There’s an article here about how new features on Japanese kids’ phones are causing worries in the airlines - as we all know the airlines are paranoid about how electronic stuff might interfere with planes’ navigation systems. And personally, I think a healthy level of paranoia is to be encouraged by airline management. I mean, the last thing we want is someone saying “Hell, it might cause us problems, but let’s just try it and see, shall we?”.
The issue is caused by a new generation of kids’ phones that are GPS equipped, so that they can be tracked and/or email their child’s location to parents. This itself isn’t a problem, but there’s a new safety feature built it, so that if you turn the phone off, it automatically turns back on, unless it’s disabled by the owner inputting a unique code.
The thinking is obviously that if the child gets abducted (every parents’ worst nightmare), the kidnapper will turn off the phone to avoid it being tracked. Then the phone will cunningly reactivate itself, enabling the phone to be tracked down and putting the baddie bang to rights.
Except that it’s not going to work that way, is it? The kidnapper will either ditch the phone altogether or simply remove the battery - which is what the airlines are doing if passengers have forgotten the disabling code in the original story.
So, the unfortunate fact is that, in the highly unusual and unfortunate case of a child being abducted, being in possession of a GPS mobile is sadly going to be pretty useless, unless the abductor is congenitally stupid and/or doesn’t consume any media at all. It’s the equivalent of a kidnapper in the old days using a landline to make a ransom demand and falling for the police request ”Won’t you just hang on for a little while [while we trace your location]…”
I’d love to be proved wrong on this, but I suspect that this isn’t an area where technology has any readily available solutions. Even if you were to insert a trackable RFID chip into very child itself, they’d be readily discoverable (and therefore removable) as the whole point of them is that they have to transmit a signal if they are to do their job.
My problem with this though, is that many parents are buying these devices and services in the mistaken belief that they’re somehow making their children safer. While the reality is that in the vast majority of cases, parents would be just as well advised as to make sure that their children carried a clean towel with them or something.
A towel being about the most massively useful thing an interstellar hitch hiker can have, of course.
But copletely agree on this complete waste of parent’s money
I want a HG2G towel with an integrated GPS and mobile, like the Petlink device :).
On a more serious note: As you know a lot in this world is perceived safety, which in many cases is enough as it decreases anxiety and people gladly pay for decreased anxiety. In this case it’s the parents’ anxiety of course. As you say, abductions are rare, but any specific parent wants his/her specific children to be safe, so they might buy this stuff anyway. The kid might of course then turn it off (by removing the battery) to avoid being tracked.
Cases in point:
Think e.g. locks on the door of your house, but no alarm. The stupidest of thieves can break a window, yet less likely without making any noise. Actually they tend to break a window, as they assume the door is locked. In terms of cars it’s easier, as many door locks are so bad that the thief can easily open the door.
And considering we talk airplanes here, what about the floatation devices and oxygene masks. Useful in a crash? Statistically speaking, definitely no.
And what about setting a PIN code in your phone. If the phone gets stolen the thief doesn’t care about the SIM or what’s on it, and which the owner anyway disables. Thieves care about getting some money for the phone, hence just removes the SIM card. PIN gone. Most stolen phones are exported in bulk, so they are also operator-unlocked.
I get your point in terms of the futility as well as the added nuisance of this kind of device on a plane, if at all they figure out that the child carries one.
Regarding having phones on in a plane in general: I’ve seen people set the phone to silent mode. Whether they think that actually turns the radio off, or they just don’t want anyone to hear if anyone calls, I don’t know.
Hi Russell:
Of course I understand the main thrust of the point you’re making here and as mentioned this does tend to serve the “peace of mind” factor as well. Clearly parents are the purchase decision sales target for pre-teen handsets. At any rate, there are a couple of points that should be made about what these ‘designed for kids’ phones do.
While the unit does run GPS tracking, which indeed would be useless once it’s seperated from the child, but at least the parent would know immed. that there is a problem - not some hours later when the dreaded ‘missing’ thoughts begin to creep-in. They would also know where the incident happened, which might help pinpoint what “big brother” cameras in the area could also be useful.
However, when the trigger is pulled.. it’s not just GPS. The handset sequence actually starts with a screamer alarm, it kicks the on-board camera to take (and auto-send) a snapshot of the scene and also it dials a pre-determined phone number.
All of these pre-cautions may not change the end result, that being said they certainly might make a difference in some cases. Parents will naturally do anything possible to protect their children, if this product could ‘potentially’ alter the outcome of a drastic situation then you better believe they will give it the benefit of a doubt.
Note we have a hands-on video demo on WWJ here:
http://wirelesswatch.jp/2007/03/05/new-mobile-phones-for-kids-rock/
On a lighter note, those units are pretty sweet! The other built-in functions like class schedules, puzzle games and easy mail/web apps are preparing the next-generation of mobile users.. a brilliant move imho.
Hello
Very interesting information! Thanks!
Bye
obviously you don’t have kids.
have you ever lost your child in a store or at a theme park? and regarding chips placed in your child, how would they find a chip if it were hidden under the skin. considering i am resposible for the safety of my children until they reach 18 years of age and then some, i am very much for these safety devices. not to mention a nine year old is quite capable of pushing the 911 feature on the phone, and pointing the camera straight at the abductor approaching them which instantly uploads. some phones instantly begin recording voice. we have taught our child to snap photos of strangers approaching them as a precaution. but moreover this help your child contact you if they become lost in a crowd. anything that may help my child is a benefit, and again, sespecially if my child is loses me in a crowded place, they simply push the mommy icon for me, or the daddy icon for daddy and it contacts our phones immediately. so i wouldn’t say these items are totally useless. considering what happened to danielle van dam in san diego and there are registered sex offenders in many neighborhoods why criticize parents for trying to protect the most precious thing to them.
Actually “Amy” I do have kids and yes, I have lost one of them when she was about 3 in Selfridge’s (large London department store) in the toy department at Christmas time. It was horrible, with thoughts going through my head about where paedophiles would hang out to abduct young kids. Fortunately we found her (sitting next to Santa!) but it’s not an experience I’d care to repeat.
BUT I’m still not convinced that I want to make my children so paranoid that they start snapping pics of people who come up to them. What kind of kids do you think they’re going to grow into? Strong, confident ones who make something of their lives, or people who cower in bomb-proof basements, waiting for an attack that never happens?
And, if a chip is embedded in something/one, it’s broadcasting a signal - that’s the whole point of it. So, that signal can be read by anyone, not just parents or good guys. So once found, the baddie is going to get it out in the easiest way possible.
I don’t wish to underestimate the dangers from strangers and abduction. But to be honest, your child is far more likely to be harmed by drowning in a swimming pool. In 1999, there were 115 case of child abductions in the US, out of over 70 million kids. In percentage terms, that’s not really even measurable. Compare this to 214,000 kids injured in the US in motor accidents or 3.5 million injured playing sports and you might just get some kind of sense of proportion.
So don’t listen to the media about how to run your life *and* ruin your child’s. Just remember that “kid killed in car accident” makes maybe page 5 in the local newspaper, whereas “7 year old abducted while she sleeps” makes headline news in the national press and TV.
So, at best your plan is going to make you feel you’re a better parent, but really, at what cost to your child? And in the horrible scenario of someone really targeting your child, using these schemes isn’t going to make any difference - sorry.
Just get things into perspective.
Russell
my husband produces the news russell. and i am a producer myself. you don’t need to explain to me how the media works. however, simple precautions just as people child proof their homes, can prevent tragedies. it is along the same lines as the precautionary information we give our children “what to do in case” such as fire, or if they feel unsafe when approached by a strange, they contact us. we give them information as to what to do in an emergency. considering the amount of sex offenders you can see in a close enough radius by checking the amber alert website for one”s neighborhood, i see nothing wrong with the “mommy i am here” tracker which fits on a shoe. you could easily have found your child. if a parent wishes to use these devices why do you care? i suppose you criticize people for having alarms in their homes too.
btw, LA is whole lot different then London “Russell” why not come for a visit with that pompous attitude, we’d love to give you an LA welcome. California is bigger than your whole country put together, people carry guns here. your police don’t even carry them, don’t tell us what is safe, you aren’t from here and have no idea what you are talking about.
Wow, LA sounds like a really friendly place, eh Russell?
Errr, “Amy” are you for real? Not some PR rep for a child tracking company trying to promote these devices?? - and rather poorly I might add. Or if you’re a real producer, so much for media balance, with your reasoned and cogent arguments - “nah nah, my state is bigger than your whole country”.
Anyway, the point I was making (if you actually read my original post) is that you’re perfectly at liberty to buy whatever you want. These schemes might just work in the case of a kid getting lost (check the post - I wasn’t writing about that scenario). But it’s not going to work if the child gets abducted, which is how these devices are primarily marketed.
That’s all.
Oh and by the way. I go to California between 6+ times year.
Anyway, that’s my final response on this. Rant on again as much as you like, but that’s it from me on this for the time being. I don’t find your scrawlings very interesting.
Toodle pip (just conforming to your stereotype).
Russell (doffing his top hat and wandering off for spot of pheasant shooting)