It turns out you can get a location just by scanning nearby wifi and cell tower signals!
19 days
You must log in or register to comment.
- frongt@lemmy.zipEnglish19 days
Yes, because Google scans and logs everything in your area. You can do this on stock Android, but it probably requires Google location services.
- 19 days
Just so long as BeaconDB can keep its data relatively up-to-date (which requires many users contributing via running another FOSS app in the background on their phones), never mind trusting them any more than Google.
- 154b161@lemmy.mlEnglish19 days
I tried it in my city, geolocation accuracy is really good. MicroG also uses BeaconDB, so they collect a lot of data.
- Frettchen@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
Just so long as BeaconDB can keep its data relatively up-to-date (which requires many users contributing via running another FOSS app in the background on their phones),
- 5gruel@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
ITT people not understanding that non-de-googled android phones use that method for localization by default, falling back to GPS only when WiFi trilateration fails.
It is a smart robust way for localization and beacondb breaks the data monopoly.
- 154b161@lemmy.mlEnglish18 days
Google, Apple and Qualcomm already have all this data. BeaconDB democratizes it.
19 daysI’m not sure why anyone thinks receiving GPS data is “bad”.
If you’re somewhere where GPS is frequently jammed (such as a warzone, etc.) then it could be useful.
- 154b161@lemmy.mlEnglish18 days
Receiving GPS data is not bad. Apps like this are more for demonstrating cool technology, not for practical use (though it seems to be working really well as well).
That being said, MicroG does use BeaconDB as a network location provider, so there is a lot of utility there as well.
- turmacar@lemmy.worldEnglish19 days
GPS is a passive receiver.
There’s processing going on, but you dramatically decrease energy use by just updating less often.
It’s not like you’re sending a signal to space.
- 19 days
I am aware of that but somehow expected that it still took more energy to receive until there are enough SATs available than to do a BLE scan. Just a gut feeling though and only receiving should have a bigger impact than I thought. Makes sense!
- 5gruel@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
Don’t worry your gut feeling is right. Wifi / Bluetooth scans are orders of magnitude cheaper. People in here don’t unterstand how localization works.
- 5gruel@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
what are you talking about? GPS is far from a “passive receiver” in any sense of that vague term. It’s running an oscillator at the carrier frequency.
GPS is probably the most power hungry sensor on your device.
- RebellionFox@piefed.socialEnglish19 days
It can help with location when you’re on a device that doesn’t have a GPS receiver. Like a laptop.
It might also help with initial positioning since it can take several seconds or minutes to get a GPS lock.
Edit: For anyone who want to contribute to BeaconDB there is NeoStumbler on F-Droid
- 154b161@lemmy.mlEnglish19 days
I think it’s more of “isn’t this really cool” than “this is pratical to use”. It’s a proof of concept of a really cool idea.
- 5gruel@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
Power consumption is way lower and satellite acquisition takes time (or you keep your GPS running and warm/hot-start, but that draws even more power)
You have that backwards. Power consumption is way lower using WiFi and cell.
- 5gruel@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
Thats what I am saying :) wifi scans are cheap compared to booting up GPS.
- Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish18 days
Cops won’t even get off their asses for stolen property with an airtag, location history, and even clear video footage.
- Frettchen@lemmy.worldEnglish18 days
There is an API where you can put in a phone number and you get the location by triangulation. You need proof you need it. Ask your provider
