Although the NAB's rants at Whitespaces give me cramps....
The AntennaWeb.org mapping program, provided by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), locates the proper outdoor* antenna to receive your local television broadcast channels.
Based on geographical maps and signal strengths, AntennaWeb locates the best antenna for you -- whether the antenna is for use with a home satellite system, high-definition television (HDTV) or a traditional analog set.
The writer makes excellent points regarding the difference between a study group and solicitation of the "fill in the answers for me" variety.
While this media does not invite nuance, at what point does collaborative learning improve the educational outcome of the collaborators?
Introductory level courses have a single threaded problem in larger institutions (#TAs, office hours), while advanced courses often involve discussion and debate engaging the students.
To zap a student for using collaborative methods reflects perhaps the "we are the educational professionals here, bub, so clam up" which can be accurate but often reflects the lonely hubris of a defensive strategy.
So, to get away with the sonnet writing exercise with a heady "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" represented as original is qualitatively and quantitatively different from a learning event "use the first derivative and set it to zero" that just might improve the outcome for the student when the integrated, applied, learning becomes part of a test.
The learning community effect becomes quite significant, threatens the Das School philosophies which do not like the views that students can contribute to their education. See Moodle info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moodle#Pedagogical_approach/for more.
Several years ago, I recall some studies of learning where putting two kids at one computer screen gave better results; model applied to extreme programming as well.
Plagiarism is one thing, collaboration is another. Open admission of collaboration and fessing up to the fact that Das School cannot and has not ever been the sole source of educational efficacy.
So, like, write a policy that says a student can collaborate, set limits on what that means, and use the test and class engagement to judge merit.
Netting it out: wireless sensors have been important and become more important with communications clouds. Applications for agriculture generally, including vineyards (where microclimate sensing sorts out good from great) and organic production (where pest management and nitrogen fixing have play).
Other "stuff" includes aquatic studies, or smart environments where Acme Farm Roombas navigate fields automatically with, say, groundhog zapping water jets. An early test relied upon GPS and gyroscopes for locational awareness of "automated tractors which could not "detect all obstacles". Wireless sensors could improve efficacy. Calling Cyberdyne!
And those whiny Ficus can go back to state government lobbies where they belong.
Among other things, several studies point to about a 1% increase in business formation and job growth rates. Haven't done a compare and contrast with this study, but it doesn't seem out of line.
Broadband supports also improved job quality, well beyond the "service economy" and into smaller scale manufacturing, educational delivery with focus upon the new "trade schools" and reskilling of people, and health care reinvention. The linkages along supply chains (auto parts for Toyota, say, or manufacturing cabinetry in the midwest for New York Apartments) really go a lot better at something over 48Kbps.
Oh, and as far as the Government costs of delivering broadband, recall that the deal was cut with the telcos to put that mojo all over the place in the mid 90s. Didn't happen, and the score keeping is rigged by measuring "success" at the 5 digit zip code level.
Eigenbehaviors allow us to identify the structure inherent in daily human behavior with models that can accurately cluster, analyze and predict multimodal data from individuals and groups. We show that it is possible to accurately model many people's lives with just a few parameters - thus allowing accurate prediction of their future behavior from limited observations of their current behavior - as well as to create a similarity metric between individuals and groups that allows accurate identification of group affiliation and behavioral 'style'.
It isn't whether it is an optimal strategy, but whether these tools improve materially the effectiveness of intelligence. "Discovery" AI/Expert systems were finding new materials processes during the 1980s.
Oh ye of little faith. Still, trust in god but lock your car.
http://www.websitesthatsuck.com/
intelligent checklists of what to do and stunningly great what not to do examples. Excellent walk through for "the boss" who might really, really, want to have that musical gif with the dog playing the banjo on the first page along side the waving flag/support our troops light show...
Test: Consider too how customers, et.al.,will access the site.
Make the dog food, eat the dog food. If the users are coming through a network jinking like a moth in flight from a bat, that big ass wonderful "thing" may well and truly blow chunks. Demo on the LAN, or on the desktop: bad thing. What's the implementation environment?
If users are urban with high capacity networks, fatter images etc. can be less of a problem. But if you're trying to reach, say, people "on the road" or in dial up land, test with their environments. I recall one rule of thumb that suggested that 4 seconds is about the design budget for the first page to show up.
In turn, consider also testing with at least a couple of current and backlevel browsers to catch major pains.
