Jump to content

MartyFouts

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    357
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MartyFouts

  1. quote:Originally posted by georgeandmary:Clever containers, I'm not talking about rubermaid or a typical camo pattern on an ammo can. Those are good solid cache stuff but lately I've been looking for, and appreciating more creative endevors. george Remember: Half the people you meet are below average. http://img.Groundspeak.com/track/5867_200.gif not all of which i've been able to find. keep up the, um, good, work kg6nee
  2. i like the thrill of the spot and the beauty of the hunt, myself. The thing about the thrill of the hunt is that there are really three thrills: 1) Figuring out where to go -- available only in multicaches and some puzzle caches 2) Figuring out how to get there -- which consist of both the research and the act of getting to where the gps reads 'distance 0' 3) Finding the object of the quest Because so many geocaches are tree tuperware #3 doesn't thrill me much anymore. #2 is where most of my time geocaching is spent, so I'd better find it thrilling, or i've got the wrong hobby. I haven't found enough caches that require much #1 activity. Straightahead multicaches are just ordinary caches with lots of waypoint, so they fall under #2 with a twist. So, in all, the "perfect" geocache requires that I solve a puzzle to find the destination which turns out to require a long hike in a park I've never been to before. At the end of the hike there's a cleverly hidden cache container with a log book to sign, or a unique virtual.
  3. This forum, plus encouragement from the hams on #geocache, convinced me to start studying last week. Took all four element exams Saturday. Passed the written ones. Will retest on Morse in a couple of weeks. Talked my wife into taking the tech test. She aced it and is now studying Morse and the general. Say hi to two brand new hams: KG6NEE - Marty KG5NEF - Jeanne
  4. First I get my weekly pocket query .loc file and convert it into a CSV file. Then I feed it to Microsoft's Streets and Trips 2002. This gives me a general pushpin map that I can use for planning caching trips. When I pick a cache, if it's urban, I use S&T to help me do route planning. If it looks like it'll be much of a hike, I take a quick look at the USGS Top using National Geographic's Topo! product. More often than not, it's in a local park that has a trail map online in a pdf format. So I gather that up and take a look at it as well. When I have a day's caching planned out, and there are more than a handful of caches involved, I go back to S&T, and 'pushpin' the parking spots. I then ask S&T to give me a route description. The route description and the park maps go into the PDA, along with fragments of the cache descriptions. (Mobi sucks. GPX will rule.) If the cache is in a rural area with no park trail map, I'll print the relevant sections of topo map. And away I go.
  5. First I get my weekly pocket query .loc file and convert it into a CSV file. Then I feed it to Microsoft's Streets and Trips 2002. This gives me a general pushpin map that I can use for planning caching trips. When I pick a cache, if it's urban, I use S&T to help me do route planning. If it looks like it'll be much of a hike, I take a quick look at the USGS Top using National Geographic's Topo! product. More often than not, it's in a local park that has a trail map online in a pdf format. So I gather that up and take a look at it as well. When I have a day's caching planned out, and there are more than a handful of caches involved, I go back to S&T, and 'pushpin' the parking spots. I then ask S&T to give me a route description. The route description and the park maps go into the PDA, along with fragments of the cache descriptions. (Mobi sucks. GPX will rule.) If the cache is in a rural area with no park trail map, I'll print the relevant sections of topo map. And away I go.
  6. quote:Originally posted by SuperGenius:and now all I need to go along with my new channel is a pair of those Rhino's! I am still waiting for them to hit the stores. Pepper Horizontals where it's at! gonna be a while on the rinos. FCC gave garmin permission to extend their wavier from the rules again, but that means Garmin's actually got to build something that works.
  7. quote:Originally posted by SuperGenius:and now all I need to go along with my new channel is a pair of those Rhino's! I am still waiting for them to hit the stores. Pepper Horizontals where it's at! gonna be a while on the rinos. FCC gave garmin permission to extend their wavier from the rules again, but that means Garmin's actually got to build something that works.
  8. I've done 8 miles with 2500/3000 feet in one long day, and I'm not in particularly good shape. 4+ days for 10 miles with 4500 feet is easily within the range of someone who does a lot of backpacking. I sure wouldn't recommend it as a first backpacking trip and I sure wouldn't try it in the shape I'm in now.
