FCC Wants First-Responders To Know Exactly Where 911 Calls Are Coming From

(bryanbope)

No one wants to be in a position where calling 911 is necessary, but if the situation does occur we’d all like to think first-responders could easily find us. But that’s just not the case now that more consumers are using cell phones to make emergency calls. Especially when those calls are being made indoors, out of the view of GPS satellites.

Of the 400,000 emergency calls made each day, nearly three-quarters are made with a cellphone. While it’s easy for 911 dispatchers to locate someone outside on a cellphone, pinpointing the location of someone inside a tall office building is more difficult, if not impossible.

The Federal Communications Commission recently announced a proposed requirement on wireless carriers and 911 dispatchers to improve indoor location accuracy, The Washington Post reports.

Currently, mobile devices can pinpoint a caller’s general location, but if you’re calling from a multi-story building there’s a chance first-responders are wasting time looking on other floors.

The proposed requirement aims to ensure that during the first 30 seconds of a 911 call dispatchers can pinpoint a caller’s location within 50 meters. Officials are hopeful that 80 percent of all wireless 911 calls will benefit from the new location capabilities in five years.

The FCC is looking at two ways to determine a caller’s precise location.

Wireless companies could use assisted GPS, which combines GPS location information with data from the cellular network. Another option is to use AFLT, a new technology which triangulates your position on the basis of your distance from multiple cell towers.

While the proposal would make significant progress in improving standards for indoor 911 calls, it has drawn criticism from regulators and the wireless industry.

FCC commissioner Michael O’Rielly is worried about how the proposal would affect consumer privacy. During a recent FCC meeting he said citizens should not have to worry about being tracked by law enforcement or other government entities in non-emergency situations.

Additionally, wireless carriers are pushing back, saying the FCC deadline of five years is impossible to reach.

New FCC proposal would require pinpoint location accuracy for 911 calls [The Washington Post]

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

The Tales Of Two Stolen Cars That Both Showed Up After Decades Away From Home

(jenni waterloo)

While going about my daily rounds on the Internet, there are constantly new and surprising little tidbits popping up, usually unrelated. Which is why it’s kind of nutty to hear that two separate car theft cold cases have suddenly been solved this week, decades after the cars were stolen, with both vehicles reappearing far from home.

The car version of Homeward Bound stars not fuzzy little pets wending their way across the great American countryside, but a 1957 Chevrolet and a 1965 VW Beetle.

First, Sir Beetle The Lost: This 1965 Volkswagen was reported stolen from Tennessee in the 1970s, reports ClickOnDetroit.com, and has shown up now in — you got it — Detroit. Because the source link, see?

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said officers in that city were checking documents on the car while it was being shipped from Michigan to Finland, and realized it had been reported stolen in 1974.

“Part of safeguarding our nation is to make sure that all exports are legitimate and lawful,” said Acting Port Director Marty Raybon. “Recovering a vehicle reported stolen 40 years ago is a testament to the vigilance and attention to detail on the part of CBP.”

The car and its parts for restoration have been seized by CBP, and it’s unclear if anyone is in hot water for this 40-year-old crime.

Then there’s Mr. “I Once Was Lost But Now I’m Found” Chevy: This 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air has a history of being pilfered, reports the Santa Rosa Press Democrat — it was stolen twice in the early 1980s and is one of the most droolworthy cars among collectors.

This week, after 30 years away and four other owners, it’s finally home in Northern California after being rescued from a container bound for Australia. And as a bonus, it’s been fully restored since the last time it was stolen in 1984.

“Somebody put a whole lot of work and money into that car,” the owner, its owner, a 65-year-old told the paper. “It was all disassembled and put back.”

The California Highway Patrol notified the man a few weeks ago that U.S. Customs inspectors had found the hot wheels at the Port of Los Angeles, bound for Down Under.

And oddly enough, its vehicle identification number was on file with the National Insurance Crime Bureau, so it’s mystifying how the Department of Motor Vehicles has allowed it to be passed from one owner to another without any red flags being raised. The CHP says it’d been through four owners during its time away.

The owner said he’d long given up being reunited with his vehicle — he couldn’t spot a mid-50s Bel Air on the road without wincing, the Press Democrat says.

