How could you create a 95% effective global emergency broadcasting system?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
23
down vote

favorite
1













THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system



No action is required.



Type: Milkyway Empire




The World



In the near future:



  • we discover FTL

  • we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"

  • in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population

Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.



It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me



"remote areas"



  • Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)

  • Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into

  • Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)

  • Areas without electricity

Partial Solution



I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with



  • antennae

  • Raspberry Pi

  • solar panels

  • batteries

  • loudspeakers

I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)



Question



Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?



Assume that all major countries want to contribute.(The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)










share|improve this question



















  • 14




    It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
    – Philipp
    Oct 3 at 19:43







  • 4




    vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
    – depperm
    Oct 3 at 19:54







  • 16




    Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
    – HopelessN00b
    Oct 4 at 0:26







  • 24




    Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
    – A C
    Oct 4 at 5:02






  • 10




    Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
    – Real Subtle
    Oct 4 at 11:46














up vote
23
down vote

favorite
1













THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system



No action is required.



Type: Milkyway Empire




The World



In the near future:



  • we discover FTL

  • we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"

  • in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population

Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.



It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me



"remote areas"



  • Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)

  • Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into

  • Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)

  • Areas without electricity

Partial Solution



I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with



  • antennae

  • Raspberry Pi

  • solar panels

  • batteries

  • loudspeakers

I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)



Question



Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?



Assume that all major countries want to contribute.(The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)










share|improve this question



















  • 14




    It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
    – Philipp
    Oct 3 at 19:43







  • 4




    vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
    – depperm
    Oct 3 at 19:54







  • 16




    Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
    – HopelessN00b
    Oct 4 at 0:26







  • 24




    Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
    – A C
    Oct 4 at 5:02






  • 10




    Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
    – Real Subtle
    Oct 4 at 11:46












up vote
23
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
23
down vote

favorite
1






1






THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system



No action is required.



Type: Milkyway Empire




The World



In the near future:



  • we discover FTL

  • we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"

  • in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population

Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.



It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me



"remote areas"



  • Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)

  • Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into

  • Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)

  • Areas without electricity

Partial Solution



I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with



  • antennae

  • Raspberry Pi

  • solar panels

  • batteries

  • loudspeakers

I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)



Question



Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?



Assume that all major countries want to contribute.(The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)










share|improve this question
















THIS IS A TEST of the Galactic Emergency Alert system



No action is required.



Type: Milkyway Empire




The World



In the near future:



  • we discover FTL

  • we run into some friendly aliens that are part of a benevolent galactic "empire"

  • in order to join, we must have a global emergency alert system that can reach >95% of our population

Most areas can be covered by cell phone/tv/radio alerts.



It is getting the alert out to the remote areas that concerns me



"remote areas"



  • Areas without cell service and no other alert method (radio,etc)

  • Areas with a warning system that we can't automate/hook into

  • Areas without a warning system at all (and no radio/etc.)

  • Areas without electricity

Partial Solution



I believe we can mass produce a simple pole with



  • antennae

  • Raspberry Pi

  • solar panels

  • batteries

  • loudspeakers

I can see deploying these in remote areas via B-52. The pole is dropped, it will jam itself into the ground and activate (pole is designed to manage terminal velocity)



Question



Including manufacturing time, how long would it take to ensure that >95% of the population would hear the global alert?



Assume that all major countries want to contribute.(The empire has a LOT of benefits when we join)







reality-check communication






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Oct 4 at 13:05









Philipp

29.1k1159110




29.1k1159110










asked Oct 3 at 19:23









Michael Kutz

1,6961514




1,6961514







  • 14




    It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
    – Philipp
    Oct 3 at 19:43







  • 4




    vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
    – depperm
    Oct 3 at 19:54







  • 16




    Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
    – HopelessN00b
    Oct 4 at 0:26







  • 24




    Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
    – A C
    Oct 4 at 5:02






  • 10




    Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
    – Real Subtle
    Oct 4 at 11:46












  • 14




    It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
    – Philipp
    Oct 3 at 19:43







  • 4




    vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
    – depperm
    Oct 3 at 19:54







  • 16




    Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
    – HopelessN00b
    Oct 4 at 0:26







  • 24




    Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
    – A C
    Oct 4 at 5:02






  • 10




    Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
    – Real Subtle
    Oct 4 at 11:46







14




14




It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
Oct 3 at 19:43





It might be cheaper, easier and have many unrelated benefits to invest into a proper permanent GSM network. Global mobile phone ownership is on the rise, especially in developing countries. 95% of the world population either owning a mobile or having someone nearby with one isn't unrealistic in the near future, especially when governments would be willing to subsidize them.
– Philipp
Oct 3 at 19:43





4




4




vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
Oct 3 at 19:54





vaguely related, Hughes is working on a system that relies on LEO satellites to provide internet to everyone by 2027 oneweb and Elon Musk/Space-x seems to have a similar idea called starlink
– depperm
Oct 3 at 19:54





16




16




Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
– HopelessN00b
Oct 4 at 0:26





Would methods of reducing the rural population be acceptable? Giving everyone a free cellphone and building out a global cell network is the boring approach. Killing everyone we can’t reach with existing systems would be a more novel and interesting solution, if it’s permissible. (I mean, you floated the idea of dropping speaker poles into remote areas from B52 bombers... why not just drop bombs?)
– HopelessN00b
Oct 4 at 0:26





24




24




Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
– A C
Oct 4 at 5:02




Given that over 5% of the world's population is apparently deaf, I think it will be hard to create an effective system using loudspeakers
– A C
Oct 4 at 5:02




10




10




Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
– Real Subtle
Oct 4 at 11:46




Why not ask the benevolent galactic "empire" how they do it? They will probably appreciate your efforts at compatibility with their systems.
– Real Subtle
Oct 4 at 11:46










11 Answers
11






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
24
down vote













Reduce the Population



95% gets a lot easier if you can chop off the long tail. Now that you can move things faster than the speed of light, kinetic kill weapons can devestate the world. While world leaders debate how to achieve the goal, a rogue faction secedes to the moon, cracks the earth in half, and neatly qualifies for entry into the galactic fold. Then, they emigrate somewhere nicer than this galactic backwater.






share|improve this answer


















  • 1




    I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
    – Daniel B
    Oct 4 at 1:28






  • 9




    But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
    – Mr.J
    Oct 4 at 1:30






  • 2




    @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
    – Michael Kutz
    Oct 4 at 1:35






  • 4




    @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
    – Mr.J
    Oct 4 at 1:57






  • 2




    The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
    – Martin Bonner
    Oct 4 at 11:02

















up vote
20
down vote













First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.



Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?



If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.



Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.



So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.



Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.



But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.



Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.



