Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-06 Thread Angie Judge
Hi Nik,



Looks like you’ve already got enough responses to write the book, but
here’s my two cents on our experience if useful, mostly at museums and
indoor cultural institutions
​, plus
 a couple of
​outdoor sites
 too.



Detecting presence using WiFi relies only on the visitor having a device
with WiFi turned on. They don’t need to connect to the network (though this
helps data quality), don’t need to download an app, accept permissions, be
actively looking at their WiFi list, have ‘ask to join’ on, etc. In our
experience, WiFi enabled devices are far more pervasive than Bluetooth.
Detection works because as our devices are surveying the field for possible
networks, they send out a signal in doing so, their MAC – a bit like a game
of Marco Polo.



A MAC address is non-identifiable, ie we can only see this is device 1234,
not Nik’s device,
​with​
 no reverse look up facility. However, privacy
​ is
 still important – data should be viewed only in aggregate and the raw
address should not be access
​ed​
by general users. If required, the
​MAC
 can be hashed at source, though this reduces data quality.



Detection can be performed by the venue’s own WiFi network (most mainstream
​vendor
s e.g. Ruckus and Cisco as mentioned offer this facility), or with a
hardware accessory. Ranges vary, and some can be adjusted to scan an
isolated area. Battery power is possible, but not desirable as it does
require more power than
​ say a b
eacon, and devices only last a week or so
​before having to be
 recharged which is logistically difficult. They can be hidden from sight,
but perform better at height and also need to be weather proof, which can
be tricky outdoors. These also still require a WiFi connection to report
back remotely. We then connect via API to stream this data, combining it
alongside other relevant data sources, such as online, social,
transactions, weather etc.



This raw data as you’ve probably discovered needs
​to be
clea
​​
n
​ed​
up; before insight analysis and then visualization.  In our case, we’re
accounting for all sorts of influencing factors. These differ city to city,
site to site, but a very rough guide is 92% of visitors carry a device to a
cultural institution (may differ for parks than museums), 75% WiFi enabled.
​
Then, you have to allow for everything else, people who carry multiple
devices, randomization, fixed equipment, staff movements, etc. Outdoors,
your configuration would need to protect against passers by and traffic.
Devices differ in their advertisements, network vendors differ in their
scanning reach and intervals, both impact accuracy. Outdoor environments
also play a part, especially if there are a lot of trees
​​
​. Parks are tricky as often there are no defined entrances and therefore
the coverage has to be high unless deemed a sample only​
. A sample manual count can help validate the overall scaling factor. Where
possible, we rely upon machine learning as part of this cleansing,
important because other than differing by site, these factors rarely stay
the same over time. Using this approach, we’ve managed to get accurate
results when compared with other counting methods, and generally speaking
each method has its own flaws (clicker counters case in point).



Additionally, WiFi data can reveal zone activation, trail routes, dwell
times, repeat visitation etc. I imagine this data would be equally valuable
to the park. Some of our clients use presence to understand visitor
behavior and take their visitation counts from ticketing or elsewhere,
others rely upon presence to report visitation itself, as well as behavior.
At parks, the question then quickly turns to ‘what constitutes a visit
​?'
, especially with thoroughfare.
​ For example, if I cut through on my way to work, am I visiting? If I do
the same on my way home, is that two? ​



I would imagine the value of this over and above validating the big number,
is to start to see the impact of levers within the park’s control, and
influences to otherwise allow for, in both overall visitation and
engagement. This insight can then be tracked against the capital plan or
used for operational purposes. For example, promotion,
​ digital engagement,
seasonality, weather, events, what’s on in the area, new facilities,
maintenance, etc.



And lastly I might add, though we have yet to measure the angle of
curiosity, rest assured we’re working on it.



Angie

Angie Judge

Dexibit
​


www.dexibit.com ​

​an...@dexibit.com ​

@Dexibit
​ ​
#musedata
___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-05 Thread Bruce Wyman
The 75% number comes from this study - 
 in which people 
responded to a survey question. All human interaction there, not automated 
polling.

Admittedly, not much detail on the study other than 2540 people in 30 
countries. No idea the breakdown nor how representative they may be in 
comparison to people strolling through Balboa Park.

I’d love to see other studies that either confirm or repudiate that ~75% number.

