GPS World

Category: Opinions

  • Stonewalling, Mapping, Google, and Fines

    After a long investigation, the FCC hit Google with a resoundingly soft penalty for stonewalling the FCC inquiry into its controversial street-mapping program. Google was picking up a payload of sensitive information from home wireless networks from 2007 through 2010. This included emails, passwords, and Internet usage history. The FCC declared that the data collection was technically legal because the information gathered was unencrypted. However, the FCC stated that, “for many months Google deliberately impeded and delayed the bureau’s investigation” and fined Google a paltry $25,000 for their behavior. After initially denying any wrongdoing, Google admitted in a blog entry in 2010 that it had made a mistake by collecting the data.

    Google and foursquare shared a panel at the GPS-Wireless conference, an interesting pairing given foursquare’s recent announcement that it is betting on the future of open source map data. New API pricing of Google Maps has a number of solution providers shopping for mapping alternatives. Google says that only the top .35 percent of Google map users is affected by the pricing (under 25,000 map views a day are still free). foursquare was among them, and re-launched its web maps using MapBox based on OpenStreetMap data. “These maps are adequate,” said Holger Luedorf of foursquare. “This helps the open street community and it felt like it was right thing to do. Google is very good and we will continue to use their products elsewhere.”

    Interesting tidbits. Heard at the “O’Reilly Where” and “GPS-Wireless” conferences this month:

    “People will pay for apps for family and safety. There is real monetization in this realm. When was the last time that people put an alarm on their house and paid for it with ads?”

    “I see nothing to augmented reality. I don’t think it will go anywhere. It feels like I’m looking through a toy camera viewer.”

    “Any location technology that has tried to compete against GPS has failed. They are useful but can’t compete head on against GPS. They now have a second life as a technology that supplements core location, which is GPS.”

    “Consumers are willing to share location if you can give them something in exchange of value. Not every company does that.”

    What’s happening to the vehicle aftermarket? It used to be that the vehicle aftermarket would lead innovation and benefited from a significant time-to-market advantage. The traditional aftermarket is currently struggling to find its special niche. The world has changed and the aftermarket is having a tough time rivaling connected vehicles. In the past, the aftermarket also offered consumers more value, but OEMS have gotten lighter on their feet. The aftermarket is now the consumer market, such as smartphones.

    Who will capture the indoor location frontier? Companies are lining up to get a shot at the indoor location market. Companies like Meridian, Google, aisle411, Point Inside, and Micello, and many others, have found their own niches. Meridian has staked out a niche for indoor navigation and mapping that is managed by the customer. “We aim to be the WordPress of indoor location,” says Jeff Hardison of Meridian. Meridian uses Wi-Fi when available and provides interactive mapping and navigation for various types of indoor venues including the American Museum of Natural History. For retail, the system can be tied into inventory systems to pinpoint items on shelves. One store has added advertisements for books on the indoor navigation system and reports 33 percent of users are clicking on the ads.

    Search rules location-based mobile ads. Locally targeted ads that accompany mobile search results are much more potent than locally targeted display ads. xAd, a mobile local ad network, reports significantly greater click-through rates for targeted local search (7 percent) compared to targeted local display ads ( 0.6 percent). Clicks alone don’t fully satisfy advertisers who want to see measured outcome. xAd self-reports secondary action rates of targeted local search ads of 37 percent and targeted local display ads of only five percent. Secondary actions include calls and requests for driving directions.

    It’s a race. Local and nationally targeted mobile advertising is currently neck and neck. This year, mobile local ad revenues have caught up with nationally targeted mobile ads, for a combined $2.7 billion in revenue, says BIA/Kelsey Group. This is an increase from last year, in which local ads were estimated to be 45 percent of total mobile ad revenues. According to projections by BIA/Kelsey Group, local mobile ads will exceed national ads in 2016 and total $5 billion of the estimated $7.7 billion in mobile ad revenues.

    Not everyone is convinced. “The financials for mobile advertising aren’t there for us. We won’t do it until our customers are asking for it,” says Bryan Trussel of Glympse at the GPS-Wireless show. “We tried it and got advertisements for toe fungus and Playtex on our screen. It wasn’t worth it. We don’t want generic banner ads. We’ll wait.”

  • Mobile Devices Galore

    Few, if any, technology products reach a worldwide audience hotter than mobile devices. I’m talking about smartphones, tablets, handhelds, and even notebooks to some extent. When’s the last time you bought a desktop computer?

    As I mentioned in my March 23 Geospatial Solutions column, at the GIS in Action conference I asked a Google presenter if he thought the mobile phone is going to be the primary mobile device people will carry. He said, “No, it’s going to be the tablet computer.”

    The competition certainly seems to be between the smartphone and the tablet, or maybe a hybrid version of the two. From a geospatial user perspective, we’ve been showered these past few months with tablet device offerings.

    1. Kindle Fire. The most significant tablet computer introduced since the iPad two years ago. Its low price has opened up the tablet market to a new level of adopters. Kindle Fire is the poster child for the many, many Android-based tablets on the market from Sony, Samsung, Motorola, LG, ASUS, etc.

    Salient features: Wi-Fi, Android operating system, web browsing, less than US$200. It’s all about the low price.

    Oops: Doesn’t run the latest Google Android operating system.

    Geospatial apps: ArcGIS for Kindle Fire

    Adoption: 5+ million sold since its introduction last fall.

    Kindle-Fire-2012

    2. Apple iPad. This product started the new revolution in tablet computing. Apple’s proprietary style may hurt it as competition from Google Android devices heats up.

    Salient Features: The defacto standard for tablet computing. Apps, apps, apps, and more apps. Shares the same operating system as the iPhone and iTouch.

    Oops: One trick pony. There is only one iPad. Google will license Android to almost anyone. Closed Bluetooth so you can’t interface to external instruments (GPS, laser rangefinders, etc.).

    Geospatial apps: ArcGIS for iOS, iCMTGIS, iGIS, GeoJot, GISPro

    Adoption: 75+ million sold since its introduction two years ago. The latest iPad sold 3 million units in the first three days it was available.

    Apple-iPad-2012

    3. Windows-based tablets. Acer Iconia Tab Series, Samsung Series 7. Windows-based tablet computers at near iPad prices.

    Salient Features: Microsoft Windows 7 operating system. GIS software compatibility.

    Oops: Battery life, expensive.

    Geospatial apps: Take your pick. Virtually any GIS app designed for Windows XP/7 will run on these tablets.