So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.






share|improve this answer
















  • 34




    What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
    – DqwertyC
    Oct 3 at 23:53










  • @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
    – Elliot Schrock
    Oct 4 at 0:20






  • 12




    I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
    – Rodolvertice
    Oct 4 at 7:52






  • 1




    As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
    – Fabian Röling
    Oct 4 at 9:52






  • 1




    @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
    – Nic Hartley
    Oct 4 at 19:25

















up vote
18
down vote













Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:



enter image description here



Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
    – Michael Kutz
    Oct 3 at 21:30






  • 2




    @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
    – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
    Oct 3 at 22:08






  • 3




    Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
    – Schwern
    Oct 4 at 3:07











  • The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
    – Chronocidal
    Oct 4 at 7:31






  • 2




    @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
    – Ruadhan
    Oct 4 at 11:34

















up vote
16
down vote













Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:




In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.




If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.






share|improve this answer
















  • 1




    @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
    – Renan
    Oct 3 at 20:32






  • 47




    Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
    – Cort Ammon
    Oct 3 at 20:37






  • 10




    You had me at "detonating nukes".
    – GrandmasterB
    Oct 3 at 22:12






  • 4




    Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
    – AmiralPatate
    Oct 4 at 6:01






  • 3




    Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
    – Mohd Abdul Mujib
    Oct 4 at 12:25

















up vote
5
down vote













Low Frequency Radio



Remember those radio-controlled clocks? They get the current time from a radio signal. The entire United States is covered by one broadcast tower in Fort Collins, Colorado. It operates on 60 kHz band. This tower broadcasts at 1 bit per second, but you could presumably increase the baud rate a bit...



What you would do is give every citizen a little device that would listen for this broadcast. This antenna could also be placed in cell phones, clocks (duh), and other devices. So for the technophobes that don't want phones or whatever you could use that arduino setup you mentioned, deploying them in strategic areas, instead of all over the world.



As for the broadcast towers, to build in redundancy, I'd go with two per continent.



As for the message, unless you want to ignore the 1 bit per second part, it could just say "get to a tv/radio/Internet access point!"






share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    4
    down vote













    Induced Gravitational Harmonics



    You didn't mention if you have artificial gravity to go with your FTL or not, but if you do, and depending on how it works, inducing fluctuations in the planet's natural gravity at a frequency audible to humans could make every loose object on the entire planet vibrate out your message all at once.



    As a bonus, more targeted manipulation could be used to crush flat anyone who doesn't want to join the galactic empire.



    Solar Thermal Transducer



    If you don't have sufficient artificial gravity power to pull this off, set up a solar laser array. Pumping a few gigawats of thermal energy into the atmosphere at the proper frequency and dispersement pattern should let you create arbitrarily loud sounds at arbitrary points on the planet's surface. You'd just have to keep your message short to avoid, shall we say, unpleasant side-effects...



    As a bonus, any dissidents who don't want to join the galactic empire can simply be vaporized in the middle of the night. No muss, no fuss, no witnesses!



    Radio



    There is a school near where I live that is less than a mile from a 50,000 watt radio transmitter station. As it turns out, you'd be amazed what kinds of things can be used as AM receivers if the signal is strong enough... Lockers, desks, telephone lines, people's fillings... Anything conductive and capable of vibrating is potentially susceptible to being driven by a sufficiently powerful signal. The energy budget to blanket the globe this way is probably cost-prohibitive given that you'd have to convert it to radio waves, and the damage it might do to sensitive electronics would also be expensive, so the other options are likely better.






    share|improve this answer






















    • Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
      – Michael Kutz
      2 days ago










    • @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
      – Freedomjail
      2 days ago










    • @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
      – Perkins
      2 days ago

















    up vote
    2
    down vote













    What about projecting the message on the moon? Everybody can see it, you only need one powerful enough projector rather than a global installation, you can cover the costs through ads.



    The problem however would be language and the fact that the message would not be instantanious for everybody.



    Or instead of projecting on the moon, set up a (or multiple) sufficiently large screen(s) in higher orbit and project on those.






    share|improve this answer




















    • The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
      – HSchmale
      2 days ago










    • The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
      – MSalters
      2 days ago










    • @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
      – Subbies
      2 days ago







    • 1




      The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
      – Bomaz
      2 days ago






    • 1




      @bomaz - GMTA :)
      – Fattie
      2 days ago

















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Regarding the viability of purchasing a phone for every person in the world:



    https://www.nbim.no/no/ - 8 468 829 792 352 nok (about a trillion dollars)



    That is the savings of Norway, a small european country of 5 million people. That is more than enough to buy a smartphone for the last 30% of the world who are still disconnected from the internet.



    I am sure we could figure something out.






    share|improve this answer
















    • 1




      The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
      – papirtiger
      2 days ago


















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    This would be trivial with today's technology because,



    Fortunately in our real world there's a near-duopoly on device OS.



    Couldn't be easier. In five minutes the 2 major device OS, and the few minor device OS, could be forced to add more "emergency alert" functions than they do now.



    Step 2, governments would simply mandate that older versions of the OS don't work, which is easy to achieve.



    None of that is any harder then, say, that you "must have brakes on a vehicle" and so on - any regulation.



    A tiny number of people don't have a device currently; it would only cost a few billion to make a minimal one for those folks.



    Note that a few nutters would want to avoid being contacted: your 95% rule easily covers that case.



    Easy! Thanks to the current duopoly on device operating systems.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      There seems to be two assumptions that people are making that I want to unpick:



      1. That a warning signal must be in a spoken language.


      2. That "urgency" means getting the message to people in minutes rather than days.


      Put a set of nuclear-powered satellites in low-earth orbit, such that their orbits cover the globe. Fit each with an incredibly a bright light source - perhaps an array of thousands and thousands of LEDs?



      Take the time to contact the hard-to-reach population areas the slow way - by mail or in person - and tell them where to look in the sky each night for the signal. Give them training on what action they should take if they see the emergency light.






      share|improve this answer



























        up vote
        -1
        down vote













        Interesting coincidence considering last Tuesday the Donald woke me up with a phone alert of "THIS IS A TEST". If OP is DARPA fishing for new ideas, you know now where to reach me. :)




        we discover FTL




        In that case we can have a grand old time playing with the nature of causality.



        If you need to warn somebody located in even the most off-the-grid place, very effectively without complicated user training other than innate susceptibility to intimidation, and with 100% reliability due to some quirks of our universe exhibiting predestination effects even in the face of plot rewriting, you can just use one of these technological wonders:



        THIS IS A TEST Arnold






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.

















