Google failed to warn 10 million of Turkey earthquake
Ten million people within 98 miles of the epicentre could have been sent Google's highest level alert - giving up to 35 seconds of warning to find safety.
Instead, only 469 "Take Action" warnings were sent out for the first 7.8 magnitude quake.
Google told the BBC half a million people were sent a lower level warning, which is designed for "light shaking", and does not alert users in the same prominent way.
The tech giant previously told the BBC the system had "performed well".
The system works on Android devices, which make up more than 70% of the phones in Turkey.
More than 55,000 people died when two major earthquakes hit south-east Turkey on 6 February 2023, more than 100,000 were injured. Many were asleep in buildings that collapsed around them when the tremors hit.
Google's early warning system was in place and live on the day of the quakes – however it underestimated how strong the earthquakes were.
"We continue to improve the system based on what we learn in each earthquake", a Google spokesperson said.
How it works
Google's system, named Android Earthquake Alerts (AEA), is able to detect shaking from a vast number of mobile phones that use the Android operating system.
Because earthquakes move relatively slowly through the earth, a warning can then be sent out.
Google's most serious warning is called "Take Action", which sets off a loud alarm on a user's phone - overriding a Do Not Disturb setting - and covering their screen.
This is the warning that is supposed to be sent to people when stronger shaking is detected that could threaten human life.
AEA also has a less serious "Be Aware" warning, designed to inform users of potential lighter shaking - a warning that does not override a device on Do Not Disturb.
The Take Action alert was especially important in Turkey due to the catastrophic shaking and because the first earthquake struck at 04:17, when many users would have been asleep. Only the more serious alert would have woken them.
In the months after the earthquake the BBC wanted to speak to users who had been given this warning - initially with aims to showcase the effectiveness of the technology.
But despite speaking to people in towns and cities across the zone impacted by the earthquake, over a period of months, we couldn't find anyone who had received a more serious Take Action notification before the quake struck. We published our findings later that year.
'Limitations'
Google researchers have written in the Science journal details of what went wrong, citing "limitations to the detection algorithms".
For the first earthquake, the system estimated the shaking at between 4.5 and 4.9 on the moment magnitude scale (MMS) when it was actually a 7.8.
A second large earthquake later that day was also underestimated, with the system this time sending Take Action alerts to 8,158 phones and Be Aware alerts to just under four million users.
After the earthquake Google's researchers changed the algorithm, and simulated the first earthquake again.
This time, the system generated 10 million Take Action alerts to those at most risk – and a further 67 million Be Aware alerts to those living further away from the epicentre
"Every earthquake early warning system grapples with the same challenge - tuning algorithms for large magnitude events," Google told the BBC.
But Elizabeth Reddy, assistant professor at Colorado School of Mines, says it is concerning it took more than two years to get this information.
"I'm really frustrated that it took so long," she said
"We're not talking about a little event - people died - and we didn't see a performance of this warning in the way we would like."
Google says the system is supposed to be supplementary and is not a replacement for national systems.
However some scientists worry countries are placing too much faith in tech that has not been fully tested.
"I think being very transparent about how well it works is absolutely critical," Harold Tobin, director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network, told the BBC.
"Would some places make the calculation that Google's doing it, so we don't have to?"
Google researchers say post-event analysis has better improved the system - and AEA has pushed out alerts in 98 countries.
The BBC has asked Google how AEA performed during the 2025 earthquake in Myanmar, but has yet to receive a response.
How a grieving mother exposed the truth of Turkey's deadly earthquake
Beverley man remembers family lost in Turkey quake
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Android Authority
11 minutes ago
- Android Authority
6 reasons why I prefer self hosted apps — and why you should too
Dhruv Bhutani / Android Authority Lately, there's a lot of hype around self-hosting and running your own apps on a home lab or NAS. But you might be wondering what you stand to gain from it? After all, Google, Apple, and many others offer perfectly competent app suites. That's what I thought too. But for the last few years, I've dived deep into the world of open source and self-hosting. And if you're curious why, saddle up — I've got some thoughts to share. When I first dived into self-hosting, it was less about control and more about finding apps that filled the gaps left by commercial applications, and devs that actually listened to feedback, feature requests, or helped out with issues. That evolved into wanting more control over the apps I was using every day. It started small with a basic notes app, a self-hosted password manager, even a media server. But all too soon, I was running half a dozen services on my own hardware. Hosting my own tools has helped me build a better relationship with data privacy, my habits, and my tech stack. While today I might stand behind the open-source ethos, back then I was just tired of depending on apps that kept changing to meet commercial targets, subscriptions that kept stacking. Over time, I came to the obvious realisation — this wasn't just a matter of convenience, I preferred the approach of open-source apps even if it sometimes meant a less-than-polished user experience. Hosting my own tools has helped me build a better relationship with data privacy, my user habits, and even my technology stack. Here's why I'm all in on self-hosted apps and why I think more people should give it a shot. I want to own my data, not rent access to it Robert Triggs / Android Authority There's something incredibly frustrating about using a service for years only to wake up one day and find out your data is locked behind a paywall. Or worse, that the service is shutting down and your stuff is disappearing unless you jump through a dozen hoops. Or how about a service losing the license for your favorite movie, and you not being able to stream it anymore. That's what pushed me to self-host my first app. Media servers tend to be a very popular first foray into open-source apps for a good reason — we've all faced the annoyance of Netflix losing a license for a favorite movie. We've all faced the annoyance of Netflix losing a license for a favorite movie — that's when self-hosting starts to make sense. When I self-host, my data lives on my machine or server. I decide when to back it up, move it, or delete it. These goals are defined by my needs, not by an algorithm driven by what a for-profit business decides. Platform updates can't suddenly change how my preferred apps work, or if I'm allowed to watch preferred content. It's mine, and that sense of ownership is something I didn't know I was missing until I had it. Of course, media streaming is just one such example. There are dozens of commercial apps that haven't been updated for the latest operating systems and keep losing functionality till they stop working entirely. With open-source alternatives, there's a good chance the developer will keep maintaining it. And if not, someone else can step in and do the job. Subscriptions started piling up, and I'd had enough Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority Mockup of Google Play Store's new subscriptions UI I firmly believe in paying for a quality app to support the developer. I even got on board the subscription train, because let's face it — a one-time $5 fee isn't going to cover the bills in today's economy. If I came across an interesting app that assisted my productivity, I would sign up for it. Five dollars here, ten dollars there, it doesn't seem like much until you start adding it all up. Over time, I was paying more to use software than I was spending on things I actually owned. That's a pretty strong reason I started looking at open-source alternatives. I was spending more on software I didn't own than on things I did. Now, let me be clear. Open source, by and large, follows the free as in free speech, not free beer model. There's a good chance that your preferred self-hosted app is available for free. But it doesn't have to be. And when it's not, it's usually just a small one-time donation to unlock a license. I'm down for that. I pay once and run the app as long as I want. I support the developers directly when I can. And best of all, I'm no longer stuck in this loop of monthly charges for tools I barely use. It's safe to say that freedom from subscription fatigue alone was worth the switch for me. I need things to work even when the internet doesn't Robert Triggs / Android Authority Here's where things get interesting. I've written enough about the need for backup strategies, and the cloud is certainly a viable element of that. However, I no longer recommend cloud-first backups as the go-to. There are many reasons for that. Be it a lack of control over costs, rising file sizes, or simply having full control over data even without internet. The fact that you might not be able to access notes, documents, photos, or files because a server or your internet line is down is absurd to me. That realisation struck me when I had the bright idea of editing vacation images during a prolonged internet outage. With cloud-first apps, that's simply not an option. It drove me crazy. Now, when I run something myself, I know it's going to work. My to-do list, my media library, my Google Photos alternative, even my backups — they all live locally or on my own server. If my internet is spotty or a company goes belly up, nothing changes for me. The apps just keep running. I do still maintain cloud copies for critical documents and files. Often, I'll sync them with cloud-first apps to enable easier on-the-go access. But all my self-hosted apps remain accessible on my local network even if the internet goes down, and via a reverse proxy when I'm out and about. Customization is key Dhruv Bhutani / Android Authority One of the things I love most about self-hosting is being able to tweak things until they feel just right. Most commercial apps are built to appeal to as many people as possible, which usually means sacrificing flexibility. But when I host something myself, I have the option to tweak it till it looks, how it works and how it conncets with the rest of my set up. I don't want to bend to an app's limitations. Open-source, self-hosted apps give me the option to fix those limitations. If you're a professional or a hobbyist coder like me, the sky is the limit. But even if you're not, many popular apps like Home Assistant, my smart home platform of choice, have a thriving community making themes, plugins, and even forks of the original software. Using open-source apps, I've built dashboards that show the latest news or my favorite Reddit threads directly on my browser's homescreen. This ability to customize tools to behave the way I want is unprecedented and makes everything feel much more personal. I trust myself more than I trust most platforms Robert Triggs / Android Authority Security isn't guaranteed, and while you can follow best practices like enabling two-factor authentication and strong passwords, your data's safety is entirely in the hands of third-party corporations. Now, I won't pretend that running your own apps is safer by default. It takes work to secure your own network, and you need to stay on top of updates, configurations, and pay attention to best practices. However, I'll take that over blindly trusting a company that has all the incentives to monetize my data for research and profit. When I host something myself, I know exactly who has access and where the data is going. I encrypt critical files that need to be encrypted. I manage the backups. I don't have to wonder if some third-party analytics script is quietly harvesting my data in the background because the likelihood of that happening with open-source software is ridiculously low. There's