    Adoption: Weak. Although Microsoft has been promoting tablet computers for 10+ years, they are getting beat up in the tablet market, at least with the general public. The Windows operating system still has a lot of value with professional users due to software/workflow compatibility. Be on the lookout for Windows 8 and Microsoft Office apps (optimized for low power, etc.) as Microsoft tries to leverage the power of Windows and match the appeal of the Ipad.

    Look for more coverage on smartphones and handhelds soon.

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Grand Setting for a Grand Summit

    Most of Munich is an ultra-modern German city, albeit one of the most expensive cities in Europe, where you can travel anywhere by tram, automobile, S-Bahn, rail or taxi. But why bother when you have the opportunity and thrill of walking through the old city center and have Bavarians greet you with “May God greet you” or “God bless­”? — what a way to say hello. That experience, which brings back fond memories — more on that in my main column — combined with the wonderful aromas from bakeries and early morning baristas hard at work, which are hard to pass by, made the short walk to the Residenz München seem all too short; and then you are there — greeted with the magnificence of the Munich Satellite Summit venue.

    The Residenz München served as the seat of government and residence of Bavarian dukes, electors and kings from 1508 to 1918. The Residenz began life in 1385 as a castle on the outskirts of München and subsequently transformed over the centuries into a magnificent palace or Schloss, its buildings and gardens extending further into the center of town or Stadtmitte. And this is the incredible venue for the Munich Satellite Summit. It is breathtakingly magnificent and yet for all its age and history the Residenz serves its varied and ever-changing purposes well, and certainly is the perfect venue for the summit. This is the 10th anniversary of the summit in this location, and hopefully it will never change. Anything else now, with so much grandeur and history, would be a huge disappointment.

    As you ascend steps that have been trod and worn down daily by kings, dukes, barons, and commoners alike for more than 625 years, it comes home that you are in a very special place. If that is not enough, the König’s guarded banquet room, which is still set with silver place settings, silverware, and crystal goblets to feed more than 100 at one grand table, soon gives you a clue that you are someplace special. Whilst there are several large banquet rooms and court areas easily capable of holding the 400+ attendees, the organizers have wisely chosen to keep you moving from place to place to pique your interest in the old castle and to keep the blood flowing after sitting through a series of high-tech presentations.

    In the alte Schloss, the summit presentations are in one area, the company and sponsor booths are in another, and the German coffee and refreshments in yet another. This keeps you moving and also keeps the noise and modern-day distractions to a manageable level — plus, of course, it is perfect for networking. There are a myriad of interesting nooks and crannies for meet-ups and impromptu discussions. Fortunately the conveniently provided summit Wi-Fi signals penetrate the thick stone walls and are available in all meeting and presentation areas.

    The real danger of meeting in this iconic Bavarian palace is that you are constantly distracted by the beauty and history surrounding you. I constantly reminded myself I was attending a 21st-century satellite summit and not a whirlwind tour of gorgeous historical Bavarian architecture. Although I must admit I managed to do a little of the latter in between presentations and meetings. Just don’t tell my editor.

    Fortunately, lunch is served in-suite, so you do not have to leave the fabulous Schloss for sustenance — and what a gourmet lunch. You guessed it: the meals were fit for a King or König, certainly more than sufficient for a mere journalist. Although I must admit to being a bit worried since as a vegetarian, Germany does not exactly have the reputation of providing veggie substitutes for wurst und sauerbraten. However, to say I was happily surprised is putting it mildly.

    Frauleins Heike Haas and Bärbel Deisting, whom I cannot praise highly enough, the intrepid and unflappable organizers of this wonderful international event, had obviously warned their chef and he provided sumptuous vegetarian or “vegetarisch auf Deutsch,” options for every meal. My most common refrain at mealtimes, as I returned for seconds and thirds, was…are you sure this does not have any meat in it? The meals, snacks, and of course the coffee are not to be missed. You might miss five minutes of a presentation but don’t dare miss a meal.

    This was my first year to attend the Munich Summit as Alan Cameron, our intrepid editor-in-chief and now publisher, has always attended in the past. So most of the greetings went like this: “Hi Don, glad you are here. Where’s Alan?” My invariable response was, “Busy being the publisher.”

    The opening plenary, as it is so aptly named, took place in the Allerheiligen-Hofkirche, or Court Church of All Saints, and it was a fitting venue. The master of ceremonies opined that the Court Church of All Saints only took 11 years to complete in the 1800s, in direct contrast to the Galileo constellation, which has already been in existence for more than 11 years with…well, you get the point.

    Now for an historical note: King Ludwig 1 who commissioned the Court Church of All Saints married Therese of Saxe-Hildburghausen in October 1810 and the resulting wedding celebration was the occasion for the first ever Oktoberfest. Beer drinkers for the last 200 years are still celebrating that wedding. I know I did when I attended University in München more than 45 years ago, but that is a story for another time. And no, this is not the Neuschwanstein, Wagner loving, mad King Ludwig, who unfortunately after a lifetime of swimming forgot how at the crucial moment…that was his grandson.

     

  • Grüss Gott – Munich Satellite Summit

    There is a reason the Munich Satellite Summit is billed as a summit and not a symposium or conference. It’s a different atmosphere that invites group chats, informal get-togethers, and networking. One item of note that I came away with is that the Chinese are looking for help and partners for their PNT constellations, of which there appear to be three in the making. But asked point blank when they would finally release the full ICD specifications for receivers (a partial ICD has been released) the answer was the same as last year. They did not know when that might happen. It is hard to build receivers and support a specific program, much less three PNT constellations, when you don’t have the specifications.

    Grüss Gott! rang out across the ancient cobblestoned Marienplatz, home of the beautiful and timeless Glockenspiel or mechanized clock tower as I strolled along. The Glockenspeil is located in the heart of the old city of München, Germany and I passed it every morning as I strolled toward the Residenz München, which centuries ago was home and castle to the Kings of Bavaria. This particular beautiful spring morning the ancient castle was my destination and the incredible venue for the Munich Satellite Summit. Talk about location, location, location! (Read more about this incredible setting.)

    Plenary Session

    There were no less than 10 plenary speakers on opening night. In retrospect there should have only been five, but that is a lesson learned, as is the fact that the Chinese presenter was totally indecipherable. Even reading his slides I still could not understand a word he said. As an organizer of such events, and yes I know from experience, you quickly learn that poor and even unintelligible speakers are just a curse that comes with the territory. However, the musical interludes presented by an a cappella musical group were outstanding. This was the highlight of the evening, which tells you something about the plenary — it was not bad actually as plenaries go, everything worked like clockwork. It was just a tad bit too long. No one ever hopes…well maybe that is backwards…actually everyone hopes to attend a plenary that is actually informative but it rarely occurs. The summit plenary wasn’t bad; the food, drink and networking opportunities were great, but next year I vote for more songs, fewer indecipherable speeches and, until they get their act together, the only Chinese item on the plenary or any summit agenda should be egg rolls.

