The End of Geocaching?!

[+wmpastor]

Technology improves daily - often by quantum leaps.

 

Today we search a 30' radius to account for the error of our GPSr and the GPSr of the CO who placed the cache. Military and government GPSr's are much more precise, & larger and more expensive.

 

It is only a matter of time before a consumer GPSr has similar precision, and even far higher precision than is possible now, with an acceptable size and price. Just look at the evolution of computers.

 

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

 

What will happen?? Bye-bye, ammo cases! Hello, micro-nanos! Tree caches may become far more common, because they could exploit the z-coordinate and remain much more interesting than most other caches. In other words, the coords would draw the tiny circle in which the cache is hidden, but you would not know how high or low the cache was placed. Only the terrain rating would hint at whether you'd find the cache at the base of the tree or 20 meters above the ground.

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

[+Roman!]

Technology improves daily - often by quantum leaps.

 

Today we search a 30' radius to account for the error of our GPSr and the GPSr of the CO who placed the cache. Military and government GPSr's are much more precise, & larger and more expensive.

 

It is only a matter of time before a consumer GPSr has similar precision, and even far higher precision than is possible now, with an acceptable size and price. Just look at the evolution of computers.

 

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

 

What will happen?? Bye-bye, ammo cases! Hello, micro-nanos! Tree caches may become far more common, because they could exploit the z-coordinate and remain much more interesting than most other caches. In other words, the coords would draw the tiny circle in which the cache is hidden, but you would not know how high or low the cache was placed. Only the terrain rating would hint at whether you'd find the cache at the base of the tree or 20 meters above the ground.

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

 

Soft coordinates, I know people that use that strategy now.

[+WarNinjas]

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

I like tree caches as well but like you say here 10-20 years. Will we be up for it then?

[+K13]

In 20 years, the oceans will have risen from the polar ice melting, so those tree caches will be accessible by kayak. Just ask AL Gore.

[+SwineFlew]

In 20 years, the oceans will have risen from the polar ice melting, so those tree caches will be accessible by kayak. Just ask AL Gore.

Good bye Texas.

[etarace]

And then ten years from now some jerk will come along to a cache I hid in 2014 and make some snotty comment about coords being off by 12 feet, and give "better" ones.

[+wmpastor]

Probably rather than soft coords posted by the CO, there will be one less digit given on the published coords. Then the GZ circle will once again be large enough to make it interesting. So the game will survive when the consumer-grade ultra-precise GPSr's arrive. Yay!

[+wmpastor]

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

I like tree caches as well but like you say here 10-20 years. Will we be up for it then?

No problem. You'll be able to buy a consumer-grade drone at Radio Shack, fly it up into the tree, and study the hi-def video images while sitting on a log down below. If you opted for the more expensive robot-drone, then your drone can retrieve the cache or sign the log for you using a bar-code scanner.

 

The sport may get as pricey as polo for those going all-out with the best equipment. Discussion of $30 membership fees will become quaint.

[the3gmen]

Probably rather than soft coords posted by the CO, there will be one less digit given on the published coords. Then the GZ circle will once again be large enough to make it interesting. So the game will survive when the consumer-grade ultra-precise GPSr's arrive. Yay!

 

Only the elite premium members will get the extra digit.

[the3gmen]

Probably rather than soft coords posted by the CO, there will be one less digit given on the published coords. Then the GZ circle will once again be large enough to make it interesting. So the game will survive when the consumer-grade ultra-precise GPSr's arrive. Yay!

 

Only the elite premium members will get the extra digit.

[+geodarts]

A foot? Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku points to a foreseeable future where the accuracy will be within inches, the internet will be available through contact lenses, and nano technology will have replaced the clunky instruments and computers we now use. Driverless cars will take us where we need to go. That will be fine since the search is the least interesting thing about this game, but augmented reality will expand Wherigos into new areas, and give us almost unlimited information for earthcaches or puzzles. Perhaps the long awaited jet packs will place five star terrains within reach.

 

Either that, or no one will care because Florida will be under a few feet of water, dwindling resources, crop failure, and water will have led to population shifts and the planet is engulfed in war while people hope that the aliens will rescue us.

Edited August 13, 2014 by geodarts

[+JBnW]

With that kind of accuracy, cachers will be absolutely certain under which lamp post skirt the cache is hiding...and the find will be just as rewarding.

[+thebruce0]

I fail to see how extreme gps accuracy will reduce the size of geocache containers accordingly...

OTOH, extreme accuracy will weed out people who don't use their devices properly and blame it on their device or environment

[+narcissa]

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

I like tree caches as well but like you say here 10-20 years. Will we be up for it then?

No problem. You'll be able to buy a consumer-grade drone at Radio Shack, fly it up into the tree, and study the hi-def video images while sitting on a log down below. If you opted for the more expensive robot-drone, then your drone can retrieve the cache or sign the log for you using a bar-code scanner.

 

The sport may get as pricey as polo for those going all-out with the best equipment. Discussion of $30 membership fees will become quaint.

 

I've already submitted paperwork to trademark DroneCaching.

[+narcissa]

Technology improves daily - often by quantum leaps.

 

Today we search a 30' radius to account for the error of our GPSr and the GPSr of the CO who placed the cache. Military and government GPSr's are much more precise, & larger and more expensive.

 

It is only a matter of time before a consumer GPSr has similar precision, and even far higher precision than is possible now, with an acceptable size and price. Just look at the evolution of computers.

 

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

 

What will happen?? Bye-bye, ammo cases! Hello, micro-nanos! Tree caches may become far more common, because they could exploit the z-coordinate and remain much more interesting than most other caches. In other words, the coords would draw the tiny circle in which the cache is hidden, but you would not know how high or low the cache was placed. Only the terrain rating would hint at whether you'd find the cache at the base of the tree or 20 meters above the ground.

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

 

The best caches I've found were large containers that I could see from 40 feet away. For those of us who cache for the journey, greater accuracy won't be an issue.

[+wmpastor]

Technology improves daily - often by quantum leaps.

 

Today we search a 30' radius to account for the error of our GPSr and the GPSr of the CO who placed the cache. Military and government GPSr's are much more precise, & larger and more expensive.

 

It is only a matter of time before a consumer GPSr has similar precision, and even far higher precision than is possible now, with an acceptable size and price. Just look at the evolution of computers.

 

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

 

What will happen?? Bye-bye, ammo cases! Hello, micro-nanos! Tree caches may become far more common, because they could exploit the z-coordinate and remain much more interesting than most other caches. In other words, the coords would draw the tiny circle in which the cache is hidden, but you would not know how high or low the cache was placed. Only the terrain rating would hint at whether you'd find the cache at the base of the tree or 20 meters above the ground.

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

 

The best caches I've found were large containers that I could see from 40 feet away. For those of us who cache for the journey, greater accuracy won't be an issue.

So maybe there will be a return to the "good old days" of hiking and enjoying the journey.

[+sbell111]

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

[+wmpastor]

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

I like tree caches as well but like you say here 10-20 years. Will we be up for it then?

No problem. You'll be able to buy a consumer-grade drone at Radio Shack, fly it up into the tree, and study the hi-def video images while sitting on a log down below. If you opted for the more expensive robot-drone, then your drone can retrieve the cache or sign the log for you using a bar-code scanner.

 

The sport may get as pricey as polo for those going all-out with the best equipment. Discussion of $30 membership fees will become quaint.

 

I've already submitted paperwork to trademark DroneCaching.

The "ultimate" use of drones for caching will be where you don't even have to leave your car, or maybe even your home. Why risk injury, mosquito bites and a bad case of poison ivy??

[+thebruce0]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

Edited August 13, 2014 by thebruce0

[+Thrak]

Probably rather than soft coords posted by the CO, there will be one less digit given on the published coords. Then the GZ circle will once again be large enough to make it interesting. So the game will survive when the consumer-grade ultra-precise GPSr's arrive. Yay!

 

Only the elite premium members will get the extra digit.

 

Give it up plebes. The Platinum Members will pwn all of you! We won't even NEED coordinates. We will be allowed to claim a find for all geocaches in existence plus all future geocaches!!!

 

Bwahahahahahahahaaaa....

 

(Oh, wait. I think there are some people already doing that...)

Edited August 13, 2014 by Thrak

[+narcissa]

Technology improves daily - often by quantum leaps.

 

Today we search a 30' radius to account for the error of our GPSr and the GPSr of the CO who placed the cache. Military and government GPSr's are much more precise, & larger and more expensive.

 

It is only a matter of time before a consumer GPSr has similar precision, and even far higher precision than is possible now, with an acceptable size and price. Just look at the evolution of computers.

 

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

 

What will happen?? Bye-bye, ammo cases! Hello, micro-nanos! Tree caches may become far more common, because they could exploit the z-coordinate and remain much more interesting than most other caches. In other words, the coords would draw the tiny circle in which the cache is hidden, but you would not know how high or low the cache was placed. Only the terrain rating would hint at whether you'd find the cache at the base of the tree or 20 meters above the ground.