Go for basic function/message first. Avoid the scripting etc. until the site is stabilized and (most)people smile.
Is it to support the operations of your business as well as communicate to your customers and partners? The ops/innards pieces, to me at least, are very different in terms of look, function, and feel. Separate these requirements from the messaging; creeping functionality kills.
Who Is The Decider?
Who is writing content? Who is editing content?
Frame up a few questions such as "who should we look like vis a vis competition, which customers and prospects are of interest, what's our brand, etc." If you get a glazed look go for the neat gif mailboxes and spinning blinkenlights and declare a victory. If the idea of integrated messaging and corporate (organizational) image are not big in the culture, well shucks, I'd go for beige on beige.
Funny. I'd been talking about this MiniTruth and Token Ring phenomena with a friend just the other day. Whilst being all corporate, actually had an IBM SE come up to me and tell me that I was risking my [redacted big honkin company] through the advocacy of Ethernet.
Two months later, at a big conference for all True Believers conducted by IBM, actually heard IBM plants in the audience doing the amen corner thing with Greek Chorus of "alas, Ethernet would kill the King" lines.... up to the "802.3 will make it hurt when you pee" level of nonsense.
The fact that a 3745 [burly iron werken] running remotely was actually running on the backup token ring thingie for a month before it fell over and died because the primary ring had never worked [vague memory of route discovery]was, well, pretty f'n sweet.
IBM's always been a great company, seriously, but the LAN wars were not its finest hour.
Vendors love to create their own ecosystem of blinkin lights and proprietary argot. Customers in that ecosystem have to be smarter than the average bear to avoid the lock-in. And people who have earned "certifications" want to leverage *their* training, not the other person's.
Example: Why the GigaCorporation has already invested $$ in training our hoarde in the Basque language... followed by the rationalization... we've pissed away a lot of money, we need to call it strategic.
Meanwhile GigaCorp technical staff have sweated to tame the one rabid boar hellspawn with over-hyped expectations of management dangling over them like Freddy Kruger in the last reel. THEY can barely keep the ship afloat without more (eek) change. Not all of this is self-serving but, unfortunately, pragmatic. Operations costs are often the d'oh factor after purchase.
Vendor gnomes are rewarded for adding features. Dilbert is probably the best source for examples but look at proprietary extensions to DB languages (et. al.)for further guidance.
Look: Math *is* hard, Barbie is right. But there's an old adage from Programming Pearls to the effect of "be just clever enough and no more." And creeping complexity, feature creep, scope creep locks the legacy in.
Useability testing could, I believe, develop consumer appliances without the "don't touch this button" instability we see in OSs now... but that's another average bear problem.
Now here's the big difference twixt digg and /.
on
The Rise of Digg.com
·
· Score: 1
From digg.com homepage:
Digg is a technology news website that employs non-hierarchical editorial control.
'xactly right. Lots of systems/products fall into groupthink - "if you users are not smart enough to see the brilliance then you're not worthy." Sort of like the fat graphic site demo'd on a LAN but that has to be served through a 56k pipe. Looks great in the office etc.
One piece of tech that had a refreshing development cycle, with real live blue-haired and etc. consumers was the interface for the first ATM machines.
The developers/designers implemented several morphological combinations of "look and feel" with - no kidding - Hypercard on cute little Macs.
The trials ran over a couple of weeks with typical users. The *only* interface training was getting people to use the single button mouse - but the screen layouts, services (balance inquiry, get cash, etc.) were examined for useability, clarity, and sequence. Iteration of the layouts was easy, new designs could be tweaked and tested in a few minutes or so. This was in, hmm, before 1988 sometime. My memory fails me.
However: New York City saw ATMs that people could actually (mostly) understand and use. Faster adoption of the new tech, joy in the land, lower "help" desk costs and etc.
So the old adage: "build one to throw away" is strikingly clear in testing how people interact with systems.
Kurt Vonnegut's Diana Moon Glampers had nothing on the email/phonemail/driveby management team I worked with.
The problem: small company and attention needy management.
When working on something complicated, the jefe would phone or email with a "let's pull up the carrots and see how they're doing".
Not good to bother the watchmakers, even if its for "just a quick question".
PTSD favorite moment: Phone call asking me if I got the email he'd just sent. Poppin' Paxil like Pez after two years there.