    This is not an expression of Xenophobia or bigotry, not at all — I just hate to waste my time. I spent several hours listening to the Chinese presentations during the summit and literally understanding about 10% or less, and unless I, and everyone else missed it, there was absolutely nothing new announced. It was a total rehash of the National Space Symposiums uninformative Chinese forum from last April.

    The one item of note that I did comprehend is that the Chinese are looking for help and partners for their PNT constellations, of which there appear to be three in the making. But asked point blank when they would finally release the full ICD specifications for receivers (a partial ICD has been released), the answer was the same as last year. They did not know when that might happen. It is hard to build receivers and support a specific program, much less three PNT constellations, when you don’t have the specifications.

    I met Joel Szabat, the senior government representative at the plenary who is currently serving as a senior official in the U.S. Department of Transportation. Joel and I have corresponded but never met, so this was a great opportunity to get acquainted. And I must add that Joel’s comments during the plenary session were right on the mark. They were short, concise, and to the point. Very well done. If only others had emulated him.

    Other notable U.S. attendees were Colonel Bernie Gruber, director of the GPS Directorate, who gave a well received but brief GPS status briefing, and some of his staff along with Hank Skalski, the Civil GPS liaison at HQ AFSPC; Ron Hatch from John Deere (Starfire); as well as an old friend, Dr. Per Enge, director of the GPS laboratory and senior professor in the Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics at Stanford University. Representatives from Lockheed-Martin Space Systems and other U.S. companies were present as well, so the U.S. space program was well represented.

    One of the Royal Lions Guarding the entrance
    to the Munich Satellite Summit.

    Summit

    There is a reason the Munich Satellite Summit is billed as a summit and not a symposium or conference. There is a different atmosphere that invites group chats, informal get-togethers and networking. It may sound strange; however, in an ancient German palace the atmosphere is a bit less formal than at the National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colorado, which is the largest Space Symposium in the world. The Munich Satellite Summit will garner ~400 international attendees while at the Broadmoor Resort there will be closer to 5,000 attending. So the summit is definitely a bit more intimate and less rushed. More conducive to networking, which in my estimation is the real value of the summit. At the summit you can easily visit all the booths in 30 minutes or less and in Colorado Springs you will be lucky to get through all the booths in less than three days of dedicated booth-hopping. In Germany everyone is a bit more relaxed, and at the National Space Symposium everyone is trying to see and attend everything; it is definitely a bit more frenetic and yet both venues are amazing in their own way and each event has its place in the scheme of things.

    Both the Munich Space Summit and the National Space Symposium, which includes Cyber 1.2 (15-19 April 2012), are about more than GPS and PNT, yet these are the predominant themes at both events…and this is only as it should be… Who me? Biased!

    eLORAN

    Seriously, the Munich Space Summit is naturally more European Space Agency (ESA) and Galileo-oriented than the National Space Symposium, and yet this year one of the main themes and topics of conversation was eLORAN and the USCG-supported UrsaNav foray into that endeavor.

    My GPS World column on that timely topic came out on March 14, the first full day of the summit, so it was a constant topic of conversation for me and I was happy to hear that sections from the article were quoted numerous times during the summit. Many were happily surprised by the UrsaNav efforts and even more surprised by the USCG support.

    A dedicated eLORAN session included Professor David Last from the UK and a speaker from the subcontinent, who told some pretty hair-raising pirate stories to illustrate his points of why a strong, impervious to jamming, low-frequency timing and PNT system is needed in his part of the world and is generally a good idea on a global basis. I would agree — when being attacked by pirates, knowing immediately exactly where and when you are can be of critical importance when seeking help. It was an entertaining, informative session that was standing-room only.

    During the entire summit, I only heard the word LightSquared used as an expletive. Most everyone said…thank goodness that “§”&%” is over… or words to that effect. Most everyone marveled that it took a year to get through the whole fiasco and wondered what will happen next…it is like waiting for the other shoe to drop…but there was an obvious huge sigh of relief and then inevitably comments like “…see, that’s why the United States needs an eLORAN system. ” Point taken I hope.

    And the U.S. does desperately need a proven high-power LF Stratum-1 timing signal that covers the U.S., approaches to the U.S. as well as portions of Canada and Latin America. Faithful readers know that I often quote the statistic that 90% of GPS users globally use GPS for time. Time and frequency standards are critical to our national infrastructure, even more so since GPS freely provides time to a very high degree of accuracy for all and using the GPS timing source has become ubiquitous among most U.S. government agencies.

    Time is critically important to all we do — more so than most of us ever take the time to consider. However the subject of time fascinates many. I remember a conference on timing a few months ago in Boulder, Colorado, at NIST with numerous timing briefings given by an old friend, Judah Levine. The topics included, “What is Time?”, “What is a Second?”, “What is a Leap Second?” and “The Importance of Frequency” — I don’t remember anyone leaving the room while Judah was speaking.

    Some of the more critical factors concerning time as associated with GPS and eLORAN are that unlike mechanical devices — such as an INS (inertial navigation system) that display your position — GPS and eLORAN signals contain data that informs you when you are as well as where you are. GPS and eLORAN can give you the day, date and time as well as a geographical or spatial position, which is crucial data for automated scheduling of activities that is so prevalent in many of our critical infrastructures today.

    I and several subject matter experts will discuss aspects of eLORAN and more during a GPS World-sponsored webinar in June 2012. Stay tuned for more information concerning that event.

    Other Forays

    Munich is a big modern city with all that brings with it and it has changed a great deal in the last 45 years, since I attended University there. I helped edit the university newspaper, worked as a disc jockey at Radio Free Europe to pay my way though university, and worked as a roving correspondent. See, I really have been in this business for a long time in one way or another. So, being the intrepid journalist I have always been, only much older and wiser and with much less hair to lose, I scheduled side trips to Astrium, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, VW-Porsche, and NATO AWACS. Do you see a trend developing?

    The Astrium personnel and the factory tour were very special, and you will be hearing more about both at another time. Astrium is building several of the key components of the Galileo satellites as a subcontractor to OHB Technology AG in Bremen, Germany.