 

10 years; 20 tops. Are you ready?! I like tree caches, so bring it on!

 

The best caches I've found were large containers that I could see from 40 feet away. For those of us who cache for the journey, greater accuracy won't be an issue.

So maybe there will be a return to the "good old days" of hiking and enjoying the journey.

 

Or more caches hidden in thorny thickets.

[+sbell111]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

I'm not as confident as you are that TPTB would make that change. There doesn't seem to be much of a benefit to the company to do so.

[+wmpastor]

Picture that world. Your GPSr and the CO's will have a margin of error of one foot. In other words, barring a typo or transcription error, the search radius will be 24 inches (0.6 meters)!

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

Okay, but when greater accuracy is possible, the FTF-Hounds will clamor for a new format that reflects that accuracy. The FTF-game will be won by the fastest sprinters.

[+wmpastor]

Or more caches hidden in thorny thickets.

 

That's when you leave the drone in your car and bring along the miniature robot. The robot goes into the thorny thicket, of course. No scratches or boo-boos.

[+wmpastor]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

I'm not as confident as you are that TPTB would make that change. There doesn't seem to be much of a benefit to the company to do so.

Where there's a product there's a market. And if no market, someone creates a market. GPS service, like caching, will forever be free? No - those who want greater accuracy will get it - for a fee. Like GS and Google Earth, the so-called "Freemium" business model will go into effect. The basics for the masses, and the paying customers walk to the front of the line.

Edited August 13, 2014 by wmpastor

[+sbell111]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

I'm not as confident as you are that TPTB would make that change. There doesn't seem to be much of a benefit to the company to do so.

Where there's a product there's a market. And if no market, someone creates a market. GPS service, like caching, will forever be free? No - those who want greater accuracy will get it - for a fee. Like GS and Google Earth, the so-called "Freemium" business model will go into effect. The basics for the masses, and the paying customers walk to the front of the line.

Over the years, we've heard that argument pretty much every time someone's request for a change to the site has been denied and then again when a competitor site has implemented the change. Strangely, those sites are all but gone and this one seems OK (to an outsider).

 

The fact is, I don't think that the majority of cachers would really like having perfect coordinates. Follow the arrow to -0- and look down doesn't seem as fun to me as actually looking for something. Further, I suspect that the quickest way to get the idea denied is to suggest that it would help FTFers play their game.

 

Finally, the idea that the company should make the change if the majority of GPSrs could make use of the additional digit seems strange to me for a few reasons. First, it would ratchet up the drama because people would be wanting to 'correct' the coordinates for a huge chunk of the caches that are already in play. Second, I'm not sure how you would determine whether the majority of units in use in the game would be compliant. Are you only going to consider new units on the market or do you also factor in the huge number of players who happily play the game with current units?

[+JohnCNA]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

 

The Garmin GPSMAP 64 has a setting for 4 digits after the decimal point. I don't see an option for 4 digtits when marking a waypoint, though. So I don't see the point to that (yet).

[4wheelin_fool]

This is the pretty much the same thread that was posted about 10 years ago. I cannot find it, but it had a similar title and the same premise about accuracy.

[+thebruce0]

And I'm certainly not advocating for a 4th digit in DM format, not right now. But the argument could be made based on some comments, why have a 3rd digit, if the fun is in the search? We know some devices don't even give reliable accuracy to the 3rd digit My point was merely that the current listing precision is arbitrary and could easily be increased when devices are reliable to that accuracy (and of course if GS felt it worthwhile to make the change).

People complain about accurate coordinates right now with 3 digits - but no one can tell whether the initial reading or the finder's reading is more accurate, or if the reader's gps-use skill is better or worse, so regardless of the precision, that argument will always be around. but yes it may be more pronounced, especially on GPSs that don't actually have the precision. Calculations could result in 4+ decimal precision, but that's the device's best guess, based on averages collected together. But that was all beside the point...

Coordinate precision is arbitrary.

With today's devices, people would have been requesting better precision than straight D'M'S as well. As devices improve, I would not be surprised if people ask for better listing coordinate precision too. *shrug*

[+The A-Team]

The "ultimate" use of drones for caching will be where you don't even have to leave your car, or maybe even your home. Why risk injury, mosquito bites and a bad case of poison ivy??

Why wait for drones? There are lots of central Europeans doing this already...

 

I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info.

