MKFmly
-
Posts
271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MKFmly
-
-
Rescuing lost hunters...
-
Feb 29, 2017
We will get a souvenir for that, will we?
Yes, this one!
-
For a different perspective I always recall the Swiss Watch paradigm shift example.
Geocaching started as a pre-dominantly wilderness game with participants having the financial capacity to purchase HH GPSrs and go hiking in far flung places and write stories. Now entry to the game is free, caches are everywhere, and players text their logs. That original paradigm (often lamented in the forums) has been gone a long long time. We are in the midst of a shift where those fondly looking back and those looking forward may diverge.
Yes PokemonGo is not geocaching but it is a geo location adventure much like Wherigo's could have and should have been.
I could easily see the opposite when quality caches dwindle to obscurity and geocaching and letterboxing are talked about as some old-school game. (If you peruse the forums many have suggested it has already happened...)I've enjoyed the Wherigo Caches that I've done, and I've enjoyed the InterCaches that I've done. But I don't see either as the future of geocaching.
Unfortunately, Groundspeak has not been very adept at predicting the very conservative vocal user community wants/desires and technology shifts with any accuracy so are obviously a little shy.
The underlying paradigm here is that it will always be difficult. Although it may not exist right now, its short sighted to assume that capability will never exist. Some of the best parts of video games are community content (so too with geocaching) at some point the right set of easily understood/used tools will put that capability in the hands of geo location adventurers (maybe even geocachers).Both the Wherigo and InterCache platforms are much more difficult than that, and the programming required is beyond the abilities of most people.
The ability of the community to easily integrate virtual (electronic) and physical stages to their caches just might be the savior of location based adventures...So I see cache owners continuing to hide mainly traditional caches. All other cache types will continue to play a relatively minor role in the game.
-
Depends on your nationality whether you need a visa and what the costs are.
Can/Us ? I can look it up, but I just thought someone may know/have experience.
August 2016Effective immediately, staff of the Brazilian Foreign Ministry, and the Brazilian embassies and all consulates general of Brazil are on strike for an indefinite period.
1)NO VISAS WILL BE ISSUED by the Brazilian authorities anywhere in the world.
Wow
Cost (Canada)
Visa - Tourist $120 + $95 Service Charge
Visa - Business $120 + $95 Service Charge
Visa - Work $150 + $95 Service Charge
-
-
I suggest reapplying to the murals category with the utility box denial included.
Yes but for me it's really a utility box and we have a lot like this in France, but too big for the first one and to small for the second one
You can continue to fight for your definition of a utility box; but a mural is still a mural regardless of what it's painted on...
-
That's the curse of community based decision making at its finest...you would think they worked for the government...
one of the reasons I pretty much gave Waymarking a pass
I suggest reapplying to the murals category with the utility box denial included.
-
Slightly of topic
Consider deploying and finding your groups own "unlisted" caches...
It provides an opportunity to show the game and a variety of hides/sizes/difficulty/terrains) while not impacting the game proper.
-
Frankly, it would only be a different path and different structure to the same end. Both service delivery models have advantages and disadvantages. Some have been highlighted. One salient point to consider is that non-profit does not mean free...
A non-profit I know provides an annual 3 day hands on course for about 600 bucks and normally land just over the break even point, with a little left over for contingencies, tool maintenance, and insurance.
-
For those who have forgotten (or didn't know)...
Groundspeak Acquires My Geocaching Profile (December 15, 2010)
http://www.cachemania.com/geocaching-stats-tab-favorites/Groundspeak/2010/12/
It's obvious that GS has integrated some of the MGP stats in your GS profile page, whether it runs MGP site or just has access to the "methods" is maybe debatable.
-
When I started caching pretty much all geocaches had a pen or pencil. It was expected. Even now, most caches i find around here still have a pen or pencil, so bringing a pen along rarely crosses my mind. Well until those instance where I find a cache without one. I've logged in with the ash from a cigar, the burnt end of a match, a crumbled leaf, a soft stone and even used my fingernail to indent my initials into the paper.
^^
Improvising works of course and there is always this option available as well...
"InsertCacherName" posted a note for "CacheWithoutaPen" -
in the past, pressing " call " after dialing 911 turned the radios on. i would assume roaming to whichever tower was available is what happens next?
Tx good to know
location data hasnt been available to 911 operators we have talked with in the past, maybe it's fixed now? no idea.
Phone data maybe not (not even now) tower triangulation probably as its passive I guess.
i bet since government agencies run the 911 services, were could find one station that can user location services provided by the phone, and another that doesn't know how.
I am sure the regulatory landscape (and technologies) are complex...
-
ohgood
Question (for the cell phone expert).
Since regulations require a cell phone to be able to dial 911 (even without a plan) and potentially give the phones location, how does that reconcile with "Airplane" mode and "Radios Off"?
-
[*]A few years ago, my GPSr suddenly decided to apply a consistent ~400 metre offset to my position. As I moved around, the track on my GPSr showed the correct movement, just in the wrong spot. I've cached in that same area many other times before and after, but it only happened that once.
[*]A couple of years ago, I was in a park that I've cached in numerous times. This time, a consistent ~1 km offset was applied to my position. Again, it correctly reflected my movements, just offset by a significant amount. About 2 hours later, it slowly corrected back to the correct position.
I had an offset by a few thousand miles once, when I was caching somewhere around El Paso or New Mexico. Thought I had just lost the map information until I saw that the map was there, it was just in the Atlantic Ocean, just off the coast of Benin, I believe. It was like that for most of the day and then came back to normal. Unfortunately, I had already tried a factory reset (to no avail) and had to rebuild all my custom settings.
Although it does not happen often, a GPS satellite can begin to send out corrupted signals therefore positional solutions using the corrupted data will be off until its repaired. Further, sometimes the GPS constellation (positional coverage of satellites) can be poor resulting in loss of positional accuracy. Sometimes even too many satellites near the horizon can degrade the GPS solutions.
Higher end GPSr's often have the ability to reject specific satellites (if you know one is in error) and implement a horizon cut off normally increasing positional accuracy.
-
Sorry a little off topic..
Personally, I feel like unless the statistic can be 100% objectively accurate (in this case, the D/T ratings reflect real and actual difficulty and terrain to any reasonable person), the challenge is meaningless. I don't see the Fizzy grid as a meaningful statistic since it's virtually impossible to verify it's accuracy on a cache-by-cache basis. But then, all those folks who just want to fill in another grid likely don't care THAT much about such things...
J Grouchy, I have to respectfully disagree. As I stated previously I cache and complete challenges for myself. To categorically assume everyone who works towards or completes a challenge as a dishonest, cheating, throwdowner, system gamer, all about the numbers cacher (I'm paraphrasing) is disingenuous and disrespectful. There are many who still hold to a sense of honour and frankly we don't need (nor care) for someone to "100% objectively evaluate" our results because we already hold ourselves to high standards.
-
Leave the speciality caches (and higher difficulty) for now and find more traditional caches... your experience and finding techniques will grow as you learn to recognise standard containers, hides, and techniques.
Note: Be aware that google maps/earth is not infallible and often the imagery is offset from reality...so be cautious with "Google Earth, I know I was looking in the right place"
-
I am fully aware this cutoff date is a double-edged sword. For the past several years, I have been considering changing the cutoff requirement. However, I'd had people praise the early cutoff date, citing it as a badge of honor and what made the cache worthwhile
As a cacher I don't so much compete with others as I do myself, it's of little interest that someone else had a harder/easier time with completing a challenge. I still complete challenges now not publishable on GC.com for my own interest (and to my own standards often the same or harder than published), we all deserve our own adventures.
However I do empathize that meeting increasingly harder demands may improve the challenge experience for some, and changing or lowering the requirements may be perceived as undermining the achievement of others.
If you want to keep the date restriction, consider hiding an entirely separate Fizzy Challenge with no date restriction. That one would get more new visitors, and the "sanctity" of finds on the original challenge would not be violated.
There is no perfect answer here, but I am leaning to the Leprechauns suggestion of keeping the original cache the same and then create a new "10 Year anniversary" fizzy challenge... maybe it will inspire others to try more restrictive versions!
-
I suppose a nano size might help but imo, it's not really needed. A nano is definitely a micro. As far as the guidelines go, i believe there are already good descriptions for the different sizes there. The problem is as i stated above, many people play but don't read the guidelines in the first place.
I am not so sure it's creep but our perception/expectation. A small is defined as 100ml to 1l in volume many "pill bottles" are larger than 100ml (roughly just under a 1/2 of a cup) and are rightly classified as small its just we rarely see anything that approach's the upper limit of the small clasification.
The examples I recall use 16 year old container examples (they have evolved mostly to a LnL standard) and were often given in a relative volume of space IIRC, not the easiest to grasp for some of us.
Micro – Tiny containers that most likely will only hold a log sheet, e.g. a film canister.
Small – Just big enough to fit a sandwich. Holds only a small logbook and small items, e.g. a small plastic container. Note: Please don’t put a sandwich in your gecoache.
Regular – Think shoe box. If you could fit a pair of shoes inside, you’re golden, e.g. an ammo box.
Large – Think Bigfoot’s shoe box. If he could fit his hiking boots inside, it should probably be labelled as a Large, e.g. a 5 gallon bucket.
Other Categorizations
For times when the traditional categories simply aren’t enough, you might need to use the following:
Nano – For the very tiniest of geocaches. ‘Nano’ is not officially listed on geocache pages, so players should mark Nanos as Micros, e.g. a fake bolt.
Other – Unusual geocache containers that just don’t fit into other categories, e.g. a magnetic strip.
Unknown – For when a little extra surprise is needed, e.g. when knowing the size of the container would completely give away the find.
Sizes
micro: Less than 100ml. Examples: a 35 mm film canister or smaller, typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet. A nano cache is a common sub-type of a micro cache that is less than 10ml and can only hold a small logsheet.
small: 100ml or larger, but less than 1L. Example: A sandwich-sized plastic container or similar. Holds only a small logbook and small items.
regular: 1L or larger, but less than 20L. Examples: a plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox.
large: 20L or larger. Example: A large bucket.e.g. 5-gallon bucket (about 20 liters)
other: See the cache description for information. Unusual geocache containers that just don't fit into other categories.
-
.png)
1
-
-
Modify the database to allow for more size choices, update and further standardize the GC descriptions, improve the website (wiki whatever) to further educate and re-enforce correct size choice...
nah that's just crazy talk...
-
One thing I learned early in my caching career that helped me focus on writing longer logs was: write logs for me.
Very good point. I use my own logs all the time. I'd still claim I'm writing for the CO first, and other seekers second, but if I can't remember a cache from reading my own log, I consider it a failure. So I can't say having the record for myself is the reason I write longer logs, but it is a convenient side effect, and considering what I'd need to know myself helps me identify what would help anyone else reading it.
Heresy! Dam your eyes for longer logs!
Logs are for hints, clues, tips, and spoiler pics. Cachers don't have the space or bandwith to display your novel on their phone/GPSr. No one, especially the cache owner gives a carp about your adventure, a couple of short lines are required at most as cache owners don't have the time to read more than three and god forbid if you find two or more of their caches and repeat yourself somewhat...TFTC and move on
In all seriousness I agree, I try to write adventure logs for me and my future self (with varying degrees of success) if the cache owner appreciates them so much the better, if they don't...C'est la vie.
-
Im fairly certain two things will happen if I change anything about the track points:
1 I'll screw it up
2 someone will call me a liar for having changed values (already happened, without changing anything)
I would prefer to just upload untouched racks, and let whoever wants to dissect them have at it.
OK, fair enough (consider stop using it as an example though).
I'm recording without Wi-Fi/cellular/Bluetooth/dlna/etc (aka airplane mode) most of the time already, but for these tracks, of course, no assistance from the evil towers of data.
For any sort of quantitative and comparative analysis you need to control the experiment. With the radio on and off are valid test points as well, but if you are interested in GPS accuracy (vice device accuracy) then you have to use the same baseline.
I see what you mean about using a known survey marker, but I have no idea where to find them. decades ago I photographed a lot of them across the nation, but dumped those photos long ago. gotta list?
You can poke around the GC.com benchmarking areas and the NGS. I may endeavour to dig out some of my data buried in logs (I have potentially 140 points with a mix of phone and GPS) not a statistically significant amount but a start.
the only way I can guarantee I follow the same course while recording is to.... do it all the same. of course the points will be at different points along the route, so I think you might be hinting this is a poor way of gathering data? I'm game for whatever.
Track errors (not being on the same line for another test) just introduces additional error that gets hidden in the system error (your bike tracks may be better than you think). Tracking one edge of the sidewalk or the other may lessen biases in your data opposed to walking the sidewalk. If the track is uncontrolled the random errors will be attributed back to the device instead of the track.
-
that particular track will never be made public, it jest can't. :-)
How about minusing the Nominal (lowest) Degree Lat and Nominal Degree Long from the data obfuscating your position but still preserving the data relationship. (For example if the positional data is Lat N12 34.567, just minus 12 degrees.)
I've compared point data (yes from within the app) and it's consistent with the screen shots from above. honestly I would like to prove it wrong or poor, but each time I test by repeating a trail or locating a single point, it's the same results.
In this case you really only test the repeatability of your device and without the raw data, no one can validate (or refute) your conclusions. As for controls I would be less concerned about open sky and more concerned with the cell network introducing any periodic or systemic errors or enhancements. I would do the test with the radio off. If you want to test the accuracy you need to test against a known baseline, either known survey markers/benchmarks or a post-processed DGPS solution of some form.
would you consider a street track , with open sky, fair game for analyzing?
