Colorado ski town fielding dozens of automated 911 calls from iPhones
coloradosun.com
coloradosun.com
I absolutely hate the world where our government sits around and waits for Apple to “fix” this, whatever that means, instead of actively prosecuting them to force this feature off and penalize them.
A quick web search shows that several people have been charged and jailed over spamming 911. Apple should be too.
As a thought experiment, say you were a person on a ski slope watching people ski and immediately calling 911 when a fall occurred. Would that stand? No. So why should Apple get away with it just because they’ve automated it and outsourced it to phones and scaled it geographically?
I believe there is established precedent in some countries that you can't connect alarm auto dialers straight to the emergency phone number (precisely because of false call-outs), and therefore need to go through an alarm monitoring company. Apple seems to be doing a direct link to emergency services here, in a world where circuit switched telco precedents seem to be missed in the packet switched world.
My guess is they think they can win in the court of public opinion because it's for "people like you" using a phone that you have, rather than something for "other people".
It would be interesting to see how Apple could be forced to implement proper quality assurance and scenario-based negative test validation of their products before they are allowed to do these kinds of things.
There's a good reason for this. In TFA, for example, the authorities are merely asking Apple to properly calibrate the algorithm to skiing. They like the general concept, and have examples of it helping.
One thing I find interesting is that in this kind of thread there are lots of people who don't work in backcountry search and rescue condemning this sort of technology on behalf of search and rescue. I don't have relevant experience, but plenty of people I listen to who do support this kind of technology. They want to get more help to inexperienced people faster because their top priority is helping people and not punishing potential moral failings.
I thought so too, but apparently accidental activation is a real problem. Here's a nuanced look at the issue by an experienced Canadian SAR volunteer:
https://blog.oplopanax.ca/2017/09/accidental-triggering-devi...
Edit: But you're right, it's not a perfect analogue.
This stuff just really upsets me because, if it happens like that, it just shows the corporate capture of the U.S. and Apple's nearly limitless market power.
> It would be interesting to see how Apple could be forced to implement proper quality assurance and scenario-based negative test validation of their products before they are allowed to do these kinds of things.
It seems to me that the bar should be incredibly high, which would mean that it's basically impossible to hook up automated systems to the emergency services line. Because I don't see a way that they could rule out false positives, especially when they're actively pushing their Apple Watch to the active and extreme sports crowds.
Note that even the emergency personnel directly involved are not arguing that the feature should not exist or only be allowed if it's perfect.
Because they would much rather respond to five false alarms than be too late for a real one.
The article directly mentions that none of the calls have been actual emergencies and that it is absolutely tying up resources.
The feature is fine in spirit, and I am sure it has helped in some situations. But I don’t like Apple failing fast. It’s going to end up costing a life because responders respond unenthusiastically to an automated call or the automated calls tying up resources preventing proper response to a real emergency.
Automation that is not accurate is a real problem. Humans will quickly calibrate to it being wrong most of the time. This has occurred time and time again.
It doesn't.
> The article directly mentions that none of the calls have been actual emergencies and that it is absolutely tying up resources.
None of the calls in this small town in the middle of multiple skiing resorts. The feature works pretty well in general and has saved multiple lives. It just unfortunately produces an increased number of false alarms for an activity (skiing) that is done very geographically concentrated, and on top of that impedes responses to confirmation calls (because the phones are kept in the pockets of thick clothes).
> Automation that is not accurate is a real problem. Humans will quickly calibrate to it being wrong most of the time. This has occurred time and time again.
Even if they did that, they would do it only in skiing towns, leaving the feature useful elsewhere.
Skiing isn't the only industry affected by this. I'm involved in the auto racing industry. At a recent conference, there was some intense discussion about false alarms resulting in emergency services showing up at the track and who's responsible for paying for it.
Not in my experience. False calls are a nuisance and inappropriately waste resources.
Many municipalties require yearly application with fee for automated burglar alarms. And fees for excess calls.
Absolutely every article I have seen on this topic has the emergency services people stress that the last thing they want is for people to be afraid of calling them. Because they already get cases where people "don't want to be a bother" and end up dead from a heart attack or permanently disabled from a stroke.
They most definitely do not want to eliminate false positives entirely.
> False calls are a nuisance and inappropriately waste resources.
But as I wrote: trying to eliminate them completely would be far worse. The only real waste are false calls that are done deliberately.
Now this case with the Apple devices is a very unusual one that really needs to have its specific circumstances taken into account. And those specific circumstances are that it does not, in general produce a lot of false positives. But for a specific activity it does, and unfortunately that activity is geographically concentrated so that those false positives are also concentrated. That should be addressed, but it absolutely does not mean the feature does more bad than good overall.
And the article does not sound like the false positives are at the intolerable level, in the opinion of the people actually affected.
It also doesn't say that false positives are irrelevant, just that eliminating them should not be the highest priority.
Because the comment I was replying to stated that "the bar should be incredibly high, which would mean that it's basically impossible to hook up automated systems to the emergency services line."
Governments didn't move fast enough to block Uber and other illegal taxi services, partially because these well-funded startups had the means to tie things up in courts for months, while continuing to operate.
If I was in a skiing accident I would prefer to live in a world where people erred on the side of calling emergency services when they assumed there was an emergency.
What exactly is the the problem with only dozens of false positives?
I can forgive if once in a blue moon a person mistakes what turns out to be a minor mishap for a severe incident. But when a computer running an inacurate algorithm starts spamming the system, that's unacceptable. If it was a person initiating all those false alarms we would similarly make them stop crying wolf.
It's a lot more than dozens. 71 false alarms in the course of a weekend is a significant strain when you've only got two 911 operators. And that's just one county.
From the article, none of the automated calls were an emergency situation. Humans don’t react well to false positives, and over time, those calls will be handled with much less priority or attention.
In the particular situation of skiing, they have their own patrols. I’m not aware of endemic situations where people are injured but not discovered or helped.
My issue is that Apple is using emergency services as the last mile implementation rather than handling it themselves.
Significantly stricter restrictions for all visitors, regardless of skill level would be one.
Like when people say "Back in my day, you didn't need a safety warning on a hot cup of coffee", we may need to do the same once the local 911 dispatch centre starts recording higher numbers of calls.
I know this sort of user first mentality is becoming more and more alien to the Apple ideology, but there’s a reason we keep coming back to it.
The user knows what they want and if you think you know better you better be damn sure.
“We are absolutely diverting essential resources away from people who need it toward a feature on a phone,” Dummer said.Grand County Sheriff Brett Schroetlin called the calls are “problematic and time-consuming,” but said they have not impacted dispatch operations.
Journalists are trained at extracting provocative statements that are conspicuously apt for misinterpretation. The above quote is a perfect example. The original conversation could be 3 minutes about how this is a nothingburger but then the Sheriff being badgered into conceding that in isolation the calls are problematic and time-consuming…
The biggest danger of false alarm is alert fatigue. If your false to real ratio is ten to one you’ve seriously messed up. This sounds like exactly the case where false alarms are causing real harm to people in need.
Your stance shows a serious misunderstanding of incident response.
It’s an extreme example, but I want to make the argument that there is a balance to consider.
But the best place to start would probably be the law enforcement officers working with the nearby ski resorts to educate their patrons about the apple watch feature with signage.
Though I distinctly remember being asked about it when setting up my mom’s watch a few years ago so maybe it’s based on age?
https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/manage-crash-detectio...
I don't think any of these too-automatic and non-apparent things are a good idea. I had no intention to call 911, and I had not intentionally configured that action. I'm just glad the speaker and mic still worked and I was able to hear the operator and respond to them.
I don't even see how this one even helps anyone even in theory. Is it even any faster than dialing 911? If I were in an emergency, would I remember some weird trick like that at a time like that? Are they thinking that people in duress will rapidly and repeatedly squeez their phone naturally and so it dials when needed without you consciouly needing to?
I guess maybe the theory is that in any kind of car or bike crash, or even ordinary fall or violence, there is a good chance the violence will have damaged the phone's most fragile part, but just like in my case the phone still worked. So it's actually somewhat likely to be a valuable option to have some way to dial 911 witbout a working screen. Ok maybe I guess.
At least this did require pressing a button unlike the fall/crash detection from the article.
I had no idea it had dialed anything until I happened to hear the operator. It wasn't even on speakerpbone but normal phone mode, so it was quiet, but luckily I was in a quiet room at thd time.
The speaker was functional. Other normal sounds were happening. It did vibrate, but it does that for several ordinary events, including reboot which I was half expecting, and so was not alarming.
Perhaps the audibility is configurable, placing this right back into "tool under the users control", and covert if the user wants it to be.
Slightly off topic, but I did not even notice before the Emergency SOS settings screen has anything below the break. This UI design is just terrible. There is absolutely nothing hinting that you can scroll down:
https://www.tablix.org/~avian/android_13_emergency_sos_setti...