In 10-20 years, Groundspeak will be willing and able to make desired changes to the website? Now we're really thinking outside of the box!

 

 

:ph34r: :ph34r:

[+thebruce0]

In 10-20 years, Groundspeak will be willing and able to make desired changes to the website? Now we're really thinking outside of the box!

 

:ph34r: :ph34r:

By then the Live API will interface directly with our visual cortex. No more numbers, just pointers and icons!

[+The_Incredibles_]

Probably rather than soft coords posted by the CO, there will be one less digit given on the published coords. Then the GZ circle will once again be large enough to make it interesting. So the game will survive when the consumer-grade ultra-precise GPSr's arrive. Yay!

 

Only the elite premium members will get the extra digit.

 

That'll made them mad!

[+wmpastor]

This is the pretty much the same thread that was posted about 10 years ago. I cannot find it, but it had a similar title and the same premise about accuracy.

Honestly did not see an earlier thread, but how many threads are absolutely original? At least this topic isn't rehashed every month!

[+spotter/g]

Don't forget that most of the 'imprecision' is derived by the intentional degradation of the civilian GPS signal. The GPSr really has nothing to do with it.

[+MartyBartfast]

Don't forget that most of the 'imprecision' is derived by the intentional degradation of the civilian GPS signal.

That hasn't been the case since Selective Avaiability was turned off back in 2000, there would be no point in intentionally introducing errors into the system which still allow a consumer GPS to be accurate to within <10m.

[+The A-Team]

Don't forget that most of the 'imprecision' is derived by the intentional degradation of the civilian GPS signal. The GPSr really has nothing to do with it.

Uhhhhh....

Selective Availability was turned off on the order of Bill Clinton at midnight on May 2, 2000. That was the trigger for Dave Ulmer's creation of the GPS Stash Hunt, which led to the current worldwide obsession called geocaching. The GPS Block IIF satellites currently being launched don't even have that capability.

 

...or is there some conspiracy theory I haven't heard of?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Using the coordinate format that we currently use, this could never happen. The minimum search area would never fall below one thousandth of a minute (lat and lon). Depending on where you live, that's going to give a search area of something like thirty square feet regardless of how good the coordinates are.

 

Decimal minutes with 3 digit precision, as per the default for listings on gc.com, sure. But it's not the decimal minute format at issue... there's no maximum precision; especially if using decimal degrees. Even UTM can have much greater precision. The limit is arbitrary I'm sure GC would update the listing precision if the majority of devices could practically make use of the extra info. Heck just a jump to 4 decimals would be beneficial at that point.

 

The Garmin GPSMAP 64 has a setting for 4 digits after the decimal point. I don't see an option for 4 digtits when marking a waypoint, though. So I don't see the point to that (yet).

 

Perhaps, that's because precision is meaningless without accuracy?

[+Pork King]

I don't think improved accuracy will affect things to the point of ending the hobby. Personally, I wouldn't mind if my GPS took me exactly to the cache, as I am often more interested in the area the cache is hidden in, not the actual cache itself (providing it is an interesting area).

[+wmpastor]

I don't think improved accuracy will affect things to the point of ending the hobby. Personally, I wouldn't mind if my GPS took me exactly to the cache, as I am often more interested in the area the cache is hidden in, not the actual cache itself (providing it is an interesting area).

So in that case caching becomes no different than, say, going to a new store. "Let's see, 235 Main Street..." A street address takes you right there with no real search, & your new GPSr will take you right to the cache with no real search.

 

I see puzzle caches growing in popularity. Puzzles that the average thinking person can solve, not just super-geeks (said in a complimentary way).

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I don't think improved accuracy will affect things to the point of ending the hobby. Personally, I wouldn't mind if my GPS took me exactly to the cache, as I am often more interested in the area the cache is hidden in, not the actual cache itself (providing it is an interesting area).

That.

 

I want people to find my caches. I put my phone number in every listing so folks don't have to leave with a DNF unless they choose to. I hid mostly ammo cans but did hide a few film cans and one particularly evil nano that most finders have to PAF before finding.

 

To me the game has always been about location. Should anyone ask me what I like about the game my first answer is always "Discovering cool locations". Groundspeak chose the phrase "The language of location" for a reason.

 

Sure, there are lame hides in parking lots with not much more value than to add to a find total, but I have found many that took me to interesting places in 28 states that I would have never seen otherwise.

 

I get a chuckle every time I see 'THIS is the end of geocaching', which ignores Groundspeak's exponential growth - at least doubling the cache count every year for the first 12 years, a trend which may still continue, I haven't looked. Listing sites may come and go, but there will be no end of geocaching.

[+thebruce0]

I get a chuckle every time I see 'THIS is the end of geocaching', which ignores Groundspeak's exponential growth - at least doubling the cache count every year for the first 12 years, a trend which may still continue, I haven't looked. Listing sites may come and go, but there will be no end of geocaching.

 

That.

 

What they really mean is "THIS is the end of my geocaching hobby" (even though they stick around for a while, if not remain indefinitely after adjusting)

[4wheelin_fool]

This is the pretty much the same thread that was posted about 10 years ago. I cannot find it, but it had a similar title and the same premise about accuracy.

Honestly did not see an earlier thread, but how many threads are absolutely original? At least this topic isn't rehashed every month!

 

This isn't the thread I was thinking about, but one that's similar.

Death of Geocaching

 

I don't know how making it easier is going to hurt anything, as there are other aspects to keep it going such as visiting interesting locations, getting exercise, and numbers of course.

[+Trotter17]

I definitely don't think that having a more accurate GPS is going to hurt anything. If anything, I think I'd enjoy things more; I'm still having to navigate through terrain, find how to open the cache or discover how the cache is disguised, solve puzzles, discover new locations, and battle nature and the elements. Narrowing a search area just isn't going to be something that I see as a real negative.

[+DanOCan]

The best caches I've found were large containers that I could see from 40 feet away. For those of us who cache for the journey, greater accuracy won't be an issue.

That's what I was thinking. My enjoyment of caching comes from the journey, not the hunt. (Sure, sometimes the hunt is fun but most times I just find it tedious.) Bring on 1 foot accuracy!

[+jellis]

If anything it won't be the end of geocaching but the end of geocaching apps on smartphones.

[+beauxeault]

An improvement in coordinate accuracy could also justify a reduction in the minimum cache separation distance, which is imposed to prevent mistaking one cache for another nearby one. I can see Groundspeak perceiving an advantage to adding a fourth digit and simultaneously dropping the minimum separation to, say, 100 feet or 30 meters, as a way to accommodate new paying members in areas where saturation will have (by then) become a problem.

[+The A-Team]

An improvement in coordinate accuracy could also justify a reduction in the minimum cache separation distance, which is imposed to prevent mistaking one cache for another nearby one. I can see Groundspeak perceiving an advantage to adding a fourth digit and simultaneously dropping the minimum separation to, say, 100 feet or 30 meters, as a way to accommodate new paying members in areas where saturation will have (by then) become a problem.

That would only work if you assume that every cache was placed with the increased accuracy and that every seeker had such a device. That will never be the case, though. You'll always have legacy caches, where the coordinates may be tens of metres off due to tree cover/multi-path/whatever, and legacy devices which can't do the increased accuracy. There'll always be that guy with the yellow eTrex...

Edited August 14, 2014 by The A-Team

[+Roman!]

An improvement in coordinate accuracy could also justify a reduction in the minimum cache separation distance, which is imposed to prevent mistaking one cache for another nearby one. I can see Groundspeak perceiving an advantage to adding a fourth digit and simultaneously dropping the minimum separation to, say, 100 feet or 30 meters, as a way to accommodate new paying members in areas where saturation will have (by then) become a problem.

 

Cool, the E.T. Highway could be 10,000+ caches.

[+wmpastor]

An improvement in coordinate accuracy could also justify a reduction in the minimum cache separation distance, which is imposed to prevent mistaking one cache for another nearby one. I can see Groundspeak perceiving an advantage to adding a fourth digit and simultaneously dropping the minimum separation to, say, 100 feet or 30 meters, as a way to accommodate new paying members in areas where saturation will have (by then) become a problem.

Did someone just open up a can of worms???

[+wmpastor]

The best caches I've found were large containers that I could see from 40 feet away. For those of us who cache for the journey, greater accuracy won't be an issue.

That's what I was thinking. My enjoyment of caching comes from the journey, not the hunt. (Sure, sometimes the hunt is fun but most times I just find it tedious.) Bring on 1 foot accuracy!

The challenge of the hunt (for those that crave it) will still be there for some caches. The key variable is still the "Z" coordinate (height). I mentioned tree caches, but I have seen a few other situations where there is an abrupt change of height in a very short distance (foot bridges in parks - is the cache over, under or on the bridge?) (staircase in park from upper level to lower level that circles back on itself) (very steep slope with trees).