Slashdot Mirror
Taking the Census, With Cellphones
sciencehabit writes: If you want to figure out how many people live in a particular part of your country, you could spend years conducting home visits and mailing out questionnaires. But a new study describes a quicker way. Scientists have figured out how to map populations using cellphone records — an approach that doesn't just reveal who lives where, but also where they go every day. The researchers also compared their results to population density data gathered through remote sensing technologies, a widely-used method that relies on satellite imaging to gather detailed information on population settlement patterns and estimate population counts. They found that the two methods are comparable in accuracy when checked against actual survey-based census data, but estimates from mobile phone data can provide more timely information, down to the hours.
Yay. Thank goodness we've finally gotten there. Can we please find a new book to emulate? Pretty please?
... hell, how about a phone book? Nice quiet read .. no end of the world catastrophies to worry about, just some lousy advertising.
How about
---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
There's the television. It's all right there - all right there. Look, listen, kneel, pray. Commercials!
We're not productive anymore. We don't make things anymore. It's all automated. What are we *for* then? We're consumers, Jim. Yeah. Okay, okay.
Buy a lot of stuff, you're a good citizen. But if you don't buy a lot of stuff, if you don't, what are you then, I ask you? What? Mentally *ill*.
Fact, Jim, fact - if you don't buy things - toilet paper, new cars, computerized yo-yos, electrically-operated sexual devices, servo systems with brain-implanted headphones, screwdrivers with miniature built-in radar devices, voice-activated computers...
Head counts are only a small fraction of the information that is gathered in a typical census (I've worked on a number around the world). Although important to determine population shifts & regional distributions of people, the more detailed demographics are what statisticians will be going through for some time after. A full census will provide details on household & family make up, religion & minority groups, immigration. I think the posted article has a long way to go to reach a full solution.
The author misses the mark by a mile. This doesn't even qualify as a poll, barely an opinion. Weak.
The primary purpose of a census is to determine apportionment to a legislature, that is, how many people require representation in a given area. Voters tend to be the elderly who have plenty of time on their hands and an inclination to follow politics. Elderly voters are much less likely to own those dang new-fangled cell-phones than trendy teenage non-voters. By conducting a census by counting cellphones, you end up ignoring politically active voters and counting politically oblivious non-voters.
ignores everybody without cell phones.
I dont have a cell phone. They can pry my census info from my cold dead hands
They could have just asked NSA.
Just another day in Paradise
Scientists have figured out how to map populations using cellphone records.
This is a fast forward advancement in technology! Wooow!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Suppose there are about a million people in a city. You could try to count each of those million people one by one and you'd miss a few, perhaps 5%.
Alternatively, you could poll 200 people in each of 20 neighborhoods within the city, a total of 4,000 people, to find out that 61% of the people have active cell phones. In other words, for every 61 cell phones, there are 100 people. Then ask the carriers how many cell phones there are and multiply. You'll still be off by 5%, and you've had to talk to 4,000 people instead of a million people.
What tune should I be playing in my head while reading those lyrics?
When it comes to the second amendment, the founders allowed for all possible advances in technology and if one can make a nuclear tipped bazooka it can't be regulated or banned. As long as it can be carried by one person, it is constitutional. When it comes to census, no advancement in counting, estimating sciences are allowed to be used. How can you hold both view points at the same time? Easy, they are time traveling mind readers, they go back to 1776 and precisely understand what the founders meant, never mind what the wrote down, never mind how SCOTUS interprets it.
Normally I would be able to find equally absurd mutually exclusive contradictory view points held by Democrats to "balance" the posting and burnish my credentials as a "neutral" guy. But it is getting increasingly difficult. And I no longer care to be the "neutral" guy. And I have karma to burn.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Yea, they really shouldn't call it a census; the article refers to it as "population density". But it does provide an interesting view of where people are during the day or on certain days (workdays, holidays, weekends, etc), something a regular census can't provide.
I didn't opt in to that.
You'll still be off by 5%, and you've had to talk to 4,000 people instead of a million people.
Plus with a statistical approximation you can tweak the estimate as needed to give a different population when you want to gerrymander a congressional district (e.g. allowing for commuters to avoid an over count in cities).
Can't you read poetry without a soundtrack? You can't? Well then, fuck you. Illiterate karaoke hipster.
Don't worry, I get your poetry, you just aren't very good at it.
Charter Member of The Committee Group For The Elimination And Eradication Of Repetitive Redundancy
So, they're saying that the obvious under-reporting (for low-income households, the homeless, and for babies/young children/seniors) is balanced by the obvious over-reporting (people with both a work and a home phone, and people who's line of work involves several "burner" phones) ?
Constitutionally - this is not a fair accounting method, since there is an income requirement to be counted.
And this is why metadata *is* data, and thus needs a warrant to collect.
Good luck.
AC
Why can't we on a global basis figure out how to send "researchers" who do this shit to jail?
Since the census was originally intended to provide for the number of Representatives to Congress, and that has since been capped at 435 total, what the hell is even the point anymore other than collecting metrics.
The study's in FRANCE.
As one of the co-authors on this paper I appreciate that you actually took the time to understand that we aren't trying to actually represent this as equivalent to a census. But rather we can estimate population density at spatial scales and across shorter temporal scales than one would normally be able to measure.
This represents a significant step forward as input data into a variety of disease transmission, demographic, transportation and other research areas and we are very excited about it. For more information check out our other research efforts: http://www.worldpop.org.uk/