a learning curve, sure, but at least I know what's happening under the hood. Every app I install teaches me something new Robert Triggs / Android Authority There's a learning curve with any new tech. I won't lie, I've struggled with installing many self-hosted apps. I've broken configuration files, misconfigured servers, occasionally lost data, and spent many, many hours reading GitHub issues and community forums to figure out what went wrong. But I've probably learnt more from self-hosting than I did in four years of engineering college. Each time I set something up, I understand the commands and processes better. I've picked up skills in networking, Linux administration, command line use, Docker, reverse proxies, and more. It's helped me go from hobbyist to reasonably adept. There's something really satisfying about getting it all to work. And along the way, I've learnt about stuff I never thought I'd need, but now I find incredibly useful. It's all about choice I'm not here to tell anyone to ditch all their apps and run everything from a Raspberry Pi in their closet. Cloud tools have their place. They can be convenient. Some of them are even great. But what bothers me is the lack of options. The way we're pushed toward services that constantly evolve, not always for the better, or lock us in. Self-hosting offers a viable alternative to many of the best cloud-first solutions. These open-source apps might not be perfect, but they are under my control. Every mistake I've made while self-hosting has taught me something I now use every day. My interest in self-hosting started with convenience, turned into curiosity, and is now something I actually rely on. I'm not constantly looking for the next big app to fix my productivity or change my life. I just want simple tools that work for me, don't ask for too much, and let me get on with my day. Self-hosted apps do that. By and large, they accomplish the task I ask of them, no more and no less. So if you've ever felt frustrated with the tools you use or wondered what it would be like to have more control over your digital life, try self-hosting something small. It could be something as basic as a music server, or well-documented like Home Assistant. See how you feel about it, and what you learn. Even if you break something, you'll definitely fix it and along the way you might just start building a set up that feels completely your own. Follow
Wall Street Journal
12 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Why Amazon's Massive Retail Business Is No Longer Enough
Amazon's AMZN 1.70%increase; green up pointing triangle retail business is raining profits these days. But that alone won't cut it in the age of artificial intelligence. The company's generally strong second-quarter report late Thursday was marred by what was considered a disappointing showing by its Amazon Web Services cloud-computing business. AWS revenue grew 17% from a year earlier to about $30.9 billion, which was largely flat with the growth rate shown the previous quarter and merely in line with Wall Street's projections. That came after rivals Microsoft MSFT 3.95%increase; green up pointing triangle and Alphabet's Google reported accelerating growth in their own cloud units for the same period.
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple's stock rises after it beats Q3 expectations on strong iPhone sales
Apple (AAPL) stock rose on Friday after the company reported third quarter earnings that beat on the top and bottom lines, thanks to better-than-anticipated iPhone sales. 'Today Apple is proud to report a June quarter revenue record with double-digit growth in iPhone, Mac, and Services and growth around the world, in every geographic segment,' CEO Tim Cook said in a statement Thursday. Shares in the tech giant were up 1.8% in premarket trading following the release. For the third quarter, Apple saw earnings per share (EPS) of $1.57 on revenue of $94 billion. Wall Street was anticipating EPS of $1.43 on revenue of $89.22 billion, according to Bloomberg consensus estimates. The company saw EPS of $1.40 and revenue of $85.7 billion in the same quarter last year. Apple's China sales hit $15.3 billion. Wall Street was expecting $15.1 billion. Apple's iPhone revenue topped out at $44 billion versus expectations of $39.8 billion. Services revenue came in at $27.4 billion. Wall Street was looking for $26.8 billion. Mac revenue topped out at $8 billion, but iPad and Wearables revenue fell year over year to $6.5 billion and $7.4 billion, respectively. Apple is dealing with a handful of major issues. President Trump has threatened to impose a 25% tariff on iPhones unless Apple begins producing them in the US. The company could also have to deal with the impact of Google's antitrust lawsuit on the company's $20 billion per year agreement to use Google Search as the default option in the Safari browser and Siri. Read more: Live coverage of corporate earnings Revenue from that deal falls under Apple's Services segment. The federal judge overseeing Google's (GOOG, GOOGL) antitrust case is expected to rule on the "remedies" phase of the trial, which will spell out what the company has to do to correct its monopolistic behavior, in August. If the judge requires Google to abandon its exclusivity deals, it would put a $20 billion hole in Apple's Services business. Apple is also facing continuing criticism for its slow AI rollout. Wedbush analyst Dan Ives has called for the company to purchase AI startup Perplexity AI ( "It's time for Cook and Cupertino to face the new reality of this quickly morphing AI driven tech landscape ... because if they do not change it will be a historic strategic black eye for Apple, in our view," Wedbush analyst Dan Ives wrote in an investor note ahead of earnings. BofA's Mohan offered a similar critique of the company's AI moves in an investor note Monday, saying that while Apple usually slowplays rolling out new technologies, the fast pace of AI innovation could leave it behind user expectations. "Each keynote that goes by with Siri still doing relatively basic things while competitors' assistants converse and create content is a hit to Apple's reputation for innovation," Mohan wrote. Email Daniel Howley at dhowley@ Follow him on X/Twitter at @DanielHowley. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
