Slashdot Mirror


Finns To Use Cell Phones To Monitor Traffic Jams

Okko writes "The Finnish Road Administration announced it is going to use cellphone location data to find out about traffic jams. They say they are using the location data available from the GSM base stations to determine the locations and speeds of vehicles carrying mobile phones. The information will be used to inform people about traffic jams and peaks in traffic trough public FM radio stations. Until now, the information about traffic has been gathered using car sensors embedded in the roads. The spokesperson of FRA, interviewed in the evening news of MTV3 Finland, seemed very pleased they can monitor cell phones even when no calls are made, it is enough the phone has power on. They said they are about to use the information anonymously and thought people approve it as long as it is done in an anonymous and "everyone-wins" way. It was told they do not currently tell the police about the data they discover as the current law forbids this. So, it is not, at least yet, possible to fine people carrying mobile phones in their cars too fast on public roads (exceeding the speed limit of the road). Unfortunately, probably because of vacations, FRA has not updated their website accordingly yet. There does exist an annoucement about testing the technology from the summer. "

56 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. first scotts, now finns by kousik · · Score: 4, Informative

    Another slashdot story was flashed a while back (13/06/02), but that was pertaining to Scottish company.

  2. just Great. by sanermind · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...I can see the day where an automated system can automatically flag and/or ticket you for exceeding the speed limit. Of course, they already have camera bases systems today, that photograph your license plate. And if the preponderance of technological competition in the radar-detector-detector-adnasuam world is any indication, there would soon enough be a market for phones that subtly altered the phase or seeming doppler profile of their signals to fool a single tower. Of course, if you show up at another tower 200Km away in 35 minutes, that would still be a little suspicious. ;)

    --

    ---
    the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    1. Re:just Great. by WPIDalamar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't think that would fly in the US ... here, speeding tickets are giving to individuals, not phones. The prosecuting attorney could prove my phone went 100mph, but not me. Maybe I lent it to someone else?

    2. Re:just Great. by sporty · · Score: 2
      ...I can see the day where an automated system can automatically flag and/or ticket you for exceeding the speed limit. Of course, they already have camera bases systems today, that photograph your license plate.


      And this is a problem because... ? Really, if there is a reason to be speeding, then fine. Speed limits are there for a reason. If the speed limit is too long, it's the responsibility of the people to raise it.

      Besides, this would have to be enforced locally. If it is setup as a warning system to law enforcement that someone is going 90mph on I-278, have a cop stop him and ticket him. If you have a legal reason to be speeding, such as a medical emergency, then I'm sure it'll be up to the officer to determine what happens.

      Now if it were more private companies having access to the data, THAT I'd be more worried about.
      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    3. Re:just Great. by Ecyrd · · Score: 2

      Good point.

      It's difficult to prove that you actually were in possession of the said cell phone (unless you of course call it: "Hey sir, you are speeding, please slow down." :-)

      But on the other hand, the whole discussion about how it would make speeding more difficult is a bit absurd. The speed limits were put in place for a purpose, and violating them is an offense. Nobody is objecting to the use of radars - so why would using a cell-phone based solution any different? All you really need is information that "someone is speeding" and his approximate location, and the police could take it from there... Automatic systems would however be open for all kinds of abuse :-)

    4. Re:just Great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yep. At least here in Finland you have to record vehicle speed, stops and taken pauses with special device if you use a truck commercially. The police can fine you for not taking long enough pauses (since that's what they monitor with the system). However they also see when you have driven too fast (speed limit for trucks is 80 km/h, if you go faster than that you are always speeding) and they CAN'T fine you even though the device is delicate, once-a-year calibrated, and can be used to investigate speeds in accidents with unbelievable accuracy (given that it merely draws a line in a paper).

      So it's very unlikely that in Finland cell-phone tracking could be used when fining people for speeding. Serious crimes are a different story.

    5. Re:just Great. by Zathrus · · Score: 2

      Of course, if you show up at another tower 200Km away in 35 minutes, that would still be a little suspicious

      200 Km in 35 minutes is suspicious? Must have low speed limits where you live... 100 Km/h is roughly 60 mph, which is well within the speed limit in much of the US.

      Of course, if you're talking residential neighborhoods that's another matter :)

      Oh, and if you say "fine, then 1000 Km" -- well, the phone company will simple disable your cell phone because it just triggered fraud detection. They've been doing that particular trick for a decade now.

