Likewise, when we instruct students on debugging, soldering, group work and critical discussions it is expected that they present at the university to undertake it. It is remarkably easy to show a student one on one what proper soldering looks like, how it feels and what the quality of the joint is afterwards - it's a tactile thing like finding a vein. Interactive skills like group discussions are greatly diminished over remote media, which is why many many business people and technical staff travel to do their jobs even in our increasingly technical age.
It is my expectation that, by the time a university student is committed to undertaking a four year degree, they will be sufficiently independent of their parents so as to be able to travel to a location proximal to their school. This is very very routine, and easily 70 percent of my class are from out of state. You're absolutely right - genius is not geographically determined (cf. Ramanujan) - and those students who excell at school are typically eligible for remote student scholarships to pay for their moving expenses to study at our university. The university really loves giving them out - it lets them talk about how they're helping the best and the brightest have new opportunities they might otherwise be denied through their remoteness.
Pitying me just because I recognise that one way of teaching absolutely sucks and one way of teaching is somewhat better (and then choose to advocate for the better way) is somewhat disengenuous. I would be doing my students a disservice if I told them "Sure! We can teach you all you need to know just fine over the phone." They would be unprepared for their profession. If you would like to see something of my approach to teaching, I will put my money where my mouth is and show you my teaching materials. I currently teach a fourth-year project course in mechatronics. My class site is here and is publically accessible. You can see my project design, lectures and feedback to students. I urge you to tell me how to do my job better - I really am committed to improving my teaching and providing the best training possibile to my students.
In a country as vast and as spottily populated as Australia
I teach engineering - specifically practical project based courses in robotics. If students can't be in the lab, it's not really clear how they could be effectively instructed. If doing tech support over the phone is hard, consider the difficulties of effectively debugging a student's circuit when the students themselves don't understand what they've done (or why it's faulty).
The pedagogical aspects of instruction can (and certainily should) be abstracted into online resources, but some aspects of instruction in practical disciplines cannot be effectively remote-taught. At least, so I think - I'm staking my future career on it.
Actually, Australia is incredibly densely populated in a few select bits - 90% of Australia's population is urbanised. The flying doctor service was for those few too far to drive from a local hospital or clinic; these days it's increasingly eccentric to live that deep in the bush.
I would suggest an accelerometer mounted to baton/conductor and a rumble motor
I'm a robotics researcher - some of my work includes developing aids for the blind. Of all the comments here, this is the sanest one and the one that would actually work for people with vision impairment. It's simple, it's cheap and it will WORK. We've had good success with similar systems for other tasks like navigation and playing soccer.
Each user has their very own UHF antenna. The receiving center has thousands of tiny UHF antennas, one per user
This really does highlight the absurdity of the current legal framework.
Yes, stores have CCTV cameras in them, but they rarely check them except in case of a crime being committed. Sure, they could use fancy face-tracking software cross-referenced with databases to find out who everyone who pays cash is, but really, they won't bother because the vast majority of people will pay with a loyalty card anyway, incentivised with frequent flyer miles or somesuch. Companies go for what's going to turn a profit - they don't do long-tail very well unless it costs them nothing.
You might say that being conspicuously absent from some modes (eg. trackable transactions) highlights you for scrutiny, but I would argue that that's a bit paranoid - companies won't double their tracking efforts to make 2% more from 'different valuers'. Governments might worry about the 2% of weirdos out there, but they already track the things that concern them - purchases of explosive materials, weapons, and phonecalls to known agitators. The best way to keep the government out of your life is to keep your nose clean, follow the law and don't publicise it if you belong to the scarlet letter club du jour (eg. communists, satanists, pedophiles, science fiction writers, etc).