(Looking at the screenshot now, you can just about see that alarm sound setting below the slightly transparent bottom row. That's just about impossible to see on the real phone, plus the row has the usual Android set of buttons on top, obscuring the text even further).
...and 911 and the highly-trained & -equipped responders have all the extra resources and patience needed to handle and respond to all the automated false alarms. And governments don't quickly get sick of the expense and create "ignore automated cries of 'wolf'" policies.
I was not aware this feature exists and certainly did not turn it on myself. It must have been turned on by default.
I was shocked because the phone suddenly started emitting a loud siren sound and then the operator came on speaker asking what the emergency is. All while I was still trying to figure out what the hell is even happening.
I managed to explain that there was no emergency and that my phone apparently made the call automatically. The operator was understanding and I was thinking that it probably wasn't the first call like that they received.
I think it is inappropriate to have such hidden features: while we tech people mostly understand the thing, I bet most people won't even get that it is a hidden feature and would think it is a bug. No one will remember to use it during a real emergency anyway.
tldw; there was an accident with a lot of blood and the injured party was able to call 911
I was a passenger in a car crash last year. I don’t remember where my phone ended up, but after the crash sent everything flying, I saw someone else’s phone in front of me and immediately activated the emergency 911 mode.
The phone I had picked up was also now cracked. I believe in this case it still ended up working, but if the digitizer was more damaged the only possible way to call 911 would be the gesture.
How do you dial if you can't see your phone? One of the things I miss about my old landline phone is that I could dial it entirely by feel. In any kind of accident or medical condition that makes me lose my vision I would not be able to dial a smartphone on-screen keyboard (or even pull up the phone app in the first place).
I realized this a few years ago when I suddenly had a black spot appear in one eye. The black spot expanded over the course of a few seconds until I could no longer see anything in that eye. Aside from one eye no longer working, I felt fine. As I was trying to decide if this was a "call 911" thing or a "drive to the emergency room" thing the black started contracting and went away. I felt find and did a few cognitive tests and coordination tests and passed so I decided to wait a bit and see if this was a one time thing. A month later it happened again, but since I was less surprised by it I was able to do some experiments and found that if I looked at a bright light I did see the black lighten and there was a particular spot off to the side where I could actually see (barely) the bright light. After that second incidence I did go to the doctor...and he found nothing. An MRI also showed nothing. So, still no idea what the hell it was, but it has not come back.
But it definitely made my realize it would be very useful to be able to summon help without having to see.
> If I were in an emergency, would I remember some weird trick like that at a time like that? Are they thinking that people in duress will rapidly and repeatedly squeez their phone naturally and so it dials when needed without you consciouly needing to?
I definitely remember at some point during setting up my iPhone (or maybe when I upgrade to the first OS that supported emergency calling?) there was a dialog that explained it and told me how to enable/disable it.
On my iPhone (iPhone X...I think there is some variation among different models) the settings (which are all on/off) are
• "Call with Hold" where if you hold the side button and a volume for a few seconds you get the emergency screen. If you continue to hold you get an alert sound and a countdown to calling 911. The emergency screen also has a slider for calling 911 and a slider to view your medical ID and a slider to power down the phone.
• "Call with 5 Presses". Press the side button 5 times to bring up the emergency screen, and sound the alarm and start the countdown to calling 911.
• "Countdown Sound". Turns the alert sound during the 911 countdown on or off.
BTW, when you dismiss the emergency screen the phone locks and disables Face ID until you enter your passcode. If you have to hand you phone to someone such as law enforcement, it is pretty easy when reaching into your pocket to get it to trigger "Call with Hold" if you have it enabled. Hold until you get haptic feedback, and then release before the 911 countdown starts so that you won't get an alarm. Then press the side button again to exit the emergency screen.
Sounds like an ocular migraine
I was thrilled when I took a bad spill over the bars of my mountain bike at 30mph downhill and my phone offered to call 911.
I was dismayed when I started snowboarding this season and without falling my watch texted my emergency contacts and called 911 repeatedly on my first runs of the season.
I’ve now disabled it as my older mother doesn’t need another reason to be scared of her son doing extreme sports regularly.
Now I lost the extra safety the feature provided simply because it was incapable of understanding snowboarding behavior.
It looks like I will have to do it again this year.
As an instructor, it is really bad wenn you see the rescue team coming to you for nothing, knowing that it diverts resources for real cases.
Update: you never ever need such piece of shitty automated system on a normal ski slope. Outside of the slopes you need an Arva.
