She's dragged off the trail. Her husband notices and notifies the police.
She halts during a physical confrontation. Her friend calls to check up on her, and calls the police when she can't be reached.
She crashes and becomes incapacitated. Someone checks her location after she fails to meet up.
In reality, sports enthusiasts already use expensive tools for this. But the point of my comment wasn't about my affluent friend. It was about similar disadvantaged people facing actual dangers.
Nerds complaining about privacy, while the only threat they face is increased cholesterol levels, just seems so trite.
Awareness is good. Zealotry isn't.
How would he notice unless he was actively watching? And what constitutes “off” the trail, anyway? If she strays off the trail for whatever reason, would she have to remember that her husband (or anyone else) might be watching and call the police to intrude on what might be a situation not amenable to improvement by armed personnel?
> She halts during a physical confrontation. Her friend calls to check up on her, and calls the police when she can't be reached.
How would the police help after a confrontation already has taken place? How fast is the police, really?
> She crashes and becomes incapacitated. Someone checks her location after she fails to meet up.
All right, in this case it would actually help. But this does not mean that she should have this capability turned on all the time, 24/7; only while she is doing a physically dangerous activity. Like going hiking – it’s normal to leave word of your planned route, in case of emergency. But not all the time.
Your “nerds” comment is insulting and demeaning.
Nearby here, recently, a woman was ambushed and taken off into the woods, and has since vanished.
Supposing hypothetically that her hypothetical tracking beacon was emitting several hundred meters off into the unexplored woods, maybe someone would have noticed. Hypothetically. Sorry.
It's uncommon for bicyclers to go off course. Bikes don't navigate well through trees. And no one wants to leave their valuable possession behind.
And I was being terse before. Normally there would be some attempted contact beforehand.
> How would the police help after a confrontation already has taken place? How fast is the police, really?
In a kidnapping or injury scenario, time is of importance. Alerting the authorities (or anyone nearby, really) can save a life. If first responders wait additional hours because they were alerted too late, that person may die.
People who travel tell people when they expect to return. If they leave on a three-hour trip, and experience catastrophe thirty minutes in, it may be 2.5 to 5+ hours before someone makes an emergency call.
> All right, in this case it would actually help. But this does not mean that she should have this capability turned on all the time, 24/7; only while she is doing a physically dangerous activity. Like going hiking – it’s normal to leave word of your planned route, in case of emergency. But not all the time.
Sure. I never suggested around-the-clock monitoring.
She -- and her bicycling friends -- have been carrying tracking equipment for years. They plot their courses and compete on sprint times.
So they are totally used to surveillance. It took me by surprise that so many HNers found the concept anathema.
> Your “nerds” comment is insulting and demeaning.
I guess. It was mostly tongue-in-cheek. I'm one of them.
Sorry for the poor language. It was unwarranted.
