News

You know, I read this whole back and forth, and the only takeaway I have is that you have absolutely no idea how any of these technologies work. Like at all. I’m not saying this to be a dick or anything -it’s ok to not know things- but it’s painfully obvious in this case because your lack of fundamental understanding is the core of your argument.

The two major systems in question here are the Emergency Alert System (ESA) which broadcasts across FM, AM, Sat Radio; Cable, Broadcast and Sat TV. The counterpart for cell phones is the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA), which broadcasts to cell phones, tablets, and similar devices. They're both coordinated under the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) managed by FEMA

An EAS message is triggered by FEMA, sending messages to the National Public Warning System (or Primary Entry Point,) stations. The NPWS stations are 77 AM-stations that get a phone call from FEMA. SiriusXM then broadcasts the message across it's sattelite network... of which those 77 AM-stations are connected into. (they receive it then they relay it.) They also broadcast it across their sat radio network. (that's been going on for ages.)

the WEA functions a bit like a pager or SMS. it broadcasts on the cell network- a one way transmission from the cellular site. Any WEA-capable cell phone or other device in the range of that transmission and not in Airplane mode (which turns the antenna off,) will register the alert. The previous mention of cell towers getting clogged during 9/11 isn't a problem, and the WEA system was established under the WARN act in 2008, and the system went live in 2012, so it wasn't even around for it. that said, it's relatively immune to mass calling events because it's a separate service on the tower, and gets priority over both SMS and Call services.

And if you did understand how the tech works, you’d probably get why those options are used instead of your layman’s idea of a good idea. Which is not, in fact, a good idea at all for a variety of reasons. Which is exactly why these other things are being discussed and supported by people who do understand them (and I’m not talking about the rest of the Lemmy comments either, I mean in the real world).

Naw. I understand the tech well enough. there's more to reliability than the tech working, though. There's the humans using the tech. of particular note are the people who are supposed to be receiving these alerts. Remeber, the whole purpose of these systems are to saturate an area (or the entire nation) with warnings and alerts, delivering those warnings to as many people as possible.

Lets look at some numbers. There are 336 million people in the US. per the article, 82 million "use AM". (note that probably includes every kind of receiver, not just car stereos. we'll go with it because I don't have a better number.) that's roughly 1/4 of the US population that will ever be in a position to hear an EAS broadcast on an AM channel.

97% of americans own a cell phone.

Even if we assume a quarter of the 326.2 million people who use cell phones receive the alert, that's still 81 million people.

Do you really think that the 82 million people that use AM at all... are always by a radio? or that, those 82 million people are always driving? Because the car radio only lets you know there's an alert if you happen to be listening to the radio.

For the vast majority of americans, the WEA alerts are going to be far more reliable than AM-band EAS alerts. Which, is probably why the FCC and congress spent oodles implementing and maintaining the WEA system as well as expanding mobile coverage. they're not dumb. they can see the writing on the wall for the ~4,500 AM stations that remain.

Even if you happen to find yourself normally in areas that don't have cell coverage... of which, 11% of the roadmiles in the US didn't have coverage... in 2016, there's much, much better solutions. a basic midland emergency radio goes for about $25 dollars. alternatively, you can get a weather alert radio that's not portable, but lets you filter what kind of alerts it wakes you up for; and location.

In terms of receiving emergency alerts... those are going to be far more effective than any car stereo for the simple reason that a car will not sound an alarm unless you happen to be actively listening to the radio. So, this bill is unlikely to improve the advanced warning people get. but what about after a nasty storm? Well. you'd have to drain your car battery to use your car radio. Sure, you could maybe time it so you check in when they're repeating the messages; but you're still draining the battery. Or you're idling the engine to charge said battery.

Either way there, that's a finite resource you're using. A resource that might be necessary to get you or someone you love to a hospital, an emergency shelter, or just out of the danger zone.

There are tons of scenarios where cell towers/fm transmitters for an area would go down, but cars would still be fully operable.

So, I'm going to assume this is an honest mistake and you know the difference between a transmitter and a receiver. Because, I mean, your entire comment is basically to tell me I should shut up for being dumb. gonna explain it anyhow.

the broadcast stations- FM or AM- are transmitters. They take a sound source and translate it into radio signal which is then broadcast. Anyone with a receiver (the radio in your car), then translates that radio signal into sound. Cell sites (be they a tower, or just the base station on a building rooftop) are technically transceivers. they go both ways. They're talking to your phone constantly, as well as to each other- that's what the "cell network" is. one cell talks to the carrier's connection to the internet or phone grid, relays that through the network to your phone; and your phone back to the carrier. A WEA message carried on a cell network is one-way communication, though. just to be clear.

But even if that wasn’t the case, why do you want to remove a public safety option that currently exists, even if you don’t and won’t use it?

Getting some real "they gonna come for your Ray-Dee-Ohs" vibes here. nobody is taking anything away. they're going to stop providing a certain entertainment and communication device in cars. That's all the car makers were going to do. All this law would do is make them add am radios back in. that's it. You want to listen to AM or get an emergency radio.... those are not going away (probably ever.) and if you really want your AM radio in your car... you can always get an aftermarket deck. but nobody is going to go into your current car and get rip out your AM radio. (not unless it's a nice radio and you left your car unlocked....but it's not the gooberment.)

I care because it offends me that politicians are using bullshit excuses to pass bullshit laws. if emergency preparedness was their concern, they could have passed a law requiring cell carriers to be participants in WEA messaging. that would reduce the number of cellphone peeps who don't get it. (all the big 3 companies are on. I'm guessing their sub-carriers are also.) Another useful law would be one that gives free emergency radios to people. just saying.

The only people who benefit are big companies (the exact ones whining they don’t want to comply) that don’t care about you, so why do you give a shit if this inconveniences them?

the people who benefit from the law are not the car companies or tech companies. which is why the opposed it. the National Association of Broadcasters lobbied hard for this. I think you know who they lobby for. those are companies that paid them to lobby the politicians. (and that also offends me. lobbyists should be outlawed.) these are companies that failed to keep up with uh... half-century old technology... oppps.

Politicians also benefit in the form of loony talkshow hosts repeating their bullshit. (probably a "bothsides" deal, if we're honest.) Also SiriusXM (whose being paid to maintain the sat uplink to those broadcasters. big contract that.) Also, the advertisers that advertise on AM. There's a lot of people who benefit from the law.