    Bottom Line

    There is so much to say about the Munich Satellite Summit and of course the extra curricular excursions; it is impossible to do so in just one or two columns, so I will be covering different aspects over the next several months. Bottom Line: the Munich Satellite Summit is a seminal event and a treat not to be missed. I want to thank our Editor-in-Chief and Publisher Alan Cameron for allowing me to attend this year, and I hope that Alan remains so busy that I will have the opportunity to personally greet you with Grüss Gott in München in February 2013. Tschüss!

    Until then, happy navigating.

     

     

  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Past, Present and Future Impact on GIS

    By Art Kakinski, GISP

    My first exposure to Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) was in 1972, serving as a young Ensign on a WWII class destroyer. The UAV was called DASH(Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter). It was a small, counter-rotating rotor drone helicopter used to extend the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) reach of a destroyer. It carried Mark46 torpedoes but could also carry nuclear depth charges. The disappointing characteristic of DASH is that it had a nasty habit of either disappearing over the horizon never to be seen again or, worse yet, crashing into the superstructure of its mother ship. 1970s technology just wasn’t up to the complex task of controlling such a vehicle.

    Enter 2012, and UAV technology looks like science fiction. My recent participation at the USSOCOM TNT exposed me to some new developments in military technology and UAVs in particular. Most of you are familiar with the better known UAVs such as the Predator, Global Hawk, or smaller Shadows, but the number of UAVs has grown exponentially with some of the most interesting developments occurring in small UAVs and persistent surveillance. With more than 100 UAVs in today’s market, it’s impossible to do a comprehensive column about UAVs, but just like the blind men looking at an elephant, the following is one GIS guy’s view of this growing market.

    Hot New UAV Systems

    Building on early lessons learned with vehicles like DASH, the Boeing A160 is a UAV helicopter, but the similarity to DASH ends there. Its design incorporates new technologies not previously used in helicopters, allowing for greater payload, endurance, and altitude than any helicopter currently in operation. The experimental program has ambitious goals of a 2,500-mile range and 24-hour endurance with a 1,200 pound payload. The 35-foot helo flies autonomously rather than relying on real-time human control with speeds over 140 knots.

    A reoccurring theme that has been presented at GEOINT and other ISR conferences is that many UAVs currently in use are proving to be almost as expensive to operate as manned aircraft. Because of this, engineers have been looking into alternate technology, including persistent surveillance. One example is the Long-Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV) a hybrid blimp and aircraft.

     

    The Lockheed Martin vehicle shown here will be tested in-theater this year. It is designed to operate unmanned and untethered at 20,000 ft. for weeks at a time carrying a 2,500-lb. intel payload. On first glance the LEMV looks like a sitting duck, but based on actual tests the low static pressure, lighter than air, aerodynamic lifting body is very survivable. At GEOINT, Maj. Gen. James O. Poss, USAF, said that if you are lucky enough to hit it from the ground with small-arms fire, it might come down next week.

    UAVs at TNT

    There were numerous UAVs at TNT, but the two that particularly caught my attention and imagination were two inexpensive vehicles that I believe could be game changers for the GIS community.

    One was a very light weight UAV from a small Ohio company called UAVision.They were flying UAVs that on first glance looked like toys, but the composite skins and advanced electronics quickly shattered that first impression. The vehicles are battery powered and almost silent in flight with loiter times of about 30 minutes. Weighing 4-8 pounds, they were easily hand launched and fly autonomously once in the air.

    The operator programs the flight path into a GIS display and the aircraft follows the programed path, ultimately doing a soft landing on to the grass next to the operator. Shown here is the live video feed from the camera on the UAV overlaid with the programed flight path (orange polygon). The resolution of the video was excellent and the image was surprisingly stable. They were also testing the ability to locate, identify, and track RFID tags from the air.

    This vehicle is designed to ultimately meet new UAS standards that are included in a recent FAA Bill. The bill, signed by the President February 14, includes important provisions regarding the integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the national airspace system. One provision could have a very rapid impact on the GIS community. It allows government agencies and first responders to fly very small UAS (4.4lbs or less) within 90 days if they meet certain requirements. The goal is to permit law enforcement and firefighters immediate access to these small systems for lifesaving purposes and to increase public safety. Some believe that this technology may be readily available for surveying and mapping within three years.

    Although 4.4 pounds doesn’t sound like a lot, UAVision’s current aircraft already has shown the ability to capture and geo-reference the imagery. 4.4 pounds seems to be a safety benchmark that puts the UAV in the same category as birds. Statistically, most manned aircraft can survive a collision with birds up to 4.4 pounds, so the low-flying UAV would pose a minimal hazard to manned aircraft. Unlike current big UAVs that have six- and seven-figure price tags, a complete UAVision system can come in as cheap as $30,000. I could easily envision GIS operations using these systems for surveillance or even low-cost imagery capture.

    The second vehicle that caught my attention was a hybrid air system from Sofcoast. Sofcoast created an aerostat the combines the benefits of a tethered balloon with the stability and directionality of an aircraft with control surfaces. This could be the most elegantly simple and low=cost solution to persistent aerial surveillance I’ve seen.

     

    The operator launches the aerostat silently using a modified fishing rod and reel. Once in position, the clear vehicle is very unobtrusive. It silently monitors the area below and has the added benefit of being almost invisible at night. I can easily see this being used for security during large public events or in response to natural disasters as a survivor search tool or to catch or deter would-be looters. To get an idea of the quality and stability of the video feed from the system, click on the following video:

    Future Systems

    There are numerous articles on the Internet that explain some rather exotic UAVs in development.

    The Propulsive Wing is a new patented aerodynamic platform that integrates an embedded, distributed cross-flow fan propulsion system within a thick wing. It looks like a fat flying wing but has the potential to carry very heavy payloads with very stable flight characteristics and short takeoff and landing.

    The Nano Hummingbird or Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) is a tiny remote-controled aircraft built to resemble and fly like a hummingbird, developed under the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The Hummingbird is equipped with a small video camera for surveillance and reconnaissance purposes and, for now, operates in the air for up to 11 minutes. It can fly outdoors, or enter a doorway to investigate indoor environments.

     

    Honeywell completed delivery of an initial order for 90 RQ-16 T-Hawk “hover and stare” micro air vehicle (MAV) systems to the U.S. Navy in December 2011, for use in detecting roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Zephyr is a lightweight solar-powered UAV which was originally designed and built by the United Kingdom defense firm Qinetiq. The carbon-fiber aircraft uses sunlight to charge a lithium sulfur battery during the day, which powers the aircraft at night. It holds the current UAV endurance record with an 82-hour flight at an altitude of 61,000 feet.

