On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:25 PM Chris Adams <c...@cmadams.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Billy Crook <bcr...@unrealservers.net> said: > > On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the > system) > > could a system like DNS help handle this? > > I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time > sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the > earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know > someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to > get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the > second floor of the house on the bed). > 4G/LTE/5G networks could be further leveraged for this. In Denton County, TX, USA, you can register to "opt in" to receive weather alerts. We get tornadoes here. I could see better leveraging of that technology than streaming services. It is uncommon to find anyone without a cell phone in the US anymore. EMS services in some states leverage private 3G/4G networks for real-time communications. Wider reach in population clusters. > To be useful for the worst events, they need to be push, and push in > very short order. And since those are the alerts most likely to be > life-saving, those are what the system needs to be built for (or what's > the point). > > And to the point of the weather service sending out more alerts than in > the past: yes, they do. To some extent, it's better radars and software > to find hazards; they're also learning all the time to better identify > what is and is not a threat (so there are storms that might have had a > warning 10 years ago that might not today). But I'll take extra alerts > now and then... a friend died in a tornado years ago because the warning > came after it was on the ground (and probably after they were dead). > > -- > Chris Adams <c...@cmadams.net> >
