Wireless communication does *not* require nodes be closely tracked. Efficiency demands some tracking but the amount of tracking can be traded off. I just drove cross-country. With me were my little hand-held phone and my Sky Pager. Lacking battery power (and out of general principals), I keep the phone off. The pager, however, was on. With this combination I can be in quite good contact with the world yet not reveal my location if I didn't make any calls. (Limited money did a pretty good job of keeping me from making roaming calls.) Out of cities the pager coverage is pretty bad--cells have much better coverage--but the point is that other than my occasional use of phones (wired and cell) I was a vanished person. In 1994 I can still buy gas and new tires with cash and vanish--for a time. (I am behind in my reading so I might repeat you people with this next comment--sorry.) The physical tracking of phone users is not just theoretical if the stories are true of finding O.J. via his cellular phone usage. Where I sit right now (Venice, CA) police helicopters fly over nearly constantly watching drug gangs or some such. That is expensive. A few gigs of hard disks is cheap, on the otherhand. The idea of logging *all* cell phone movement seems to me not at all far-fetched. I am glad I know enough about phones that before I got caught I could accomplish at least several calls through the effective call "remailers" in the system. (Isn't there a commercial phone anonymity service? It had a catchy 800-number, but I forget it.) -kb P.S. Yes, I am about to go out and buy the SF Chronicle to read the O.J. article. -- Kent Borg +1 (617) 776-6899 kentborg@world.std.com kentborg@aol.com Proud to claim 28:15 hours of TV viewing so far in 1994!