-bw.


> On Dec 5, 2016, at 11:33 AM, nikhil trivedi  wrote:
> 
> I just want to put a thought out there on the idea of people "looking for
> free wifi." I wonder if the numbers you you're seeing don't translate to
> people actually opening up the list of available networks on their devices.
> I think our devices are constantly scanning for networks, and each scan
> might result in a ping to our wireless systems.
> 
> For example, the way Location Services generally works (if i'm not
> mistaken) is if we have wifi enabled on our devices, they've constantly
> scanning for networks to triangulate our location. The more accurate the
> location is as we move, the more scanning our devices need to do. So I'm
> not surprised that 75% of mobile users are "looking for free wifi." I think
> that's more a reflection of our devices constantly scanning wifi networks.
> 
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Nik Honeysett  wrote:



Bruce Wyman
bwy...@teufelkind.net


___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-05 Thread Keir Winesmith

(I believe) If someone has WiFi enabled, you'll see them on your enterprise 
network monitoring regardless. My experience (3 years stale now) is that 
devices with WiFi on are always looking for familiar WiFi signals, regardless 
of what settings you have on the actual phone/tablet/computer.

-k

Keir Winesmith
Head of Web and Digital Platforms

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art
Now Open!
Tickets Available at SFMOMA.org
415.357.2871
kwinesm...@sfmoma.org

151 Third Street | San Francisco, CA 94103

This message, together with any and all attachments, is intended only for the 
use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is 
privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not 
review, copy or distribute this communication. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the original sender by email and delete 
the message, along with any attachments.


-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Nik 
Honeysett
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 12:40 PM
To: mcn-l@mcn.edu
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

So, a nuanced question. If I have WiFi enabled but “Ask to Join Networks” 
disabled - will I see it on my network or not? And what’s the equivalent on 
Android?

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.


On Dec 5, 2016, at 11:33 AM, nikhil trivedi <ntriv...@artic.edu> wrote:

I just want to put a thought out there on the idea of people "looking for free 
wifi." I wonder if the numbers you you're seeing don't translate to people 
actually opening up the list of available networks on their devices.
I think our devices are constantly scanning for networks, and each scan might 
result in a ping to our wireless systems.

For example, the way Location Services generally works (if i'm not
mistaken) is if we have wifi enabled on our devices, they've constantly 
scanning for networks to triangulate our location. The more accurate the 
location is as we move, the more scanning our devices need to do. So I'm not 
surprised that 75% of mobile users are "looking for free wifi." I think that's 
more a reflection of our devices constantly scanning wifi networks.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Nik Honeysett <nhoneys...@bpoc.org> wrote:

> Thanks again for the thoughts and insights. This is a city park, and
> anybody on this list who works with a city on landmark spaces will
> know I'd have to offer up my first born to do any kind presence
> detection, they’re as bad as art museum directors when it comes to
> putting things into spaces where they shouldn’t be. How do you set up
> a line of sight wireless bridge when you can’t have anything in sight...
>
> Right, zoning in on an accurate measurement is my goal, and that’s a
> good point about focusing on smaller scale situations that might
> inform the larger number.
>
> -nik
>
> 
> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
>
> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
>
> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org  nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
>
> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and
> science.
> 
>
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:
>
> Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P
>
> I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources,
> is it possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?
>
> You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other
> such events that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it
> possible, on these smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi
> numbers? That would at least allow you to see if your numbers agree
> with or wildly deviate from the 75% number from the UK survey.
>
> Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap?
> I'm sure you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use
> existing wifi to tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the
> necessary leg work, but then use that to feed a larger model to
> validate and/or debunk your 12M number.
>
> In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited
> data collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even
> battery po

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-05 Thread Nik Honeysett
So, a nuanced question. If I have WiFi enabled but “Ask to Join Networks” 
disabled - will I see it on my network or not? And what’s the equivalent on 
Android?

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.


On Dec 5, 2016, at 11:33 AM, nikhil trivedi <ntriv...@artic.edu> wrote:

I just want to put a thought out there on the idea of people "looking for
free wifi." I wonder if the numbers you you're seeing don't translate to
people actually opening up the list of available networks on their devices.
I think our devices are constantly scanning for networks, and each scan
might result in a ping to our wireless systems.

