When I log into my bank, I type in my user ID, my password, and then type in the answer to a question. It's all done on a keyboard. If I were to access my account on a public computer with a keylogger install- and chances are, if it's a public computer, a keylogger *is* installed on it- then I could lose all my money.
Several times this summer, I've received email from people who've had their email or facebook accounts hacked. Usually, it's because of keylogging. Sometimes through malware, sometimes through physical devices.
I propose the following updates.
Have a pair of on screen keyboards- manipulated using the mouse- for entering passwords. Have it work in concert with the physical keyboard. This would allow the user to remove letters from the logging data, making it useless.
Why two onscreen keyboards? To make it more difficult to use mouse logging in concert with screen capture. The keyboards can also alternate between being in qwerty and alphabetical order and move around (between entered letters) to make it impossible to gather usable data. This wouldn't cancel the need for malware blockers.
People need to be educated by their email providers to check the integrity of the keyboard cord whenever they're on a strange computer.
There are always going to be workarounds. So, in addition to the password, I propose an extra layer of security that would be activated whenever someone attempts to access an account from a strange IP address.
When you set up an account, you are shown a series of cartoons with random names assigned. You memorize the names of the cartoon faces, which are provided to you so you can't be socially engineered. You then modify the names in two ways.
For instance, you're shown a goofy cartoon face and told that the this is "Pedronimo." You're quizzed several times to make sure you've memorized this. When you access your account, you're sometimes asked to answer security questions as a refresher. You may also be asked to change the name in some way. Change, but not replace. For instance, you might use "redPonim00." You can now be asked questions based on this information. The questions are presented in mild captcha form.
"What is the original name of this person?"
"What is your version of this person's name?"
"Except for the first two letters, what is the original name of this person?"
"What are the last three letters of your version of this person's name?"
"What does this person do for a job?"
...and so on.
The keylogger may get the raw data, but not know the question- including what the face looks like. And even if the hackers got everything- including the face and the questions- you'd just have more cartoon faces than likely legitimate locations for logging in. No two face/question combinations would appear to consecutive disparate IP addresses. For consecutive visits to the same insecure IP address, you'd ask a different question about the same face.
Every once in a while, you'd learn a new cartoon face while working from a secure location and from within your email account. You enter all the information using mouse data- just in case- so that even if you're being keylogged, no one can see your answers or even infer that this is what you're doing. You have a choice about how many of these faces are used- as few as five and as many as ten or fifteen.
If a person happens to suffer from a bout of extremely poor memory, you'd have a set of backup questions which require sentence-length answers. While the exact spelling and order of words isn't essential, a certain minimum percentage of correct words is required. If you score low on one question- less than 95%, you have to answer another sentence-length question. If you can score above 90% on two, or above 85% on three, you get access to your account.
How do you keep from keylogging these answers? That's a problem. Inference of missing letters would surpassingly easy if you were to do the mixed method mentioned above. Of course the questions would be in captcha form. The only solution I can think of is that every time you successfully answer one of these personal long-form questions, it is never used again. If you get less than 85% matching on a single attempt, the question is red-flagged and no further attempts at accessing the account from non-secure IP addresses will be allowed for 24 hours.
Could someone that knows you really well answer these questions? Possibly. This places a burden on using intensely personal content and idiom. Like the cartoon faces, this is a method that would need to be actively maintained. One could put the answers (without questions) in a secure place. A secure place is one that no one that knows you knows about. If someone that doesn't know you finds the sentence, they won't know what to do with it. They won't even know the question.
A program running on your phone uses a virtual-randomization algorithm. By running a number through a series of mathematical operations (invisible to the user), and then returning a sequence of numbers based on the original. The login page offers a seed number, which you enter into the separate program, and it returns a four-digit number which is the incorporated into your password. For instance.
You're given a seed number of 59393
The virtual randomizer, which is, itself a unique program created by random seeding, returns 8702.
Your part of the password is the word "rutebega." But "rutebega" all by itself doesn't work. You have to add the first digit before the first letter and the last three digits just before the last letter. Your password, in this instance, is "8rutebeg702a" Given a different seed number, it would result in a different password.