  9. quote:Originally posted by kc8ubw:New to this game. 2 finds in two attempts in 2 days. Lucky or what? Anyway, just wondering if there are caches hidden out there with multiple waypoints? Whether it be because of terrain or otherwise. Also wondering if there are any rules against multiple waypoints? Asking because when we're ready, I have an excellent place for a hide, but am still trying to figure out how to use a single waypoint and not endanger person and/or property. There are, indeed, caches with multiple waypoints. Puzzle caches have multiple stages, where you have to solve a puzzle at each waypoint in order to find the coordinates for some further waypoint or the actual cache. Also, people often put multiple waypoints in the text of the cache description for reasons similar to yours. Go ahead and add the extra waypoints you think are appropriate.
  10. quote:Originally posted by kc8ubw:New to this game. 2 finds in two attempts in 2 days. Lucky or what? Anyway, just wondering if there are caches hidden out there with multiple waypoints? Whether it be because of terrain or otherwise. Also wondering if there are any rules against multiple waypoints? Asking because when we're ready, I have an excellent place for a hide, but am still trying to figure out how to use a single waypoint and not endanger person and/or property. There are, indeed, caches with multiple waypoints. Puzzle caches have multiple stages, where you have to solve a puzzle at each waypoint in order to find the coordinates for some further waypoint or the actual cache. Also, people often put multiple waypoints in the text of the cache description for reasons similar to yours. Go ahead and add the extra waypoints you think are appropriate.
  11. quote:Originally posted by Raouljan:Go this from my handy-dandy massive collection of repeater links http://www.accesscom.com/~dave6592/scv-rptrs.html As I remember, the Bay Area is covered like a glove repeater-wise... you should get much better covereage than cell phone Thanks for the pointer. Passed my written tests this morning. Will try the code test again in two weeks. So I'll be able to check this idea out before the end of the month.
  12. It's easy. Anyone who's got a bit of time and is willing to study can do it. Here's how I proved that: About 8 days ago, due to chats with geocachers in the forums and on #geocaching IRC channel, I finally decided to get my amateur license. I went to the local ham store (a Ham Radio Outlet, in Sunnyvale, CA), and got the ARRL study guides for the three written elements. I also got some free Morse practice software (Morse Academy) and the ARRL Morse CD roms. I read the technician book carefully, as suggested, and took practice tests at hamtest.com. This made me realize that the technician test is very easy So I talked my wife into reading for the tech test and I read most of the material in the general license book and some of the material in the extra license. Meanwhile, I practiced Morse code, twice a day, for a half hour, as recommended. This morning, my wife and I went to a test session in Cupertino. She took, and passed with a perfect score, the tech test. I took the code test. Failed it miserably. No real surprise, I knew I wasn't ready, but only took the test for the opportunity to practice taking it. I then took the tech test. Passed, but with a lower score than my wife. So we both are now licensed hams. I then took the general test. Passed it easily as well. This convinced several people to recommend that I go ahead and take the extra test as well. This is a good idea, because, at that point, it cost me nothing but time. I squeeked by! This puts me in the rather unique position of having passed all three written tests, but only having a tech license because of the code. But my wife and I are going to keep studying code, and she's going to keep studying the general book. Expect her to have her general license and me to have my extra license in two weeks.
  13. It's easy. Anyone who's got a bit of time and is willing to study can do it. Here's how I proved that: About 8 days ago, due to chats with geocachers in the forums and on #geocaching IRC channel, I finally decided to get my amateur license. I went to the local ham store (a Ham Radio Outlet, in Sunnyvale, CA), and got the ARRL study guides for the three written elements. I also got some free Morse practice software (Morse Academy) and the ARRL Morse CD roms. I read the technician book carefully, as suggested, and took practice tests at hamtest.com. This made me realize that the technician test is very easy So I talked my wife into reading for the tech test and I read most of the material in the general license book and some of the material in the extra license. Meanwhile, I practiced Morse code, twice a day, for a half hour, as recommended. This morning, my wife and I went to a test session in Cupertino. She took, and passed with a perfect score, the tech test. I took the code test. Failed it miserably. No real surprise, I knew I wasn't ready, but only took the test for the opportunity to practice taking it. I then took the tech test. Passed, but with a lower score than my wife. So we both are now licensed hams. I then took the general test. Passed it easily as well. This convinced several people to recommend that I go ahead and take the extra test as well. This is a good idea, because, at that point, it cost me nothing but time. I squeeked by! This puts me in the rather unique position of having passed all three written tests, but only having a tech license because of the code. But my wife and I are going to keep studying code, and she's going to keep studying the general book. Expect her to have her general license and me to have my extra license in two weeks.
