Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Zosimos

  1. The Raspberry Pi is VERY interesting. I'm going to have to take a closer look at it...
  2. You appear to have done exactly what I want to do! So, how hard is it to build that kit? The picture resembles a card I'd need to solder on to a motherboard or something! Does it come with an external housing unit? Would it be easy to modify to be powered using a mini solar cell? I was looking at something similar except to transmit on AM Frequency (1/4 mile rang). http://www.tequipment.net/RamseyElectronicsAM1C.html
  3. I see. Interesting, but since it's limited only to those with certain Garmin devices it doesn't seem very practical for my purposes.
  4. I was thinking I would hide the transmitter very close to the location where they would be directed to receive the message, like perhaps in the tree above the container where I hid the radio for them to use? The transmitter would be cammo'd so visitors wouldn't even know the transmitter was above them. I guess this circles back to my original question as to my need for a license to transmit anything with a long range. And if I go with something that transmits with a longer range, what would that equipment look like? I'd rather have something that transmitted on a shortwave band to make it seem more authentic.
  5. I'm not really interested in building anything too complicated. I'd prefer to do this with a turnkey solution, if possible. I was thinking of using a mini transmitter (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GXNRETS/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=QMZSLCXCJP4&coliid=I18YBCTE1U8NDM) connected to a mini MP3 player that would play a loop that would broadcast the "message" powered with a solar solution.
  6. I am unfamiliar with beacon caches. What type of equipment do you need to receive/transmit "beacons?"
  7. Hi, I have an idea for a themed mystery cache that would fit the surroundings of a local area here. It would involve transmitting a series of numbers on a shortwave radio frequency, and I would provide a receiver at a location so the "spy" would receive the numbers and would be provided a "one time pad" to decrypt the secret message (i.e. a numbers station). I was wondering how difficult it would be to do this as I don't have experience with ham radio. Do I need to acquire a license to broadcast on shortwave? I think I read the FCC doesn't regulate if it is within 300 feet, but if it is longer they do? Is that correct? In fact, I'm not sure ham radio and short wave are the same thing. True? If there are any radio enthusiasts out there who can comment on the feasibility of this idea I'd greatly appreciate it including recommendations for equipment needed if it could be pulled off. Thanks!
  8. Wondering if it would be possible to modify the Geocaching mobile app to enable "pinch and zoom" in the built-in Web browser? When you click on a cache's related Web page link in the mobile app, the page opens in the Geocaching app itself instead of in iOS Safari (iPhone) and the zoom feature doesn't work as expected if the external Web page is using the viewport meta tag.
  9. Maybe. But as a developer myself, I know a fix for this would take less than ten minutes to implement. So I think it's probably more than that. My vote would be to keep it the way it is.
  10. I respectfully disagree. I believe the roots of geocaching were grounded in the desire for people to visit interesting places and collectively share experiences. To this end, a "placer" or "hider" of a quality cache is just as interested to know what people think about the location and/or physical cache he or she placed, not just whether the "finder" found and logged his or her cache on a specific date and time. Unfortunately, there are many cachers who ignore this element of the game and choose to only focus on the logging of a cache as a way to gain a "smiley" on their profile. Those who make an effort to place caches in "interesting" places would like to hear more about people's experiences (good or bad) and see more than just a "TFTC" and three or four animated emoticon in a log entry. It is my belief that Groundspeak has made a conscious effort NOT to encourage an easy integration of emoticons into their logs because this functionality could lead to overuse and/or even "thinner" entries than what are seen now. Personally, I think the current system is just fine the way it is and that people will likely abuse or overuse emoticons in their logs if they are readily available.
  11. Thanks to Moun10bike for maintaining this cache over the years, but let's not forget he's also employed by Groundspeak. Many people seem to forget that this is a for-profit company supported by yearly premium membership fees and merchandise sales bought and paid by geocachers all over the world. This is no non-profit group, nor is it run by volunteers. For heaven's sake, GS could afford to hire two FTEs to sit in lawn chairs at the site to make sure TOL doesn't go missing if they wanted to. Obviously, I'm not suggesting this as a viable solution but I believe it illustrates Groundspeak's responsibility to make more of an effort to maintain TOL for the good of in the sport. If this means letting someone else adopt and care for the cache, then so be it. What exactly gives GS the right to pull the plug? Because they own the Web site? Please.... I, for one, am not afraid to ask for this small return on investment on behalf of the millions of people worldwide who pay the salaries of all the "lackeys" at HQ. The geocaching community should be the group who decides if this cache should be archived. It is not appropriate for a handful of people, who now find it inconvenient because some rogue cacher has stolen the can, to make the decision "for us." I myself have replaced a large ammo (similar to the APE can) three times after a cache muggling. I'm not going to let the bad guys win. Why should we?
  12. Has this challenge been solved, yet? Please post an update as to its status. Thank you!
  13. I have a feature request for premium members. It would be nice to include an opt-in checkbox that a member could select in his/her profile area to display specific geocaching statistics. For example, I'd like to be able to auto generate a map of the USA showing states where I've found cache(s) to display on my public GC.com profile. To my knowledge, as it stands I have to jump through hoops to create such a map using a 3rd party tool (e.g. World66) to manually generate this basic statistic. It seems like this would be fairly easy to produce automatically using a query across my record and the corresponding database table(s). I can't imagine this hasn't been requested before, but I was unable to find any relative forum postings because my search using the phrase "map" was deemed too short (i.e. less than five characters) to generate a usable result set. Maybe this feature should be adjusted, too. This 5 char limit restricts members from using thousands of potential keywords to find information in these forums.