    On the really creepy side are rumors of Nano UAVs the size of insects. Following is a video clip from the University of Pennsylvania showing a swarm of UAV quad copters flying in formation and showing an almost collective intelligence.

     

    The “fly on the wall” may soon be a reality, controlled by your GIS technician.

    Follow us on Twitter.

  • Companies Look for Alternatives to Google Maps, but Location Giant Chugs Along…

    The big news at the recent O’Reilly Where 2.0 and GPS-Wireless conferences, both located in the San Francisco Bay Area, may be continued industry fallout from Google’s decision to start charging higher volume users. Location-based services may have jumped the shark, as one Nokia executive said at GPS-Wireless, but such deals as Foursquare’s partnership with American Express can only help grow consumer awareness and drive mobile purchases. Indoor positioning and connected vehicles continued to be a hot topic at both Where 2.0 and GPS-Wireless. Yet, at least one executive at GPS-Wireless said that “the year of LBS has come and gone — and nobody noticed it.”

     

    SAN FRANCISCO — A few companies in the location industry have decided to change mapping vendors in the wake of Google’s decision to start charging companies when their sites averaged 25,000 map views per day. Around the time of the recent 2012 Mobile World Congress, Foursquare said it would move from using Google Maps to user-contributed map service OpenStreetMap. The company said Google’s recent price increases prompted the change.

    Foursquare did not change mapping vendors because of the quality of the maps, said Holger Luedorf, Foursquare vice president and head of business development. “Google Maps are a great product. We are big fans of openness, but it was not the lack of quality why we switched,” he said at GPS-Wireless 2012.

    But while some companies are heading to other places because of the Google charging policy, the company says it is still doing well. “We did announce that Google was going to start charging for 25,000 or more [map hits]. In terms of usage, we have actually gone up since the announcement,” said Jay Akkad, Google product manager, mobile local ads, also at GPS-Wireless conference.

    One of the big topics at GPS-Wireless is the idea that the term location-based services has “jumped the shark” in terms of consumer awareness and acceptance. “What the hell is LBS? It is an enabling technology,” said Duncan McCall, PlaceIQ co-founder and CEO. “The mythical Starbucks LBS deal does not make me care. We now have advertisers who have a particular [return on investment] they are looking for.”

    At least one speaker, on a venture capital panel, said that the expression “LBS” hasn’t been useful in defining the market in at least eight years. “The huge opportunity is not location — there are tons of 100K-a-year-guys staying at the Red Roof Inn and not the Four Seasons. The huge opportunity is how people shape their habits — and location is one way,” said Prioleau Advisors’ Marc Prioleau. “Banner ads push to consumers, but the objective is loyalty. It’s the ‘we know where you are and where you go’ model.”

    In all of the talk about LBS, the usual “who pays for it” was a hot topic at GPS-Wireless. “With 150,000 ads on a platform, [the consumer] doesn’t have to pay for it,” Luedorf said.

    For the navigation piece of LBS, it still is the one area consumers know about and want, panel members said.

    “Navigation still is hot. More than half of our users choose to use carrier-branded navigation,” said Brian Salisbury, TCS director of business development. “Consumers will start marginalizing a [paid for] service when it stops producing for them. The value for the consumer is if it is bundled with other services—sometimes that bundle is subsidized.”

    People still are paying for navigation, despite attendees saying that a freemium model is the future, said Kris Kolodziej, Verizon Wireless associate director of cloud and location services. “Consumers are always going to find options. Maybe they will be looking at premium traffic [in the future],” he said.

    Groupon, which presented at GPS-Wireless, announced at the recent 2012 Mobile World Congress in Barcelona that one quarter of its users purchased vouchers through a mobile service, a triple increase to more than 9 million deals. The company also said that LBS and proximity-based sales will increase because it plans to roll out mobile service in more than 30 countries soon. Currently, the company has its daily-deal service, online, in 48 countries.

    “The core foundation of our company is the daily deal. Groupon Now goes into the core of location — where we are expanding into 30 markets — so location doesn’t get more specific,” said Andreas Lieber, Groupon director of mobile partnerships. “We recently released our mobile numbers and are seeing 25 percent growth — this is a really significant revenue stream.”

    Mobile searches and deals will continue to grow, Google’s Akkad said. “Mobile searches have grown four times since 2010, according to our user surveys. This is a huge opportunity for developers,” he said. “One area we have noticed is the ability to close the loop in the location business. Businesses have to identify who is coming into their stores — that’s why hyper local ads are important — because of the proximity signal that tends to be a strong signal.”

    The big location market still is evolving, but Foursquare’s deal last summer with American Express doesn’t hurt consumer awareness. “The deal with American Express drives users to Foursquare. No one knows how it is going to play out, but we are seeing an uplift as people are spending money,” Luedorf said. “[Location is] not monetizing heavily right now — companies need scale. But it actually is selling. We believe it’s through an ad model we can build, but not a premium service. Facebook and Twitter are trying to monetize — we will see.”

    While the deal with American Express is a nationwide one where cardholders check in with Foursquare on their mobile devices at certain shops and restaurants for deals, check-ins may not be the emphasis the company wants in the future. “We are seeing more people consuming the data — not just checking in. They want to see what’s local in terms of tips for eating out and drinking and other entertainment,” Luedorf said.

    Overhyped Expressions in the Location Industry           

    One of this editor’s pet peeves is the use of the word “experience” as in “consumer experience” when a company official describes a market, product or service. In a new technology and markets panel, moderator Clay Babcock of Rand McNally asked his panel what is an overhyped expression in the location industry. Kanwar Chadha of CSR said, “GNSS triangulation, TV or otherwise.”

    Nick Brachet, CTO of Skyhook Wireless said, “near field communications.” Babcock chimed in with “augmented reality,” the expression “gadget play.” David Allen, CTO of Locaid said “anything to do with beacons.” Ankit Agarwal, Micello CEO, “any Starbucks story, especially something about a coupon.” One person said, in a conference filled with this story line, “indoor positioning is overhyped.”

    At Where 2.0, the expression “SoLoMoCo” is destined to be one of those types of overhyped monikers. SoLoMoCo stands for a busy mix of social, local, mobile and commerce.

    Panel at GPS-Wireless.

    Exhibits at GPS-Wireless.