If someone gets the letter parts of your password- the "rutebega," they still need the randomizer to get the rest.
If someone gets both your phone, and your root word, they'd be able to get access to your account. Otherwise, using keylogging would do them no good whatsoever.
To authenticate your standalone app, it would generate a long number that represents the identity of the random program that it is using to generate the seeds. Enter this on your email account to match the math. You'd only need to do this once.
And example of a random program.
Seed squared times pi, take thirteenth through eighteenth digits, divide by the current date in six digit format, take cube root of the fourth through eleventh digits, invert the answer, multiply by the square root of 2, and take the third through sixth digits. Rearrange- first digit third, second digit first, third digit fourth, fourth digit second. And that's your seed. The individual steps, constants, use of independent variables, etc. are all subject to one-time randomization.
To prevent the program from being copied, you could have a line item that uses an internal identifier, such as a serial number, as a source of a constant. Furthermore, you could make the device unusable to a stranger using your phone by having a number added to the seed. Your email account would need to know what this number is.
In other words, part of your password would be entered on a separate device.
I'm not saying that any of these ideas are perfect. All of them share the same issue of being more complicated than simply remembering a password. They wouldn't be used on secure computers, but they could be an option for questionable computers. Some of them might be considered fun. Some might appeal to those made paranoid by past experiences. Methods such as the ones I've mentioned could be provided on an optional basis. This means that hackers would go after the low-hanging fruit instead.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Optimum Language Curriculum for an Unlimited Traveler
What are the most important languages? We'll start with the following assumptions:
1. The language student wishes to have the maximum possible flexibility throughout the world.
2. Basic communication, and not fluency, is the standard of success.
There are lots of ways of calculating this answer. Number of native speakers, number of first and second speakers, number of countries where a language is spoken, relative economic influence of those speakers. I'm going to take this question to another level. We'll be considering the effect of sprachbund ( language family), relative isolation, difficulty of learning, and availability of alternate communication among native speakers. We'll assign positive and negative points for all of these factors. We'll also take into account emergent, as opposed to historical, trends in globalism.
For simplicity sake, we'll be comparing just eleven languages, including English.
These are (alphabetically):
1. Arabic
2. Chinese (Mandarin)
3. English
4. French
5. German
6. Hindi
7. Japanese
8. Korean
9. Portuguese
10. Russian
11. Spanish
Here are the variables:
N. Number of native speakers (as a first language). 4 + 0.1 awarded for every 25 million speakers, rounded to the nearest 25). Note that the relative difference is small except for in the case of Hindi and Chinese. Wikipedia
1. Chinese (Mandarin) (1.1 billion) = 8.4
2. Hindi/Urdu (350 million) = 5.4
3. Spanish (330 million) = 5.3
4. English (300 million) = 5.2
5. Arabic (200 million) = 4.8
6. Portuguese (160 million) = 4.6
7. Russian (160 million) = 4.6
8. Japanese (125 million) = 4.5
9. German (100 million) = 4.4
10. French (75 million) = 4.3
11. Korean (72 million) = 4.3
E. Economic rank. 1 + percentage of world GDP (per language) / 10. unicode.org/notes/tn13/
1. English (28.2%) = 3.8
2. Chinese (22.8%) = 3.3
3. Japanese (5.6%) = 1.6
