Mixing
THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system
No action is required.
Type: Milkyway Empire
The World
In the near future:
- we discover FTL
- we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"
- in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population
Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.
It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me
"remote areas"
- Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)
- Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into
- Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)
- Areas without electricity
Partial Solution
I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with
- antennae
- Raspberry Pi
- solar Panels
- Batteries
- load speakers
I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)
Question
Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?
Assume that all major countries want to contribute. (The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)
reality-check communication
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system
No action is required.
Type: Milkyway Empire
The World
In the near future:
- we discover FTL
- we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"
- in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population
Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.
It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me
"remote areas"
- Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)
- Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into
- Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)
- Areas without electricity
Partial Solution
I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with
- antennae
- Raspberry Pi
- solar Panels
- Batteries
- load speakers
I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)
Question
Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?
Assume that all major countries want to contribute. (The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)
reality-check communication
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
3
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system
No action is required.
Type: Milkyway Empire
The World
In the near future:
- we discover FTL
- we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"
- in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population
Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.
It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me
"remote areas"
- Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)
- Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into
- Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)
- Areas without electricity
Partial Solution
I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with
- antennae
- Raspberry Pi
- solar Panels
- Batteries
- load speakers
I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)
Question
Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?
Assume that all major countries want to contribute. (The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)
reality-check communication
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system
No action is required.
Type: Milkyway Empire
The World
In the near future:
- we discover FTL
- we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"
- in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population
Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.
It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me
"remote areas"
- Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)
- Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into
- Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)
- Areas without electricity
Partial Solution
I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with
- antennae
- Raspberry Pi
- solar Panels
- Batteries
- load speakers
I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)
Question
Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?
Assume that all major countries want to contribute. (The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)
reality-check communication
reality-check communication
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
asked 4 hours ago
Michael Kutz
1,5951411
1,5951411
3
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
3
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago
3
3
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:
In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.
If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:
Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.
Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?
If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.
Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.
So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.
Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.
But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.
Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.
So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:
In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.
If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:
In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.
If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:
In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.
If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:
In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.
If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
answered 3 hours ago
Renan
34.8k881178
34.8k881178
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
Wouldn't radioactive particles potentially contaminate the planet's atmosphere?
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
@KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
– Renan
3 hours ago
4
4
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
– Cort Ammon
3 hours ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
You had me at "detonating nukes".
– GrandmasterB
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:
Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:
Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:
Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:
Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
answered 3 hours ago
KITTENDESTROYER-9000
2214
2214
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
– Michael Kutz
2 hours ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
@MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
– KITTENDESTROYER-9000
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.
Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?
If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.
Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.
So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.
Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.
But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.
Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.
So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.
Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?
If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.
Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.
So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.
Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.
But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.
Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.
So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.
Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?
If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.
Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.
So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.
Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.
But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.
Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.
So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.
Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?
If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.
Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.
So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.
Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.
But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.
Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.
So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
answered 41 mins ago
Elliot Schrock
1,769613
1,769613
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
– DqwertyC
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126675%2fthis-is-a-test-of-the-galactic-emergency-alert-system%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
3
It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
4 hours ago
vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
4 hours ago
It depends on how loud the loudspeakers are and how much manpower you can devote to their construction. The louder they are, the further apart they can be and the fewer you will need. In any case you're going to need a tremendously huge number, and it will take a similarly huge number of man-hours to make them. I think you're better off just requiring by law all new cellphones to be able to connect to satellites. It doesn't have to be a good connection, just enough for text. Combine it with loudspeakers in cities and billboards on highways and you're set.
– Ryan_L
2 hours ago