Facebook Lets Users Prompt Danger Alert 19
Facebook's Safety Check is a handy service that allows people to let their friends and family know they are okay in an event of emergency. The social giant announced the next major step for this feature. From a BBC report: Facebook is to enable members to trigger its Safety Check service themselves if a dangerous event occurs near them. Until now, it could only be activated by Facebook staff. Safety Check lets people notify their friends and family that they are safe in the aftermath of a natural disaster or human conflict in their area. The recent earthquake in Italy marked the 25th time this year that it has been triggered. Safety notifications have reached one billion people in 2016 alone, the firm said. In the previous two years combined (2014 and 2015) it had only been activated 11 times. The Safety Check Facebook team uses three criteria to decide whether the tool should be switched on -- how many human lives are affected, the extent of that impact and the duration of the event.
Anthony Weiner used this feature! (Score:3)
Weiner was a beta tester with his Carlos Danger alerts.
But nobody came to rescue him when Huma cut him off.
Re: That's almost one horrific even per week! (Score:1)
Duuuuaaah yeah! They relly our! They a bunchof fuckies who dustroy thinks. Like are lifes.
Re: (Score:1)
Trump personally murdered me and literally everyone in my entire state last Tuesday because he's racist.
He's just SO EVIL, which is why 100% of the Republicans voted for him and nobody in the Republican party opposed him at all whatsoever.
current criteria are crap (Score:3, Interesting)
Istanbul airport bombing triggered an alert but the coup didn't. The airport bombing was much more localized and thus a threat to a much smaller number of people.
This seems easily abused. . . (Score:2)
. . . . for example, if you want to disrupt an event, especially if using a throwaway account. Cannot find the link, but recently, a housewife heard a RUMOR of a gun incident at or near a school, spread the word on social media, and disrupted that school for several days.
I didn't see the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
I did not see the day coming where internet service was more available and easy to access than phone (wireless or landline) in a natural or Human disaster-type event. Just always assumed that if wireless telephony and landlines were out that there would be no internet connectivity possible, and no communication in general in that situation without ham radio operators or mobile comm stations.
It just seems weird. Don't get me wrong, I might be missing a big piece of something here, but it just doesn't seem feasible to be able to alert others of your well-being via 'net if there aren't general comms available.
Re: (Score:2)
A former LEO coworker of mine has an app that alerts all of his contacts in a predetermined group if he pushes the button for the app on his home screen. Other emergency workers will tell you that an SMS message has a lot more chance of getting through as a small blip of data than a connected voice call to each of your relatives when all circuits are busy.
Agreed but it depends on your device, provider, and network type. E.g. 3G via ATT doesn't use a control channel on EDGE or GPRS (GSM) to send a text as a control channel message like has been done for years and years since text began; ATT uses a 3G connection to implement an IP data packet(s) that send the message as an app-dest IP conversation (not sure if it's UDP; sorry if it is for using 'conversation'). When 3G is congested, it's difficult for the device to 'get a word in edgewise' on the uplink chan
Re: (Score:2)
Most people have cellphones now, with no landline phone backup. In an extended power outage, it's likely the landlines will keep running on backup generators long after the cell towers' 4hr batteries (mandated by the FCC after hurricane Katrina) have run out of juice. Fortunately, most people still have landlines for their INTERNET access. That is assuming you have some power, while the area around you does not, for whatever reason.
Of course I would resort to a quick email to friends and family, not some c
Dangerous (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would it have to be? It seems well-suited to our current number of emergencies.
Danger, Emergency (Score:2)