[BC] EAS

[WFIFeng@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/13/2005 6:06:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
monsterfm at monsterfm.com writes:

>   What's wrong with alerting on ALL alerts (assuming that, if it's
>  receiving a signal, the disaster could potentially affect that area).
>  Personally, (having lived through numerous tornadoes and hurricanes) I'd
>  prefer to have TOO MANY alerts to having NONE AT ALL.

Because to 99.999% of the General Public, too many "irrelevant alerts" 
becomes the "Chicken Little Syndrome". The thing goes off one too many times at 3am 
and they'll chuck it out the window, smash it, or rip the battery out. All 
done.

In order to be effective, it has to be relevant. That means more 
sophistication. To make that simple to the user means it won't be cheap. (Combining it 
with GPS, or cell-cites for example.) To make it cheap means much user input 
would be required. They just won't bother.

Willie...