4. Spanish (5.2%) = 1.5
5. German (4.9%) = 1.5
6. French (4.2%) = 1.4
7. Portuguese (3.4%) = 1.3
8. Russian (2.1%) = 1.2
9. Hindi (2.1%) = 1.2
10. Arabic (2.0%) = 1.2
11. Korean (1.4%) = 1.1
S. Number of speakers as a second language. This is also a measure of the language's versatility, hence it's relatively heavy weight: 2 + 0.1 for every 10 million speakers, rounded to the nearest 10. Wikipedia
1. French (190 million) = 3.9
2. English (150 million) = 3.5
3. Russian (125 million) = 3.3
4. Portuguese (28 million) = 2.3
5. Arabic (21 million) = 2.2
6. Chinese (20 million) = 2.2
7. Spanish (20 million) = 2.2
8. German (9 million) = 2.1
9. Japanese (8 million) = 2.1
10. Hindi (?) = 2
11. Korean (?) = 2
C. Number of countries where spoken. Number of countries / 10 + 0.1 for every 50 million people. You'll notice that English gets a huge - and admittedly unfair - advantage on this one. Many of those 115 countries are small islands in the Caribbean, for instance. Before you accuse me of Anglo-chauvinism, remember that we're starting from the assumption that *you* read and speak English. Therefore, English isn't even included in the question. www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm
1. English (115) = 11.5 + 0.6 = 12.1
2. French (35) = 3.5 + 0.2 = 3.7
3. Arabic (24) = 2.4 + 0.4 = 2.8
4. Spanish (20) = 2.0 + 0.7 = 2.7
5. Russian (16) = 1.6 + 0.3 = 1.9
6. German (9) = 0.9 + 0.2 = 1.1
7. Chinese (Mandarin) (5) = 0.5 + 2.2 = 2.7
8. Portuguese (5) = 0.5 + 0.3 = 0.8
9. Hindi/Urdu (2) = 0.2 + 0.7 = 0.9
10. Korean (2) = 0.2 + 0.1 = 0.3
11. Japanese (1) = 0.1 + 0.3 = 0.4
L. "Learnability" (for an English speaker). Reverse scale from 2 to 0. 2 is highly learnable, 0 is very difficult. Increments of 0.1. (Ref: arbitrary judgement which includes the relative difficulty of learning to read the language).
1. Arabic = 0.3
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.1
3. English = 2.0
4. French = 1.4
5. German = 1.6
6. Hindi = 0.4
7. Japanese = 0.4
8. Korean = 0.5
9. Portuguese = 1.4
10. Russian = 1.0
11. Spanish = 1.6
B. Sprachbund rank - is the language part of a larger family of languages in which more alternatives exist? Among the languages on the list, does it stand alone? Scale between 0 and 1 in increments of 0.1.
1. Arabic = 1.0
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 1.0
3. English = 0.5
4. French = 0.4
5. German = 0.4
6. Hindi = 1.0
7. Japanese = 0.9
8. Korean = 0.9
9. Portuguese = 0.3
10. Russian = 0.7
11. Spanish = 0.5
R. "Replaceability" - Do other language options exist in significant numbers? For instance, while Morocco is Arabic-speaking, many people speak French. In Morrocco, Arabic is "replaceable" with French. Scale of 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1. Low numbers means that it has a good chance of being replaceable by another language on the list. A low number reflects a high number of multi-linguals among a quorum of the population. In some cases, this tends to offset the advantage of "N" (# of countries spoken-in).
1. Arabic = 0.8
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.7
3. English = 0.9
4. French = 0.2
5. German = 0.1
6. Hindi = 0.5
7. Japanese = 0.8
8. Korean = 0.7
9. Portuguese = 0.5
10. Russian = 0.7
11. Spanish = 0.6
X. Special factors such as emergent economic or diplomatic consideration. Takes into account secondary speakers throughout the world. Scale of 0 to 2 in increments of 0.1.
1. Arabic = 1.4
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 1.4
3. English = 0.0
4. French = 1.1
5. German = 0.5
6. Hindi = 1.8
7. Japanese = 1.2
8. Korean = 1.6
9. Portuguese = 0.7
10. Russian = 1.5
11. Spanish = 2.0
F. "Friendliness." How likely are you to have a chance to put your skills to use? Scale of 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1. A purely arbitrary judgement based on impressions of receptivity to tourism.
1. Arabic = 0.3
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.6
3. English = 0.9
4. French = 0.5
5. German = 0.6
6. Hindi = 0.6
7. Japanese = 0.4
8. Korean = 0.8
9. Portuguese = 0.4
10. Russian = 0.5
11. Spanish = 0.6
Here are the calculations:
English:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
5.2 3.8 3.5 12.1 2.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 0.9 28.9
Chinese (Mandarin):
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
8.4 3.3 2.2 0.5 0.1 1.0 0.7 1.4 0.6 18.2
Spanish:
N + C + S + E + L + B + R + X + F =
5.3 1.5 2.2 2.7 1.6 0.5 0.6 2.0 0.6 17.0
French:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.3 1.4 3.9 3.7 1.4 0.4 0.2 1.1 0.5 16.9
Russian:
N + C + S + E + L + B + R + X + F =
4.6 1.2 3.3 1.9 1.0 0.7 0.7 1.5 0.5 15.4
Arabic:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.8 1.2 2.2 2.4 0.3 1.0 0.8 1.4 0.3 14.4
Hindi:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
5.4 1.2 2.0 0.9 0.4 1.0 0.5 1.8 0.6 13.8
Japanese:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.5 1.6 2.1 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.4 12.4
German:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.4 1.5 2.1 1.1 1.6 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.6 12.3
Portuguese:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.6 1.3 2.3 0.8 1.4 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.4 12.3
Korean:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.3 1.1 2.0 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.7 1.6 0.8 12.2
0. English 28.9 (Widespread, ecomomically dominant)
1. Chinese 18.2 (Extremely populous, multi-emergent)
2. Spanish 17.0 (Locally important, widespread)
3. French 16.9 (Essential worldwide as a secondary language)
4. Russian 15.4 (Irreplaceable gateway language, populous / emergent)
5. Arabic 14.4 (Widespread, often irreplaceable. Local dialects dominate)
6. Hindi 13.8 (Highly populous, multi-emergent)
7. Japanese 12.4 (Economically significant, localized)
8. German 12.3 (Highly replaceable)
9. Portuguese 12.3 (Localized)
10. Korean 12.2 (Localized)
Japaneses through Korean represent powerful, albeit localized languages. All three are replaceable to a limited degree- either by English or Spanish (thanks to the versatility of the local population).
This is not a "perfect" calculus. It makes many arbitrary assumptions. In the case of the last four languages, the differences are practically insignificant. One could easily argue that the local importance of Spanish greatly outweighs the vast numbers faraway Chinese. However, recall that the original assumption is that the language student is traveling throughout the world and is looking for the greatest amount of versatility with the least number of languages.
1. The language student wishes to have the maximum possible flexibility throughout the world.
2. Basic communication, and not fluency, is the standard of success.
There are lots of ways of calculating this answer. Number of native speakers, number of first and second speakers, number of countries where a language is spoken, relative economic influence of those speakers. I'm going to take this question to another level. We'll be considering the effect of sprachbund ( language family), relative isolation, difficulty of learning, and availability of alternate communication among native speakers. We'll assign positive and negative points for all of these factors. We'll also take into account emergent, as opposed to historical, trends in globalism.
For simplicity sake, we'll be comparing just eleven languages, including English.
These are (alphabetically):
1. Arabic
2. Chinese (Mandarin)
3. English
4. French
5. German
6. Hindi
7. Japanese
8. Korean
9. Portuguese
10. Russian
11. Spanish
Here are the variables:
N. Number of native speakers (as a first language). 4 + 0.1 awarded for every 25 million speakers, rounded to the nearest 25). Note that the relative difference is small except for in the case of Hindi and Chinese. Wikipedia
1. Chinese (Mandarin) (1.1 billion) = 8.4
2. Hindi/Urdu (350 million) = 5.4
3. Spanish (330 million) = 5.3
4. English (300 million) = 5.2
5. Arabic (200 million) = 4.8
6. Portuguese (160 million) = 4.6
7. Russian (160 million) = 4.6
8. Japanese (125 million) = 4.5
9. German (100 million) = 4.4
10. French (75 million) = 4.3
11. Korean (72 million) = 4.3
E. Economic rank. 1 + percentage of world GDP (per language) / 10. unicode.org/notes/tn13/
1. English (28.2%) = 3.8
2. Chinese (22.8%) = 3.3
3. Japanese (5.6%) = 1.6
4. Spanish (5.2%) = 1.5
5. German (4.9%) = 1.5
6. French (4.2%) = 1.4
7. Portuguese (3.4%) = 1.3
8. Russian (2.1%) = 1.2
9. Hindi (2.1%) = 1.2
10. Arabic (2.0%) = 1.2
11. Korean (1.4%) = 1.1
S. Number of speakers as a second language. This is also a measure of the language's versatility, hence it's relatively heavy weight: 2 + 0.1 for every 10 million speakers, rounded to the nearest 10. Wikipedia
1. French (190 million) = 3.9
2. English (150 million) = 3.5
3. Russian (125 million) = 3.3
4. Portuguese (28 million) = 2.3
5. Arabic (21 million) = 2.2
6. Chinese (20 million) = 2.2
7. Spanish (20 million) = 2.2
8. German (9 million) = 2.1
9. Japanese (8 million) = 2.1
10. Hindi (?) = 2
11. Korean (?) = 2
C. Number of countries where spoken. Number of countries / 10 + 0.1 for every 50 million people. You'll notice that English gets a huge - and admittedly unfair - advantage on this one. Many of those 115 countries are small islands in the Caribbean, for instance. Before you accuse me of Anglo-chauvinism, remember that we're starting from the assumption that *you* read and speak English. Therefore, English isn't even included in the question. www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm
1. English (115) = 11.5 + 0.6 = 12.1
2. French (35) = 3.5 + 0.2 = 3.7
3. Arabic (24) = 2.4 + 0.4 = 2.8
4. Spanish (20) = 2.0 + 0.7 = 2.7
5. Russian (16) = 1.6 + 0.3 = 1.9
6. German (9) = 0.9 + 0.2 = 1.1
7. Chinese (Mandarin) (5) = 0.5 + 2.2 = 2.7
8. Portuguese (5) = 0.5 + 0.3 = 0.8
9. Hindi/Urdu (2) = 0.2 + 0.7 = 0.9
10. Korean (2) = 0.2 + 0.1 = 0.3
11. Japanese (1) = 0.1 + 0.3 = 0.4
L. "Learnability" (for an English speaker). Reverse scale from 2 to 0. 2 is highly learnable, 0 is very difficult. Increments of 0.1. (Ref: arbitrary judgement which includes the relative difficulty of learning to read the language).
1. Arabic = 0.3
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.1
3. English = 2.0
4. French = 1.4
5. German = 1.6
6. Hindi = 0.4
7. Japanese = 0.4
8. Korean = 0.5
9. Portuguese = 1.4
10. Russian = 1.0
11. Spanish = 1.6
B. Sprachbund rank - is the language part of a larger family of languages in which more alternatives exist? Among the languages on the list, does it stand alone? Scale between 0 and 1 in increments of 0.1.
1. Arabic = 1.0
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 1.0
3. English = 0.5
4. French = 0.4
5. German = 0.4
6. Hindi = 1.0
7. Japanese = 0.9
8. Korean = 0.9
9. Portuguese = 0.3
10. Russian = 0.7
11. Spanish = 0.5
R. "Replaceability" - Do other language options exist in significant numbers? For instance, while Morocco is Arabic-speaking, many people speak French. In Morrocco, Arabic is "replaceable" with French. Scale of 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1. Low numbers means that it has a good chance of being replaceable by another language on the list. A low number reflects a high number of multi-linguals among a quorum of the population. In some cases, this tends to offset the advantage of "N" (# of countries spoken-in).
1. Arabic = 0.8
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.7
3. English = 0.9
4. French = 0.2
5. German = 0.1
6. Hindi = 0.5
7. Japanese = 0.8
8. Korean = 0.7
9. Portuguese = 0.5
10. Russian = 0.7
11. Spanish = 0.6
X. Special factors such as emergent economic or diplomatic consideration. Takes into account secondary speakers throughout the world. Scale of 0 to 2 in increments of 0.1.
1. Arabic = 1.4
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 1.4
3. English = 0.0
4. French = 1.1
5. German = 0.5
6. Hindi = 1.8
7. Japanese = 1.2
8. Korean = 1.6
9. Portuguese = 0.7
10. Russian = 1.5
11. Spanish = 2.0
F. "Friendliness." How likely are you to have a chance to put your skills to use? Scale of 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1. A purely arbitrary judgement based on impressions of receptivity to tourism.