For example, the way Location Services generally works (if i'm not
mistaken) is if we have wifi enabled on our devices, they've constantly
scanning for networks to triangulate our location. The more accurate the
location is as we move, the more scanning our devices need to do. So I'm
not surprised that 75% of mobile users are "looking for free wifi." I think
that's more a reflection of our devices constantly scanning wifi networks.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Nik Honeysett <nhoneys...@bpoc.org> wrote:

> Thanks again for the thoughts and insights. This is a city park, and
> anybody on this list who works with a city on landmark spaces will know I'd
> have to offer up my first born to do any kind presence detection, they’re
> as bad as art museum directors when it comes to putting things into spaces
> where they shouldn’t be. How do you set up a line of sight wireless bridge
> when you can’t have anything in sight...
> 
> Right, zoning in on an accurate measurement is my goal, and that’s a good
> point about focusing on smaller scale situations that might inform the
> larger number.
> 
> -nik
> 
> 
> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
> 
> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
> 
> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org  nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
> 
> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and
> science.
> 
> 
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:
> 
> Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P
> 
> I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources, is
> it possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?
> 
> You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other such
> events that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it possible,
> on these smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi numbers? That
> would at least allow you to see if your numbers agree with or wildly
> deviate from the 75% number from the UK survey.
> 
> Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap? I'm
> sure you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use existing
> wifi to tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the necessary leg work,
> but then use that to feed a larger model to validate and/or debunk your 12M
> number.
> 
> In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited
> data collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even
> battery powered) presence detection devices in a few key places where you
> have at least one other form of ground truth e.g. a camera?
> 
> My goal with any/all of these suggestions is to simply find out,
> eventually, which metric has higher accuracy.
> 
> I am happy to be wrong, but with that many "bags of mostly water", I just
> don't buy that a wifi-based counting system that relies on back-scatter and
> reflection counting, with some phase calculations thrown in, is going to be
> worth anything other than maybe order of magnitude.
> 
> Take care,
> Sina
> 
> President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
> Twitter: @SinaBahram
> Company Website: http://www.pac.bz <http://www.pac.bz/>
> Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com <http://www.sinabahram.com/>
> Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com <http://blog.sinabahram.com/>
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu> [mailto:
> mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu>] On Behalf Of Nik
> Honeysett
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:4

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-05 Thread nikhil trivedi
I just want to put a thought out there on the idea of people "looking for
free wifi." I wonder if the numbers you you're seeing don't translate to
people actually opening up the list of available networks on their devices.
I think our devices are constantly scanning for networks, and each scan
might result in a ping to our wireless systems.

For example, the way Location Services generally works (if i'm not
mistaken) is if we have wifi enabled on our devices, they've constantly
scanning for networks to triangulate our location. The more accurate the
location is as we move, the more scanning our devices need to do. So I'm
not surprised that 75% of mobile users are "looking for free wifi." I think
that's more a reflection of our devices constantly scanning wifi networks.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Nik Honeysett <nhoneys...@bpoc.org> wrote:

> Thanks again for the thoughts and insights. This is a city park, and
> anybody on this list who works with a city on landmark spaces will know I'd
> have to offer up my first born to do any kind presence detection, they’re
> as bad as art museum directors when it comes to putting things into spaces
> where they shouldn’t be. How do you set up a line of sight wireless bridge
> when you can’t have anything in sight...
>
> Right, zoning in on an accurate measurement is my goal, and that’s a good
> point about focusing on smaller scale situations that might inform the
> larger number.
>
> -nik
>
> 
> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
>
> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
>
> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org  nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
>
> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and
> science.
> 
>
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:
>
> Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P
>
> I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources, is
> it possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?
>
> You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other such
> events that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it possible,
> on these smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi numbers? That
> would at least allow you to see if your numbers agree with or wildly
> deviate from the 75% number from the UK survey.
>
> Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap? I'm
> sure you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use existing
> wifi to tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the necessary leg work,
> but then use that to feed a larger model to validate and/or debunk your 12M
> number.
>
> In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited
> data collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even
> battery powered) presence detection devices in a few key places where you
> have at least one other form of ground truth e.g. a camera?
>
> My goal with any/all of these suggestions is to simply find out,
> eventually, which metric has higher accuracy.
>
> I am happy to be wrong, but with that many "bags of mostly water", I just
> don't buy that a wifi-based counting system that relies on back-scatter and
> reflection counting, with some phase calculations thrown in, is going to be
> worth anything other than maybe order of magnitude.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
> Twitter: @SinaBahram
> Company Website: http://www.pac.bz <http://www.pac.bz/>
> Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com <http://www.sinabahram.com/>
> Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com <http://blog.sinabahram.com/>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu> [mailto:
> mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu>] On Behalf Of Nik
> Honeysett
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:46 PM
> To: mcn-l@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l@mcn.edu>
> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust
>
> Sina - that took 3 minutes? You’re awesome. Many thanks...
>
> Bruce - this is kind of thing I’m looking for - many thanks.
>
> Obviously, my friend is me. The accepted park visitorship is 12 million -
> no idea where this comes from. Institutional attendance (museums and zoo)
> reports in at about 6.5 million but there is double, triple and quadruple
> counting hiding in these numbers. I’m interested in whether the 12 million
> is accurate, so yes, interested in the joggers, dog walkers and picnickers,
> etc. I’m inclined to thi

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-02 Thread Nik Honeysett
Thanks again for the thoughts and insights. This is a city park, and anybody on 
this list who works with a city on landmark spaces will know I'd have to offer 
up my first born to do any kind presence detection, they’re as bad as art 
museum directors when it comes to putting things into spaces where they 
shouldn’t be. How do you set up a line of sight wireless bridge when you can’t 
have anything in sight...

Right, zoning in on an accurate measurement is my goal, and that’s a good point 
about focusing on smaller scale situations that might inform the larger number.

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.


On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:

Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P

I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources, is it 
possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?

You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other such events 
that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it possible, on these 
smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi numbers? That would at 
least allow you to see if your numbers agree with or wildly deviate from the 
75% number from the UK survey.

Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap? I'm sure 
you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use existing wifi to 
tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the necessary leg work, but then use 
that to feed a larger model to validate and/or debunk your 12M number.

In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited data 
collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even battery 
powered) presence detection devices in a few key places where you have at least 
one other form of ground truth e.g. a camera?

My goal with any/all of these suggestions is to simply find out, eventually, 
which metric has higher accuracy.

I am happy to be wrong, but with that many "bags of mostly water", I just don't 
buy that a wifi-based counting system that relies on back-scatter and 
reflection counting, with some phase calculations thrown in, is going to be 
worth anything other than maybe order of magnitude.

Take care,
Sina

President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Company Website: http://www.pac.bz <http://www.pac.bz/>
Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com <http://www.sinabahram.com/>
Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com <http://blog.sinabahram.com/>

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu> 
[mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu>] On Behalf Of Nik 
Honeysett
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:46 PM
To: mcn-l@mcn.edu <mailto:mcn-l@mcn.edu>
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

Sina - that took 3 minutes? You’re awesome. Many thanks...

Bruce - this is kind of thing I’m looking for - many thanks.

Obviously, my friend is me. The accepted park visitorship is 12 million - no 
idea where this comes from. Institutional attendance (museums and zoo) reports 
in at about 6.5 million but there is double, triple and quadruple counting 
hiding in these numbers. I’m interested in whether the 12 million is accurate, 
so yes, interested in the joggers, dog walkers and picnickers, etc. I’m 
inclined to think the 12 million is inflated significantly.

Its Ruckus equipment and we tried counting all devices in the area, but the 
differential between users on the wifi and devices wasn’t very big, so I didn’t 
trust it. However, if 75% of smartphone users are looking for free wifi (I 
thought it would be much lower), then maybe I should take another look at that 
number.

We serve an average of 100K users per month on the wifi and tomorrow and 
saturday is our signature event when we’ll “officially" see 350K people in the 
park - no idea where this number comes from either, but like to support it it 
or debunk it.

Thanks for the thoughts and data much appreciated. And while I’d love to use 
some drones, we’re on the SAN flight path and only a mile from the airport.

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org> <mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-02 Thread Chris Alexander
Nik,

This seems like a question that Google would give to you during a job 
interview! Fascinating to see the MCN Brain Trust put it’s thought process to 
work!