          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "579"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126675%2fhow-could-you-create-a-95-effective-global-emergency-broadcasting-system%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          11 Answers
          11






          active

          oldest

          votes








          11 Answers
          11






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          24
          down vote













          Reduce the Population



          95% gets a lot easier if you can chop off the long tail. Now that you can move things faster than the speed of light, kinetic kill weapons can devestate the world. While world leaders debate how to achieve the goal, a rogue faction secedes to the moon, cracks the earth in half, and neatly qualifies for entry into the galactic fold. Then, they emigrate somewhere nicer than this galactic backwater.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
            – Daniel B
            Oct 4 at 1:28






          • 9




            But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:30






          • 2




            @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 4 at 1:35






          • 4




            @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:57






          • 2




            The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
            – Martin Bonner
            Oct 4 at 11:02














          up vote
          24
          down vote













          Reduce the Population



          95% gets a lot easier if you can chop off the long tail. Now that you can move things faster than the speed of light, kinetic kill weapons can devestate the world. While world leaders debate how to achieve the goal, a rogue faction secedes to the moon, cracks the earth in half, and neatly qualifies for entry into the galactic fold. Then, they emigrate somewhere nicer than this galactic backwater.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 1




            I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
            – Daniel B
            Oct 4 at 1:28






          • 9




            But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:30






          • 2




            @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 4 at 1:35






          • 4




            @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:57






          • 2




            The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
            – Martin Bonner
            Oct 4 at 11:02












          up vote
          24
          down vote










          up vote
          24
          down vote









          Reduce the Population



          95% gets a lot easier if you can chop off the long tail. Now that you can move things faster than the speed of light, kinetic kill weapons can devestate the world. While world leaders debate how to achieve the goal, a rogue faction secedes to the moon, cracks the earth in half, and neatly qualifies for entry into the galactic fold. Then, they emigrate somewhere nicer than this galactic backwater.






          share|improve this answer














          Reduce the Population



          95% gets a lot easier if you can chop off the long tail. Now that you can move things faster than the speed of light, kinetic kill weapons can devestate the world. While world leaders debate how to achieve the goal, a rogue faction secedes to the moon, cracks the earth in half, and neatly qualifies for entry into the galactic fold. Then, they emigrate somewhere nicer than this galactic backwater.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Oct 4 at 1:23

























          answered Oct 4 at 1:18









          Daniel B

          3,6071523




          3,6071523







          • 1




            I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
            – Daniel B
            Oct 4 at 1:28






          • 9




            But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:30






          • 2




            @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 4 at 1:35






          • 4




            @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:57






          • 2




            The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
            – Martin Bonner
            Oct 4 at 11:02












          • 1




            I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
            – Daniel B
            Oct 4 at 1:28






          • 9




            But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:30






          • 2




            @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 4 at 1:35






          • 4




            @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
            – Mr.J
            Oct 4 at 1:57






          • 2




            The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
            – Martin Bonner
            Oct 4 at 11:02







          1




          1




          I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
          – Daniel B
          Oct 4 at 1:28




          I agree, the rogue faction that enacts this plan will be highly immoral.
          – Daniel B
          Oct 4 at 1:28




          9




          9




          But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
          – Mr.J
          Oct 4 at 1:30




          But take note, I have to emphasize this, this is highly logical. Immoral, yes, but logically correct.
          – Mr.J
          Oct 4 at 1:30




          2




          2




          @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
          – Michael Kutz
          Oct 4 at 1:35




          @Mr.J , etc. - I'm already killing off at least 50% of the population at the end of "Chapter 1" because of a massive multi-brood infestation of Space Locus in our asteroid belt. I don't want/need any more needless killings. ( worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/102010/… )
          – Michael Kutz
          Oct 4 at 1:35




          4




          4




          @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
          – Mr.J
          Oct 4 at 1:57




          @MichaelKutz You forgot to add that detail, this changes things. If your period is post apocalypse, do you think most of earths facilities are still intact?
          – Mr.J
          Oct 4 at 1:57




          2




          2




          The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
          – Martin Bonner
          Oct 4 at 11:02




          The problem is that killing off the people in remote places is much harder than killing all the people in Tokyo, Shanghai, and Jakata (which is about 0.1 billion). Apart from anything else, people in remote places often live much more self-reliant lifestyles, so a collapse of civilization will tend affect them less.
          – Martin Bonner
          Oct 4 at 11:02










          up vote
          20
          down vote













          First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.



          Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?



          If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.



          Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.



          So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.



          Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.



          But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.



          Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.



          So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.






          share|improve this answer
















          • 34




            What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
            – DqwertyC
            Oct 3 at 23:53










          • @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
            – Elliot Schrock
            Oct 4 at 0:20






          • 12




            I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
            – Rodolvertice
            Oct 4 at 7:52






          • 1




            As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
            – Fabian Röling
            Oct 4 at 9:52






          • 1




            @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
            – Nic Hartley
            Oct 4 at 19:25














          up vote
          20
          down vote













          First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.



          Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?



          If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.



          Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.



          So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.



          Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.



          But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.



          Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.



          So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.






          share|improve this answer
















          • 34




            What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
            – DqwertyC
            Oct 3 at 23:53










          • @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
            – Elliot Schrock
            Oct 4 at 0:20






          • 12




            I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
            – Rodolvertice
            Oct 4 at 7:52






          • 1




            As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
            – Fabian Röling
            Oct 4 at 9:52






          • 1




            @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
            – Nic Hartley
            Oct 4 at 19:25












          up vote
          20
          down vote










          up vote
          20
          down vote









          First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.



          Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?



          If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.



          Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.



          So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.



          Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.



          But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.



          Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.



          So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.






          share|improve this answer












          First off, >95% coverage means that, with a worldwide population of 7 billion, you can ignore 350 million people. Which I feel like gives you some wiggle room.



          Second, when you say 'near future,' what do you mean?



          If you mean anything longer than the next few years, you may not need to do anything other than use cell phones. As of 2017, about 70% of the world's population owned one, and that percentage is rapidly increasing. In many areas of the world, mobile phones are the way you access the internet.



          Additionally, about a quarter of the world's population is under 14 years old. The vast majority of these children, I believe it's safe to say, will be within hearing distance of an adult.



          So, 70% of the world has cell phones. 25% are close enough to an adult to hear one in an emergency. Adding those together gives you 95% coverage.



          Now, that's cutting it a little close as of 2017, but with the increasing ubiquity of mobile devices, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume in your 'near future' scenario that more than 95% could hear a cell phone if it went off.



          But what if you wanted to be even more sure? Well, as we're all aware, humans are not evenly distributed across the planet. China and India each have more than a billion people, and many of those are among the poorest in the world... and they also live in large cities. By hooking up your raspberry pi to some airhorns in those large cities, you can pick up whole percentage points of the world population.



          Want to be even more sure? Require phone manufacturers to donate a few tens of millions of devices, for the good of the planet. Ship those devices to every village in Africa and rural community in India, and voila! Even better coverage.