But it sounds like having it back in all its newly-restored glory is going a long way to ease that past pain.

“There’s all kinds of chrome added under the hood,” he said. “The headers look brand spankin’ new. The tires, they look like they haven’t even been around the block.”

“I imagine somebody in Australia must be awful upset,” he added.

Stolen VW Beetle found in Detroit after 40 years [ClickOnDetroit]

Stolen Chevy returned to owner 30 years later [Santa Rosa Press Democrat]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Safeway’s “Gluten Free” Shelf Labels Could Use Some Work

(Your Protagonist)

We commend Safeway for making it easier for customers with celiac disease and gluten sensitivity to find products that they can eat on the store shelves. However, it’s probably not such a good idea to just go around printing any old shelf tags on the “Gluten Free” paper once you run out of other paper.

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Is Amazon Prime Price Hike In UK A Sign Of Things To Come?

(formatc1)

Last month, Amazon revealed that after nearly a decade of charging $79/year for its Amazon Prime service, it was mulling over the possibility of adding anywhere from $20 to $40 to that amount. Now comes news out of Europe that the online giant is increasing Prime rates for customers in the U.K. and Germany.

The justification for the Prime price hike — going from £49 ($81) to £79 ($131) in the U.K., and from €29 ($40) to €49 ($67) in Germany — is that customers in these countries will now have access to Amazon’s LOVEFiLM streaming collection as part of their Prime membership. Previously, Prime only included expedited shipping and access to the Kindle Lending Library.

Of course, Prime members in the U.S. have had access to streaming video content for quite some time, and it was offered at no additional cost beyond the $79 annual fee.

And it’s worked out well for the company. In its recent quarterly earnings report, Amazon says there are now “tens of millions” of Prime members around the world. The company has never provided specific numbers on Prime subscribers.

Keeping that many people happy requires investment in content. Amazon said it recently increased its Prime video library in the U.S. from 33,000 titles to 40,000, and it is currently in the process of launching a second series of original shows. It also requires investment in technology in order to deliver quality streams across numerous platforms.

It’s possible that the price increases overseas are just bringing fees up to the same profit level Amazon makes off U.S. Prime members, but it seems more likely that it’s an indicator of changes to come stateside.

What may be biting Amazon in the butt is its annual fee model. People see headlines about $20 or $40 price increases and — understandably — their immediate response is often a negative reaction. Whereas, were Amazon talking about going from $6.59/month (the current level, if you broke it down into monthly payments) to $8.25 or $9.92 a month, people may not be so quick to charge the Amazon gates with torches and pitchforks.

What’s interesting about the European price increases is that Amazon is allowing people to lock in existing rates if they sign up in the next couple weeks. Additionally, it is continuing to offer LOVEFiLM as a standalone streaming service for customers who don’t want to pay for the Prime benefits.

Amazon will have to raise the price for Prime at some point (or begin offering tiers of Prime service) and some members will undoubtedly quit the program, whether out of anger or because they don’t see the value in Prime anymore. But if Netflix could make it through the whole Qwikster debacle, which saw the company split its DVD and streaming services and effectively doubled the monthly rate for customers who wanted both, Amazon will probably survive a Prime price increase.

[via GigaOm]

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Study: Chemical Banned For Decades Still In Yellow Clothing, Paper In “Worrisome” Levels

Yellow dyes and pigments are under the lens. (SOBPhotography)

A new, unpublished study is turning the spotlight onto a chemical that was banned in the United States 35 years ago, but is still present today in everything from yellow clothing, to yellow paper and other consumer products using yellow pigments. Researchers say traces of polychlorinated biphenyls — or PCBs — are leaching out of everyday products found around the globe.

But if PCBs are banned, how can this be possible? That’s because PCB-11, the form of the chemical found in yellow dyes, inks and paints, is an unintentional byproduct of pigment manufacturing, explains Scientific American, and therefore is exempt from U.S. laws regulating the compounds.

PCB-11 showed up in almost all samples of paper products sold in 26 countries and clothing sold here in the U.S., the researchers say in the study, which is undergoing peer review and is expected to be published this year.

Although it doesn’t accumulate in the human body or waterways like other PCBs, it’s still a matter of concern, the study’s authors say.