Best regards,

Chris Alexander
Digital Media Manager 
Cantor Arts Center 
Stanford University 
328 Lomita Drive 
Stanford, CA 94305-5060 

650.723.6114 | cma...@stanford.edu 
http://museum.stanford.edu
http://cantorcollections.stanford.edu

> On Dec 2, 2016, at 4:00 AM, mcn-l-requ...@mcn.edu wrote:
> 
> Send mcn-l mailing list submissions to
>   mcn-l@mcn.edu
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   mcn-l-requ...@mcn.edu
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   mcn-l-ow...@mcn.edu
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of mcn-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 15:21:34 -0800
> From: Nik Honeysett 
> To: "mcn-l@mcn.edu" 
> Subject: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a park. 
> The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of the 
> availability of free-wifi. He?s looking to estimate the total number of 
> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi 
> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have 
> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the 
> network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user 
> checking to see whether there?s wifi available.
> 
> What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think he 
> will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of the 
> population looks for free wifi?
> 
> -nik
> 
> 
> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
> 
> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
> 
> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
> 
> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and 
> science.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
> 
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
> 
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
> 
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> ___
> mcn-l mailing list
> mcn-l@mcn.edu
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
> 
> 
> End of mcn-l Digest, Vol 136, Issue 1
> *

___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Sina Bahram
Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P

I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources, is it 
possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?

You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other such events 
that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it possible, on these 
smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi numbers? That would at 
least allow you to see if your numbers agree with or wildly deviate from the 
75% number from the UK survey.

Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap? I'm sure 
you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use existing wifi to 
tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the necessary leg work, but then use 
that to feed a larger model to validate and/or debunk your 12M number.

In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited data 
collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even battery 
powered) presence detection devices in a few key places where you have at least 
one other form of ground truth e.g. a camera?

My goal with any/all of these suggestions is to simply find out, eventually, 
which metric has higher accuracy.

I am happy to be wrong, but with that many "bags of mostly water", I just don't 
buy that a wifi-based counting system that relies on back-scatter and 
reflection counting, with some phase calculations thrown in, is going to be 
worth anything other than maybe order of magnitude.

Take care,
Sina

President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Company Website: http://www.pac.bz
Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com
Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Nik 
Honeysett
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:46 PM
To: mcn-l@mcn.edu
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

Sina - that took 3 minutes? You’re awesome. Many thanks...

Bruce - this is kind of thing I’m looking for - many thanks.

Obviously, my friend is me. The accepted park visitorship is 12 million - no 
idea where this comes from. Institutional attendance (museums and zoo) reports 
in at about 6.5 million but there is double, triple and quadruple counting 
hiding in these numbers. I’m interested in whether the 12 million is accurate, 
so yes, interested in the joggers, dog walkers and picnickers, etc. I’m 
inclined to think the 12 million is inflated significantly.

Its Ruckus equipment and we tried counting all devices in the area, but the 
differential between users on the wifi and devices wasn’t very big, so I didn’t 
trust it. However, if 75% of smartphone users are looking for free wifi (I 
thought it would be much lower), then maybe I should take another look at that 
number.

We serve an average of 100K users per month on the wifi and tomorrow and 
saturday is our signature event when we’ll “officially" see 350K people in the 
park - no idea where this number comes from either, but like to support it it 
or debunk it.

Thanks for the thoughts and data much appreciated. And while I’d love to use 
some drones, we’re on the SAN flight path and only a mile from the airport.

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.


On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:18 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:

I'm familiar with Mostofi's work, but wen I last looked at it, the out-door 
performance was far less accurate than in-door, due to not being able to rely 
on reflections, etc.

When I googled it now, I notice casual references to outdoors. What I don't 
know is whether the team did further work, or whether they are simply echoing 
the original paper's comments, but not properly accounting for in-door VS 
out-door when it comes to accuracy?


Take care,
Sina

President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Company Website: http://www.pac.bz
Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com
Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Bruce 
Wyman
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:09 PM
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv <mcn-l@mcn.edu>
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

(huh, it looks like I use my personal email address for this listerv, this was 
my original message)

Nik — 

It’s worth reaching out to these folks: 
<http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi 
<http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi>>. They may be able to 
give you the coarse estimator that you’re looking f

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Nik Honeysett
Sina - that took 3 minutes? You’re awesome. Many thanks...