          So, even assuming you're not happy with the current growth of cell phone usage worldwide, which within the next few years will easily take you over 95% coverage, manufacturing and shipping those cheap mobile devices for rural areas would take, what, a year? At most? We're already making hundreds of millions of phones now, so it wouldn't take long to redirect them where they're needed if necessary.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Oct 3 at 23:13









          Elliot Schrock

          1,975614




          1,975614







          • 34




            What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
            – DqwertyC
            Oct 3 at 23:53










          • @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
            – Elliot Schrock
            Oct 4 at 0:20






          • 12




            I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
            – Rodolvertice
            Oct 4 at 7:52






          • 1




            As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
            – Fabian Röling
            Oct 4 at 9:52






          • 1




            @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
            – Nic Hartley
            Oct 4 at 19:25












          • 34




            What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
            – DqwertyC
            Oct 3 at 23:53










          • @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
            – Elliot Schrock
            Oct 4 at 0:20






          • 12




            I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
            – Rodolvertice
            Oct 4 at 7:52






          • 1




            As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
            – Fabian Röling
            Oct 4 at 9:52






          • 1




            @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
            – Nic Hartley
            Oct 4 at 19:25







          34




          34




          What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
          – DqwertyC
          Oct 3 at 23:53




          What percent of cell-phone users are also under 14 years old? I agree with the validity of the rest of your answer, but if there's any chance of overlap between two groups, you can't get an absolute percent, just lower and upper limits.
          – DqwertyC
          Oct 3 at 23:53












          @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
          – Elliot Schrock
          Oct 4 at 0:20




          @DqwertyC Good question! I briefly considered this, but decided that the number of kids who have a phone would balance those who were out of earshot. In fact, back in my day™, I wasn't allowed to go out with friends alone unless one of us had a cell phone. But you're absolutely right, we can't know for sure, and there is definitely a potential for an overlap that messes up my numbers.
          – Elliot Schrock
          Oct 4 at 0:20




          12




          12




          I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
          – Rodolvertice
          Oct 4 at 7:52




          I think that you are mixing things up with the percentage addition part, kids with phones will not cancel out with kids out of ear shot, those two categories will actually both decrease the percentage.
          – Rodolvertice
          Oct 4 at 7:52




          1




          1




          As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
          – Fabian Röling
          Oct 4 at 9:52




          As far as I know even villages in Africa usually have a few cellphones in them. The users often have to go to the next city to get a connection, but many have one. There's even a pretty popular payment method there that uses SMS.
          – Fabian Röling
          Oct 4 at 9:52




          1




          1




          @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
          – Nic Hartley
          Oct 4 at 19:25




          @DqwertyC Considering the rate at which cell ownership is increasing, I think it's fair to say that overlap won't matter within a few years. I don't have any hard numbers to calculate it out, though.
          – Nic Hartley
          Oct 4 at 19:25










          up vote
          18
          down vote













          Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:



          enter image description here



          Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.

















          • But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 3 at 21:30






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
            – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
            Oct 3 at 22:08






          • 3




            Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
            – Schwern
            Oct 4 at 3:07











          • The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
            – Chronocidal
            Oct 4 at 7:31






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
            – Ruadhan
            Oct 4 at 11:34














          up vote
          18
          down vote













          Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:



          enter image description here



          Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.

















          • But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 3 at 21:30






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
            – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
            Oct 3 at 22:08






          • 3




            Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
            – Schwern
            Oct 4 at 3:07











          • The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
            – Chronocidal
            Oct 4 at 7:31






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
            – Ruadhan
            Oct 4 at 11:34












          up vote
          18
          down vote










          up vote
          18
          down vote









          Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:



          enter image description here



          Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          Is the scope of the system to only be on Earth? If that is the case, then satellites should suffice, as we have had 100% coverage for decades now. The old Iridium constellation, famous for its satellite flares, was able to completely cover the Earth, as shown below:



          enter image description here



          Simply use a satellite alert system for phones, or use those pole thingies you mentioned but hook them up to a satellite.







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered Oct 3 at 20:37









          KITTENDESTROYER-9000

          3815




          3815




          New contributor




          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          KITTENDESTROYER-9000 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.











          • But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 3 at 21:30






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
            – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
            Oct 3 at 22:08






          • 3




            Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
            – Schwern
            Oct 4 at 3:07











          • The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
            – Chronocidal
            Oct 4 at 7:31






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
            – Ruadhan
            Oct 4 at 11:34
















          • But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
            – Michael Kutz
            Oct 3 at 21:30






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
            – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
            Oct 3 at 22:08






          • 3




            Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
            – Schwern
            Oct 4 at 3:07











          • The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
            – Chronocidal
            Oct 4 at 7:31






          • 2




            @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
            – Ruadhan
            Oct 4 at 11:34















          But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
          – Michael Kutz
          Oct 3 at 21:30




          But how long would it take to manufacture and distribute the pole thingies to ensure >95% of the people can be reached?
          – Michael Kutz
          Oct 3 at 21:30




          2




          2




          @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
          – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
          Oct 3 at 22:08




          @MichaelKutz Depends how dedicated you are. I doubt if we have FTL travel greater than 5% of the population would be disconnected from the internet, so this question may not even be applicable.
          – KITTENDESTROYER-9000
          Oct 3 at 22:08




          3




          3




          Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
          – Schwern
          Oct 4 at 3:07





          Iridium is still going and launching new satellites.
          – Schwern
          Oct 4 at 3:07













          The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
          – Chronocidal
          Oct 4 at 7:31




          The only real issue with using Satellites is that they have trouble connecting if there is too much between you and the sky - but, that's mostly an issue in urban settings (tall buildings, etc) where we already have phone masts. Mandate a change of all phones to support both satellites and masts (since the necessary antenna are different), then run a global "subsidised trade-in" scheme to encourage everyone to upgrade (the new "basic model" might be free with any trade-in)
          – Chronocidal
          Oct 4 at 7:31




          2




          2




          @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
          – Ruadhan
          Oct 4 at 11:34




          @MichaelKutz If money is no object (and lets face it, you're joining an intergalactic community here, it's worth shelling out!) then you could probably contract a few manufacturers and churn out a few million of the things in a matter of months at most.
          – Ruadhan
          Oct 4 at 11:34










          up vote
          16
          down vote













          Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:




          In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.




          If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.






          share|improve this answer
















          • 1




            @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
            – Renan
            Oct 3 at 20:32






          • 47




            Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
            – Cort Ammon
            Oct 3 at 20:37






          • 10




            You had me at "detonating nukes".
            – GrandmasterB
            Oct 3 at 22:12






          • 4




            Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
            – AmiralPatate
            Oct 4 at 6:01






          • 3




            Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
            – Mohd Abdul Mujib
            Oct 4 at 12:25














          up vote
          16
          down vote













          Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:




          In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.




          If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.






          share|improve this answer
















          • 1




            @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
            – Renan
            Oct 3 at 20:32






          • 47




            Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
            – Cort Ammon
            Oct 3 at 20:37






          • 10




            You had me at "detonating nukes".
            – GrandmasterB
            Oct 3 at 22:12






          • 4




            Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
            – AmiralPatate
            Oct 4 at 6:01






          • 3




            Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
            – Mohd Abdul Mujib
            Oct 4 at 12:25












          up vote
          16
          down vote










          up vote
          16
          down vote









          Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:




          In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.




