Microsoft to identify 'bad neighborhoods' for gps

http://www.informationweek.com/byte/news/personal-tech/geo-location/232301460

It makes me sick to hear what tripe the US Patent Office is willing to grant patents for. "Take the subway rather than walk because it's raining outside". "Don't walk through crime infested neighborhoods for your own safety".

What, did Microsoft just patent common sense? This patent was granted by people with the least common sense. Maybe they're hoping to get a kickback from Microsoft granting them some common sense.

I would think the point would be, that if you are in unfamiliar territory, you would not have the local knowledge that would enable you to avoid bad places. Years ago, I was attending a conference in Boston, a nice scholarly meeting on historic preservation. For some reason, I walked to one of the sessions, thereby traversing Boston's Combat Zone, about which I knew nothing. It was not your typical walk in the park....

Local knowledge is less than reliable. There is a notion that the East side of my city has far more crime than the West side. "It's practically a war-zone." The truth is crime is about equal on both sides. This misinformation is perpetuated by the paranoid residents of West side of the city.

I see all sorts of problems with this.

1. What does 'bad' mean?

2. Is it updated in real time? Crime happens in spurts and a temporary danger zone can crop up anywhere.

3. If I get mugged on a route deamed 'safe' by Microsoft, can I sue Microsoft for leading me into danger?

4. Can business owners listed as a being in an 'unsafe' area due to an isolated crime incident be damaged? I see groups of businesses filing class action suits for damages caused by misinformation.

5. It's not the place that's dangerous. It's the people that are dangerous. Crime happens where opportunity meets criminal. Criminals don't stay in one place waiting for Microsoft to identify them and put a mark on a map.

6. Do you really need an app to manage your walking route because of the weather?

7. Your wits and your own situational awareness are far more effective tools for keeping you safe than any electronic gizmo that pushes information to you.

8. The distraction your smartphone creates might be enough opportunity for a criminal to get the advantage over you.

It sounds something like what is called "redlining" in the financial industry, and is a strict "no-no."

Also, besides the list of people who will sue listed in Izzy's post, add the folks who followed the directions and had something bad happen: "I followed your directions and (fill in the blank) happened and you are responsible."

Based on the little we know, it could really backfire. Some ideas should remain just that.

Well, that has happened numerous times already when people get stuck out in the boonies because the GPS map database was out of date or else the quality of the road (dirt fire road vs paved road) is not what the user expected. I'm not aware of any of them successfully suing the GPS unit manufacturers, unless they were all quietly settled out of court.

Shouldn't the GPS take into consideration user-dependant "bad areas"? Let me give a few examples:

- You are wearing a red shirt with a red bandana. Should the GPS warn you away from Crips territories?

- You are the paragon of the mindless MTV generation, and you worship Paris Hilton. Should the GPS warn you against clubs frequented by Goths, who might hurl insults at you? Though vacuous that you are, you may still feel the sting of words!

These are, I hope my readers realize, tongue in cheek. The more "serious" (if the term applies) scenarios may include areas with a history of intolerance of various sorts (race, sexual orientation, creed, etc.).

I was thinking this exact thing just now. There are multiple sides to this issue. For example, without getting political, I'm sure there are GPS users who would prefer NOT to be routed through certain "safe" areas because there's a good chance they would be pulled over by the police just because they looked "suspicious" in that neighborhood.

Excellent point Arney. I guess the app will need to know your race, sexual orientation and clothing preferences to work properly.

Locally, I know the bad spots to avoid and on what streets your car will drive away without you. In a new city, not so much. As a visiter, I'd value information, even of less then perfect reliability, on these spots.

I agree with most folks that this approach is probably going to be impractical.

However, there is one thing that they could do. They could give some sort of rating to neighborhoods based on police report statistics. For example, you could get a number from the GPS that reflects the data on number of homicides per year, or number of auto burglaries per year. It doesn't have to be the actual crime number - just some sort of rating that is proportional to the crime rate in that area.

Pete2

I want the GPS that gives me the stats for speeding tickets, parking tickets, etc. That one will sell like there is no tomorrow.

This is already being done and is easily available as a commercial product that could be incorporated into GPS coordinates....
http://www.tetrad.com/pub/documents/capindexbackground.pdf

That's a great idea that I was also thinking about when I first read about this story. I'm not aware of anyone who has created a service or app like this, but something that leverages the power of crowdsourcing could create a lot of useful info/advice. Not just about "dangerous" neighborhoods but even to avoid routes/areas with a lot of traffic congestion, bad potholes, etc. The concept could certainly be expanded to include more positive things, like finding bike-friendly routes through a city or finding streets that are good for hanging out in during the evenings, etc.

Kind of like taking the Yelp concept to something more visual, on a map. Say, the particular topic is "Streets with potholes," users could click on particular city blocks or stretches of road that are heavily rutted on a map to indicate places to avoid. When calculating a GPS route somewhere, it can take that user-input info into consideration.

Of course, depending too much on user-input has its pitfalls, too. Such as a map that keeps showing a pothole-filled street even though it has been repaired because no one bothers to update the status of that spot.

Block by block crime heat maps. I compared the one of my city to what I know from experience. It's not dead nuts on, but it's very close.

http://www.trulia.com/crime/#

I treat everywhere I travel as a "bad neighborhood". That way I'm always in condition yellow and I'm aware of my surroundings. Basing your safety on what has, or more importantly "hasn't" happened there in the past is a poor plan.

Well said haertig.

Cool, Houston is crime-free!
-Blast

That thing is WAyyyyy off,Houston isn't even listed!I looked at the Los Angeles dot,& of places I know presently that are a No-Go at anytime of day(due to my hue)& those places aren't even colored in!Also,New York City isn't listed,You know something is Verrry wrong here,lol!

This smacks of corporate control i.e.; they get to define "bad".