1. Arabic = 0.3
2. Chinese (Mandarin) = 0.6
3. English = 0.9
4. French = 0.5
5. German = 0.6
6. Hindi = 0.6
7. Japanese = 0.4
8. Korean = 0.8
9. Portuguese = 0.4
10. Russian = 0.5
11. Spanish = 0.6
Here are the calculations:
English:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
5.2 3.8 3.5 12.1 2.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 0.9 28.9
Chinese (Mandarin):
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
8.4 3.3 2.2 0.5 0.1 1.0 0.7 1.4 0.6 18.2
Spanish:
N + C + S + E + L + B + R + X + F =
5.3 1.5 2.2 2.7 1.6 0.5 0.6 2.0 0.6 17.0
French:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.3 1.4 3.9 3.7 1.4 0.4 0.2 1.1 0.5 16.9
Russian:
N + C + S + E + L + B + R + X + F =
4.6 1.2 3.3 1.9 1.0 0.7 0.7 1.5 0.5 15.4
Arabic:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.8 1.2 2.2 2.4 0.3 1.0 0.8 1.4 0.3 14.4
Hindi:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
5.4 1.2 2.0 0.9 0.4 1.0 0.5 1.8 0.6 13.8
Japanese:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.5 1.6 2.1 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.4 12.4
German:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.4 1.5 2.1 1.1 1.6 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.6 12.3
Portuguese:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.6 1.3 2.3 0.8 1.4 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.4 12.3
Korean:
N + E + S + C + L + B + R + X + F =
4.3 1.1 2.0 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.7 1.6 0.8 12.2
0. English 28.9 (Widespread, ecomomically dominant)
1. Chinese 18.2 (Extremely populous, multi-emergent)
2. Spanish 17.0 (Locally important, widespread)
3. French 16.9 (Essential worldwide as a secondary language)
4. Russian 15.4 (Irreplaceable gateway language, populous / emergent)
5. Arabic 14.4 (Widespread, often irreplaceable. Local dialects dominate)
6. Hindi 13.8 (Highly populous, multi-emergent)
7. Japanese 12.4 (Economically significant, localized)
8. German 12.3 (Highly replaceable)
9. Portuguese 12.3 (Localized)
10. Korean 12.2 (Localized)
Japaneses through Korean represent powerful, albeit localized languages. All three are replaceable to a limited degree- either by English or Spanish (thanks to the versatility of the local population).
This is not a "perfect" calculus. It makes many arbitrary assumptions. In the case of the last four languages, the differences are practically insignificant. One could easily argue that the local importance of Spanish greatly outweighs the vast numbers faraway Chinese. However, recall that the original assumption is that the language student is traveling throughout the world and is looking for the greatest amount of versatility with the least number of languages.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
The Indeterminate Finish Line
All you have to do to get this is to visit these two sites:
A balloon trip to the edge of space:
http://vimeo.com/12488149
The device they used to track down the instrument package:
http://www.findmespot.com/en/index.php?cid=102
So, here's the idea. Turn on the Spot, launch via helium balloon, allow to fly for half an hour, wait fifteen minutes, and then start providing delayed telemetry to each of two or more chase teams. First team to locate it wins. Or, alternately, first team to get it safely back to their base wins. Other teams can re-capture it by successfully mounting an assault using paintball guns (obviously, this assumes wilderness). Likely, it would play out over several days. Perhaps you'd play it using dual sport motorcycles (road-legal dirt bikes).
A high tech steeple chase.
Could call it a "Tracker Race." (Sounds a little like "Track Erase.") Who wants to play?
A balloon trip to the edge of space:
http://vimeo.com/12488149
The device they used to track down the instrument package:
http://www.findmespot.com/en/index.php?cid=102
So, here's the idea. Turn on the Spot, launch via helium balloon, allow to fly for half an hour, wait fifteen minutes, and then start providing delayed telemetry to each of two or more chase teams. First team to locate it wins. Or, alternately, first team to get it safely back to their base wins. Other teams can re-capture it by successfully mounting an assault using paintball guns (obviously, this assumes wilderness). Likely, it would play out over several days. Perhaps you'd play it using dual sport motorcycles (road-legal dirt bikes).
A high tech steeple chase.
Could call it a "Tracker Race." (Sounds a little like "Track Erase.") Who wants to play?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)