  14. Oh yeah. Getting out has made my dust allergies worse to the point where I have to use a nasal inhaler. My trick knee's acting up because of the amount of steep slope hiking I'm doing. My heel tendinitis is wose than it's ever been. I've dropped something heavy on my right hand and bruised it badly. I've jammed my toe. On the other hand, my hypertension is under control, and I can walk a lot farther than I could five months ago. Wouldn't give it up for the world.
  15. quote:Originally posted by datum:I thought I knew the answer to this…but maybe I don’t. For the sake of discussion: Would you claim a find for a virtual cache that you are able to answer the question to without visiting it? Would you claim a find for a virtual cache that you may have visited before it was posted (say two years ago) but knew the answers to the question(s)? If you answered yes to the last question – What is a reasonable time in which to claim a virtual….two years….five years….ten? Doesn’t matter. Is it up to the virtual cache sponsor to be very specific as to what they require in order to claim the virtual as a find? I have mixed feelings about virtuals and locationless caches. Seems to me there is a lot of room for interpretation as to what constitutes a find. Of course, none of this matters. We’re all doing this for fun. We’re all doing this for ourselves. You’re only fooling yourself? So does ANYTHING go? Just curious….. I, personally, won't log a virtual unless I visit the site(s) specifically to do so. On the other hand, as a cache hider, I don't ask people if they went specifically, although almost all of the logs of my one virtual cache indicate that they have.
  16. quote:Originally posted by Randall J. Berry:I gave up buying Audiovox gear a long time ago. Unless they have shaped up they are VERY poor in the workmanship and reliability department. Besides, the Audiovox to my knowledge does NOT have the capability to transmit your cords to the other person via FRS/GMRS. Garmin I think has the patent pending on that. Which I believe is the delay. Randall J. Berry davros@mdgps.net) http://www.mdgps.net Garmin has a patent appplication for their Person-to-Person Positioning (P2PP) stuff. Can't recall if it has been granted or not, although it pretty obviously shouldn't be. That, however, is not the cause for the delay. For Garmin to legally do P2PP on FRS, the FCC has to change the rules. Garmin has applied for the rule change, the FCC was going to, but, to date, they have not. Also, all consumer electronics devices need FCC approval, and Garmin has apparently not gotten that either.
  17. quote:Originally posted by CJ_Moof:Quote: I'm not sure if it will actually come out though because as I inderstand it, it's illegal to send data via FRS. Why is that illegal? I don't doubt if it is or not, just can't think up a good reason for it. Maybe the FCC doesn't need a good reason? The Rino looks very appealing... I keep loosing my dog at the dogpark. Maybe I could ductape one onto her.... wonder if has a "transmit location every 30 seconds" option? FRS is defined to be "VOICE ONLY". The reason has to do with the intent of the band, which is, after all, "FAMILY" radio service. Voice-only and low-power are meant to keep the band from being attractive to anyone else. Garmin went to the FCC and asked them to change the rules. The FCC proposed the rule change way back in the winter, but, as far as we can tell checking the federal register, they never actually got around to it. The FCC proposed change is very limited, allowing only the digital transmission of location information.
  18. quote:Originally posted by Jamie Z: quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:Technically, you can only publish an identifiable image of individual, (in the US, other jurisdictions vary,) either with their prior consent, or because the image shows them in a newsworthy endeavor. Marty, this may be true, but we're not publishing anything. By publishing, one assumes a profit is generated. If I'm just out with my camera and take pictures of people in public, I'm not breaking any law, but if I try to _sell_ those pictures without consent of the people in the picture, that's where I can run into trouble. A webcam shot of someone looting a cache is not going to be published anywhere where any money is generated, so I think we'd be safe with that tactic. Jamie Legally, a profit motive is not required for publication, and there have been cases about the circumstances under which photos are allowed on web sites. Case law on the net is, at the best of times, tricky, but people have lost libel suits involving publishing photos on web sites. I would be very wary of posting photos along with assertions of guilt unless I was very certain I could convince a jury of guilt, because I'm not at all interested in losing a libel suit. For an interesting (but unrelated) take on how complicated the issue of web publication is, check into the law suits around Kurt Vonnegut's electronic publication rights.