“It’s out there in levels that are worrisome,” said Lisa Rodenburg, an associate professor of environmental chemistry at Rutgers University and senior author of the study. “Even at the parts per billion levels, if you find it in almost everything you test, that means people are in almost constant contact.”

There are no studies on the health effects due to coming into contact with trace amounts of PCB-11, unlike the old, banned PCBs which have been linked to reduced IQs, cancer and suppressed immune systems.

However, because it’s showing up in so many products used by people, that seems to indicate that people are constantly exposed to PCB-11, which allows for it to show up in tests. The study found that all 28 samples of non-U.S., ink-treated paper products, including advertisements, maps, postcards, napkins and brochures, contained PCB-11 in the parts-per-billion range. U.S. paper products had PCB-11 in 15 of the 18 paper products tested.

Furthermore, all the 16 pieces of clothing tested that are sold in the U.S. contained PCB-11, mostly kids’ items bought at Walmart but manufactured overseas.

“PCB 11 is ubiquitously present as a by-product in commercial pigment applications, particularly in printed materials,” the authors say in the draft of the new study.

Federal regulations “recognize that some products (e.g., pigments and dyes) contain inadvertently generated PCBs,” an Environmental Protection Agency spokespersons said.

These compounds can be excluded and aren’t regulated “as long as they are reported to EPA and the PCB concentrations do not exceed specified limits,” she said, adding that the EPA is looking into any potential risks from PCB-11.

The study’s lead researcher notes that while we still don’t know what effect there could be, if any, from PCB-11 exposure, the fact that it appears to be everywhere is a cause for concern.

That idea is echoed by Dr. David Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany-SUNY.

“Everyone has ignored the lower chlorinated congeners, primarily because they are not persistent and are relatively easily metabolized in the human body,” he explained to Scientific American, adding that it’s a “very real and important issue.”

“If they are in the air and one breathes them in every day, there will be continuous exposure to what I suspect are very toxic substances,” he explained.

Meanwhile the paint industry is paying attention, says the vice president at the American Coatings Association, which represents paint manufacturers.

“We’ve been aware of it and we’ve alerted the pigment manufacturers, but as of right now, it’s an unavoidable byproduct in these pigments.”

You can follow MBQ on Twitter if you want, PCB-free: @marybethquirk

Yellow Pigments in Clothing and Paper Contain Long-Banned Chemical [Scientific American]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Big Banks Don’t Want To Be Transparent About Checking Fees If Little Banks Don’t Have To Be

(afagen)

If we were to play a word-association game with the nation’s largest banks, we’re sure that terms like “fair” and “equitable” would be right on the tip of peoples’ tongues. And because big banks always play fair with everyone else, they are asking that their checking-account fees not be put under the regulatory microscope if smaller banks’ fees aren’t going be subject to the same scrutiny.

Bloomberg reports that the banks are attempting to put up a fight against proposed regulations that would require banks to include detailed breakdowns of their revenue (about $30 billion a year) from fees on customers’ accounts in the public quarterly reports they file with the FDIC.

The banks’ argument? That it’s unfair because banks with assets under $1 billion are exempt from the reporting requirement.

And even though the total amount of fees taken in by big banks is significantly larger, small banks are more reliant on these fees.

The original regulation had indeed included smaller banks, but Bloomberg’s sources claim that the little institutions were able to put up enough of a fuss to get the FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to agree to the $1 billion ceiling for exemptions.

But even then, the operators of mid-sized banking operations are calling for that exemption threshold to be increased to $10 billion.

“The information-gathering effort put forth in the notice represents the latest in a long line of new regulatory burdens faced by these institutions,” wrote a VP for the Independent Community Bankers of America trade group in a recent letter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

One of the main goals of the new requirement was to provide the public and the CFPB with regular, detailed information about bank account fees. The Bureau maintains that having this data would allow it to better understand and regulate controversial issues like overdraft fees.

A CFPB report from last June found that the average consumer was spending some $225 a year on overdraft fees and that these fees alone accounted for 60% of banks’ fee-based revenues each year.

It’s the CFPB’s plan to use the data for analytical purposes that has the larger banks questioning whether the bureau has legal authority to change the requirements of the quarterly FDIC Call Reports.