    6. Re:just Great. by sporty · · Score: 2
      Simply to automatically ticket someone based on the calculated travelling speed of a device that may not even be in their possession is fraught with loopholes that even the lamest of attorneys could exploit.


      Read my post again. I mention that a person (law) would get a signal to go stop someone who is speeding. So if my phone is travelling 90mph in my mother's car, she'd get the ticket. This is far from automatic.

      Wash,rinse, repeat.
      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    7. Re:just Great. by bnenning · · Score: 2
      The speed limits were put in place for a purpose


      Yes, mainly revenue generation. If safety were the primary goal they would be significantly higher (see the repeal of the national 55 mph limit, where the predicted bloodbath never materialized).


      Having said that, I wouldn't object to automated enforcement, *provided* the limits were set such that a driver exceeding them would actually be acting dangerously. This is nowhere near the case with the majority of speed limits today.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    8. Re:just Great. by sporty · · Score: 2

      National speed limits? afaik, Tenessee has a speed limit of 65mph, while ny has one of 55. Is there some sorta federal speed limit or something? I thought it was state goverened.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    9. Re:just Great. by stephanruby · · Score: 2
      Don't think that would fly in the US ... here, speeding tickets are giving to individuals, not phones. The prosecuting attorney could prove my phone went 100mph, but not me. Maybe I lent it to someone else?

      This hasn't stopped american cities from using cameras for issuing red-light traffic violations. In San Francisco, it has been proven that those cameras have a 30% failure rate. When they first got started, a city technician would discard half of the pictures because they were bad, but now because of city budget cuts they stopped discarding those bad pictures, and they started issuing tickets regardless of doubt.

      Now, I understand we can all take a day off from work and protest those traffic violations, but the judges we have down here are not the most rational/principled human beings in the world and I would love to hear you give that excuse "May be someone else was driving?" to one of our judges.

      In any case, in theory there is no limit to the number of traffic violations that could be issued if everything was automated and unfortunatly there is a limit to the number of sick-days you can take off from work to protest those tickets.

    10. Re:just Great. by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2

      What would be funnier if the system was completely automated with sanity checks...

      Imagine you rent a private plane and fly along a busy highway (and you leave your cell phone on)

      In the mail you get something like:

      "A citation has been issued because you were calculated going 215mph on rt. 495 at 4:34pm. The total charges come to $1043.33"

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  3. Might improve safety by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After all, nobody is going to believe that speeding information won't be passed to the police, despite any laws currently in place, therefore, they may well switch off their bloody phones rather than weave randomly across lanes of traffic when making or answering a call the way they do at the moment.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:Might improve safety by dattaway · · Score: 2

      I'd be more interested what a person with a cell phone and a directional antenna in a remote area would do to this "speed sensing" algorithm. Remote areas make people do funny things.

      "Yes your honor, we tracked him traveling 450mph down the interstate.

      "Its impossible he was sitting on his living room couch at the time. We have the data right here."

    2. Re:Might improve safety by arivanov · · Score: 2

      Not in Finland. They have plenty of precedents of telling the police to go screw themselves under similar circumstamnces. In other words they are a civilised country (civilised does not mean pleasant to live in, you should see their liquor prices).

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    3. Re:Might improve safety by arivanov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is GSM, not CDMA. It has a limit on the timing advance which puts a well defined limit on the "remoteness". As a result people do not use directed antennas at all.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  4. As Long as it's Anonymous by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There shouldn't be any problems as long as the system remains anonymous - hell, they may even be able to inform the police which areas and times have the highest incidence of speeding to improve their ability to ticket people - nothing a radar gun sitting on the side of the road can't do...

    At any rate, I would keep an eye on the anonymity of the whole thing - I wouldn't want a ticket showing up form my highway driving.

    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
    1. Re:As Long as it's Anonymous by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wouldn't want a ticket showing up form my highway driving.

      The question then is, "Why even have laws at all?". The police are charged with enforcing the law. Period. They aren't supposed to be de facto judge and jury though selective enforcement, no matter how many of them try to usurp that power. Law enforcement's goal, in theory, is 100% enforcement of the law.

      Of course that raises practical problems, because everyone is a criminal. The laws in most places are written in such a way that anyone can be arrested at any time, because everyone is breaking some law. This is leveraged by governments constantly to supress people they don't like. The problem isn't really about privacy, it's about laws that make everyone arrestable. We need to fix the laws so that only real criminals can be arrested, not prevent enforcement.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  5. An attack on privacy by anarchima · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is yet another part of the system being built up around civilian populations in the West. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but lately (as in the last 5-10 years) new technologies have emergies which on their own might not seem to affect your privacy much. Things like credit cards, email, telephone banking, THE INTERNET, satellites, and more are all capable of spying on you. Sorry for sounding like such a paranoid person, but if all these devices were coordinated we could all be watched. The Big Brother is out there, and this is just another step in the wrong direction...Does anyone actually believe that this sort of information isn't being used (or can easily be used) against you?

    1. Re:An attack on privacy by doubleyewdee · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Does "Big Brother" really give two farts about whether or not I am speeding, though? I mean, if you're going to be paranoid at least be paranoid about something worthwhile. I don't even think it's so much easier to watch me than it was before. In the days of yore people had a lot less information swirling around, and so you could learn all there was to know about someone without having to collect and save the data. It wasn't too tough, back in the day, for BB to find out all about you through what some would call 'conventional methods' (using spies/trackers/etc). I think that BB has simply been keeping up with the times. We are no more or less secure now than we were before, it's just that our (in)security has changed.

      Furthermore, why is everyone so upset about getting caught speeding? Don't want to get caught? Don't do it. If you don't like the laws, then use the appropriate paths (voting, lobbying, running for office) to get the laws fixed. Don't grouse because now all of a sudden you can be caught breaking the law. If the law seems inappropriate to you then get it fixed. Don't let bad laws sit and gain acceptance with age. There are a lot of silly/bad laws out there that only exist because people ignore them or go around them since "it's not a big deal." It's ridiculous. Don't ignore the law, change it!

      --


      you can take the road that takes you to the stars...
    2. Re:An attack on privacy by snillfisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just a comment about how the current situation is, they're currently using embedded sensors in the road. How can you be so sure about the fact that these sensors may just as well register the license plate of your car? A small X10-cam sitting by the road and just grabbing images of licensing plates as they go by? Just set up a couple of these, and you have the same effect. The current solution could probably be tampered with just as much as this one - and I would probably say that the new solution is a lot better than the current one. If its there, use it! If you're moving around in public space, there's always a risk of getting registered and surveillanced, even if you take all possible measures. Get a non-registered phone or something .. after all, if you really were paranoid, you wouldnt move in public spaces or carry a cell phone.

      --
      mats
      One man's ceiling is another man's floor.
    3. Re:An attack on privacy by karmawarrior · · Score: 2
      Finally! Someone with a clue! THANK YOU for saying this.

      Laws are not made to be broken, they're made to make living a little easier. If you have problems with the laws on the books, and believe they're not helping, you need to raise your voice. Make your government aware of your misgivings. It's YOUR government damn it. You may have decided to let it run itself these last few years, but ultimately the founding fathers made sure that the government would be, in some way, answerable to you - be that, arguably as originally intended, on a State by State level, or, as it is now, on a more pluralist democratic level (yes, as long as the legislature is answerable to the populace, it's a democracy. You don't need more than that, all this BS about rule by plebicite is just that: BS)

      Speeding may or may not be something you believe should be outlawed. Clearly, if you believe it should be, you must call for more appropriate and stict enforcement of this law - if everyone is forced, through widespread non-compliance such that compliance is itself dangerous, to disobey that law, then the only way it can be made to work is to create mechanisms that enforce it properly. Similarly, you may be of the opinion that selective or patchy enforcement means that the law is itself wrong, that the ends do not justify having the law in the first place, and that the law should itself be taken off the books. But without you declaring it a problem, and demanding your government deal with this, the government will assume you consent to the laws we have as they're written.

      This quagmire of government inaction over inappropriately implemented laws regardless of the consequences will not disappear by itself. Unless people are prepared to actually act, not just talk about it on Slashdot, nothing will ever get done. Apathy is not an option.

      You can help by getting off your rear and writing to your congressman [house.gov] or senator [senate.gov]. Tell them either to enforce the law or take it off the books, depending on what you believe. Tell them that you appreciate the work being done to protect your safety, or that you're fed up of taxpayers money being spent on enforcing unenforcable laws, but if money keeps being thrown at half-assed half-implemented solutions that you either agree or disagree with, you will be forced to use less and less secure and intelligently designed alternatives. Let them know that SMP may make or break whether you can efficiently deploy OpenBSD on your workstations and servers. Explain the concerns you have about freedom, openness, and choice, and how half implemented laws harms all three. Let them know that this is an issue that effects YOU directly, that YOU vote, and that your vote will be influenced, indeed dependent, on whether or not they either implement the law fully, or abolish it, depending on your point of view.

