one hand, it is probably a good idea to include a channel for emergency contact for the deaf/mute population, and for those in situations where audible speech is ill-advised, such as a hostage scenario...

    THAT SAID, it is far more likely the system is going to be inundated with spam from, for lack of a more accurate descriptor, fucking imbeciles (who think taking 15 minutes to compose a 4 sentence message is somehow more efficient than taking 15 seconds to just call the person), which will cause it to appear useless and thus inevitably be abandoned.

    I'm guessing this is one situation in which writing a pre-emptive obituary isn't an over-reaction.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    1. Re:Torn by Krischi · · Score: 1

      Black Hawk County in Iowa has been offering text-to-911 for quite a while. The public safety answering point says that call volume has not been a problem for them. In fact, they have been urging more carriers to join this program.

    2. Re:Torn by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Black Hawk County in Iowa has been offering text-to-911 for quite a while. The public safety answering point says that call volume has not been a problem for them. In fact, they have been urging more carriers to join this program.

      Sure, it's easy enough for a county with a population of less than 150,000; also, probably not a whole lot of trolls in that demographic.

      That model begins to become questionable when implemented in areas with a greater population density.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  22. My bill isn't going to go up for this, will it? by BetaDays · · Score: 1

    I'm just wondering if my bill will go up. I already get the mandatory price for E911 so is this new feature going to be included in that E911 cost or will they charge me another fee or raise the existing E911 fee?

    Don't get me wrong I think it's a good idea I just want to know what it is going to cost me.

    --
    Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
    1. Re:My bill isn't going to go up for this, will it? by Bigby · · Score: 1

      It will cost you one way or another... It may be indirect, but you can't "do more" and have it be less expensive...unless this is streamlining some process or something.

  23. The IT Crowd by preaction · · Score: 1

    Dear Sir/Madam:

    I am writing to inform you of a fire that has broken out in the basement level of the... No, too formal...

  24. Get Out of the Suburbs, People! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In rural areas there is often as much "fringe" coverage where SMS works but a voice call can't complete as there is "service area". The best you can do now is to text a bunch of your friends with, "crashed in ditch on river rd, ovrtrned, brkn neck, pls call 911," and hope somebody notices.

    This kind of 911 service could effectively double mobile 911 coverage in those places. That's quite sufficient a reason to put up with the whiny problems posted above.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  25. Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    User: theres a hijacker on the plane
    Cop: Don't you mean "there's"?

    Your scenario is absurd. There's no way a cop would be literate enough to recognize grammatical mistakes.

    1. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They would if they were the grammer police.

    2. Re:Ridiculous by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      You need to get out more. Modern cops have a "GrammerNazi" app installed on their iPad.

    3. Re:Ridiculous by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      LOL at you thinking an associates or even a bachelor's equals educated. It means they went somewhere for 2-4 years and at the end of it someone handed them a piece of paper. It really proves very little in the modern world.

      --
      Good-bye
    4. Re:Ridiculous by bartoku · · Score: 1

      Bachelor's degree == the new high school diploma?

    5. Re:Ridiculous by Guru2Newbie · · Score: 1

      They would if they were the grammer police.

      You must mean Kelsey Grammer. Surely you aren't speaking about GRAMMAR, are you?

  26. Re:is it free? and will it work with txting blocke by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    Voice 911 services typically work even if the phone isn't provisioned for billing(I'm sure there are some models that are so sim-locked that they just won't boot or similar; but US GSM handsets with the SIM pulled can usually still make 911 calls if there is a network available, as can CDMA phones that have had whatever the equivalent de-provisioning done to them), so I would assume that 911 texts would also work without charge, and would cut through any text blocking.

  27. Re:is it free? and will it work with txting blocke by Krischi · · Score: 1

    No, it likely won't. The reason it works for voice calls is that the standards are established for "non-service initialized phones." There is no equivalent for SMS, and it is doubtful whether there will be any incentive to make this happen for a technology that already is on its way out.

  28. Relay services are inappropriate for 9-1-1 calls by Krischi · · Score: 3, Informative

    Location accuracy isn't good enough just to make a voice call and hope for the best without further communication. A case like this was recently documented by the Seattle authorities, where the location was off by four blocks, and the disabled victim was only saved by the fact that the parents were able to call 9-1-1 and give the precise location.

    Most deaf and hard of hearing people do not use TTYs anymore. Many now use video and captioned telephone relay services, but 9-1-1 calls through relay services suck, to put it mildly. Call routing doesn't work well for these situations, and there are many documented cases of introducing 5-10 minute delays before the call is finally connected to the emergency responders. Compare that to sub-10 second response times for the majority of voice calls.

  29. So when will it by Hentes · · Score: 1

    support Twitter too?

  30. Lassie? by vawwyakr · · Score: 1

    Timmy: *Cough* Siri, go get help
    Siri: Ruff
    Dispatcher: What is it girl? Is Timmy hurt?

    1. Re:Lassie? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      While this is funny (well, it made me smile), it might be interesting to see how an Intelligent Assistant (insert your favorite) might work with this.

      One example given above was a car accident. If you see one, you just say, "Hey, let the cops know there's an accident," and your Intelligent Assistant figures out your location and sends "Accident on 110N b4 Rosecrans" and sends it off.

  31. Sweden has already done this by mufflon · · Score: 1

    We actually had this some ago in sweden once, but it failed to catch on for the general population and was discontinued. Technology is not always the answer for everything, though it'll be interesting to see how this will fare this time around.

    1. Re:Sweden has already done this by Krischi · · Score: 1

      SMS to emergency services in Sweden is still alive. It has a registration requirement, though.

  32. Why does the FCC need to "champion" it? by quixote9 · · Score: 1

    It's a regulatory agency. Just order it, you doofi.

  33. waiting for a BIG FAIL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    18 years as a 911 operations admin and 30+ years programming.

    Unless Verizon has rebuilt the entire system [read broke existing standards] this will, not if, but when, FAIL.

    1) no ID information - calling has a phone number
    2) no LOCATION X/Y Lat Lon information - that is the latest FCC of Phase2 911, 100meter-90% and 30meters-60% of time
    3) no TCP/IP - can this read sequence packets of out you?
    4) no guarantee of delivery NOW - does a lot of good to get text 2 hours later
    5) no *off network* stability - this will be gateways on and off the carriers network which have issues
    6) NO FUNDING - this is Next Gen 911 [NG911] and it is EXPENSIVE and has no regulation [FCC/Public Utility Commission] on internet like phones do so the providers are pushing this

    many, many more issues that indicate a LAW SUIT WAITING TO HAPPEN
    [on blackboard of Law 101 - It's not whether you win or lose, but how long you drag it out on billable hours]

  34. How about the drunk texts you send to the wrong # by DontScotty · · Score: 1

    Me: Hey baby - I want to play put it where it doesn't belong.

    911: Please state the nature of your emegency.

    Me: I need to shoot my load reallly bad

    911: Police are being dispatched to your location.

  35. Re:is it free? and will it work with txting blocke by f3rret · · Score: 1

    You actually PAY for SMSing? I don't think any service provider here in my country actually charges for SMSs, they did a while back but not any more.

    --
    Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
  36. UK too by alanw · · Score: 1

    emergencySMS. Requires registration. Marketed to the deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired, but Mountaineers are recommended to sign up too

  37. Text rates may apply by Nalez · · Score: 1

    Thank you for contacting 911. Standard text message charges may apply from your wireless provider, depending on your text message plan. If you have an unlimited text messaging plan, then there would be no additional charge. 911 is not responsible for any fees charged by your wireless provider. If you wish to continue to send notifications to 911, please reply with CONTINUE. At any time you may discontinue 911 text services by sending STOP to 911.

  38. Unique? by phorm · · Score: 1

    Cellular voice/data -- existed for a couple decades. Barely-regulated private kleptocracy; every provider sucks in an individual, unique way.

    I humbly disagree. While carriers may have some unique versions of their own "suck", there are plenty of methods of suck which they share around (hidden fees, unreasonable limits, and terrible contracts come to mind).

  39. Home invasions by phorm · · Score: 1

    Not as uncommon as you might think. I'd rather not have to talk loud enough for the cellphone operator to hear me whilst hiding in the closet from armed intruders.

  40. Re:is it free? and will it work with txting blocke by ACS+Solver · · Score: 1

    Within the EU, there's a requirement that all phones - including public payphones and mobiles - be able to dial 112 for free. Usefully, 112 is also in the GSM standard, so calling 112 will work even in the USA, connecting to 911. Not sure if dialing 911 in Europe would work.

  41. Standing My Ground by KhabaLox · · Score: 1

    i c suspect in hoodie omg here he comes SMG!

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  42. Might take too long to use by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    While its good to have this as an option as in this case more options are good, calling 911 and leaving the phone off the hook ( prompting a police visit ) is far faster than having to sit there and actually text 'help me'.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  43. HELP by shiftless · · Score: 1

    OMG 911 PLZ HELP...ive fallen n i cant get up!

  44. Re:Welcome visiting airjordansneaker.net by shiftless · · Score: 1

    thanks bro...this looks totally legit

  45. yo dawg by shiftless · · Score: 1

    ur ideas r interesting....imma follow u on twitter

  46. Re:How about the drunk texts you send to the wrong by laejoh · · Score: 1

    or...

    911: I put on my robe and wizard hat!

  47. Good for teens by jtgd · · Score: 1

    ...who have forgotten how to make phone calls because they only use their cell phones for txting.

    --
    J