  19. quote:Originally posted by Jamie Z: quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:Technically, you can only publish an identifiable image of individual, (in the US, other jurisdictions vary,) either with their prior consent, or because the image shows them in a newsworthy endeavor. Marty, this may be true, but we're not publishing anything. By publishing, one assumes a profit is generated. If I'm just out with my camera and take pictures of people in public, I'm not breaking any law, but if I try to _sell_ those pictures without consent of the people in the picture, that's where I can run into trouble. A webcam shot of someone looting a cache is not going to be published anywhere where any money is generated, so I think we'd be safe with that tactic. Jamie Legally, a profit motive is not required for publication, and there have been cases about the circumstances under which photos are allowed on web sites. Case law on the net is, at the best of times, tricky, but people have lost libel suits involving publishing photos on web sites. I would be very wary of posting photos along with assertions of guilt unless I was very certain I could convince a jury of guilt, because I'm not at all interested in losing a libel suit. For an interesting (but unrelated) take on how complicated the issue of web publication is, check into the law suits around Kurt Vonnegut's electronic publication rights.
  20. Add me to the NiMH list. I've got a Maha charger that can do AA and AAA batteries. I use AA in my GPS and am just now starting to experiment with the AAA in my PDA. It's a rare day when I don't get through the entire day on one set of batteries, but I always have two sets ready to go.
  21. Welcome to the support group. We have a 12 step program, by the way. Step 1 is: buy a gps.
  22. quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): quote:Originally posted by LarsThorwald: I'd be pretty careful of this from a constitutional rights/invasion of privacy standpoint. From my limited knowledge of law, I believe you can take a picture of anyone and publish it, as long as you don't profit from that person's likeness. Otherwise the newspapers would have a heck of a lot of lawsuits on their hands. I doubt a photo of someone would deter them from taking a cache, unless you can give out particular's on the individual, like their name. A fourth thought is to create permission style caches, where someone would have to ask permission from the owner before receiving access to their caches. After permission was granted, they could see all of that user's caches. It beats the account-only cache idea, where you need to be logged into geocaching.com - which can be easily bypassed with a lame hotmail or yahoo account. Jeremy Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location I just got around to reading this thread, and noticing the comments about photo legality. Technically, you can only publish an identifiable image of individual, (in the US, other jurisdictions vary,) either with their prior consent, or because the image shows them in a newsworthy endeavor. Newspapers do, from time to time, get sued for photos that identify people, and sometimes lose because the image wasn't deemed newsworthy. what's been suggested in the early parts of this thread is legally risky. You'd better be able to prove in a court of law that the person really was doing what you're accusing them of, or they'll be able to successfully sue you for libel.
  23. quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): quote:Originally posted by LarsThorwald: I'd be pretty careful of this from a constitutional rights/invasion of privacy standpoint. From my limited knowledge of law, I believe you can take a picture of anyone and publish it, as long as you don't profit from that person's likeness. Otherwise the newspapers would have a heck of a lot of lawsuits on their hands. I doubt a photo of someone would deter them from taking a cache, unless you can give out particular's on the individual, like their name. A fourth thought is to create permission style caches, where someone would have to ask permission from the owner before receiving access to their caches. After permission was granted, they could see all of that user's caches. It beats the account-only cache idea, where you need to be logged into geocaching.com - which can be easily bypassed with a lame hotmail or yahoo account. Jeremy Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location I just got around to reading this thread, and noticing the comments about photo legality. Technically, you can only publish an identifiable image of individual, (in the US, other jurisdictions vary,) either with their prior consent, or because the image shows them in a newsworthy endeavor. Newspapers do, from time to time, get sued for photos that identify people, and sometimes lose because the image wasn't deemed newsworthy. what's been suggested in the early parts of this thread is legally risky. You'd better be able to prove in a court of law that the person really was doing what you're accusing them of, or they'll be able to successfully sue you for libel.
  24. Couple weeks ago I went to Pleasanton for a personal cache-athon. It was not the best possible trip, I got NFs on 4 caches. I logged all four. I've heard back from three of the cache hiders, and the caches are definitely still there. (In three cases, I suspected it was, in the fourth, I'm still surprised I couldn't find it. ) But I still think that logging them was a good thing. I encourage it: if you looked for the cache, log an NF, even if you assume it was your failure to find the cache rather than the cache not being there.
  25. Couple weeks ago I went to Pleasanton for a personal cache-athon. It was not the best possible trip, I got NFs on 4 caches. I logged all four. I've heard back from three of the cache hiders, and the caches are definitely still there. (In three cases, I suspected it was, in the fourth, I'm still surprised I couldn't find it. ) But I still think that logging them was a good thing. I encourage it: if you looked for the cache, log an NF, even if you assume it was your failure to find the cache rather than the cache not being there.
×
×
  • Create New...