     

  • Expert Advice: Soldiers and Civilian GPS: Dangerous (and Deadly?) Expediency

     

    Headshot: Jules McNeff
    Headshot: Jules McNeff

    By Jules McNeff

    An old adage says, “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.” That is particularly relevant in today’s world of GPS and the positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) dependencies it has created. In business, it’s all about location, and in military circles, something called real-time situational awareness, driven by the ready availability of PNT from GPS. However, it has been reported (and validated by experience) that U.S. soldiers believe that the GPS equipment they are issued through official channels is too big, too heavy, uses too many batteries, and is old-looking and not sexy like the multi-color, multi-app personal electronics and smart phones they are accustomed to at home.

    Furthermore, they reportedly feel encumbered by Department of Defense (DoD) policies that require the use of encrypted military GPS signals when executing combat mission command-and-control or performing combat-related actions such as synchronizing tactical networks, designating targets, and calling for fire support when in contact with an adversary force. They wish they could just use their iPhone, or iPad, or similar smart device with its integral location-based apps and ready communication capabilities, and not have to deal with what many see as obsolescent gear and antiquated policies. Unfortunately, were that wish to really come true across the joint force and mission domain, it could have disastrous and deadly consequences.

    This is not intended to be a defense of the DoD requirements and acquisition processes, for there is much that could be improved within both. Adherence to those processes in the procurement of PNT equipment means that it will take longer to develop and produce the equipment than comparable commercial units, and that the equipment will probably be heavier and less user-friendly than commercial products.

    However, those processes exist and are rigorously followed, first because they are required by statute, but also for practical reasons of justifying investments of taxpayer resources and ensuring as much as possible that whatever is procured will withstand the rigors of service in its intended military application. For GPS equipment, this includes not only the rigors of the physical environment but also those of the electronic environment, including threats of both unintentional and hostile interference and signal imitation. It is precisely that threat environment that presents the greatest danger to reliance on commercial GPS products in military applications.

    The U.S. military and coalition forces have been fortunate from a PNT perspective over the last couple of decades in facing relatively unsophisticated adversaries with either limited access to or limited desire to routinely employ PNT countermeasure technology. Consequently, we have seemingly become complacent to the risks posed by overreliance on commercial-derivative PNT products. This complacency is apparent in the recent reporting from the Army’s forward-leaning Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) program, in which the Army assesses leading-edge commercial technologies and identifies those with great promise in order to fast-track them into operation, bypassing as much as possible the aforementioned DoD requirements and acquisition processes. 

    At the same time, the Army gives a wink and a nod to the GPS security policies requiring use of encrypted military GPS signals for combat operations. It is a virtual certainty that if GPS drives the location-based applications in the commercial-derivative technologies evaluated by NIE, those applications are all powered by civilian GPS and not the encrypted military GPS. As noted, civilian GPS is frequently seen by those not thoroughly familiar with PNT technology as the cheap, expedient choice because more secure or integrated PNT sources are too expensive, too heavy, too much bother, and so on. 

    It is also apparent, though not confirmed, that during NIE field testing, the opposing force toolkit does not include navigation warfare (NAVWAR) techniques for GPS jamming and spoofing. If it did, and if the test scenarios included active GPS jamming and spoofing, then the commercial location-based apps with civilian GPS as their input would not work or would derive erroneous solutions. In that case, the Army might have to reconsider its rapid deployment decisions for these vitally important devices. Clearly, it is not doing that.

    The highly touted Rifleman Radio, advertised by the Army as a success, uses civilian GPS as its source of PNT information. The Army is planning to deploy tens of thousands of these radios for operational use over the next several years. While soldiers may be told or even admonished not to use the position and timing solutions derived from these radios for other than situational awareness — in other words, not to use them for direct combat or combat-support tasks — the likelihood of that policy being followed in the real world is nil. Either of necessity or for convenience, soldiers will use what is made available to them for whatever purposes they deem appropriate. That will be true whether the commercial-derivative PNT solution is in a smartphone or a Rifleman Radio. 

    For the near term, that may not be a problem. However, at some point, in a contested environment against a knowledgeable adversary, mission effectiveness will be compromised and soldiers’ lives will be endangered by such devices. Further, proliferation of these devices will constrain our own commanders in their ability to employ offensive NAVWAR techniques that might be necessary to disrupt adversary use of open civilian GPS signals against our forces in the combat theater.

    These statements are not mere speculation. The vulnerability of civilian GPS signals to unintentional interference and intentional jamming is well known. Reports of personal privacy devices interfering with reception of civilian GPS signals at Newark Airport provide a recent example (see “Personal Privacy Jammers,” page 28 in this issue). What is less well understood, but even more sinister in a combat environment, is civil GPS susceptibility to spoofing: the intentional creation of false, but believable, signals. 

    In a recent interview with Fox News, Todd Humphreys, a well-regarded GPS researcher from the University of Texas, stated, “The civil GPS signal is completely open and vulnerable to a spoofing attack, because they have no authentication and no encryption. It’s almost trivial to mimic those signals to imitate them and fool a GPS receiver into tracking your signals instead of the authentic ones.” In a combat environment, such deception could result in mission failure or loss of life through loss of command-and-control communications in high tempo lethal actions, erroneous target designations, or misdirected fires.

    All those who recommend providing soldiers in combat situations with PNT capabilities derived from civilian GPS, whether via smart phone, iPad, or Rifleman Radio, in lieu of or even in addition to their less convenient but more reliable military GPS devices, should reconsider that recommendation in light of the above. 

    There is no argument to the statement that the DoD owes the warfighter more modern, integrated, compact, battery-efficient PNT devices incorporating military GPS. Those will come through the acquisition process, though not as fast as we all would like. In reality, a proliferation of civil PNT devices in military operations will likely delay further the availability of more suitable integrated military equipment. 

    In the meantime, we should not be misled because of our experience in today’s war. Instead, we must plan for future actions in anti-access/area denial situations against knowledgeable adversaries. We cannot afford to undermine the warfighters’ cause in advance by advocating reliance on vulnerable and exploitable commercial GPS equipment that can get them killed.

    Jules McNeff is vice president for strategy and programs for Overlook Systems Technologies. He served 20 years in the U.S. Air Force, and then was responsible for Defense Department management and oversight of the GPS program. He is a charter member of GPS World’s Editorial Advisory Board.

  • Out in Front: Independence: A National Value

    Following is a guest editorial by GPS World’s contributing editor for Defense, Don Jewell.