Luckily after the last situation I opened up the app and disabled all Emergency SOS features so hopefully it does not happen again. Also, hopefully I never actually need it
The submission title is missing vital context, original title:
“Colorado ski town emergency dispatch centers fielding dozens of automated 911 calls from skier iPhones”
"Colorado town fielding dozens of automated 911 calls from skier iPhones"
I wonder how many times it's been activated not by skiers, but by angry people throwing their phones for whatever reason.
“We are communicating with Apple to get them to pay more attention to this but it feels like we are trying to turn a battleship in a bathtub.”
An easy way to get them to pay attention might be to just loudly announce the intention to, and then start ignoring, automated calls from them, or at least deprioritise them in favour of human calls. The equivalent of nullrouting DDoS traffic.
They did.
"We did have a conversation with Apple about the crash detection this fall and they told us they were aware of the issue and were working on a fix they were hoping to have out in the first quarter of 2023"
As did some other people.
"His dispatch supervisor has contacted Apple and received a response that the company is aware of the conflict between skiers and the crash detection technology and are working on a fix, Schroetlin said."
They can't, which basically means it's a poor feature and shouldn't have been implemented.
Let people know that they must buy a second phone for use with skiing.
Even just dropping it.
I’m bemused at how many cracked screen devices I see given how often I drop mine and yet it never seems to break.
I have fallen while cruising on skateboard
At minimum, it would require biosensors that detect the owner is still wearing the watch yet his life signs are significantly perturbed from the norm: irregular heart beat and oxygen saturation, hypothermia, AI-informed sound interpretation for things like gasping for air etc.
It is not as dumb as just looking for spikes in acceleration, but specific patterns and integrating acceleration to get position and velocity history in order to match situations that look like car crashes. Obviously the real world is demonstrating some bugs with bad matches that didn’t get found in testing, but this isn’t surprising or some big failure. Unfortunate it is bothering emergency workers, but is it actually impacting emergency services?
And that's a fundamentally stupid idea.
> is it actually impacting emergency services?
Yes, but that's an externality, so don't worry about it.
Ah yes, the tried and true method of minimizing false positives: test on true positives.
I was joking that we should send Apple an invoice for the faulty feature. Maybe they will pay it, and if they don’t, we can take them to small claims court. I’m quite familiar with the process now. Lol.
https://old.reddit.com/r/ProRevenge/comments/8pocxv/apples_h...
Apple is wrongly exploiting a public service rather than paying (and charging for) a proxy.
No-one will shout at you for it. You're not in any trouble.
Just for fuck's sake don't hang up the call, because then we have to send everyone to your phone's reported position just in case there *is* a problem.
This really is important technology, particularly for the elderly and infirm.
When the app started to get used, it was very popular.
The reason is - we configured it to be used with a caretaker - i.e. another human that would be alerted if there were a fall. This use-case was immediately compatible with existing structures in the fall-detector market; i.e. letting grandma out into the yard for a bit of alone time while I put the kettle on...
I don't know if Apple have a way for the user to inform a caretaker, but if they do I can only assume its a nuisance to set up.
I think you could have worded this to make your gran sound less like a dog...
Or Apple could disable it temporarily to stop filling up the 911 queue?
At least add a msg saying it's automated?
In what world is generating false positives spamming 911 and potentially displacing actual emergencies a "pretty cool feature"??? This "feature" is doing more harm than good in Summit County, it's trash:
“We are not in the practice of disregarding calls,” said Trina Dummer, the interim director of the Summit County 911 Center. “These calls involve a tremendous amount of resources, from dispatchers to deputies to ski patrollers. And I don’t think we’ve ever had an actual emergency event.”
The problems faced by emergency ski services are niche. If this technology doesn't give false positives outside of that niche I'd say it's pretty worth it. And fixing it for that niche is probably not that hard.
In general I'd say spend more resources if it meant saving more lives; inverse need not apply?
All that to say, myself (and likely OP) agree with your thoughts.
So that's dozens of events where they have to send first responders out to see if there's a serious injury/fatality on the mountain because it could be nothing or you could have collided with a tree or fallen off a cliff.
The problem seems to be that Apple under-thought this feature. They made it one-size-fits-all instead of context sensitive. For example, maybe when it detects you're near a ski resort it asks you to switch into a skiing-friendly mode for the rest of the day. Same for amusement parks and other common pastimes that involve rapid deceleration events.
Just because this number sounded low to you as quoted in the headline doesn't mean it's not a big expensive problem for them. They can't ignore 911 calls.