          If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.






          share|improve this answer












          Detonating nukes in very high altitudes causes a lot of noise and brings along some nice pyrotechnical effects:




          In general, nuclear effects in space (or very high altitudes) have a qualitatively different display. While an atmospheric nuclear explosion has a characteristic mushroom-shaped cloud, high-altitude and space explosions tend to manifest a spherical 'cloud,' reminiscent of other space-based explosions until distorted by Earth's magnetic field, and the charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres to create an auroral display which has led documentary maker Peter Kuran to characterize these detonations as 'the rainbow bombs'.




          If we have the tech for FTL, we have the tech to blow some nuclear fireworks up high. That should gather a lot of attention. We could do it around the globe.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Oct 3 at 20:26









          Renan

          35.1k1083181




          35.1k1083181







          • 1




            @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
            – Renan
            Oct 3 at 20:32






          • 47




            Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
            – Cort Ammon
            Oct 3 at 20:37






          • 10




            You had me at "detonating nukes".
            – GrandmasterB
            Oct 3 at 22:12






          • 4




            Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
            – AmiralPatate
            Oct 4 at 6:01






          • 3




            Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
            – Mohd Abdul Mujib
            Oct 4 at 12:25












          • 1




            @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
            – Renan
            Oct 3 at 20:32






          • 47




            Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
            – Cort Ammon
            Oct 3 at 20:37






          • 10




            You had me at "detonating nukes".
            – GrandmasterB
            Oct 3 at 22:12






          • 4




            Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
            – AmiralPatate
            Oct 4 at 6:01






          • 3




            Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
            – Mohd Abdul Mujib
            Oct 4 at 12:25







          1




          1




          @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
          – Renan
          Oct 3 at 20:32




          @KITTDESTROYER-9000 the fallout would be minimal, you get more rads from bricks. But we'd need to upgrade our satellites to withstand that.
          – Renan
          Oct 3 at 20:32




          47




          47




          Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
          – Cort Ammon
          Oct 3 at 20:37




          Your attention please. An emergency has been declared. Nuclear explosives have been detonated in your atmosphere to draw your attention to this emergency. Incidentally, it is also the emergency itself.
          – Cort Ammon
          Oct 3 at 20:37




          10




          10




          You had me at "detonating nukes".
          – GrandmasterB
          Oct 3 at 22:12




          You had me at "detonating nukes".
          – GrandmasterB
          Oct 3 at 22:12




          4




          4




          Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
          – AmiralPatate
          Oct 4 at 6:01




          Wouldn't the EMP kill all electronics everywhere? Some might consider that a negative.
          – AmiralPatate
          Oct 4 at 6:01




          3




          3




          Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
          – Mohd Abdul Mujib
          Oct 4 at 12:25




          Welp, If the cause of emergency may be fatal to us humans, then I might as well die while seeing a nuclear blast by my naked eyes and a fooking aura in the sky!!! That would be an icing on the cake.
          – Mohd Abdul Mujib
          Oct 4 at 12:25










          up vote
          5
          down vote













          Low Frequency Radio



          Remember those radio-controlled clocks? They get the current time from a radio signal. The entire United States is covered by one broadcast tower in Fort Collins, Colorado. It operates on 60 kHz band. This tower broadcasts at 1 bit per second, but you could presumably increase the baud rate a bit...



          What you would do is give every citizen a little device that would listen for this broadcast. This antenna could also be placed in cell phones, clocks (duh), and other devices. So for the technophobes that don't want phones or whatever you could use that arduino setup you mentioned, deploying them in strategic areas, instead of all over the world.



          As for the broadcast towers, to build in redundancy, I'd go with two per continent.



          As for the message, unless you want to ignore the 1 bit per second part, it could just say "get to a tv/radio/Internet access point!"






          share|improve this answer
























            up vote
            5
            down vote













            Low Frequency Radio



            Remember those radio-controlled clocks? They get the current time from a radio signal. The entire United States is covered by one broadcast tower in Fort Collins, Colorado. It operates on 60 kHz band. This tower broadcasts at 1 bit per second, but you could presumably increase the baud rate a bit...



            What you would do is give every citizen a little device that would listen for this broadcast. This antenna could also be placed in cell phones, clocks (duh), and other devices. So for the technophobes that don't want phones or whatever you could use that arduino setup you mentioned, deploying them in strategic areas, instead of all over the world.



            As for the broadcast towers, to build in redundancy, I'd go with two per continent.



            As for the message, unless you want to ignore the 1 bit per second part, it could just say "get to a tv/radio/Internet access point!"






            share|improve this answer






















              up vote
              5
              down vote










              up vote
              5
              down vote









              Low Frequency Radio



              Remember those radio-controlled clocks? They get the current time from a radio signal. The entire United States is covered by one broadcast tower in Fort Collins, Colorado. It operates on 60 kHz band. This tower broadcasts at 1 bit per second, but you could presumably increase the baud rate a bit...



              What you would do is give every citizen a little device that would listen for this broadcast. This antenna could also be placed in cell phones, clocks (duh), and other devices. So for the technophobes that don't want phones or whatever you could use that arduino setup you mentioned, deploying them in strategic areas, instead of all over the world.



              As for the broadcast towers, to build in redundancy, I'd go with two per continent.



              As for the message, unless you want to ignore the 1 bit per second part, it could just say "get to a tv/radio/Internet access point!"






              share|improve this answer












              Low Frequency Radio



              Remember those radio-controlled clocks? They get the current time from a radio signal. The entire United States is covered by one broadcast tower in Fort Collins, Colorado. It operates on 60 kHz band. This tower broadcasts at 1 bit per second, but you could presumably increase the baud rate a bit...



              What you would do is give every citizen a little device that would listen for this broadcast. This antenna could also be placed in cell phones, clocks (duh), and other devices. So for the technophobes that don't want phones or whatever you could use that arduino setup you mentioned, deploying them in strategic areas, instead of all over the world.



              As for the broadcast towers, to build in redundancy, I'd go with two per continent.



              As for the message, unless you want to ignore the 1 bit per second part, it could just say "get to a tv/radio/Internet access point!"







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Oct 4 at 23:36









              johnVonTrapp

              28915




              28915




















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  Induced Gravitational Harmonics



                  You didn't mention if you have artificial gravity to go with your FTL or not, but if you do, and depending on how it works, inducing fluctuations in the planet's natural gravity at a frequency audible to humans could make every loose object on the entire planet vibrate out your message all at once.



                  As a bonus, more targeted manipulation could be used to crush flat anyone who doesn't want to join the galactic empire.



                  Solar Thermal Transducer



                  If you don't have sufficient artificial gravity power to pull this off, set up a solar laser array. Pumping a few gigawats of thermal energy into the atmosphere at the proper frequency and dispersement pattern should let you create arbitrarily loud sounds at arbitrary points on the planet's surface. You'd just have to keep your message short to avoid, shall we say, unpleasant side-effects...



                  As a bonus, any dissidents who don't want to join the galactic empire can simply be vaporized in the middle of the night. No muss, no fuss, no witnesses!