      You CAN make a difference. Don't treat voting as a right, treat it as a duty. Keep informed, keep your political representatives informed on how you feel. And, most importantly of all, vote.

      --
      KMSMA (WWBD?)
  6. Privacy by Kajakske · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is all very interesting, but as stated before, there is a privacy risk involved with this. Not only can you actually track where a user goes, you can also track who he is with.

    Another point is, who knows how many cell phones are in 1 car ? If you have several cars with 4 people in it, all having there cell phone turned on, then it might look like a traffic jam, or at least very condensed traffic, but it might not be the case.
    Or the opposite. If they take an average of 2 phones per car, and it's work time and there are like only people with 1 person in the car, it might look like fluid traffic where there is a jam.

    1. Re:Privacy by Ecyrd · · Score: 2

      Statistics.

      The average number of people in a car is quite predictable, and they're interested only in the relative density of cell phones and their average speed, which helps in traffic planning.

      A bigger problem is that they cannot determine the type of the vehicles from the cell phone signatures, and thus they have to combine this with the old sensors-under-the-road counting technique, which can give a good estimate of the vehicle size as well. A sudden insurge of trucks on the highways is much more important information than the fact that you are travelling with a friend. Of course, since the relative location error available from GSM cell phones is about 100 metres or so, it is unlikely that you could say who is riding in which vehicle.

  7. Re:So you've decided to live off the grid by WPIDalamar · · Score: 2

    Give me freedom or give me death!

    Live free or die!

    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety^H^H^H^H^H comfort, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety^H^H^H^H comfort.

    Or did I fall for a troll?

  8. Re:So you've decided to live off the grid by anarchima · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can't get traced if you use cash - as in bills and coins - however, you can get traced, and quite easily, if you use a credit card. There's a big difference. And I think this _is_ worrying, "even if you don't have anything to hide".

  9. Similar story by Koyaanisqatsi · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is not a dupe (hey, not yet ;) but a similar story was reported a while back. Here is the magic link.

    The linked BBC article on the story is in English too.

  10. Traffic Jams in buildings? by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What happens when everyone starts getting to work? Most buildings are within a few dozen feet of a road... will they be able to tell a building full of cellphones from a road full of cellphones?

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:Traffic Jams in buildings? by DirkDaring · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can't be too hard... buildings don't move all that fast. Even in traffic.

  11. Welcome to your nice padded cell. by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2

    I hear they are very warm and cosy at this time of year. Everything will be lovely and soft, no need to make any decisions or take responsibility for anything ever again.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  12. Re:multiple cell phones - traffic jam? by japa · · Score: 2, Informative
    If you have several cars with 4 people in it, all having there cell phone turned on, then it might look like a traffic jam, or at least very condensed traffic, but it might not be the case.

    They measure how long it takes for a random cell phone to get from point A to point B. So they don't actually measure the cell phone density, but what's the average speed of "cell phone mass". When traffic increases close to jam levels, speeds go down..

  13. Probably not that simple by dachshund · · Score: 2
    If you have several cars with 4 people in it, all having there cell phone turned on, then it might look like a traffic jam, or at least very condensed traffic, but it might not be the case

    Presumably they're looking as much at the speed of the passers-by than at the density; four cellphones zipping past at 120 km/h certainly looks a lot different than four cellphones sitting still or crawling by along with 10,000 others. Four cellphones sitting still while 10,000 other zip by at 120 km/h also isn't going to look like a jam.

    I imagine they've refined this technique a little bit so that it won't be confused by a few people stopped or going slower than average, etc. I remember a number of companies doing this, so I'm sure there's commercial software out there that's already been tested.

    Any way you cut it, a traffic jam's going to look a lot different from a normal, free roadway. I don't imagine that it's terribly difficult to build a system that can differentiate between the two, although it's possible that there will be some unique situations in which confusion is possible.

  14. Re:So you've decided to live off the grid by stoops · · Score: 2, Insightful

    exactly how is cash more traceable than bartering? you'd think if i used cattle from my farm rather than cash, there'd be more dna evidence in my barn linking that cow back to me than there is on that 5 dollar bill. what's your reasoning?

  15. Re:So you've decided to live off the grid by Angry+White+Guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cash is easily traceable. That little metal strip in US Currency is not an anti-counterfit device, it's a homing beacon. Each bill has its own signature, picked up any time you walk through a metal detector.

    "Well how can they know which bill I have?" you ask? That's not a newspaper salesman in the airport, that's a g-man waiting to give you your change. Once you're marked, the bill sends an electromagnetic signal which switches on all the other money in your wallet so they can use that to track you as well. Or that guy that bumped into you in the alley, He was a carrier, sent to activate your money. They just have to get close to you and they can tag you for surveillance.

    NEVER buy anything at the airport! And if you're going anyplace public where they can get near you, keep your money wrapped up in tinfoil, and separate each bill with newsprint. This will block the g-men's activation signal, plus give the added benefit of always having crisp, clean cash.

    --
    You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
  16. Jamming the system... by spacefight · · Score: 2

    I wonder what the system says when every driver throws out the mobile on a specified route at mainly the same time....

    Error: Route A34 slashdotted, traffic stopped completely

  17. So they say they,ll use the info anonymously.. by theLOUDroom · · Score: 2

    Here's my problem with this:
    They say they'll use the info anonymously and not share it right?
    Nothing actually holds them to their word on this.
    They can say they'll use the info anonmyously, and then change their mind later. Nothing's stopping them, or at least nothing stops gov't officials in the US from doing things like this. "No new taxes" anyone?

    I would accept a system like this, if there was actually an assurance that they would hold to their word, say fines and jail time for anyone who shares the confidential info and maybe a contract where they have to trash the whole system if X amount of data gets comprimised.
    And of course they would have to be audited, by auditors whose only business is auditing.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
    1. Re:So they say they,ll use the info anonymously.. by sopuli · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We telecom related privacy violations very seriously in Finland.

    2. Re:So they say they,ll use the info anonymously.. by arivanov · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Nothing actually holds them to their word on this.

      Do you think that Finland is a village in Alabama or something? Finland is a civilised country. And as such it has data protection regulations and telecoms laws you have hardly dreamed of. In order to get to that data police need

      • 1. A court warrant on a specific person

      • 2. Having obtained the court warrant they can start recording only the specific subset they have been granted access to.
        3. They have no access to any prior data except the last 60 days of billing (and nothing but billing).
        4. Any non-billing data that can personally identify an individual may not be retained by the telecom operator and is immediately destroyed after operational use.
      Germany and other EU countries have similar laws. There are exemptions of course. Like the UK.

      But overall, the police cannot get to any data of practical interest for the prosecution of minor misdemanors.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  18. Minority Report by epicstruggle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This use of our cell phones might lead to some serious privacy issues. I dont know if you watched Minority Report. But one interesting aspect of the future in that movie was how pervasive the SYSTEM monitored you (using an iris scan to identify you). Using your cell phone to monitor traffic might seem like a small thing, but it might lead to some serious deteoration of your privacy. Say we have some serious criminal act, and we want to know who might have been near the area, these people could be suspects or witnesses. We could just check who had their cell phones on in the area. This might not seem bad, unless your labeled a "person of interest". I doubt youd like to be under that much scrutiny (sp?)

    anyways, just a thought
    epicstruggle

    --
    "Im drowning here, and you're describing the water!"
    1. Re:Minority Report by Killeri · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, this happened already in Finland. The police can request a court order to get location data for a phone identified with a suspect. In one case a court granted an order to release location data for all phones in a single cell during a certain time period, even though this is not allowed by law. This came up in a yearly report of such court orders.

  19. Get out of those trickly police situations... by jamesjw · · Score: 2


    Honest officer.. I wasnt talking and driving at the same time.

    I was detecting traffic jams.. Just doing my bit!

    --
    -- If at first you don't succeed, lie!
  20. Old news actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Check out the date: 18.6.2002.

    The press release talks about monitoring traffic jams on highways. Thus several phones in single car won't make a difference, since dozens of cars will pass checkpoints every minute.

    Privacy isn't an issue here. Finland has very strict privacy laws and this system is designed with privacy in mind: System assing different (changing) codes to the each cell phone and it only tracks when code X pass through the checkpoints.

    It is also illegal for operators to give information about calls to the police, unless owner is suspected of very severe crime.

  21. Speeding tickets - not likely; privacy, no change by ronys · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I seriously doubt that the information is accurate enough to convict a driver of speeding. The poster wrote that the intended use is monitoring traffic jams - this means using statistical methods that average out errors. Saying that the traffic is flowing at X km (miles) per hour is very different from saying that cellphone C is moving at speed Y.