Bruce - this is kind of thing I’m looking for - many thanks.

Obviously, my friend is me. The accepted park visitorship is 12 million - no 
idea where this comes from. Institutional attendance (museums and zoo) reports 
in at about 6.5 million but there is double, triple and quadruple counting 
hiding in these numbers. I’m interested in whether the 12 million is accurate, 
so yes, interested in the joggers, dog walkers and picnickers, etc. I’m 
inclined to think the 12 million is inflated significantly.

Its Ruckus equipment and we tried counting all devices in the area, but the 
differential between users on the wifi and devices wasn’t very big, so I didn’t 
trust it. However, if 75% of smartphone users are looking for free wifi (I 
thought it would be much lower), then maybe I should take another look at that 
number.

We serve an average of 100K users per month on the wifi and tomorrow and 
saturday is our signature event when we’ll “officially" see 350K people in the 
park - no idea where this number comes from either, but like to support it it 
or debunk it.

Thanks for the thoughts and data much appreciated. And while I’d love to use 
some drones, we’re on the SAN flight path and only a mile from the airport.

-nik


Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer

BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE

M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
<mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101

A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science.


On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:18 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote:

I'm familiar with Mostofi's work, but wen I last looked at it, the out-door 
performance was far less accurate than in-door, due to not being able to rely 
on reflections, etc.

When I googled it now, I notice casual references to outdoors. What I don't 
know is whether the team did further work, or whether they are simply echoing 
the original paper's comments, but not properly accounting for in-door VS 
out-door when it comes to accuracy?


Take care,
Sina

President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Company Website: http://www.pac.bz
Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com
Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Bruce 
Wyman
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:09 PM
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv <mcn-l@mcn.edu>
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

(huh, it looks like I use my personal email address for this listerv, this was 
my original message)

Nik — 

It’s worth reaching out to these folks: 
<http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi 
<http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi>>. They may be able to 
give you the coarse estimator that you’re looking for even if they’ve patented 
their refined version.

Aside from that, This survey out of the UK in 2014. 
<http://purple.ai/latest-survey-people-use-wifi-public-places/ 
<http://purple.ai/latest-survey-people-use-wifi-public-places/>> did a survey 
which indicates ~75% of people are looking for & using wifi. (mileage may vary, 
no idea the size of n or how biased the survey pool may have been)

Additionally, the Wireless Broadband Association indicates that by 2017, 60% of 
carrier network traffic will be offloaded to Wi-Fi. And Pew Research last year 
indicates that 68% of adults have smartphones. 
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/2999631/phones/pew-survey-shows-68-percent-of-americans-now-own-a-smartphone.html
 
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/2999631/phones/pew-survey-shows-68-percent-of-americans-now-own-a-smartphone.html>>
 (and another study that I can’t find at the moment suggests that 90% of 
smartphones have Wifi which seems low to me, but we’re quibbling at this point).

So. 2/3 of the population have smartphones, 75% of those smartphone users are 
looking for free wifi, stringing together a few studies and looking at some 
tough commonality.

That gets you somewhat close for estimate purposes.

And then validate with a small tracking study and / or the UCSB folks in the 
first link.

-bw.



> On Dec 1, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Nik Honeysett <nhoneys...@bpoc.org 
> <mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>> wrote:
> 
> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a park. 
> The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of the 
> availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of 
> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi 
> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have 
> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage wil

Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Bruce Wyman
(huh, it looks like I use my personal email address for this listerv, this was 
my original message)

Nik — 

It’s worth reaching out to these folks: 
>. They may be able to 
give you the coarse estimator that you’re looking for even if they’ve patented 
their refined version.

Aside from that, This survey out of the UK in 2014. 
> did a survey 
which indicates ~75% of people are looking for & using wifi. (mileage may vary, 
no idea the size of n or how biased the survey pool may have been)

Additionally, the Wireless Broadband Association indicates that by 2017, 60% of 
carrier network traffic will be offloaded to Wi-Fi. And Pew Research last year 
indicates that 68% of adults have smartphones. 
>
 (and another study that I can’t find at the moment suggests that 90% of 
smartphones have Wifi which seems low to me, but we’re quibbling at this point).

So. 2/3 of the population have smartphones, 75% of those smartphone users are 
looking for free wifi, stringing together a few studies and looking at some 
tough commonality.

That gets you somewhat close for estimate purposes.

And then validate with a small tracking study and / or the UCSB folks in the 
first link.

-bw.



> On Dec 1, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Nik Honeysett  > wrote:
> 
> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a park. 
> The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of the 
> availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of 
> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi 
> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have 
> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the 
> network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user 
> checking to see whether there’s wifi available.
> 
> What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think he 
> will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of the 
> population looks for free wifi?
> 
> -nik
> 



Bruce Wyman
bwy...@teufelkind.net


___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Bruce Wyman
Nik — 

One more bit of esoterica. If you’re using Cisco equipment, their mobility 
services for tracking folks. To work around the spoofing of IP addresses that 
happens with some devices (iOS, that’s you) you can mitigate this to some 
degree by setting “Enable Locally Administered MAC filtering” to *off*.

That will likely improve your numbers of devices being counted. 

-bw.


> On Dec 1, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Nik Honeysett  wrote:
> 
> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a park. 
> The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of the 
> availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of 
> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi 
> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have 
> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the 
> network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user 
> checking to see whether there’s wifi available.
> 
> What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think he 
> will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of the 
> population looks for free wifi?
> 
> -nik



Bruce Wyman
bwy...@teufelkind.net


___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Max Evjen
Agreed with Leonard, your friend will need to perform some visitor studies to 
be sure.

Best,
Max

> On Dec 1, 2016, at 6:39 PM, Leonard Steinbach  wrote:
> 
> It would seem to me to be such a myriad of factors that one needs much more
> baseline data to make such an extrapolation, eg. increases in young people
> when school is not in session; are there persons who use the park as a
> pedestrian thoroughfare to/from work.  Are there running trails where for
> some fitness devices are in play?  You get the idea.
> 
> With this limited information, I would suggest a random survey of persons
> in the park at various times/uses to ascertain wifi use compared with
> visitors, compare that with connections seen to try to model
> extrapolation.  Short of that level of effort, I might see if there is a
> way to photograph wide enough swarths the park at various times to do
> person counts which could be mapped against unique clients.
> 
> I know this seems a litte old-schoo/brute force.
> 
> This also presumes your friend has contacted those who manage wifi access
> at other (analogous enough) parks to see if they have made such studies.
> 
> Hope this helps or stirs the conversation.
> 
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Nik Honeysett  wrote:
>> 
>> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a
>> park. The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of
>> the availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of
>> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi
>> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have
>> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the
>> network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user
>> checking to see whether there’s wifi available.
>> 
>> What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think
>> he will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of
>> the population looks for free wifi?
>> 
>> -nik
>> 
>> 
>> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
>> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
>> 
>> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org > nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
>> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
>> 
>> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and
>> science.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
>> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>> 
>> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
>> 
>> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
>> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>> 
>> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
>> 
>> 
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
> 
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
> 
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
> 
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/


Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust

2016-12-01 Thread Leonard Steinbach
It would seem to me to be such a myriad of factors that one needs much more
baseline data to make such an extrapolation, eg. increases in young people
when school is not in session; are there persons who use the park as a
pedestrian thoroughfare to/from work.  Are there running trails where for
some fitness devices are in play?  You get the idea.

With this limited information, I would suggest a random survey of persons
in the park at various times/uses to ascertain wifi use compared with
visitors, compare that with connections seen to try to model
extrapolation.  Short of that level of effort, I might see if there is a
way to photograph wide enough swarths the park at various times to do
person counts which could be mapped against unique clients.

I know this seems a litte old-schoo/brute force.

This also presumes your friend has contacted those who manage wifi access
at other (analogous enough) parks to see if they have made such studies.

Hope this helps or stirs the conversation.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Nik Honeysett  wrote:

> I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a
> park. The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of
> the availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of
> visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi
> network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have
> their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the
> network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user
> checking to see whether there’s wifi available.
>
> What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think
> he will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of
> the population looks for free wifi?
>
> -nik
>
> 
> Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer
> BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE
>
> M (805) 402-3326  P (619) 331-1974  E nhoneys...@bpoc.org  nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101
>
> A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and
> science.
> 
>
>
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
>
>
___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/