    Advanced low-frequency (LF) signals are back on the air in North America, with live testing of a wide-area precise-timing solution. Initial tests include a comprehensive pallet of signals, including eLoran, that are being evaluated for their ability to provide a robust, wide-area, wireless precise-timing alternative that can operate cooperatively with GPS, or during periods of GPS unavailability.

    The high-power, virtually jam-proof and spoof-proof LF signals operate independently of GPS and GNSS, and provide a Universal Coordinated Time reference, critical to many aspects of U.S. national infrastructure, on the order of tens of nanoseconds.

    Not only is this an independent timing backup, but the LF signals can also be used as pseudoranges mixed with GPS, or if enough transmitters are available, as a fully independent PNT network — in other words, a true backup PNT capability for safety-of-life navigation, for dispatching first responders, and for supporting critical national infrastructures.

    This is an extremely positive development, especially in light of the LightSquared debacle and the now better-understood vulnerabilities of the very low-power GPS signals.

    I hoped I would never have to type that word again, as a noun or a verb, but LightSquared did serve to point out a dire need and shortcoming in the U.S. PNT infrastructure. Fortunately, the proposed eLoran system appears to be on track to fill that need perfectly.

    For the first 32 years that GPS signals were broadcast, Loran-C served as a timing backup and a less accurate but viable navigation alternative. In 2010, the current U.S. administration unplugged Loran-C, against the recommendations of the Department of Transportation’s Positioning and Navigation (PosNav) Committee, the Department of Homeland Security Geospatial Committee, the DOT Undersecretary for Policy, and the DHS Deputy Undersecretary for Preparedness and National Protection.

    Long story short: non-technical people forced ill-advised technical decisions. 

    At that time, Loran-C was 80 percent of the way through a critical metamorphosis into a new digital version known as enhanced Loran or eLoran, with better, more reliable transmitters, smaller receivers, and a virtually jam-proof signal structure. Many likened eLoran to a strong ground-based GPS with coded signals for security. 

    Since then, the government has spent more money dismantling the legacy Loran-C infrastructure than it would have taken to complete the remaining 20 percent upgrade to eLoran. 

    Let’s hope the eLoran demonstrations continue successfully, and that a contract is forthcoming quickly before anyone forgets the LightSquared lessons learned — like we would ever let that happen.

    This is a win/win proposition.

  • The Geospatial Promised Land: Indoor Positioning

    At the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain a few weeks ago, a company called Loctronix introduced meter-level indoor positioning technology. “In 50 meters, turn left to find Macy’s Department store” is not very far in our future. This technology and others one step closer to making accurate indoor navigation possible so you can navigate from store-to-store inside a shopping mall or even navigate to particular items within a particular store.

    sirf-fusion_26102011jpg

    It’s all about sensor fusion. CSR’s SiRFstar V/SiRFusion technology uses data from all available satellite navigation systems from the U.S., Europe, Russia, China and Japan, as well as WiFi, cellular systems, accelerometers, gyros, and compasses. Loctronix calls their technology Doppler Aided Inertial Navigation (DAIN) and Spectral Compression Positioning (SCP) which allows them to obtain one meter positioning outdoors, indoors, and even underground without relying on external servers with the following features:

    • Client-based, sensor fusion software platform producing real-time position, speed, direction of motion, and heading information.
    • Optional integrated GPS/GNSS signal and navigation processing – using Loctronix’ SCP hybrid technology.
    • Fully integrated map-matching functionality with support for third-party map data.
    • Optional WiFi RSSI location and access point profiling.
    • Third-party LBS API support.
    • Multiple implementation options supporting existing smartphones and next-generation wireless devices.

    Think about what would happen if indoor positioning is actually implemented per the above, able to deliver one meter accuracy. Less than ten years ago, the automobile Personal Navigation Device (PND) market was in its infancy. GPS positioning was clearly able to deliver the accuracy required for point-to-point street navigation. What makes the PND valuable is the outdoor map database. These are the highly detailed digital maps from Navteq/Nokia and TeleAtlas/TomTom that are inside 90% of the PNDs in the world. Drawing from this experience, it’s obvious that indoor mapping databases are going to be huge, not only the location of stores, but the location of items on the shelves within stores. A friend of mine works for a large national retail chain in the U.S. He said they’ve tried aisle-to-aisle navigation technology before, and it failed. It was too difficult for the shopper to use. What that tells me is that the demand is there, in a big way.

    The PND market in the 1990s was messing around too, trying to arrive at a technology and price point for mass adoption. Indoor navigation is on the same path, only this time it won’t be Navteq/Nokia and TeleAtlas/TomTom leading the pack.

    Thanks, and see you next week.
    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Navigating the Moon

    The European Space Agency has issued an intriguing Intended Invitation To Tender, “Weak GNSS Signal Navigation on the Moon.” The study will investigate use of weak-signal GPS/GNSS — and of course ESA is interested primarily in the use of Galileo — for real-time position, navigation and timing information to various future lunar assets such as automated landers, rovers, Earth-Moon transportation vehicle, in-situ navigation, and so on.

    Does ESA have a lunar exploration agenda? This I did not know, but with only my own ignorance to thank, I quickly found out that ESA has had a lunar orbiter, SMART-1 (Small Missions for Advanced Research in Technology), since 2004, equipped with an Advanced Moon Imaging Experiment (AMIE) micro-camera and a mission, at least in part, to zero-in on suitable study sites for potential future lunar exploration missions.

    Since the conclusion of that project, ESA now plans to land a spacecraft in 2018 near the Moon’s south pole, a region full of dangerous boulders and high ridges. The aim is to probe the moonscape and test new technology — and now we know this includes GNSS — to prepare for future human landings. “The region may be a prime location for future human explorers because it offers almost continuous sunlight for power and potential access to vital resources such as water-ice.”

    “Although the visibility geometry is not always favorable,” the current ESA Invitation to Tender states, “it would result in 100-500m position accuracy as estimated in a NASA JPL/Ohio University paper. For lunar navigation applications, GPS/Galileo signals could be used if receivers complemented with advanced processing signal and filtering techniques, are capable of acquisition and tracking in the order of 15dBHz signal to noise ratios. Today latest developments show that these values are feasible. The PNT performance figures could also be improved with a GNSS-based system on a lunar relay satellite orbiting the moon as analyzed in [RD3]. The hardware required is equivalent to GPS space-based receivers and a high gain antenna.”

    The invitation to tender, to the tune of 200,000–500,000 euros, closes on April 23.

    GNSS use in space exploration, novel as it seems, has been outlined and partially explored in previously published articles in GPS World.