  14. This is a minor point, but I noticed with the enhancements to the site that the thumbnails representing profile pictures on the "My Details" page are now rendering to a square 75 x 75 px. I think this is good and saves screen space. However, I was wondering if the GD scripting used to render the pictures can be changed so non-square profile pictures will not looked distorted? I know Flickr.com uses a similar approach to render square thumbnails without distortion using a calculation that compensates for non-square master images. Other than that, I think the new enhancements look good! Nice job!!
  15. I totally disagree with your comment. Rating systems on amazon and other sites which include unbiased, thought provoking comments made by other consumers have helped me make informed decisions on many, many products over the years. I will rarely purchase an item now without reviewing what people have to say about it beforehand. They do work and I'm sure I'm not the only person who feels this way. Some here seem to believe that people can't think for themselves and will blindly take what another person says regarding a rated object (cache, product, etc.). That's not how I use comments and ratings, myself. Comments and ratings are just another tool that can help people make informed decisions. If one person says it's good and one person says it bad, I analyze the context and meaning of how the comments were made and go from there. If you ask me, rating systems aren't as much about identifying the "good" as they are about shedding light on the "bad." It's difficult for poor products to hide when there is a ratings system in place. After giving it some thought, I feel the bookmarks feature on geocaching.com could be better utilized (or better explained) in this regard. Until someone mentioned it during this discussion, I never even considered creating a bookmark AFTER visiting a cache. To me, a bookmark is something I would set prior to visiting a cache. My guess is most people who use geocaching.com don't use bookmarking as a way to make comments regarding a cache after they find it. Perhaps if it was titled as "Favorites" it would be more clear as to how it can be used to comment on caches post discovery. I didn't realize that there is an identifier actually placed on a cache's page after someone bookmarks it. I was under the impression that bookmarks were only listed as part of an individual user's profile. Based on this newfound discovery, I'll be more apt to use bookmarking now that I know more about how it can be implemented.
  16. I'm not sure I understand your point. Why would the proposal of a rating system imply that someone doesn't "love the sport?" Many would argue just the opposite, I imagine... You would argue the oppostite of my love of caching? If you hate it, then why are you here? Everyone has a cache type that they like, and a cache type they like less (or not at all) but this differs from cacher to cacher. I will find and log anything , fom a LPC to a long hike to a puzzle... Your original quote seems to imply I "don't love the sport" because I proposed a rating system. I would argue just the opposite, that I do love the sport because I want to make it better. I don't relate to the argument that different people like different caches and there's no way to accurately rate a cache because people like different things, etc. If that's the case, why do ratings work on sites like amazon, cnet, etc.? People have differing perspectives towards products but that works in favor of the diversity of the overall system. And sure, people post ratings that are bogus or fruitless all the time, but people can see right through them because the rule of the majority always filters out the chafe of the few. Heck, I created my own photography Web site that includes a rating system. I know that not everyone will like my pictures, and many people post negative ratings, but I don't really care because more often than not the overall ratings turn out to be pretty accurate after enough votes are tallied. I guess some people here are worried that their caches may get a few low ratings and they'd prefer not to be subjected to this type of criticism.
  17. I'm not sure I understand your point. Why would the proposal of a rating system imply that someone doesn't "love the sport?" Many would argue just the opposite, I imagine...
  18. Yes, but are bookmark lists sortable and searchable? For example, it would be nice as a premium member to be able to search for 4 or 5 star caches in a particular area in one of my pocket queries. Rating systems like the particular one proposed in this (and another thread on this board) are extremely common on eCommerce Web sites and software portals (see hotscripts.com for an example) across the Internet. As a new person who recently discovered geocaching, I am a bit perplexed as to why this hasn't already been implemented on geocaching.com.
  19. I'm assuming you are referring to the rating system here http://www.ratethiscache.com/waypoint_vote...aypoint=gczzzzz? Yes, this is far from ideal because a person does not need to create an account to submit a rating for a cache. However, I think the scale including criteria questions are fine. Ideally, Groundspeak should incorporate this rating scale into their current system. But from what I can gather from the comments in this thread I do not feel that confident that the new "geocaching v. 2.0" Web site will be released anytime soon. It's too bad because this particular feature would be fairly easy to implement (programmatically speaking) and would be a great enhancement (IMHO).
  20. Hello, I'm new to geocaching so I'm sure this topic has been discussed at length, but I searched the forums but wasn't returned any obvious discussion topics so I'll post it anyway. I understand the rating system instituted here rates terrain and level of difficulty but am not sure if quality is also weighed? Is there a way to rate caches this way on geocaching.com? For instance, I found this site http://www.ratethiscache.com/waypoint_vote...aypoint=gczzzzz which institutes a type of rating system related to quality, but it looks as though it is independent of geocaching.com. Have there been discussions about merging/incorporating this type of system on geocaching.com? Thanks, -J
  • Create New...