    As to privacy, the location of each cellphone is already available to law enforcement (even if powered off), so there's no real difference. If you really want to drive to your lover for an afternoon, be sure to remove the battery from your cellular...

    --
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas: Where there is doubt, there is freedom.
  22. Re:Traffic Jams by ComaVN · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wonder how much of my life I have wasted sitting in the car, surrounded by idiots.

    Reminds me of some graffiti I saw on a wall next to a highway, which (roughly translated) said: "You're not IN a traffic jam, you ARE the traffic jam."

    --
    Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
  23. Re:No chance by Zathrus · · Score: 2

    There is little hope of changing speed limits

    Uh... riiiight. Which is why, I suppose, the speed limits haven't changed in the last decade in the US.

    Oh wait. They have. The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 repealed the 55 mph limit in all areas (a 1987 act allowed speed limits to increase to 65 in rural areas on interstates). The limits are now set by the states. In Montana, for instance, there is no enforced speed limit during daylight hours on much of the highways.

    Bah! Or am I just bitter?!

    Both bitter and clueless. But I guess that's why you're an AC.

  24. Re:No chance by Zathrus · · Score: 2

    Right you are - the speed limit is 75 for cars on interstates in non-urban areas during daylight.

    And it looks like it may have been federal funding that did it, although I'm not bothering to look into it in depth. One site claims that it was actually safer during the no limit time than it was after limits were imposed. Dunno.

  25. Not a problem for speeding by slipgun · · Score: 2

    So, it is not, at least yet, possible to fine people carrying mobile phones in their cars too fast on public roads (exceeding the speed limit of the road)

    Never will be - just switch your phone off if you intend to go above the posted speed limit. It's dangerous to use your mobile while driving anyway. (Much more dangerous than it is to go 20mph above the speed limit on a clear motorway at 1am).

    --
    SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
  26. A penni for my thoughts by Joey7F · · Score: 2

    They drive there? I thought they just ran Lapps.

    Sorry for the joke, but I swear I am finnished...
    Well I was lying but now I am definitely am...

    --Joey

  27. Also this same method by Jonny+Ringo · · Score: 2

    will be used to calculate how many assholes are in a movie theatre at any given time.

  28. Re:just Great. - not always true by Cerlyn · · Score: 2

    However, in New Jersey (and possibly other states?), if you own a vehicle seen passing a stopped school bus, the bus driver can write down your license plate. The police then will send a ticket via mail to the owner of the vehicle.

    In order to avoid prosecution (and a lot of points on your license), you must show that you were not the one driving. They then go ticket that person.

    There was also a case in New York where a car was seized and sold off by New York City due to someone other than the owner driving it drunk. The owner of the car appealed, since she was not expecting the driver to be where he was, or him driving drunk at all (he had no history of alchol abuse). She still lost the court case, as well as the car.

    Several states are considering and/or implementing similar laws.

  29. Similar ideas already in use in the United States by Phaid · · Score: 2

    There is a conceptually similar system in use today in Atlanta. The system consists of a number of RF readers stationed around the city. These readers are compatible with the Georgia 400 Tollway's "Cruise Card" transponders, used for electronic toll collection. The system reads the transponders in vehicles and uses the data to determine overall traffic speed. Obviously, not everyone in the city has these transponders, but enough vehicles carry them to generate plenty of useful data.

    I believe Houston has a similar system in place, since the Sam Houston Tollway uses the same equipment.

    People will predictably shout about privacy issues, but it is illegal for this information to be used to enforce speed limits, and the information is not permanently recorded anywhere.

    You can read a bit more about this setup at the transponder manufacturer's site among other places.

  30. Re:just Great. - not always true by Electrum · · Score: 2

    However, in New Jersey (and possibly other states?), if you own a vehicle seen passing a stopped school bus, the bus driver can write down your license plate. The police then will send a ticket via mail to the owner of the vehicle.

    There is a big difference between loaning some your cell phone and loaning someone your car.

  31. Re:ehh by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 2

    You become and accomplice to a crime! :)

    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  32. Crash by Superfreaker · · Score: 2

    It would probably be reported as a 30,000 car pile up.

  33. Use the data, please by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2

    "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." --Abraham Lincoln

  34. Re:It's about traffice jams, not speeding by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2

    You can't measure speed of GSM-phone accurately enough to convict people of speeding.

    Depends how fast you're going and how far you're tracked while going that speed.