Last year, trade groups for the nation’s biggest banks complained to the regulators that this data demand “would be a major diversion from the existing purposes of the Call Report.”

Another gripe with the small-bank exemption is that it eliminates almost 90% of all U.S. banks from the additional reporting requirement; a decision which one economist says “leaves a huge gap in the data.”

So the question remains as to whether or not it would still be valuable to have the data from the few larger banks if the many small banks are not included. Perhaps that’s why the CFPB says it is continuing to study the matter and may consider other regulations.

Regardless of the fate of this fee-transparency requirement, it seems like an inevitability that the CFPB will continue to push for continued reform on fee transparency, especially when it comes to overdrafting. And given how much banks could lose if customers were to opt out of overdraft protection en masse, expect financial institutions to keep fighting any new regulation.

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Girl Scout Provides One-Stop Shopping By Selling Cookies Outside Medical Marijuana Clinic

(Triborough)

Kids should always listen to their parents when they talk to them about drugs. And in the case of one 13-year-old Girl Scout who’s probably racking up cash for cookies, it’s a good thing she listened to her mother when she suggested she set up shop outside a San Francisco medical marijuana clinic this week.

Because the movies tell me that when people smoke “the reefer” they sometimes get a little hungry and want to “munch” on things, the idea of drumming up business where there will surely be many marijuana users is pretty darn smart.

The business savvy mom says that her two middle-school-aged daughters have sold Girl Scout cookies outside California medical marijuana dispensaries before, though this is the first time she’s helping with her 13-year-old’s stand outside this particular business.

She set up shop this week, reports Mashable, and the patients have been coming out in force: She sold 117 boxes of cookies outside the clinic just on President’s Day, which is about 37 more boxes than she sold during the same time period outside a Safeway the next day.

And for any naysayers out there railing against her parenting methods, the mom says she usually has her girls try selling cookies at different spots around San Francisco so they can learn about new areas while they peddle their wares. She adds that it’s a good way to start the conversation with her kids about drugs, and explain that some people use marijuana as medicine.

“You put it in terms that they may understand,” she says. “I’m not condoning it, I’m not saying go out in the streets and take marijuana [...] It also adds a little bit of cool factor. I can be a cool parent for a little bit.”

The dispensary is all for it and gave permission to the group as soon as the mom called to ask permission.

“It’s no secret that cannabis is a powerful appetite stimulant, so we knew this would be a very beneficial endeavor for the girls,” a staff member at the clinic told Mashable. “It’s all about location, and what better place to sell Girl Scout cookies than outside a medical cannabis collective?”

And lest any fellow Girl Scouts are wondering how these girls are getting away with it, the Girl Scouts of Northern California are totally fine with it.

“Girls are selling cookies, and they and their parents pick out places where they can make good sales,” the director of marketing and communications for Girl Scouts of Northern California explained. “The mom decided this was a place she was comfortable with her daughter being at.”

“We’re not telling people where they can and can’t go if it’s a legitimate business,” she added.

Funnily enough, it’s a different story in Colorado, where marijuana is legal for recreational use now as well. When a Photoshopped pic of three scouts selling cookies outside a medical marijuana clinic supposedly in Colorado surfaced, that state’s Girl Scout organization put the kibosh on the idea.

http://ift.tt/OeGxKJ

The Girl Scout and her mom will be back to selling Thin Mints outside the clinic tomorrow afternoon.

You can follow MBQ on Twitter if you don’t mind her wishing constantly that there were Girl Scout cookies outside her place of business too: @marybethquirk

A Savvy Girl Scout Is Selling Cookies at a Cannabis Clinic in San Francisco [Mashable]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Consumerist Friday Flickr Finds

Here are eight of the best photos that readers added to the Consumerist Flickr Pool in the last week, picked for usability in a Consumerist post or for just plain neatness.

(Eric Arnold Photography)

(Atwater Village Newbie)

(JoelZimmer)

(Mento)

(softlad – resting between engagements)

(pamelainob)

(stellarviewer)

(JD Hancock)

Our Flickr Pool is the place where Consumerist readers upload photos for possible use in future Consumerist posts. Want to see your pictures on our site? Just be a registered Flickr user, go here, and click “Join Group?” up on the top right. Choose your best photos, then click “send to group” on the individual images you want to add to the pool.