                  Radio



                  There is a school near where I live that is less than a mile from a 50,000 watt radio transmitter station. As it turns out, you'd be amazed what kinds of things can be used as AM receivers if the signal is strong enough... Lockers, desks, telephone lines, people's fillings... Anything conductive and capable of vibrating is potentially susceptible to being driven by a sufficiently powerful signal. The energy budget to blanket the globe this way is probably cost-prohibitive given that you'd have to convert it to radio waves, and the damage it might do to sensitive electronics would also be expensive, so the other options are likely better.






                  share|improve this answer






















                  • Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                    – Michael Kutz
                    2 days ago










                  • @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                    – Freedomjail
                    2 days ago










                  • @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                    – Perkins
                    2 days ago














                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  Induced Gravitational Harmonics



                  You didn't mention if you have artificial gravity to go with your FTL or not, but if you do, and depending on how it works, inducing fluctuations in the planet's natural gravity at a frequency audible to humans could make every loose object on the entire planet vibrate out your message all at once.



                  As a bonus, more targeted manipulation could be used to crush flat anyone who doesn't want to join the galactic empire.



                  Solar Thermal Transducer



                  If you don't have sufficient artificial gravity power to pull this off, set up a solar laser array. Pumping a few gigawats of thermal energy into the atmosphere at the proper frequency and dispersement pattern should let you create arbitrarily loud sounds at arbitrary points on the planet's surface. You'd just have to keep your message short to avoid, shall we say, unpleasant side-effects...



                  As a bonus, any dissidents who don't want to join the galactic empire can simply be vaporized in the middle of the night. No muss, no fuss, no witnesses!



                  Radio



                  There is a school near where I live that is less than a mile from a 50,000 watt radio transmitter station. As it turns out, you'd be amazed what kinds of things can be used as AM receivers if the signal is strong enough... Lockers, desks, telephone lines, people's fillings... Anything conductive and capable of vibrating is potentially susceptible to being driven by a sufficiently powerful signal. The energy budget to blanket the globe this way is probably cost-prohibitive given that you'd have to convert it to radio waves, and the damage it might do to sensitive electronics would also be expensive, so the other options are likely better.






                  share|improve this answer






















                  • Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                    – Michael Kutz
                    2 days ago










                  • @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                    – Freedomjail
                    2 days ago










                  • @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                    – Perkins
                    2 days ago












                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote









                  Induced Gravitational Harmonics



                  You didn't mention if you have artificial gravity to go with your FTL or not, but if you do, and depending on how it works, inducing fluctuations in the planet's natural gravity at a frequency audible to humans could make every loose object on the entire planet vibrate out your message all at once.



                  As a bonus, more targeted manipulation could be used to crush flat anyone who doesn't want to join the galactic empire.



                  Solar Thermal Transducer



                  If you don't have sufficient artificial gravity power to pull this off, set up a solar laser array. Pumping a few gigawats of thermal energy into the atmosphere at the proper frequency and dispersement pattern should let you create arbitrarily loud sounds at arbitrary points on the planet's surface. You'd just have to keep your message short to avoid, shall we say, unpleasant side-effects...



                  As a bonus, any dissidents who don't want to join the galactic empire can simply be vaporized in the middle of the night. No muss, no fuss, no witnesses!



                  Radio



                  There is a school near where I live that is less than a mile from a 50,000 watt radio transmitter station. As it turns out, you'd be amazed what kinds of things can be used as AM receivers if the signal is strong enough... Lockers, desks, telephone lines, people's fillings... Anything conductive and capable of vibrating is potentially susceptible to being driven by a sufficiently powerful signal. The energy budget to blanket the globe this way is probably cost-prohibitive given that you'd have to convert it to radio waves, and the damage it might do to sensitive electronics would also be expensive, so the other options are likely better.






                  share|improve this answer














                  Induced Gravitational Harmonics



                  You didn't mention if you have artificial gravity to go with your FTL or not, but if you do, and depending on how it works, inducing fluctuations in the planet's natural gravity at a frequency audible to humans could make every loose object on the entire planet vibrate out your message all at once.



                  As a bonus, more targeted manipulation could be used to crush flat anyone who doesn't want to join the galactic empire.



                  Solar Thermal Transducer



                  If you don't have sufficient artificial gravity power to pull this off, set up a solar laser array. Pumping a few gigawats of thermal energy into the atmosphere at the proper frequency and dispersement pattern should let you create arbitrarily loud sounds at arbitrary points on the planet's surface. You'd just have to keep your message short to avoid, shall we say, unpleasant side-effects...



                  As a bonus, any dissidents who don't want to join the galactic empire can simply be vaporized in the middle of the night. No muss, no fuss, no witnesses!



                  Radio



                  There is a school near where I live that is less than a mile from a 50,000 watt radio transmitter station. As it turns out, you'd be amazed what kinds of things can be used as AM receivers if the signal is strong enough... Lockers, desks, telephone lines, people's fillings... Anything conductive and capable of vibrating is potentially susceptible to being driven by a sufficiently powerful signal. The energy budget to blanket the globe this way is probably cost-prohibitive given that you'd have to convert it to radio waves, and the damage it might do to sensitive electronics would also be expensive, so the other options are likely better.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 2 days ago

























                  answered Oct 5 at 1:31









                  Perkins

                  3,144415




                  3,144415











                  • Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                    – Michael Kutz
                    2 days ago










                  • @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                    – Freedomjail
                    2 days ago










                  • @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                    – Perkins
                    2 days ago
















                  • Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                    – Michael Kutz
                    2 days ago










                  • @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                    – Freedomjail
                    2 days ago










                  • @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                    – Perkins
                    2 days ago















                  Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                  – Michael Kutz
                  2 days ago




                  Sounds similar to how the Vogons announced their intentions to destroy earth to make way for a hyperspace lane. But, how do you overcome the multiple Language barrier?
                  – Michael Kutz
                  2 days ago












                  @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                  – Freedomjail
                  2 days ago




                  @Michael Kutz Why not simply repeating the signal in every known language ?
                  – Freedomjail
                  2 days ago












                  @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                  – Perkins
                  2 days ago




                  @MichaelKutz The technical requirement is for the message to "reach" 95% of the population... That doesn't necessarily require that they understand it. But you could use multiple languages for the messages if you want to be nice.
                  – Perkins
                  2 days ago










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote













                  What about projecting the message on the moon? Everybody can see it, you only need one powerful enough projector rather than a global installation, you can cover the costs through ads.



                  The problem however would be language and the fact that the message would not be instantanious for everybody.



                  Or instead of projecting on the moon, set up a (or multiple) sufficiently large screen(s) in higher orbit and project on those.






                  share|improve this answer




















                  • The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                    – HSchmale
                    2 days ago










                  • The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                    – MSalters
                    2 days ago










                  • @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                    – Subbies
                    2 days ago







                  • 1




                    The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                    – Bomaz
                    2 days ago






                  • 1




                    @bomaz - GMTA :)
                    – Fattie
                    2 days ago














                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote













                  What about projecting the message on the moon? Everybody can see it, you only need one powerful enough projector rather than a global installation, you can cover the costs through ads.