Sure, if you want to repeat the data acquisition... How do you ensure your track is the same each time you do the route?
-
I'm not sure if I missed something you meant to highlight, but it just looks like a block quote of text on my browser.
was there a specific point ? :-)
Yes, it clearly explains Time To First Fix (TTFF) that directly relates to the OP's question/discussion regarding GPS "accuracy and response times". It explains why some devices "appear" to have a faster TTFF and some tricks that can be used to speed up the TTFF. For good quality GPS measurements your receiver needs a copy of the almanac and the ephemeris data.
In the fields of science, engineering and statistics, the accuracy of a measurement system is the degree of closeness of measurements of a quantity to that quantity's true value.[1] The precision of a measurement system, related to reproducibility and repeatability, is the degree to which repeated measurements under unchanged conditions show the same results.[1][2] Although the two words precision and accuracy can be synonymous in colloquial use, they are deliberately contrasted in the context of the scientific method.A measurement system can be accurate but not precise, precise but not accurate, neither, or both. For example, if an experiment contains a systematic error, then increasing the sample size generally increases precision but does not improve accuracy. The result would be a consistent yet inaccurate string of results from the flawed experiment. Eliminating the systematic error improves accuracy but does not change precision.
In context of the above definitions, you present some pictures that "appear" to show your phone provides precise data and you assume accurate (but that is not proven its assumed). However, it's a little disingenuous to try to illustrate 33' errors on a 2 mile scale where differences between the tracks are visually indistinguishable. Not to mention that the receiver built in "accuracy" measurements are normally estimates and are subject to a significant amount of manufactures "fudging" often just to "appear" to be the best.
It's just like cell phone signal strength measurements, where one phone shows 5 bars and one phone shows 2, where under the hood they are essentially the same value just "displayed" to an advantage.
How about uploading your raw data and letting us have a look. I also suggest that you survey in some existing survey monuments (with known coordinates) for a start of an accuracy assessment.
-
Time to first fix
The TTFF is commonly broken down into three more specific scenarios, as defined in the GPS equipment guide:
Cold or Factory: The receiver is missing, or has inaccurate estimates of, its position, velocity, the time, or the visibility of any of the GPS satellites. As such, the receiver must systematically search for all possible satellites. After acquiring a satellite signal, the receiver can begin to obtain approximate information on all the other satellites, called the almanac. This almanac is transmitted repeatedly over 12.5 minutes. Almanac data can be received from any of the GPS satellites and is considered valid for up to 180 days. Manufacturers typically claim the factory TTFF to be 15 minutes.
Warm or Normal: The receiver has estimates of the current time within 20 seconds, the current position within 100 kilometers, and its velocity within 25 m/s, and it has valid almanac data. It must acquire each satellite signal and obtain that satellite's detailed orbital information, called ephemeris data. Each satellite broadcasts its ephemeris data every 30 seconds, and is valid for up to four hours.
Hot or standby: The receiver has valid time, position, almanac, and ephemeris data, enabling a rapid acquisition of satellite signals. The time required of a receiver in this state to calculate a position fix may also be termed Time to Subsequent fix (TTSF)
Many receivers can use as many as twelve channels simultaneously, allowing quicker fixes.[1] Many cell phones reduce the time to first fix by using assisted GPS (aGPS): they acquire almanac and ephemeris data over a fast network connection from the cell phone operator rather than over the slow radio connection from the satellites.
.png)
"Friend to Find" promotion
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Slightly on/off topic
It's a transparent fairly standard marketing ploy by a commercial business with no hidden agenda. We are all inundated daily; with ads, flyers, coupons, online offers, membership plans, discount books and "free" samples. Why is Groundspeak being perceived/judged any different?
A souvenir may have some intrinsic value or simply be a symbol of past experience. However without the souvenir owner's input and context the symbolic meaning and value is invisible. Via context; it's quite clear that J Grouchy was referencing Geocaching Souvenirs (and Badges) as provided by Groundspeak through members' profiles and not marginalising *all* souvenirs. It seems you are suggesting that *all* souvenirs have meaning to everyone, when that is merely the inverse perspective of what you are calling J Grouchy out for...
Your Japan souvenir and the mother's pictures are meaningless to me, just as my branded golf shift and anyone's FTF's are meaningless to you. Obviously, its a personal perspective and value of meaning for any souvenir, where we have to extend to others the freedom to make their own determination of meaning...
and in this case I have to agree with J Grouchy, the Friend to Find reward is meaningless (to me)