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Early Birds Beware: Buying Tickets To Europe Too Far In Advance Could Cost You

(I_am_Allan)

Planning a trip abroad? We’ve always been told that buying airfare far in advance was the best way to snag a good deal, but what if we told you that you could purchase significantly lower airfare just two months before your trip? You’d think we’re crazy. But we’re not.

Some travelers have a tendency to book international tickets months and months in advance, but depending on where you’re going, waiting until a month or two before departure could score you the best price.

A new analysis of million of searches made by U.S. travelers on the travel website Kayak found that the average fare for a flight from the U.S. to Europe will vary by $256 from when a ticket is first offered to when the plane actually takes off, Quartz reports.

The cheapest flights from the U.S. to Europe were found just 53 days before departure. The best deal for a flight from the U.S. to Africa was found a mere 33 days before takeoff.

Not all international destinations are so welcoming of short lead times. According to Kayak, flights to South America were cheapest when booked 162 days before the date of departure. By comparison, if you buy those tickets to South America super-early (9-10 months in advance), expect to pay 20% more than you would have if you purchased them around the 5-6 month mark.

If you’re planning to travel to Asia the conventional wisdom of purchasing far in advance still holds true. The best deals on flights were found 270 days, or nine months, before departure.

But don’t wait too long to buy your tickets. Fares jumped significantly during the week of departure. Fares from the U.S. to Europe increase by 15% in the week before departure.

Here’s why you shouldn’t buy a US-to-Europe flight more than two months in advance [Quartz]

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Colorado, Utah Propose 21 As Legal Age To Smoke; Florida Mulls E-Cig Ban For Minors

(NoNo Joe)

Following the lead of New York City’s former health cowboy — err, mayor Michael Bloomberg, two Western states changing how wild the West can be for anyone under 21: Colorado and Utah are both considering raising the legal age to smoke tobacco from 18 to 21. Meanwhile down in Florida, legislators are proposing banning e-cigarettes for minors

Both Colorado and Utah voted favorably on proposals yesterday to treat tobacco like alcohol, reports the Associated Press, in an effort motivated by new research about how early smokers start smoking.

“By raising the age limit, it puts them in a situation where they’re not going to pick it up until a much later age,” said one Utah resident who testified in favor of the idea there.

A similar show went down in Colorado, where testimony stated that it would make it harder for teens to get into the habit and then perhaps lead to fewer adults smoking.

“What I’m hoping to do is make it harder for kids to obtain cigarettes,” said Rep. Cheri Gerou, a Republican who sponsored the measure.

There are still more votes that will need to happen before either proposal becomes law. But this is a big move — they’d be the first states that have gone this far to cut down on smoking rates. New York City’s council voted last fall to up the smoking age to 21, but that is only a citywide rule.

FLORIDA TO BAN E-CIGS FOR MINORS?

Traveling back east and south to Florida, state lawmakers are making moves to keep electronic cigarettes out of teens’ hands. A Senate panel approved a proposal yesterday that wouldn’t allow anyone under 18 to buy the devices.

“We don’t allow minors to buy cigarettes,” Sen. Lizbeth Benacquisto, R-Fort Myers, said, reports the Miami Herald. “We should certainly not allow minors to buy these products, as well.”

The bill has already done well in two other committees, winning unanimous support, so it could be among the first proposals heard on the Senate floor when the legislative session begins March 4.

Some municipalities have already outlawed the sale of e-cigarettes to minors, with Miami apparently headed that way as well.

“We became aware of the issue and felt we needed to start the discussion now, rather than waiting on the state,” Miami Commissioner Francis Suarez said. “Nicotine is an addictive substance.”

E-cigarettes are starting to earn a certain cachet among teens, apparently, perhaps partly because celebrities are often seen taking a toke off them. A recent study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed that the amount of middle and high school students using e-cigs had more than doubled in just one year, from 2011 to 2012.

“We think it’s time now that we drew the line in the sand, so children could not have access to those products and not develop those habits down the line,” Benacquisto said.

COLORADO, UTAH MOVE TO HIKE SMOKING AGE TO 21 [Associated Press]

Proposed Florida law would ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors [Miami Herald]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist