Cellphone Data Map Reveals Which Americans Are Ignoring Quarantine

Cellphone Data Map Reveals Which Americans Are Ignoring Quarantine

Found on Yahoo, but mostly Yahoo, sucks down news from elsewhere. Still in the article there is a link to another website that will let you look at the raw data for your state.

Big Brother IS watching….

(My cellphone has been turned off for several days, only once did I turn it on to use it’s camera. I’ve been calling it from a land line to check for messages.)

2+
avataravatar

12 thoughts on “Cellphone Data Map Reveals Which Americans Are Ignoring Quarantine”

  1. As is the new normal for the corporate media, the article is largely fake news. Even though purports to be a Social Distancing Scoreboard, the site merely tracks distance traveled, which is weakly connected (if at all) to social distancing.

    The site confuses the two uses of the word distance: physical distance between individuals versus distance traveled by any individual. The more insidious version of GPS tracking would use location data to determine if individuals were gathering in groups against the recommendations of the government. I can’t imagine how this might be used in the future to undermine the First Amendment.

    5+
    avataravataravataravataravatar
  2. My daughter made a good point about this map in response to a cousin who posted it: in the states that are more rural, like here in Montana, many of us live in the country and have to travel much farther to get to stores. For example, in our case, we are nine miles from town. So it’s a little unfair to accuse our area of ignoring the shutdown. At our house, my daughters and I stay home, while husband is permitted to travel for work, and  he stops at the stores for necessities. His phone would show a lot of movement, even though we are living within the guidelines.

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  3. sawatdeeka:
    in the states that are more rural, like here in Montana, many of us live in the country and have to travel much farther to get to stores.

    I noticed the same thing, even at the more granular county level. In a more rural area, the distance you travel may change relatively little since necessary travel under the terms of the orders makes up most of the distance.

    The corporate media are the enemy of the people.

    5+
    avataravataravataravataravatar
  4. drlorentz:
    As is the new normal for the corporate media, the article is largely fake news. Even though purports to be a Social Distancing Scoreboard, the site merely tracks distance traveled, which is weakly connected (if at all) to social distancing.

    The site confuses the two uses of the word distance: physical distance between individuals versus distance traveled by any individual. The more insidious version of GPS tracking would use location data to determine if individuals were gathering in groups against the recommendations of the government. I can’t imagine how this might be used in the future to undermine the First Amendment.

    I totally agree with you there Doc.

    2+
    avataravatar
  5. This is a remarkably bad story, even by Yahoo News standards.  There are numerous grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors, an obvious lack of critical thought in simply repeating the linked site’s claims, and even the name of the linked site is spelled in two different ways in the story.

    Gosh.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  6. Haakon Dahl:
    This is a remarkably bad story, even by Yahoo News standards.  There are numerous grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors, an obvious lack of critical thought in simply repeating the linked site’s claims, and even the name of the linked site is spelled in two different ways in the story.

    Gosh.

    Like I said, it’s from Yahoo. But the more important part, or at least what I thought important, is it’s available. Like if every one decided to migrate, the map would show it, no not this simple thing, bu undoubtedly the CIA is capable of a better map. And more undoubtedly if you ARE on the run, Turn your phone off, and wrap it in tinfoil. Then if you must use it, you have it and then they will think what the hell, we were looking in the wrong area. Then back in tinfoil and go back to your previous area.

    0

  7. Gerard:
    Turn your phone off, and wrap it in tinfoil

    Turning it off might help but tinfoil (actually aluminum) doesn’t seem to do the trick and I’m not sure why. The skin depth for 1 GHz is less about 2.5 µm, even lower for 2 GHz. That’s where all the cell phone RF bands are. WiFi bands are even higher, hence smaller skin depth. Heavy duty aluminum foil is about 25 µm thick: at least ten skin depths. That’s -43 dB of attenuation.

    I tried wrapping my phone in foil and it didn’t make that much difference. This deserves further thought.

    2+
    avataravatar
  8. drlorentz:

    Gerard:
    Turn your phone off, and wrap it in tinfoil

    Turning it off might help but tinfoil (actually aluminum) doesn’t seem to do the trick and I’m not sure why. The skin depth for 1 GHz is less about 2.5 µm, even lower for 2 GHz. That’s where all the cell phone RF bands are. WiFi bands are even higher, hence smaller skin depth. Heavy duty aluminum foil is about 25 µm thick: at least ten skin depths. That’s -43 dB of attenuation.

    I tried wrapping my phone in foil and it didn’t make that much difference. This deserves further thought.

    Humm, I’ll look into that tomorrow, I’ll admit it was a off the cuff solution that I seriously thought would work. Another answer would to be put it in a microwave, but they are a little bit cumbersome to drag around. I have some smaller tin, boxes I will experiment with as well as the tin, (aluminum), foil tomorrow.

    0

  9. Gerard:

    drlorentz:

    Gerard:
    Turn your phone off, and wrap it in tinfoil

    Turning it off might help but tinfoil (actually aluminum) doesn’t seem to do the trick and I’m not sure why. The skin depth for 1 GHz is less about 2.5 µm, even lower for 2 GHz. That’s where all the cell phone RF bands are. WiFi bands are even higher, hence smaller skin depth. Heavy duty aluminum foil is about 25 µm thick: at least ten skin depths. That’s -43 dB of attenuation.

    I tried wrapping my phone in foil and it didn’t make that much difference. This deserves further thought.

    Humm, I’ll look into that tomorrow, I’ll admit it was a off the cuff solution that I seriously thought would work. Another answer would to be put it in a microwave, but they are a little bit cumbersome to drag around. I have some smaller tin, boxes I will experiment with as well as the tin, (aluminum), foil tomorrow.

    Well, I wasn’t kidding when I listed it in a different thread. Disappointing that it didn’t work. My guess is that a thick metal box should work but that’s cumbersome to carry around. By rights, the foil should be thick enough.

    0

  10. drlorentz:

    Gerard:

    drlorentz:

    Gerard:
    Turn your phone off, and wrap it in tinfoil

    Turning it off might help but tinfoil (actually aluminum) doesn’t seem to do the trick and I’m not sure why. The skin depth for 1 GHz is less about 2.5 µm, even lower for 2 GHz. That’s where all the cell phone RF bands are. WiFi bands are even higher, hence smaller skin depth. Heavy duty aluminum foil is about 25 µm thick: at least ten skin depths. That’s -43 dB of attenuation.

    I tried wrapping my phone in foil and it didn’t make that much difference. This deserves further thought.

    Humm, I’ll look into that tomorrow, I’ll admit it was a off the cuff solution that I seriously thought would work. Another answer would to be put it in a microwave, but they are a little bit cumbersome to drag around. I have some smaller tin, boxes I will experiment with as well as the tin, (aluminum), foil tomorrow.

    Well, I wasn’t kidding when I listed it in a different thread. Disappointing that it didn’t work. My guess is that a thick metal box should work but that’s cumbersome to carry around. By rights, the foil should be thick enough.

    Was it Ratburger UltrafoilTM? The other foils are mainly used for cooking.

    1+
    avatar

Leave a Reply