
Swarmsourcing: Radar Detection - T_S_
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ari-krupnik/hazmap-open-everything-radar-detector
======
mikeknoop
I have a thought. There are already services that attempt to do this, with the
exception that they do not automate the reporting: <http://www.trapster.com/>

Radar detectors are very finicky, and my understanding is that it is difficult
to build a reliable one.

Now, my experience is with a specific model (and I think a very very popular
one, the Passport 9500), it has an RJ45 connection which plugs into the unit
and then the other end plugs into your car cigarette lighter for power. The
end which plugs into your car cigarette lighter has a dongle and LED which
flashes when radar has been detected (along with a mute button). There is two-
way state information transmitted over the line in addition to power.

It would be awesome to build a "man in the middle" device to intercept and
interpret the signals from popular device models, then send it's own signal to
the iPhone/Android/WP7 phone to share the information.

This has the large benefit of being extremely cheaper to manufacture.
Additionally, you're leaving the challenge of building the actual Radar
Detection to well established companies who know what they are doing.

Additionally the service could look for patterns in the data. False positives
are a huge problem with detectors. When every car is reporting radar 24/7 at
this one location, you know it's most likely a false positive. Newer Passport
models have this logic built in with GPS.

~~~
mjb
> Additionally, you're leaving the challenge of building the actual Radar
> Detection to well established companies who know what they are doing.

This is probably going to become more and more important in future. Both RF
and processing electronics are becoming cheaper and more capable - and this
will lead to 'smarter' radar technology being affordable in speed-gun type
devices. Old-school dump pulse-doppler systems are trivially easy to detect,
but there are many radar technologies out there that will present a much
bigger challenge. It wouldn't surprise if we soon see PCL (passive coherent
location) based speed traps soon. Passive radars like these can use radiators
of opportunity (cell towers, TV, FM radio) and don't need to emit any energy
of their own. They aren't undetectable, but are much harder to detect.

The point is that radar detection is going to become much harder in future,
and while the equipment will probably still get cheaper, the technical
sophistication required for detection will increase.

~~~
ovi256
If they don't emit any energy of their own, they are undetectable. Unless I'm
missing something. You cannot passively detect another passive receiver.

~~~
mjb
> You cannot passively detect another passive receiver.

In general, there isn't really such a thing as a passive receiver. The typical
radar receiver design will downmix the incoming signal to some lower frequency
(IF) using its 'local oscillator'. Some of the energy from this oscillator
will leak out of the receiver and be detectable. This is only one of several
possibilities for detecting receivers.

So no, not undetectable, but much harder than detecting an active transmitter.

~~~
wglb
This is almost always true, but there is at least one interesting exception:
[http://www.ramseyelectronics.com/cgi-
bin/commerce.exe?preadd...](http://www.ramseyelectronics.com/cgi-
bin/commerce.exe?preadd=action&key=ABM1)

I imagine for dedicated listeners, there might be others.

------
iter
Thank you for all the great feedback! I am Ari Krupnik, the guy in the
KickStarter video.

My idea is to make and sell devices, and make the software free--as in freedom
and as in beer. The business model is that stuff that costs money to make
(hardware) costs money to buy. Stuff that users collect (data) I distribute
for free. I want to make sure that data that individual users collect is
available to users--for any use that they want for it. There are several
closed systems on the market. These companies get people to collect data for
them--and then lock it up. They create an artificial scarcity of data and try
to make money from that scarcity.

I say--let the data flow.

Ari.

------
xxpor
This idea has been done before, see <http://radaractive.com/>

It attaches to the Valentine 1 RD, which is already known as one of the best
out there. I hope this guy doesn't underestimate the engineering that goes
into a quality radar detector these days. Belscort, Valentine, and Whistler
spend millions of dollars and have decades of experience in the engineering.
The ability to detect quick trigger, but also having the necessary DSP to
filter out false signals being so important, I don't know if this will be a
viable product anytime soon.

Edit: It appears he's using a Cobra radar detector. They are a complete joke.
This is a non starter if that's what he's going with.

If you have an interest in radar detectors in general, I suggest you check out
<http://radardetector.net>. Read some of the comments on there about Cobras.

~~~
Griever
Any info as to why the V1 is the best out there? I have a Passport 9500ix and
my friend owns a V1. I'm constantly noticing that his goes off for many, many
more false positives than my 9500ix does. Not trying to start a war or
anything, btw. Just curious.

~~~
xxpor
Your ix has a GPS that automatically locks out falses after driving past them
a few times. The V1 doesn't. It is also commonly accepted the V1 is more
sensitive, but has more falses. This is why people will buy a 9500ix for in
town, and a V1 for the highway.

------
dustball
I know this hacker. He works out of Hacker Dojo in Mountain View (across
street from ycombinator). This guy is for real.

------
tlrobinson
There are several radar/laser networks already.

* Trapster is the most popular one with manual reporting.

* RadarActive hooks up to an actual detector (Valentine One, considered by many to be the best) to automatically report radar/laser detections.

* Some of the high end Passport detectors and possibly others have GPS and trap databases, but not in real time AFAIK. You have to hook it up to a computer to update the database, so it's only useful for fixed traps like red light / speed cameras.

I hope the networks don't get too fragmented, because the real power lies in
the network effects. You need a critical mass of users/detectors reporting for
it to be useful.

------
hartror
There is some moral ambiguity here, SHOULD this sort of thing be done?

Can one in good conscience build and maintain a service that at it's core is
about circumventing laws designed to save lives?

I am not condemning this and there are a lot of arguments you can make
justifying it. But in all I would not choose to be involved it its production,
just as I wouldn't work for a weapons manufacturer but I don't condemn my
friends that do. (I can't say I don't get a little jealous when they talk
about the drones they work on).

~~~
rfrey
In the city I grew up in (Edmonton, Canada), the police used to tell the radio
stations where the radar traps were. The goal of a radar trap is to get people
to _slow down_.

That was in a gentler time; nowadays I recognize that radar traps are often
used for revenue generation, so forces might be more reticent about revealing
location. But 20 years ago even the police themselves would have had no issue
with this, and might even have endorsed it.

------
natch
I have met this guy several times and can say a few things about him: he is
the real deal; he is very good, technically savvy, has been working hard and
is developing strong expertise in connecting hardware devices to mobile
devices, beginning with iPhone. He has a very good reputation at the Hacker
Dojo. I'm betting you are going to hear a lot more about his stuff in the
future.

------
hartror
Neat, though you will want to be careful not to fall foul of the law but
they're pretty liberal in the US right now.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector#Legality>

------
earle
The bigger problem with this strategy is that almost everyone is moving to
Laser based detection systems. Detecting at this point simply becomes a
notification post-mortem.

Additionally as mentioned in previous comments, a solid radar based detector
(X, K, Ka, and Lidar) is very difficult to make a good one. Valentine1 being
one of the best available on the market.

For the laser problem, definitely look at laser interceptor USA. These guys
showed up to Radar Roy's competition with a winnebago they couldnt get a
reading on.

~~~
tlrobinson
Laser is exactly why a radar/laser detector network is useful, but yes, it
must include laser detection capability. RadarActive
(<http://radaractive.com/>) integrates with the V1 to do exactly that.

~~~
huhtenberg
Also, not everyone with a radar detector always drives over a speed limit. And
yet they _are_ too getting sniped at.

------
Estragon
Might want to add a bit of a delay before announcing that you've just detected
radar. Otherwise, police following site site will know who's reporting them...

~~~
nickdunkman
I guess users need to be anonymous then. I'm not sure I like this idea much;
it really undermines our only defense against speeding.

~~~
MJR
It more than undermines it, it encourages speeding in areas that don't show
radar. Turn on an inverse of the map and it gives you speeding zones rather
than radar zones.

The marketing attempt at "... RadarLoc encourages law-abiding behavior." is
patently false. It encourages the opposite, speeding outside radar enforced
zones.

~~~
mikeknoop
It's not binary. Both statements are true. It encourages law-abiding behavior
within the zone, and non-law-abiding behavior while outside.

------
tocomment
Here's a really simple idea.

Make radar detectors emit radar when a trap is confirmed.

Use case: Radar detector alerts you to what it thinks is a trap. If it is a
trap, you hit a button and it will emit radar for 5 or 10 seconds to warns
approaching motorists? The bonus is all existing radar detectors can pick up
the signal.

~~~
xxpor
By emitting with enough power to be useful, you get into the range that you
need to have a licence.

~~~
ruslan
I think by "emmitting" Tocomment means "sending update to the server", thus
notifying everyone who is connected and is in some certain range from the
point.

~~~
tocomment
No I domean emitting radar. Now a radar gun obvoisly doesn't need a license
and that emits detectible radar.

To make my idea legal how about building a combination radar detector/radar
gun. Officially the purspose of the radar gun is to get a second estimate on
your speed when you may be in proximaty of a trap.

~~~
iter
Sort of like Ethernet collisions? You notice a collision and start yelling
"collision, collision" on the segment?

~~~
tocomment
I think so?

------
ck2
Please do not get distracted by your iphone while driving.

Also, what prevents people from purposely sending fake signals?