To net it out: email obsession might healthy for the larger company's ceo. If they're spending all of their time on bs, it at least keeps 'em away from the workers. I say, get 'em a game console too. Maybe a coffee can in the lounge to pay for ceo's adult site subscriptions.
Working for a telecom hardware company in the mid-90s, our team (burly xx and xy consultants all) came up with the strategy to enhance the software and packaging of their flagship product and *only* tell their trusted distribution channel.
God bless 'em, they took the advice.
Product launched. They ran out of manufacturing capacity in a couple of months; stuff flew off the shelves. Their competitors were in the "Michael Corleone without a gun in the restaurant" mindset for about 18 months.
Of course, they thought the world was circuit switched big dial tone and divided themselves pretty well by zero by 2000.
Point well taken; remember a href="http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/">boids were used to understand emergent "flock behavior" through simulation with sparse rules.
And at the risk of mixing humor with information...
The Mississipi River (et.al) now has Asian Carp escaped from Catfish ponds. These carp mess up the indigenous ecosystem, and now threaten the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Fishery Management site has video of Asian Carp leaping.
Now with RoboFish, maybe we can make a bad problem worse (Jurassic Park with Techno); think RoboFish with a frickin' laser targeted to an Asian Carp's "smell"/DNA signature. And imagine a programming error with the 1.1 code release....
Perhaps grief for Noodling afficianados. More Noodling reviews at Johnsjottings.com.
From Wikipedia.org: "Noodling is the practice and sport of fishing for catfish using only one's bare hands. Noodling may be called grabbling, graveling, hogging, or tickling, depending on what southern state you're in (Kentuckians call it dogging, while Nebraskans prefer stumping)."
For extra fun try NPR's Justice Talking "The First Amendment in a Digital Age" which aired on 16 September 2005 with Jack Valenti (MPAA), Floyd Abrams (Pentagon Papers), and Lawrence Lessig (Creative Commons).
Interesting discussion of Intellectual Property & etc. And my sense of the discussion was that the (former jefe of) MPAA's resembled the effect of talking to a Television Set.
This begins to complete a package for the Great Wall: get the offshore search engines to "private label" Internet search, so no nasty ProtestorTankPic.jpg can be found, so that Chinese bloggers/reporters can be turned in, and hardware-based media (DVD) can be private labeled for "safe" domestic distribution in China.
Look: its bad enough that the Wal*Marts have changed the content of CDs and what's on their magazine racks. This is a nation state, a growing and strong nation state, that is not exactly fighting the good fight.
So the above poster's onto a theme there: it's not about copyright or piracy, it's a control game. They may be fighting against entropy and innovation, but it is still a control of information game.
In my days in big financial services tech hell, I was on the Disaster/Recovery planning committee. If the plan could not be really tested, it was fantasy hoping for good luck.
The test cases weren't only terrorism - just what would happen if we had a steam explosion, the building was sprayed with asbestos, and the NYPD and FD put yellow tape around it.
In Peopleware, Tom DeMarco tells of the job interview... "We need a juggler. Can you juggle?" "I'm great!" "Burning Logs?" "No problem!" "Animals?" "No problem-o!" "You've got the job!" "Don't you want to see me juggle?"
So the idea of something that resembles live-fire testing is a very good idea. Intrusion testing, auditability (even open book audits as in "we're gonna ask you this, uber-geek!")is not perfect; however, I remember speaking with smug black frocked dotcommers who built systems that couldn't scale etc. etc.
Ok. I think I'm gonna get some of that spray-on hair now and sort punch cards. But a test (if not completely lame)is a critical part. If the thing fails, do it again. If it passes the test, make the test harder. Fight dirty when you test - it will make for better results when the stuff hits the fan for real.
Arbitrary Precision Having spent all of a minute to thing about this, wouldn't a multi-band/multi-protocol gizmo give the ability to find location in 2-space (if not 3-space) to an arbitrary level of precision? Example: the FM station signal locates the car in (x,y) with a circular error probable of 200 meters. AM station signals reduce it to a CEP of 10 meters (waves hands a lot now), and the radar leaks from airports reduce it to 2 meters....)
Made up gedanken example, but it does seem feasible to me, gentle/. readers.
Other Arts: E911, LORAN, Hybrid Triangulation
on
Wireless Positioning
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Couple of observations:
Triangulation from fixed points does not require a time stamp, just directions.
Arbitrary Precision Having spent all of a minute to thing about this, wouldn't a multi-band/multi-protocol gizmo give the ability to find location in 2-space (if not 3-space) to an arbitrary level of precision? Example: the FM station signal locates the car in (x,y) with a circular error probable of 200 meters. AM station signals reduce it to a CEP of 10 meters (waves hands a lot now), and the radar leaks from airports reduce it to 2 meters....) Made up gedanken example, but it does seem feasible to me, gentle/. readers.
Slashdot Mirror
The * is that indoor antennas have a lot of variables driving reception quality.
While this media does not invite nuance, at what point does collaborative learning improve the educational outcome of the collaborators?
Introductory level courses have a single threaded problem in larger institutions (#TAs, office hours), while advanced courses often involve discussion and debate engaging the students.
To zap a student for using collaborative methods reflects perhaps the "we are the educational professionals here, bub, so clam up" which can be accurate but often reflects the lonely hubris of a defensive strategy.
So, to get away with the sonnet writing exercise with a heady "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" represented as original is qualitatively and quantitatively different from a learning event "use the first derivative and set it to zero" that just might improve the outcome for the student when the integrated, applied, learning becomes part of a test.
The learning community effect becomes quite significant, threatens the Das School philosophies which do not like the views that students can contribute to their education. See Moodle info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moodle#Pedagogical_approach/for more.
Several years ago, I recall some studies of learning where putting two kids at one computer screen gave better results; model applied to extreme programming as well.
Plagiarism is one thing, collaboration is another. Open admission of collaboration and fessing up to the fact that Das School cannot and has not ever been the sole source of educational efficacy.
So, like, write a policy that says a student can collaborate, set limits on what that means, and use the test and class engagement to judge merit.
I'm waiting for the Best Buy Number Six bundle pack.
Other mesh network source: http://www.cuwireless.net/ with hardware schematics at http://www.cuwin.net/docs/.
Prior Art: Hotblack Desiado, QED
Netting it out: wireless sensors have been important and become more important with communications clouds. Applications for agriculture generally, including vineyards (where microclimate sensing sorts out good from great) and organic production (where pest management and nitrogen fixing have play).
Other "stuff" includes aquatic studies, or smart environments where Acme Farm Roombas navigate fields automatically with, say, groundhog zapping water jets. An early test relied upon GPS and gyroscopes for locational awareness of "automated tractors which could not "detect all obstacles". Wireless sensors could improve efficacy. Calling Cyberdyne!
And those whiny Ficus can go back to state government lobbies where they belong.
Among other things, several studies point to about a 1% increase in business formation and job growth rates. Haven't done a compare and contrast with this study, but it doesn't seem out of line.
Lake County, Florida, http://www.freepress.net/docs/broadband_and_economic_development_aes.pdf/ is the poster child for these studies, but a broader analysis is available from http://www.eda.gov/PDF/MITCMUBBImpactReport.pdf/. The writers do a good job of explaining ANOVA issues and context.
Broadband supports also improved job quality, well beyond the "service economy" and into smaller scale manufacturing, educational delivery with focus upon the new "trade schools" and reskilling of people, and health care reinvention. The linkages along supply chains (auto parts for Toyota, say, or manufacturing cabinetry in the midwest for New York Apartments) really go a lot better at something over 48Kbps.
Oh, and as far as the Government costs of delivering broadband, recall that the deal was cut with the telcos to put that mojo all over the place in the mid 90s. Didn't happen, and the score keeping is rigged by measuring "success" at the 5 digit zip code level.
It isn't whether it is an optimal strategy, but whether these tools improve materially the effectiveness of intelligence. "Discovery" AI/Expert systems were finding new materials processes during the 1980s.
Oh ye of little faith. Still, trust in god but lock your car.
Where would the internet be if nobody had invested in upgrading beyond dialup technology?
Available here in rural Verizon territory.
Good sources for design by example:
http://www.edwardtufte.com/
how to present quantitative information and get to the essence: less is more.
http://www.garrreynolds.com/
many examples on messages and negative space
http://www.websitesthatsuck.com/
intelligent checklists of what to do and stunningly great what not to do examples. Excellent walk through for "the boss" who might really, really, want to have that musical gif with the dog playing the banjo on the first page along side the waving flag/support our troops light show...
Test: Consider too how customers, et.al.,will access the site.
Make the dog food, eat the dog food. If the users are coming through a network jinking like a moth in flight from a bat, that big ass wonderful "thing" may well and truly blow chunks. Demo on the LAN, or on the desktop: bad thing. What's the implementation environment?
If users are urban with high capacity networks, fatter images etc. can be less of a problem. But if you're trying to reach, say, people "on the road" or in dial up land, test with their environments. I recall one rule of thumb that suggested that 4 seconds is about the design budget for the first page to show up.
In turn, consider also testing with at least a couple of current and backlevel browsers to catch major pains.
Go for basic function/message first. Avoid the scripting etc. until the site is stabilized and (most)people smile.
Is it to support the operations of your business as well as communicate to your customers and partners? The ops/innards pieces, to me at least, are very different in terms of look, function, and feel. Separate these requirements from the messaging; creeping functionality kills.
Who Is The Decider?
Who is writing content? Who is editing content?
Frame up a few questions such as "who should we look like vis a vis competition, which customers and prospects are of interest, what's our brand, etc." If you get a glazed look go for the neat gif mailboxes and spinning blinkenlights and declare a victory. If the idea of integrated messaging and corporate (organizational) image are not big in the culture, well shucks, I'd go for beige on beige.
Funny. I'd been talking about this MiniTruth and Token Ring phenomena with a friend just the other day. Whilst being all corporate, actually had an IBM SE come up to me and tell me that I was risking my [redacted big honkin company] through the advocacy of Ethernet.
Two months later, at a big conference for all True Believers conducted by IBM, actually heard IBM plants in the audience doing the amen corner thing with Greek Chorus of "alas, Ethernet would kill the King" lines.... up to the "802.3 will make it hurt when you pee" level of nonsense.
The fact that a 3745 [burly iron werken] running remotely was actually running on the backup token ring thingie for a month before it fell over and died because the primary ring had never worked [vague memory of route discovery]was, well, pretty f'n sweet.
IBM's always been a great company, seriously, but the LAN wars were not its finest hour.
Vendors love to create their own ecosystem of blinkin lights and proprietary argot. Customers in that ecosystem have to be smarter than the average bear to avoid the lock-in. And people who have earned "certifications" want to leverage *their* training, not the other person's.
Example: Why the GigaCorporation has already invested $$ in training our hoarde in the Basque language... followed by the rationalization... we've pissed away a lot of money, we need to call it strategic.
Meanwhile GigaCorp technical staff have sweated to tame the one rabid boar hellspawn with over-hyped expectations of management dangling over them like Freddy Kruger in the last reel. THEY can barely keep the ship afloat without more (eek) change. Not all of this is self-serving but, unfortunately, pragmatic. Operations costs are often the d'oh factor after purchase.
Vendor gnomes are rewarded for adding features. Dilbert is probably the best source for examples but look at proprietary extensions to DB languages (et. al.)for further guidance.
Look: Math *is* hard, Barbie is right. But there's an old adage from Programming Pearls to the effect of "be just clever enough and no more." And creeping complexity, feature creep, scope creep locks the legacy in.
Useability testing could, I believe, develop consumer appliances without the "don't touch this button" instability we see in OSs now... but that's another average bear problem.
'xactly right. Lots of systems/products fall into groupthink - "if you users are not smart enough to see the brilliance then you're not worthy." Sort of like the fat graphic site demo'd on a LAN but that has to be served through a 56k pipe. Looks great in the office etc.
One piece of tech that had a refreshing development cycle, with real live blue-haired and etc. consumers was the interface for the first ATM machines.
The developers/designers implemented several morphological combinations of "look and feel" with - no kidding - Hypercard on cute little Macs.
The trials ran over a couple of weeks with typical users. The *only* interface training was getting people to use the single button mouse - but the screen layouts, services (balance inquiry, get cash, etc.) were examined for useability, clarity, and sequence. Iteration of the layouts was easy, new designs could be tweaked and tested in a few minutes or so. This was in, hmm, before 1988 sometime. My memory fails me.
However: New York City saw ATMs that people could actually (mostly) understand and use. Faster adoption of the new tech, joy in the land, lower "help" desk costs and etc.
So the old adage: "build one to throw away" is strikingly clear in testing how people interact with systems.
The problem: small company and attention needy management.
When working on something complicated, the jefe would phone or email with a "let's pull up the carrots and see how they're doing".
Not good to bother the watchmakers, even if its for "just a quick question".
PTSD favorite moment: Phone call asking me if I got the email he'd just sent. Poppin' Paxil like Pez after two years there.
To net it out: email obsession might healthy for the larger company's ceo. If they're spending all of their time on bs, it at least keeps 'em away from the workers. I say, get 'em a game console too. Maybe a coffee can in the lounge to pay for ceo's adult site subscriptions.
Sorry, but what happens under non disclosure stays under non disclosure. But it was telephone gadgets.
Working for a telecom hardware company in the mid-90s, our team (burly xx and xy consultants all) came up with the strategy to enhance the software and packaging of their flagship product and *only* tell their trusted distribution channel.
God bless 'em, they took the advice.
Product launched. They ran out of manufacturing capacity in a couple of months; stuff flew off the shelves. Their competitors were in the "Michael Corleone without a gun in the restaurant" mindset for about 18 months.
Of course, they thought the world was circuit switched big dial tone and divided themselves pretty well by zero by 2000.
Interesting discussion of Intellectual Property & etc. And my sense of the discussion was that the (former jefe of) MPAA's resembled the effect of talking to a Television Set.
I only wish Hunter Thompson had moderated.It would, of course, be gauche to say "ME TOO!".
This begins to complete a package for the Great Wall: get the offshore search engines to "private label" Internet search, so no nasty ProtestorTankPic.jpg can be found, so that Chinese bloggers/reporters can be turned in, and hardware-based media (DVD) can be private labeled for "safe" domestic distribution in China.
Look: its bad enough that the Wal*Marts have changed the content of CDs and what's on their magazine racks. This is a nation state, a growing and strong nation state, that is not exactly fighting the good fight.
So the above poster's onto a theme there: it's not about copyright or piracy, it's a control game. They may be fighting against entropy and innovation, but it is still a control of information game.
Ok. Time for decaf.
In my days in big financial services tech hell, I was on the Disaster/Recovery planning committee. If the plan could not be really tested, it was fantasy hoping for good luck.
The test cases weren't only terrorism - just what would happen if we had a steam explosion, the building was sprayed with asbestos, and the NYPD and FD put yellow tape around it.
In Peopleware, Tom DeMarco tells of the job interview... "We need a juggler. Can you juggle?" "I'm great!" "Burning Logs?" "No problem!" "Animals?" "No problem-o!" "You've got the job!" "Don't you want to see me juggle?"
So the idea of something that resembles live-fire testing is a very good idea. Intrusion testing, auditability (even open book audits as in "we're gonna ask you this, uber-geek!")is not perfect; however, I remember speaking with smug black frocked dotcommers who built systems that couldn't scale etc. etc.
Ok. I think I'm gonna get some of that spray-on hair now and sort punch cards. But a test (if not completely lame)is a critical part. If the thing fails, do it again. If it passes the test, make the test harder. Fight dirty when you test - it will make for better results when the stuff hits the fan for real.
My bad... got a "couldn't find server" followed with a "couldn't find post". Hangs head, cries.
Couple of observations:
/. readers.
Triangulation from fixed points does not require a time stamp, just directions.
Some other sources:
- Cellular Location Services (E911, drive by text ads...) some discussion at http://www.binspy.com/tech/lbsvs.html
- LORAN at http://www.loran.org/library.html
Arbitrary Precision
Having spent all of a minute to thing about this, wouldn't a multi-band/multi-protocol gizmo give the ability to find location in 2-space (if not 3-space) to an arbitrary level of precision? Example: the FM station signal locates the car in (x,y) with a circular error probable of 200 meters. AM station signals reduce it to a CEP of 10 meters (waves hands a lot now), and the radar leaks from airports reduce it to 2 meters....)
Made up gedanken example, but it does seem feasible to me, gentle
Couple of observations:
/. readers.
Triangulation from fixed points does not require a time stamp, just directions.
Some other sources:
- Cellular Location Services (E911, drive by text ads...) some discussion at http://www.binspy.com/tech/lbsvs.html
- LORAN at http://www.loran.org/library.html
Arbitrary Precision
Having spent all of a minute to thing about this, wouldn't a multi-band/multi-protocol gizmo give the ability to find location in 2-space (if not 3-space) to an arbitrary level of precision? Example: the FM station signal locates the car in (x,y) with a circular error probable of 200 meters. AM station signals reduce it to a CEP of 10 meters (waves hands a lot now), and the radar leaks from airports reduce it to 2 meters....) Made up gedanken example, but it does seem feasible to me, gentle