The main problem with these projects - which was not much of an issue when the projects started - is that mobile phones of today seek access to web servers at vendors, including the OS source and possibly others such as the phone manufacturer and ISP. The phones balk if they don't connect to those servers. PirateBox and LibraryBox are not just captive portals to Internet connections, they are local content and app servers and don't need the Internet.
So when you connect to a Box via Wi-Fi your phone demands to connect to Internet hosts even though this is unnecessary for this use case. This behavior is confusing to the user. Some early solutions involved trying to spoof Apple servers for example, but the names and IPs of these servers kept changing and this kluge became ineffective.
The only solution I am aware of is to pre-inform users of a local IP address to browse to once their Wi-Fi is connected to the Box. But depending on the occasion and venue, getting such instructions to the audience and having them follow it, can be its own problem.
You can setup DNS on the box to redirect users and to give a friendly name to your box. That's what we do for butter box (https://likebutter.app/box/). To make it a step easier, we provide a QR code. But even that is a little clumsy since you must first connect to WiFi, then scan the code.
Captive portals sound nice until you find out how limited they are -- a lot of styling, JS and browser features are simply unavailable. So, you need to tell users "Close this, then go open this site in your real browser"...
Of course, you can't and probably don't want to redirect HTTPS traffic since you don't have the matching cert for e.g. https://google.com
I actually have a "MonsterOTG" portable WAP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THnT-rWFnE8 ...their pitch was "put your kids movies on an SD card and they can navigate to them from their iPad (on a road-trip)"... or have all the media on one SD-card and not have to have them on all your phones (like a proto-NAS, kindof).
I used it actually while on a trip to "fake" being a web-server. eg: `scp index.html 10.1.10.1:/media/files/public` (or whatever) and then I could have my phone navigate to it. Chromebook => "OTG-Wifi" && Phone => "OTG-Wifi". Chrombook.push(); Phone.fetch(...);
I couldn't connect directly from phone to chromebook, but if they were both on the same (captive) wifi, I could actually have the phone navigate to the server running on the chromebook via that little device as a "wifi mediator" (even while in the middle of nowhere with no internet for 50 miles around). I had some episodes of Twilight Zone that I'd ripped and could connect to it while on a flight. You could take the SD-Card out of your camera and fetch pictures over to the macbook-without-sd-card situation, then clear the card and take more pics (or keep them on and just be guaranteed that you have a backup).
There's really some non-pirate use cases of things like that, and the overall concept is pretty cool! Got me thinking of something like a neighborhood "Captive SSID", like a LAN that you opt in to vs the WAN that's always connected. It's really instructive to think through for yourself personally: if you were on the moon, and all you had was a wifi access point that held SD-Cards
> when you connect to a Box via Wi-Fi your phone demands to connect to Internet hosts
I don't follow: When my phone connects to a wlan, it will try to connect to the Internet, and if the phone can't do that then the phone won't function on the wlan?
> The only solution I am aware of is to pre-inform users of a local IP address to browse to once their Wi-Fi is connected to the Box.
What is the response from this local IP address that solves the problem above?
> Is there a way to broadcast on the radio or tv without getting into such contract that limits what you can broadcast?
Not in the US. Even if your station or device does not require an individual license, you are still subject to US law and must comply with FCC rules based on that law (the Communications Act). There is no free speech right to broadcast by radio.
Wireless Emergency Alerts use the same tones, but didn’t exist on 9/11. EAS did exist, but the alerts are supposed to include the protective action to be taken. What protective action would you have recommended the public take? And since broadcast news widely covered the attacks, what contribution would an EAS alert make?
“The FCC document references the 18 Fox owned stations and says nothing about the 200+ affiliate stations.”
Im fact the FCC mentions the affiliates several times. One example: “Therefore, we find FOX responsible for broadcasting the Promotional Segment containing the EAS Tones on 18 of its owned-and-operated broadcast stations, transmitting the Promotional Segment to 190 of its network-affiliated television broadcast stations, and causing the transmission of the Promotional Segment on Fox Sports Radio and the Fox Sports on XM channel.”
> Are those stations culpable if they also broadcast Fox produced content that was in violation of EAS rules?
Station licensees are responsible for the content they broadcast. In this case at least the FCC went after the content source, which is itself also a licensee.
It has nothing to do with Wi-Fi. If people leave their phones on, not in Airplane Mode, while in the cabin they could well receive the alert from any cellular service area they are flying over. And it doesn't have to be an Amber alert, it could be a wireless emergency alert for anything.
A child was abducted, and in some cases - as happened just a few days ago - the noncustodial parent threatens to kill the child. And does. The fact that the abduction involves a custody dispute is only one of the factors that goes into the decision to send an alert.
Many abductions are vehicle thefts where the thief takes off without noticing or caring that there is a child in the car.
In one recent case, the thief threw the baby out the window into a ditch. Citizens who received the Amber alert found the child.
Almost everyone owns a phone. Amber alerts go to all phones by default. It is therefore statistically unremarkable that "Citizens who received the Amber alert found the child". It's akin to the observation that they were all born after the Civil War. It has no relevance.
Title 47 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Section 10.500(h) requires the alert to be preserved "in a consumer-accessible format and location for at least 24 hours or until deleted by the subscriber."
Canada doesn't have a president, but until it passes a law that requires phones sold in Canada to have Canada-specific features in the alert display, it will say what it says in the USA. And in USA the Presidential Alert is switching to National Alert.