    In September 2008, Jim Miller and A.J. Oria brought us all up to date on the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) plans to use GPS in the great dark out-there.

    “NASA has engaged with the Department of Defense (DoD) to define the performance parameters to support navigation services in a Space Service Volume (SSV) designated from 3,000 kilometers to GEO altitude to approximately 36,000 kilometers,” they wrote in “NASA’s Vision for Space.”

    “This type of navigation requires specialized software to process the side-lobes of GPS signals coming over the earth’s limb, as well as the increased attenuation and tracking of a very few satellites at a time. Once tracking is initiated. however, one can begin to imagine a future where GPS-in-space may also include syncing GPS positioning and timing with spacecraft and beacons broadcasting other “GPS-like” signals near celestial bodies such as the moon and Mars.

    “Transition from terrestrial-based radar tracking of space vehicles to space-based radiometric data from GPS is well underway at NASA. Simulations demonstrate GPS Navigator receiver applications could be performed almost to the moon. An ongoing effort is developing the TDRSS Augmentation Service for Satellites (TASS) to disseminate differential corrections from the Global Differential GPS (GDGPS) network to users in LEO. The Communication, Navigation, Networking, reConfigurable Testbed (CoNNeCT) on the ISS will use software-defined radios to process GPS/GNSS signals and waveforms.’

    Also, in “GPS Goes Martian: Nav/Com for a Red Planet,” a 2004 article by Susan Skone, Kyle O’Keefe, and Gerard Lachapelle, the authors describe plans for a network of satellites to be placed in orbit around our eerie solar-system sibling for the purpose of GPS-like navigation.

    Finally, way back in 2002, a group of authors proposed “Formation Flight in Space.” Russell Carpenter, Michael Moreau, Jonathan How, Lesse Leitner, Frank Bauer and David Folta described how distributed spacecraft systems are developing new GPS capabilities, on the drawing boards, at least.

    “Scientists have just begun to understand the full potential of space vehicle formation flying. In the last few years, this technology has gone from a space oddity — and a high risk one at that — to a concept fully embraced by earth and space scientists around the world. Prior to the selection of the New Millennium Program Earth Orbiter-1 (EO-1) mission in 1996 (the first autonomous formation flying earth science mission), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had only one or two formation flying concepts under consideration. Now 35 mission sets fill that list.”

    If any young and adventurous engineers out there have been lamenting the dearth of new frontiers for them to explore GNSSively, cry no more.

     

  • Automakers Move Ahead on Mobile Connectivity

    It wasn’t quite a call to arms, but Bill Ford, head of Ford Motor, called on the wireless community to work with car makers to avoid global gridlock and create a future of “urban mobility,” a network that will track vehicles and automatically instruct cars to change lanes, exit a road, or park. Vehicle connectivity was one of the major themes of the Mobile World Congress, held in February in Barcelona. For some of us, it brought up memories of the PATH automated highways project of the 1990s. You have likely seen photos of that prototype automated highway with platoons of driver-less vehicles riding on I-15 in southern California. The vision has changed, and we are headed towards autonomous, connected vehicles and away from the specialized, and prohibitively expensive, infrastructure that defined earlier efforts.

    By 2020, 90 percent of cars will have mobile connectivity, compared to 10 percent today, predicts Machina Research in a study funded by the GSMA. The industry is aflutter with connected activity. Sprint Nextel is partnering with Chrysler Group’s Uconnect voice-activated vehicle communications system that enables Sprint phones to connect to the vehicle’s audio system. The Ford Sync will be available to European customers. The Family Locator from TCS will be incorporated in connected vehicles.

    Smartphones Overtake Feature Phones. For the first time, close to half of Americans own smartphones, edging out feature phone ownership, reports the Pew Internet and American life project. According to its report, 45 percent of adults identify themselves as smartphone owners, compared to 41 percent who identify as feature phone owners. There was a notable increase in smartphone ownership by almost every demographic group, including men and women, younger and middle-age adults, urban and rural residential and wealthy and lower-income people.

    Apple Grown Maps. For a year, there have been signs that Google was developing its own mapping and navigation service. Apple has acquired digital mapping companies and listed licenses from many third-party location service companies. 9to5Mac reports that Apple’s mapping contract with Google expires at the end of 2012, and hasn’t yet been renewed. The just-released iPhoto application uses Apple-grown mapping, and not Google.

    Disappearing Ovi. Nokia is closing down the Ovi Share media sharing site to focus on offerings by its location and commerce division, dedicated to building consumer-centric social location products and applications, as well as platform services and local commerce solutions. Services include Nokia Drive, Nokia Maps, and Nokia Transport.

    Gambling Geo-Fence. In the U.S., online and mobile gambling is only legal within the state of Nevada. The location of the mobile user must be determined to ensure she is within state boundaries. Locaid Technologies is the first company to meet all the requirements of the Nevada Gaming Control Board to certify the location of a mobile gambler. Locaid uses geofencing to build virtual, digital perimeters around the state of Nevada and reports it can “prove that a user is physically with a mobile device, and whether the person is located within Nevada state borders, across any major carrier mobile network — whether the mobile device is indoors or outdoors, GPS-enabled or not, and whether the device is a smartphone, feature phone, or laptop computer.”

    February Black Friday. Shopkick announced results of an experiment to create a one-day boost in foot traffic at partner retail stores using holiday tactics during a non-peak shopping period. “We asked a simple question: What if retailers could create Black Friday shopping behavior any day of the year that they wanted?” said Cyriac Roeding of shopkick. The company reports that by doubling the incentives they deliver via smartphone, none worth more than a dollar, their retail partners experience double-digit increases. Retail partners include American Eagle, Macy’s, Old Navy, and Best Buy.

    Effectiveness of Mobile Shopping Apps? Smartphones are increasingly used for shopping, researching products, comparing prices, and finding retail locations. Nielsen metered the smartphones of 5,000 U.S. volunteers during the 2011 holiday shopping season. Nielsen’s analysis reveals that retail websites are more popular than retail apps. Both genders prefer retailers’ mobile websites over mobile apps. The top retail apps and websites combined were Amazon, Best Buy, eBay, Target, and Walmart, and reached nearly 60 percent of smartphone owners during the end of 2011.

    What Was Ford Thinking? In his Mobile World Congress address, Bill Ford, great grandson of Henry, warned that unless the wireless and automotive industries find a solution, global gridlock could one day become a “human rights issue.” In addition to working to end torture, does Mr. Ford think that Amnesty International should pursue the issue of vehicle traffic mitigation?