FCC chair says we’re too dependent on GPS and wants to explore ‘alternatives’.
-
It’s also just a generally bad idea to be too dependent on a single system.
You're saying this in the world where SMS is considered good for 2FA, and PSTN identifier is considered as good as your citizen's ID, and people's lives depend on systems incorporating NodeJS and Kubernetes. Yeah, by the way, Docker everywhere, and all the POSIX standardization and source-compatibility to allow different systems adhering to standards ... have lost to Linux just becoming another main target.
But yes! It's a bad idea. Also it's typical now for these systems to start lying in warzones where their owners don't want one of the sides to have satellite navigation. They then give shift maps or whatever to the side they want to win.
-
How do we call these assholes and tell them to get their heads out of Muskovitch's ass?
-
There's no reason why some sort of augmentation system couldn't improve the navigation situation with the big dig. Stick some low power beacons that provide GPS-like signal in the tunnel based on their predetermined location and we'll have GPS accounting for special relativity, general relativity and continental drift.
-
Is that the difference between when something like Google Maps has your general location and when it has your specific location?
-
Starlink is LEO, GPS is not.
-
Isn't GPS a US project?
-
Oh, so that's what that saucer is for.
-
And I'm sure that's a distinction politicians really care about. /s
Your answer is rational. US politicians are not, since they have an agenda to hand off their money and power to Trump and Elon.
-
three sats determine your accurate position. the fourth is for clock correction only.
-
Lat/Long is only valid if elevation is valid. You can't reference a lat/long that is miles into space... or beneath the crust of the earth.
-
No.
Satellites project a sphere, you need 4 in order to get to a singular point. I've outlined each step. Fourth isn't for clock correction only. And even outlined why sometimes 3 is okay, but that requires additional logic that many gps devices sometimes can't compute, and even outlined that the vast majority of devices will use way more than 4.
https://gisgeography.com/trilateration-triangulation-gps/
https://www.gps.gov/multimedia/tutorials/trilateration/ -
You know what's a great backup? The ability to read a map or use a compass. This is set up to get Starlink or another billionaire to own GPS.
-
It's like you're making my point for me.
-
Reject modernity, return to sextant.
-
A watch... or other simple gps device doesn't know what the elevation is.
Only one of the 2 selected points in a 3 satellite setup will be valid. And your device would have no idea which one is valid without elevation knowledge or a 4th satellite. Some devices can figure it out with just 3 satellites. Many/most won't. But ultimately it's the same thing. You need 4 pieces of input. Either 3 satellites AND elevation. Or 4 satellites.
So no. I've not made a point "for" you. You're just ignorant or specifically being obtuse on something you clearly don't understand.
-
A watch... or other simple gps device doesn't know what the elevation is.
My point, exactly
-
Which is why they'd need 4 satellites. Read the whole post. Read the given sources. Stop being stupid.
-
it doesn't work once you leave the atmosphere.
Fun fact: just this past week an experiment on a lunar lander confirmed that GPS signals can be detected from the surface of the moon. I don't know if those signals can give any kind of location precision, but it is an interesting finding.
-
I did read the whole post. Stop being an asshole.
