Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ryan Lantzy" data-source="post: 26710" data-attributes="member: 7">Re: Contemporary Culture Loses My RespectPersonally, I think their original storage scheme and fix sucks.&nbsp; Here&#039;s why:&nbsp; they store everything with a time stamp.&nbsp; For anonimity and anti-tracking purposes, this is awful, as any location data (no matter how small) can be replayed in time.&nbsp;One of the reasons they probably stored the date is that they had planned to flush records out of a certain age... but that is siliness too.&nbsp; This also causes the same location-to-access_point record to be stored multiple times, just with a different date.&nbsp;Date-time stamps should be left out of it.&nbsp; What they should do is decide what the max size they want is for the cached location database.&nbsp; Then, every time the phone sees a new location-to-access_point association, it stores that (sans date-time).&nbsp; If the association already exists, it would increment a counter for that association (i.e. I&#039;ve seen this MAC address for this router and I&#039;ve had this normalized Geolocation 20 times).&nbsp; Then, as the database reaches capacity, it starts to purge the records that have the fewest hits (i.e. where I go the least).&nbsp; The location records would look like this:&nbsp;Location - Access Point Identifiter - Count&nbsp; (maybe some other data would be needed like the type of Access Point, WiFi, Cell tower, etc).&nbsp;The other thing they would do (if they are smart) is to use a grid coordinate location scheme and a look up table to convert to rough Lat/Lon.&nbsp; Storing records with specific Lat/Lon may actually produce way too many records given the &quot;exactness&quot; of it.&nbsp; Grid coordinates could map rougly to half kilometer by half kilometer squares or something, because remember the purpose is to just speed up location identification until the network and/or GPS can get an exact fix and most people are just using this to get a list of nearby restaurants anyway.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ryan Lantzy, post: 26710, member: 7"] Re: Contemporary Culture Loses My Respect Personally, I think their original storage scheme and fix sucks. Here's why: they store everything with a time stamp. For anonimity and anti-tracking purposes, this is awful, as any location data (no matter how small) can be replayed in time. One of the reasons they probably stored the date is that they had planned to flush records out of a certain age... but that is siliness too. This also causes the same location-to-access_point record to be stored multiple times, just with a different date. Date-time stamps should be left out of it. What they should do is decide what the max size they want is for the cached location database. Then, every time the phone sees a new location-to-access_point association, it stores that (sans date-time). If the association already exists, it would increment a counter for that association (i.e. I've seen this MAC address for this router and I've had this normalized Geolocation 20 times). Then, as the database reaches capacity, it starts to purge the records that have the fewest hits (i.e. where I go the least). The location records would look like this: Location - Access Point Identifiter - Count (maybe some other data would be needed like the type of Access Point, WiFi, Cell tower, etc). The other thing they would do (if they are smart) is to use a grid coordinate location scheme and a look up table to convert to rough Lat/Lon. Storing records with specific Lat/Lon may actually produce way too many records given the "exactness" of it. Grid coordinates could map rougly to half kilometer by half kilometer squares or something, because remember the purpose is to just speed up location identification until the network and/or GPS can get an exact fix and most people are just using this to get a list of nearby restaurants anyway. [/QUOTE]

Verification