                  The problem however would be language and the fact that the message would not be instantanious for everybody.



                  Or instead of projecting on the moon, set up a (or multiple) sufficiently large screen(s) in higher orbit and project on those.






                  share|improve this answer




















                  • The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                    – HSchmale
                    2 days ago










                  • The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                    – MSalters
                    2 days ago










                  • @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                    – Subbies
                    2 days ago







                  • 1




                    The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                    – Bomaz
                    2 days ago






                  • 1




                    @bomaz - GMTA :)
                    – Fattie
                    2 days ago












                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  What about projecting the message on the moon? Everybody can see it, you only need one powerful enough projector rather than a global installation, you can cover the costs through ads.



                  The problem however would be language and the fact that the message would not be instantanious for everybody.



                  Or instead of projecting on the moon, set up a (or multiple) sufficiently large screen(s) in higher orbit and project on those.






                  share|improve this answer












                  What about projecting the message on the moon? Everybody can see it, you only need one powerful enough projector rather than a global installation, you can cover the costs through ads.



                  The problem however would be language and the fact that the message would not be instantanious for everybody.



                  Or instead of projecting on the moon, set up a (or multiple) sufficiently large screen(s) in higher orbit and project on those.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 days ago









                  Subbies

                  1413




                  1413











                  • The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                    – HSchmale
                    2 days ago










                  • The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                    – MSalters
                    2 days ago










                  • @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                    – Subbies
                    2 days ago







                  • 1




                    The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                    – Bomaz
                    2 days ago






                  • 1




                    @bomaz - GMTA :)
                    – Fattie
                    2 days ago
















                  • The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                    – HSchmale
                    2 days ago










                  • The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                    – MSalters
                    2 days ago










                  • @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                    – Subbies
                    2 days ago







                  • 1




                    The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                    – Bomaz
                    2 days ago






                  • 1




                    @bomaz - GMTA :)
                    – Fattie
                    2 days ago















                  The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                  – HSchmale
                  2 days ago




                  The moon would be too small. It's not that big of a screen. Also any screen that could be visible from the night sky as described could also be used as a weapon to block out the sun.
                  – HSchmale
                  2 days ago












                  The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                  – MSalters
                  2 days ago




                  The moon is big enough, but that is also the problem. "One powerful enough projector" has to outshine the Sun (!). Your worst-case scenarion is the full moon, in which the visible disk of the moon is fully lit by direct sunlight, unattenuated by any atmosphere.
                  – MSalters
                  2 days ago












                  @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                  – Subbies
                  2 days ago





                  @HSchmale you could always just project letter by letter, thus making it readble. As for using screens as weapons, yes but a country with the capacity to launch such satellites most likely has better weapons than a giant flying target. Plus it seems that Earth is fairly united in this question.
                  – Subbies
                  2 days ago





                  1




                  1




                  The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                  – Bomaz
                  2 days ago




                  The power requirements are something of a hurdle here, what-if.xkcd.com/13
                  – Bomaz
                  2 days ago




                  1




                  1




                  @bomaz - GMTA :)
                  – Fattie
                  2 days ago




                  @bomaz - GMTA :)
                  – Fattie
                  2 days ago










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote













                  Regarding the viability of purchasing a phone for every person in the world:



                  https://www.nbim.no/no/ - 8 468 829 792 352 nok (about a trillion dollars)



                  That is the savings of Norway, a small european country of 5 million people. That is more than enough to buy a smartphone for the last 30% of the world who are still disconnected from the internet.



                  I am sure we could figure something out.






                  share|improve this answer
















                  • 1




                    The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                    – papirtiger
                    2 days ago















                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote













                  Regarding the viability of purchasing a phone for every person in the world:



                  https://www.nbim.no/no/ - 8 468 829 792 352 nok (about a trillion dollars)



                  That is the savings of Norway, a small european country of 5 million people. That is more than enough to buy a smartphone for the last 30% of the world who are still disconnected from the internet.



                  I am sure we could figure something out.






                  share|improve this answer
















                  • 1




                    The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                    – papirtiger
                    2 days ago













                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote









                  Regarding the viability of purchasing a phone for every person in the world:



                  https://www.nbim.no/no/ - 8 468 829 792 352 nok (about a trillion dollars)



                  That is the savings of Norway, a small european country of 5 million people. That is more than enough to buy a smartphone for the last 30% of the world who are still disconnected from the internet.



                  I am sure we could figure something out.






                  share|improve this answer












                  Regarding the viability of purchasing a phone for every person in the world:



                  https://www.nbim.no/no/ - 8 468 829 792 352 nok (about a trillion dollars)



                  That is the savings of Norway, a small european country of 5 million people. That is more than enough to buy a smartphone for the last 30% of the world who are still disconnected from the internet.



                  I am sure we could figure something out.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 days ago









                  Daniel Vestøl

                  52117




                  52117







                  • 1




                    The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                    – papirtiger
                    2 days ago













                  • 1




                    The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                    – papirtiger
                    2 days ago








                  1




                  1




                  The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                  – papirtiger
                  2 days ago





                  The Norwegian state savings are hardly typical as its the result of squirrelling away oil money for the last 30+ years. Norway may be a small country - but its has vast natural resources.
                  – papirtiger
                  2 days ago











                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  This would be trivial with today's technology because,



                  Fortunately in our real world there's a near-duopoly on device OS.



                  Couldn't be easier. In five minutes the 2 major device OS, and the few minor device OS, could be forced to add more "emergency alert" functions than they do now.



                  Step 2, governments would simply mandate that older versions of the OS don't work, which is easy to achieve.



                  None of that is any harder then, say, that you "must have brakes on a vehicle" and so on - any regulation.



                  A tiny number of people don't have a device currently; it would only cost a few billion to make a minimal one for those folks.



                  Note that a few nutters would want to avoid being contacted: your 95% rule easily covers that case.



                  Easy! Thanks to the current duopoly on device operating systems.






                  share|improve this answer
























                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote













                    This would be trivial with today's technology because,



                    Fortunately in our real world there's a near-duopoly on device OS.



                    Couldn't be easier. In five minutes the 2 major device OS, and the few minor device OS, could be forced to add more "emergency alert" functions than they do now.



                    Step 2, governments would simply mandate that older versions of the OS don't work, which is easy to achieve.



                    None of that is any harder then, say, that you "must have brakes on a vehicle" and so on - any regulation.



                    A tiny number of people don't have a device currently; it would only cost a few billion to make a minimal one for those folks.



                    Note that a few nutters would want to avoid being contacted: your 95% rule easily covers that case.



