Re: Shades of J Orwell

John P. Mullen wrote: 
LuGo wrote:

John P. Mullen wrote:
 Falcon wrote:


In article <43b2ae6f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"John P. Mullen" <jomullen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Falcon wrote:

In article <43acc395@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"John P. Mullen" <jomullen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


An Mac Tíre Bán; (Whitewolf) wrote:



On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:06:34 -0000, "mul" <ecobag_NOSPAM_@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:




Subject: England to track every car movement..


----------------------

Britain will be first country to monitor every car journey


From 2006 Britain will be the first country where every journey by 





every car will be monitored
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 22 December 2005

Britain is to become the first country in the world where the movements
of all vehicles on the roads are recorded. A new national surveillance
system will hold the records for at least two years.



http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/article334686.ece



They can (and probably do) track anyone here (USA) through their cell phone...
They all come with a GPS sender now... I wouldn't be surprised to find that our
cars have them secretly as well...

But the old staying goes... If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to
fear...

Ray

--




The GPS sender is normally inactive. It turns on if you dial 911, for
obvious reasons or if you turn it on manually.

However, every call is recorded and the tower used is part of the record.

John Mullen 





I've never read such unadulterated crap.

--
Falcon:





Obviously, you don't know beans about how cell phones work.

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/09/17/Worldandnation/Cell_phone_trails_sna.shtml


John Mullen 





Nor do you.
You mentioned the so-called "GPS sender", not me.

--
Falcon:





Actually, I do.

And, you comment reveals even more ignorance, since the GPS sender is a separate issue.



What GPS sender? Standard mobile phones have no such thing. There are a few phones that include some form of GPS receiver, but very few are in use. Having said that, some US mobile networks like to call the fact that they record your approximate position as a matter of course, GPS. It usually isn't.
Mobile logons can be pin-pointed fairly accurately by triangulating mast signal strengths, but it has nothing to do with global positioning satellites. Some mobile carriers, like Virgin, offer the facility to disable positioning, but they still record that data. It just means they don't automatically pass on positioning data to 911 centers and potential text message advertisers, which happens by default in most cases. So the idea that law enforcement needs a court order to obtain this information is complete bull*** in practice. They're under obligation to provide the information in the US if it is demanded by a court, though, so it is recorded whether the user disables the feature or not.
Still, it is not GPS. Its positioning data is an estimate calculated from signal strengths, which can vary according to local topography and conditions, and not a definite position to the same accuracy as GPS affords.

Luke


You are confusing two different systems. The original E911, which you are describing, uses triangularization, but is not practical in all areas. Around 1999, the FCC announced that a carrier could use GPS in an alternative system to support 911 calls. Here in southern New Mexico, the providers use GPS because in so many places, 1) there are not enough antennas to effect triangularization and 2) it is more cost effective to put a GPS receiver in each phone than to set up the equipment for E911.

Nationally, some carriers have switched almost entirely to GPS phones.

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/support/governmentgpse911.jsp

If you want, here are the gory details.

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/News_Releases/2001/nwl0127a.pdf


I stand corrected. Just as well I'm paranoid enough not to keep the battery in mine, then...

Luke
.

Loading