                    Easy! Thanks to the current duopoly on device operating systems.






                    share|improve this answer






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      This would be trivial with today's technology because,



                      Fortunately in our real world there's a near-duopoly on device OS.



                      Couldn't be easier. In five minutes the 2 major device OS, and the few minor device OS, could be forced to add more "emergency alert" functions than they do now.



                      Step 2, governments would simply mandate that older versions of the OS don't work, which is easy to achieve.



                      None of that is any harder then, say, that you "must have brakes on a vehicle" and so on - any regulation.



                      A tiny number of people don't have a device currently; it would only cost a few billion to make a minimal one for those folks.



                      Note that a few nutters would want to avoid being contacted: your 95% rule easily covers that case.



                      Easy! Thanks to the current duopoly on device operating systems.






                      share|improve this answer












                      This would be trivial with today's technology because,



                      Fortunately in our real world there's a near-duopoly on device OS.



                      Couldn't be easier. In five minutes the 2 major device OS, and the few minor device OS, could be forced to add more "emergency alert" functions than they do now.



                      Step 2, governments would simply mandate that older versions of the OS don't work, which is easy to achieve.



                      None of that is any harder then, say, that you "must have brakes on a vehicle" and so on - any regulation.



                      A tiny number of people don't have a device currently; it would only cost a few billion to make a minimal one for those folks.



                      Note that a few nutters would want to avoid being contacted: your 95% rule easily covers that case.



                      Easy! Thanks to the current duopoly on device operating systems.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered 2 days ago









                      Fattie

                      59627




                      59627




















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          There seems to be two assumptions that people are making that I want to unpick:



                          1. That a warning signal must be in a spoken language.


                          2. That "urgency" means getting the message to people in minutes rather than days.


                          Put a set of nuclear-powered satellites in low-earth orbit, such that their orbits cover the globe. Fit each with an incredibly a bright light source - perhaps an array of thousands and thousands of LEDs?



                          Take the time to contact the hard-to-reach population areas the slow way - by mail or in person - and tell them where to look in the sky each night for the signal. Give them training on what action they should take if they see the emergency light.






                          share|improve this answer
























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            There seems to be two assumptions that people are making that I want to unpick:



                            1. That a warning signal must be in a spoken language.


                            2. That "urgency" means getting the message to people in minutes rather than days.


                            Put a set of nuclear-powered satellites in low-earth orbit, such that their orbits cover the globe. Fit each with an incredibly a bright light source - perhaps an array of thousands and thousands of LEDs?



                            Take the time to contact the hard-to-reach population areas the slow way - by mail or in person - and tell them where to look in the sky each night for the signal. Give them training on what action they should take if they see the emergency light.






                            share|improve this answer






















                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote









                              There seems to be two assumptions that people are making that I want to unpick:



                              1. That a warning signal must be in a spoken language.


                              2. That "urgency" means getting the message to people in minutes rather than days.


                              Put a set of nuclear-powered satellites in low-earth orbit, such that their orbits cover the globe. Fit each with an incredibly a bright light source - perhaps an array of thousands and thousands of LEDs?



                              Take the time to contact the hard-to-reach population areas the slow way - by mail or in person - and tell them where to look in the sky each night for the signal. Give them training on what action they should take if they see the emergency light.






                              share|improve this answer












                              There seems to be two assumptions that people are making that I want to unpick:



                              1. That a warning signal must be in a spoken language.


                              2. That "urgency" means getting the message to people in minutes rather than days.


                              Put a set of nuclear-powered satellites in low-earth orbit, such that their orbits cover the globe. Fit each with an incredibly a bright light source - perhaps an array of thousands and thousands of LEDs?



                              Take the time to contact the hard-to-reach population areas the slow way - by mail or in person - and tell them where to look in the sky each night for the signal. Give them training on what action they should take if they see the emergency light.







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered yesterday









                              Oddthinking

                              1,539245




                              1,539245




















                                  up vote
                                  -1
                                  down vote













                                  Interesting coincidence considering last Tuesday the Donald woke me up with a phone alert of "THIS IS A TEST". If OP is DARPA fishing for new ideas, you know now where to reach me. :)




                                  we discover FTL




                                  In that case we can have a grand old time playing with the nature of causality.



                                  If you need to warn somebody located in even the most off-the-grid place, very effectively without complicated user training other than innate susceptibility to intimidation, and with 100% reliability due to some quirks of our universe exhibiting predestination effects even in the face of plot rewriting, you can just use one of these technological wonders:



                                  THIS IS A TEST Arnold






                                  share|improve this answer








                                  New contributor




                                  user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                                    up vote
                                    -1
                                    down vote













                                    Interesting coincidence considering last Tuesday the Donald woke me up with a phone alert of "THIS IS A TEST". If OP is DARPA fishing for new ideas, you know now where to reach me. :)




                                    we discover FTL




                                    In that case we can have a grand old time playing with the nature of causality.



                                    If you need to warn somebody located in even the most off-the-grid place, very effectively without complicated user training other than innate susceptibility to intimidation, and with 100% reliability due to some quirks of our universe exhibiting predestination effects even in the face of plot rewriting, you can just use one of these technological wonders:



                                    THIS IS A TEST Arnold






                                    share|improve this answer








                                    New contributor




                                    user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                    Check out our Code of Conduct.



















                                      up vote
                                      -1
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      -1
                                      down vote









                                      Interesting coincidence considering last Tuesday the Donald woke me up with a phone alert of "THIS IS A TEST". If OP is DARPA fishing for new ideas, you know now where to reach me. :)




                                      we discover FTL




                                      In that case we can have a grand old time playing with the nature of causality.



                                      If you need to warn somebody located in even the most off-the-grid place, very effectively without complicated user training other than innate susceptibility to intimidation, and with 100% reliability due to some quirks of our universe exhibiting predestination effects even in the face of plot rewriting, you can just use one of these technological wonders:



                                      THIS IS A TEST Arnold






                                      share|improve this answer








                                      New contributor




                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                      Interesting coincidence considering last Tuesday the Donald woke me up with a phone alert of "THIS IS A TEST". If OP is DARPA fishing for new ideas, you know now where to reach me. :)




                                      we discover FTL




                                      In that case we can have a grand old time playing with the nature of causality.



                                      If you need to warn somebody located in even the most off-the-grid place, very effectively without complicated user training other than innate susceptibility to intimidation, and with 100% reliability due to some quirks of our universe exhibiting predestination effects even in the face of plot rewriting, you can just use one of these technological wonders:



                                      THIS IS A TEST Arnold







                                      share|improve this answer








                                      New contributor




                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer






                                      New contributor




                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                      answered yesterday









                                      user13972

                                      995




                                      995




                                      New contributor




                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                                      New contributor





                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                                      user13972 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.



























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function ()
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126675%2fhow-could-you-create-a-95-effective-global-emergency-broadcasting-system%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                          );

                                          Post as a guest













































































                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                                          Bahrain

                                          Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay