Slashdot Mirror
UK Police Expand License Plate Camera Systems
An anonymous reader writes "According to this article at the BBC British Police forces are widening their use of automatic License Plate recognition. One of the police officers involved says 'we can effectively deny criminals the use of the roads.' For those who don't know central London already has a network of number plate recognising camera systems to support the Congestion Charge system."
So if a badguy shoots someone and takes their car how does this system keep the badguy from using the roads?
Or what if they steel the license plate from valid drivers while they sleep?
This sytem is only for keeping track of law abiding (or at least those that attempt to be law abiding on some level) people.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
I'd like to think this isn't the way the world is headed. This seems like it is really from the big-brother-is-watching-you dept.
I was annoying my friends years ago about how I was going to make this system myself and sell it to the police. Didn't know they already had it, i'm giving up on my tinfoil hat, they can still steal my ideas. Time to ante up and get a lead hat!
But at least its proven technology now, so anyone interested in making a package that will identify the license plates of police cruisers to put in civilan cars? Its only fair.
"Don't go to London"
These methods are great for those of us concerned about law enforcement. they allow an already understaffed agency to monitor for potentially illegitimate traffic at little to no personal risk to themselves.
Who cares if they're dying?
There's always Ninnle Linux!
I think this is a good idea, if they feel that it is truly necessarry to use it. Imagine being able to use this to identify stolen vehicles, minutes after they are reported stolen, just put in the recognition to look for a car and there you go.
There are some issues about location tracking of your citizens, but as it is being used it is for tracking who is using the roadway during high congestion periods. As long as it is not used for private data mining (IE trying to figure out where you tend to shop and such) then I am all for it. If there is a counter argument, I am not seeing exactly "where" the abuses could be applied on this one to any extent. As long as the thing wasnt being used as an auto traffic cop for running through red lights and such, since we know from some experience here in the U.S. that that can cause some seriuos issues via mis-identifying breaking the law, and turning right at a red.
As long as it is used for congestion identification, and possibly tracking of stolen vehicles/people who have committed a crime and the police which to facilitate their capture. I cannot see a bad side to this.
Since driving is a privilidge given by the state, being able to track who is driving is also a responsiblity of the state if they wish to implement it.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
I bet you could foil this pretty easy by splashing some mud on your bumper (to look more 'real' :) and over a few crucial digits on your plate.
If you want to run linux, think twice. Don't forget about the license fees you will pay to SCO. Include that and you see WinXP has a lower TCO. Plus WinXP is just a better product with better support.
If you're driving on a public road, you have to assume that individuals or the government might be (gasp!) reading your license plate. This is functionally no different from having a cop sitting by the side of the road, taking notes, just more efficient.
'we can effectively deny criminals the use of the roads.'
I fail to see how they can say that. Public law enforcement will never be able to deny crime in any way as long as the people continue not to fear the punishment.
All this does is go one step further to tightening the hold that the law has on the abiding citizens.
The story's on the Beeb's web site. I challenge you to /. it.
Thank you, that was very informative!
Monitoring all of us 24/7 will naturally make law enforcement so much easyer. Life in Oceania 2003.
Why should any law-abiding citizen object to a two-way TV monitor in their living rooms to help inform them on the war against terrorism.
Road safety would be significantly enhanced if cars were fitted with event recorders that would be queried by police at regular intervals, the idea is to automatically ticket illegal behaviour like speeding or avoiding to stop at stop signs. Such a system could obviously be used to track vehicle whereabouts. One could also imagine having to swipe one driver's licence through the onboard computer to positively identify drivers.
"Deny criminals the use of the roads," indeed. Stupid criminals, maybe.
It's getting to be where everyone's going to have to be on motorized bicycles and wearing a full hood and cloak in order to avoid automated recognition. I can just see it now, a world of jawas on two wheels.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Wrong article, PERV.
- "Law-abiding motorists should have nothing to fear"
Yeah. So they thought about this long enough to realize there'd be at least a small public backlash, but didn't do much thinking beyond that.If we're going to go down this road, fine, but as papers on the Transparent Society suggest, this should be much more open.
Everyone benefits... the police and "law-abiding motorists" get their criminals, McCarthys get to entertain their delusions, politicos get to have their watergates, and the public and press get a little entertainment over the whole thing.
Apparently some people believe 1984 was a training manual.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
...This kind of thing surely means more donut time! Why go out on the road and risk an angry trucker pulling over lorries when I can just sit back, and watch the boobs, er, traffic, fly by, and get beeped by the bloody system if something interesting happens to wonder through while waiting for tea?
Many will say this is a true invasion to privacy and what is next is complete control over the traffic system. I must disagree. While I am opposed to stoplights taking pictures of light breakers and machine radar enforced areas (the ones where they send you a ticket in the mail), this is a positive direction towards making roads safer and more efficient.
Where I live, there is an incredibly busy road. The city was going to have a man monitor the roads and sit in a booth with cameras to determine which lights they should change when (for better traffic control). Some stupid liberal jumped on the issue and said "Absolutely not, it's an invasion of privacy, and Big Brother is entering our lives." And he convinced about half of the voters(the stupid ones) who were initially for it completely against the idea. The world is getting bigger, we have to try new things so our systems don't get out of control. With all the political disagreement and lack of logic the people in our politcal system have, we move in almost no direction.
-Greg
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
Just what London needs...
"Law-abiding motorists should have nothing to fear and will be pleased to see untaxed, uninsured and unregistered being caught in the act." I don't care so much about them being "caught in the act". Here's my wish. I would be most pleased if my insurance rates were to go down *IF* this system helps remove said drivers from driving.
"Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
This...
'I'm sorry to say that as a [fairly] law abiding citizen, I am pleased about this.'
... is an interesting perspective from somebody with this...
'"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up your skirt" [Oscar Wilde]'
...for their signature.
From this evidence I must assume that you are either A) Joking or B) A cop who gets off on using public surveillance to look up skirts.
this system could be abused by "cloners" as the article said, people making "fake" license plates then going down town to drive while someone else is charged the fee.
;-(
Oh well, yet another problem with automatic systems
What they should do is keep a small 10 second clip of the vehicle for court, and make it easy to come in and file a claim against the device, if the snapshot or vehicle shows THEIR vehicle, then they have to pay a court fee.
Otherwise the tax is waved, and the car in the screenshot is flagged by its make and model, and its owner arrested if it can be identified again, and file a criminal case against them.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
Not for long, the anti privacy legislation here is starting to get extremely excessive, time to look for a new country (preferably cold and with good net connection ;-)
Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
The system is implemented in .NET. Shouldn't be too difficult to change the administrator password.
Its funny because M$ is insecure!!! LOLOLOLOL! You ROOFLE OWNED SCRUB Micro$oft!!!
When it's a crime to drive on the roads, only criminals will drive?
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
will put this to good use.
Yes, you do realize you have just suggested fascism, right? If only we didn't have to deal with those stupid voters.
Maybe he meant "Bobbies"?
You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
"Math in a song is good."-Linford
From what I remember, a while ago there was a huge outcry about this camera based traffic monitoring system and this was developed in India. I think /. had articles about it before. Can anyone find the links ?
Once they know what car you're driving you have to ditch it and jack another! It'll be soooo cool! All they need to do is set up some ramps so you can dive out at top speed and launch your car at buildings and cop cars.
So a thief will add 10 seconds to his "lift-a-car-time" by spray painting the plate before driving off...
Next...
Antiquated competence won't be a job skill forever.
The next step will to have paint sprayers hidden at key motorway entrances and exits to mark cars whose plates aren't readable.
This is GREAT!
Imagine if a system were installed nationwide, which detected every crime committed the second it was comitted, and sent a ticket/issued a warrent to the criminal. Practically overnight all the stupid laws that make 95% of us criminals would have to be abolished or the system would collapse under its own weight.
Imagine if everyone would get a ticket each time they exceeded the speed limit. Limits would have to be raised to reasonable levels nationwide, or people would riot in the streets.
Perhaps a little bit of big brotherism is what we need to abolish unreasonable laws.
Ummm.. the story was posted at 3:12 and your comment went up at 3:14. That's pretty fast -- read the BBC piece, consider your thoughts, and submit a comment all in two minutes. (Well... the "consider your thoughts" portion didn't take much time, apparently.)
There are lots of ways to be a criminal driving around in a car with a perfectly good license tag without shooting someone and taking their car.
For starters: not paying your taxes, not registering your car, driving without a license, skipping bail, violating parole, a zillion different kinds of taffic violations, not paying child support, auto theft, child abuse, etc., etc.
In fact, just about any crime in which the perpetrator can be linked to a particular car, which is everyone who drives.
There's no difference between a flesh-and-blood cop running a check on your license plate and this automated system. It just maximizes the capability.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
"Big Brother" is _NOT_ OK - ever.
The city was going to have a man monitor the roads and sit in a booth with cameras to determine which lights they should change when (for better traffic control). Some stupid liberal jumped on the issue and said "Absolutely not, it's an invasion of privacy, and Big Brother is entering our lives."
Your example is deeply flawed - someone, who doesn't know the difference between surveillance and traffic monitoring, attributes one term to the other, and you now believe that because he did, that term now means something it didn't mean before.
Suppose I called giving people money "murder" - does that now mean that "murder" means giving someone money?
According to your example, it does.
And what's more, according to your own logic (a crackpot called traffic monitoring "surveillance", so therefore "surveillance" is a good thing), you now believe that "murder" should be legal. (because if "murder" wasn't legal, nobody can get paid.)
Just because one crackpot says something, doesn't mean that it's so.
It's just another tool for increasing revenue for the police forces around the country.
They day will come when every motoring offence on any major road is recorded and dealt with automatically.
Break the speed limit 4 times in one day? Ker-ching! 4x£50 to your local copshop please.
It`s yet another example of the ongoing 'automatic-insta-justice' trend.
And no, I didn`t read the article.
\\ Mitch
Now, when we want to get rid of some politician ...
we just use his license plates and do a lot
of traffic violations
KGB
Ooh, I'm imagining it..and it looks like...
LoJack!
JD
>but its not uncommon to see vehicles being >chased down for obscured plates among other >things
...but a little mud on your plates and their out full force?
That's nice to know....if you live in a black neighbourhood in TO, the police response time to a crime is between an hour and next year....
zac
It seems George Orwell is becoming to British society what Jules Verne has become to the worlds technology.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
in public? hell no....infact you have no rights at all in reguards to public viewing of yourself...some one can point a camera at you and use you in a movie that makes millions...you have zero rights to any of it.
so for the police to watch every street corner with a camera does not bother me. if they realy wanted to watch you there are better more informative ways to do it.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
At some point we have to ask ourselves how much of a control system it is safe to build. Power corrupts, and total power corrupts totally.
I dont like to play the part of a off-the-rocker libertarian, but how much information about individuals is it safe to allow the Ministry of Information Retrieval to collect?
Let us say we find it a good idea to have public places filmed and install automatic tracking of vehicles, why stop there. Let us do automatic tracking of the whereabouts of all cell-phones as well. When we get RFID tags in most stuff we buy why not track the whereabouts of peoples wallets or underwear - Just to make sure we can locate criminals fast in case we miss them. When we know where people are we also know who they meet.
Again, this is nothing that should worry law-abiding citizens.
Exactly what surveillance measures would people in general object against?
My only argument is that increased government road monitoring or surveillance can be a good thing. While we may lose minor personal rights, it is for the better of security and efficiency.
BTW, if you're in Dallas, you might know the road I'm talking about: Cooper street in Arlington.
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
I'd give up the use of my wang to bone her.
After all, once you've had that, your wang is only going to be disappointed by anything else.
I suggest a logic test before someone can have anything to do with local or federal government. =)
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
It gets better!
The provincial goverenment here has suggested automatic license suspension for people who haven't paid thier bills for driving on the 407.
That might not sound bad, except for the administrative incompotence of the company running the 407. I've gotten a bill for $0.00 before, and I know perfectly well had I not done something about it, they would have flagged me as defaulted (I paid $0.01 online through my bank, which seemed to make them happy).
There are countless horror stories about how incompotent the 407 administration is -- the fact that the province is considering making thier word law is terrifying. Perfectly expected, knowing the bunch of cronies in Queen's Park right now, but still terrifying.
Ummm.. the story was posted at 3:12 and your comment went up at 3:14. That's pretty fast -- read the BBC piece, consider your thoughts, and submit a comment all in two minutes.
He's probably a subscriber. They get to read the story early, you know. :P
It's an offense to have an obscured number plate, so the only real way round this system is to get fake plates.
Regardless of the big brother implications; If you have a "traffic monitoring" system that suddenlty becomes an unpopular police tool, you lose support for the cameras. Soon people vandalize the cameras by spray painting them, or even putting plastic bags over them. The initial purpose of the system is compromised.
Suddenly the cost of maintaining the system is a lot higher and it dies on the next cost-benefit analysis, which governments love so much.
and for all the time you took to read it your pondering didn't do you a lick of good.
;-P
I'm sorry if I think too fast for you to comprehend. It's really not my fault. Everyone seems to want me to be at least as dumb as they are. It's called the Dilbert principle.
Well I refuse. I will be both smart and fast.
And flesh and blood cops are not omnipresent and cannot run checks on every plate they see. That's a good thing imho.
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
surveillance and traffic monitoring are different. No SH*T Sherlock. I'm glad that you responded to my message to confirm that mental gap in my mind! And how the hell do those two lines say one word can stand for another word? I never once compared surveillance to traffic control. But if people are afraid of traffic monitoring, then they will be even more afraid of surveillance forms of driving security and efficient methods.
In summary, string you="illogical"; string stupidVoter="stupid liberal with inablity to make a point"; if(you=="illogical") you=stupidVoter; return you;
-Greg
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
It's don't go to England you fool!
I think a virtual world comparison that a lot of /.er's would understand is the Carnivore system... Essentially this system gives the police the same sort of ability and the same sort of potential for abuse.
In my opinion both should be stopped, finding a stolen car or an online criminal can be achieved in a case by case fashion and everybody's personal privacy shouldn't be compromised in order to do so.
What do you all think?
Visualize the world of wine
Welcome to the incredibly under-developed USA. Most of this place is like that. And it's almost sad for any country to be compared to France and lose!
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
In these modern times where owning a vehicle is (argueably) a necessity for 95% of the population (this assumption may be more skewed toward the US, I admit). Because of this, I'd claim that this is more akin to a right, rather than a priviledge (such as owning a weapon, etc.) and makes the potential for abuse of such a system very dangerous.
"We are far too easily pleased." --C.S. Lewis
Yeah that "law-abiding" quote gave me a shiver.
Your suggestion is balanced. Otherwise the increase in power is only in one direction: towards general security and away from individual freedom.
It's a trade-off between these two. Your suggestion would arguably increase both.
But I could just imagine:
1. people trying to find out famous peoples' license plates to follow them
2. police keeping a list of activists' plates so they could be rounded up before any summits
3. data mining for evidence of potential criminals
Esteem isn't a zero sum game
arse?? Isn't that a small furry animal that is often seen flattend on the road?
THERE IS NO SUCH WORD AS "PRIVILIDGE". IT'S "PRIVILEGE". thanks for coming out though. jackhole.
back to fucking your mother now.
since most cameras are sensitive to IR light, but our eyes aren't, using super-bright IR leds to illuminate the license plate might saturate the camera in that region...making the plate unreadable. i've wanted to do this for years, but my state doesn't use cameras so there is no need. LEDs mounted under a hat brim might do the same for obscuring faces for sur. cameras...
Oh, there it is.
Your sig...
:P
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your 0.02, so
Umm...have you checked the exchange rate lately? IIRC, I think your $0.02 is only worth around 0.017.
I would try to figure this out in terms of free speech, but there's that pesky divide-by-zero problem.
3000 / 60 min / 60 sec =
Personally, I think their current system, this expansion and the whole concept of congestion billing is based upon the ignorant position that the government can usurp arbitrary amounts of people's freedom and liberty for their duties. In my country (USA) the soverign are the people and the government get is rights only from the pleasure of the people. The power structure is clear. The citizenry is the ultimate power in the USA, constitutionally speaking, the government by design is the servent of the people to carry out their wishes.
This view of the world in Britian and I must admit and certain socialist parties here in the US (DNC for example) is the exact opposite, presupposing that the citizenry is ignorant and certainly in a position of inferiority to the all-knowing all-powerfull Government. BAH! They vote there, in Great Britian, just like the rest of us; they want it they can have it. As for me, I'm voting from freedom and liberity when I have the chance!
------ Michael A. Romig
THERE IS NO SUCH WORD AS PRIVILIDGE. IT'S PRIVILEGE. learn how to spell, ass-sucker.
your mother is very disappointed in you. she mentioned that whlist licking my asshole.
The kernel of the idea is that instead of individuals assuming certainties and expecting the government to deal with those certain problems, the individual is now required to assess the various risks and insure against them in some way (tangibly such as a lock on your door or not, like insurance). The proposed system goes against that trend if you accept the idea that as the system is perfected, the chance of apprehension of criminals will be quite high. This said, it is interesting to see how there is a tension between those who see justice as a black and white extension of morality and those who appreciate the wiggle room of gray zones and the risk based approach. Personally, I think that society could not have got to the point it is without black and whiteness. I also think that the black and whiteness is better.
When people complain about being watched or about stupid laws that stop them from doing something they feel is harmless entertainment, that says something about thier intentions to me. By this thinking, driving down the 401 (highway through Toronto, Canada) at 150 km/hr should be allowed and not ticketted because (a) the person is in a hurry and (b) they know how to drive well. Most people (99%) do not have the kind of reaction times required to be able to avoid accidents at this speed. People do it and get away with it. But driving at that speed will harm others. If you cannot acknowledge that, then you are a selfish idiot.
The system has the possibility of abuse. You have to find ways to safeguard against that abuse. If that is successful, then why not use it to promote public safety.
He's probably a subscriber. They get to read the story early, you know.
:-)
Actually, no. There would have been an asterisk by the username if that were the case. But that was my first thought, too.
Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
Jeremy Clarkson (UK motoring journalist) once said - Driving a car is a privilege not a right.
This is a fact often overlooked by too many drivers, in the UK there is a problem with people driving un-MOT'd (MOT is a annual inspection of any car that is more than 3years old), untaxed, and worst of all uninsured (try suing someone who can't pay). As far as these people are concerned driving a car is a God given right. Something really does need to be done to get these people off the roads, but I don't think cameras are the best solution as these people will just do something to evade detection (heck they're breaking the law already so why would they care).
Sorry, just testing ...
And flesh and blood cops are not omnipresent and cannot run checks on every plate they see. That's a good thing imho.
... why, exactly?
Uhm,
There are criminals out there. There are cops out there. If the cops could "validate" every car they see, then statistically, they would catch more criminals that they would otherwise miss. How is this a bad thing?
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Looks like China is rolling out a scaled-down version -- to catch spitters. Which country will be the first to go after nose-picking?
A couple'o thoughts:
.38 slug into the roadside camera.
There are vendors in the US that sell polarized license plate covers that are clear from a straight-on view, but obscure the plate numbers (and letters too!) from an angled view. This pretty much takes care of any road-side or overhead cameras. Use of these plate covers are often illegal or at least questionable, but infrequently cited. Y'all law-abiding folks in the northern reaches of the EU and elsewhere might not understand this, but people here in the western US occasionally drive their vehicles with no plates at all for weeks at a time -- blatantly illegal -- w/o getting cited. (But don't try this if your skin is anything but pearly white or while wearing a religious headcovering, or John Ashcroft will personally declare you an "enemy combatant" and revoke your citizenship. Welcome to America as we deconstruct it.)
Here in WA USA, there is a license plate re-issuance schedule to make sure that you have shiny new plates on the front every few years. This is purely for the benefit of the laser-speed-gun-weilding state troopers. However, a light misting from a can of white spray-paint takes care of that... Subtlety is always a good option when stealth mode is impractical.
And speaking of impractical stealth mode, I'm looking forward to advances in flexible LCD technology, so that I can put a transparent screen over my plates. Every few minutes, the 3 and 6 turn into 8's, the 5 into a 9, and an extra digit shows up in the blank space... Perhaps I can also use it to send a scrolling message to the cell-phone idiot in the 2cm-penis-compensation SUV behind me? Of course, if we're going to go for an active response instead of a passive one, I should just plug a
Driving the bike and shooting left-handed oughtta be interesting, but I don't think showing up for work with powder burns on my right sleeve and stinking of sulfur qualifies as "subtle."
Jon
I think not...(*poof*)
This isn't like a policeman following everywhere you go.
:-)
I'm sure, on rare occasion, there will be gaps in the continuous photo coverage of a foot or so. Imagine all the freedom you've got as you cross those few feet.
In any case, you KNOW the courts will gleefully hold that those few inches of privacy will be more than enough to discourage ant need for a warrent.
We told you so!
We had our weekly discharge of Orwellophobia again and again here on Slashdot. We all had our dose of anxiety of an invisible superpower of surveillance building up bit by bit and we were dismissed as paranoid eggheads in superstitial fear of losing the 1,5TB pr0n collections. Now you have your police state or at least the essential infrastructure and you can't complain since *we told you so* while you were pretending to be ignorant naive lemmings.
Now you just need ONE unlawful individual in any subsection of your law enforcement agencies and you're screwed - seriously screwed.
Now any member of these agencies can check your life with a typical response rate of several milliseconds. Any member of these agencies can get name, adress and photo of your significant other. Any of them can check every person you were visiting on public space, every destination you were driving to on public roads.
And they can match your destinations and personal meetings with the forementioned data of your beloved and happy significant other. If they don't always match, they may or may not blackmail you with intimidating proof, at their discretion. Only if you are a terrorist, of course. (Or the law enforcement agent likes your wife or your money too much, but that can't be real since agents would never do something unlawful.)
But we told you and you now all can try to tear down the new Ministry of Truth if you are brave. I don't really care. And of course none of you cheats on their partners. Only the other 80% of the US-Americans do. Statistically.
I never once compared surveillance to traffic control.
Yeah, and I never said you did.
What I did say was that you compared surveillance to traffic monitoring. Which you did.
The title of your post read Big Brother is sometimes OK Which means that you must have agreed with the guy who called traffic monitoring "Big Brother".
OH OH OH read first, THEN post.
i knew ive been doing something wrong.
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
Watching DVDs on Linux is the supervillain masterplan of the 21st century. The intended illegal primary use of DeCSS is exactly that you bumfucker.
A quote from the article:
One in 12 stops during the trial of the scheme produced an arrest and Mr Ainsworth described the results as "surprisingly good".
I am not familiar with typical police actions, but what would the rate of arrests be on a random search of vehicles? 1 in 12 does not sound very accurate to me.
I'd say something like "Thank goodness I live in the US where there are protections against unreasonable search". Unfortunately, there isn't anymore, Thanks Rummie for PATRIOT I and II - Gotta love it when we send our friends and family off to fight and die in order to protect the American Freedoms, and when they come home, those freedoms do not exist.
It's a great technology and will surely automate a lot of law enforcement processes as well as reducing costs. Nonetheless, there is an obvious potential for abuse by those who have access to the systems and some who don't.
Browse the Information Directory
Subscribers can turn that off.
Stealing other people's plates / cars isn't a problem for law-abiding citizens. *Duplicating* someone else's *is*.
This has already started to happen in other areas of the country - people clone the plates of a similar make & model, do whatever they want that's illegal - and be seen doing it on the cameras. The next day the (innocent) owner of the original vehicle has police turn up on their doorstep, or they get arrested when they drive through the cameras on their daily commute.
Of those that try to cheat the system - some will *always* succeed. The more complex the system becomes, the more likely innocents are to get hurt in the process.
Subscribers can turn that off.
Oh. I sit corrected.
Mmmmm...tasty foot...
Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
I wear a full face helmet with black visor. I guess leathers don't count as a cloak.
When I'm speeding past the cameras at 140mph, I am comforted by the knowledge that my friendly local councillor (the bastards who voted for the cameras) will be getting the tickets rather than me.
It's worth noting that plate cloning is trivial. Look for similar make/model/colour of vehicle and have a plate made. After all, the camera never lies.
In fact, if you want to really fuck the implementers of the camera systems, go see what your councillors are driving, hire same make/model/colour car and put a cloned plate on. Then visit some of the local speed cameras.
The chances of being caught are absolutely miniscule.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
This is totally phuquing real.
There's a toll-road in Orange County CA which claimed to find my truck in photo's blowing thru a toll booth.
Except I live in Ventura County, and never drive the vehicle anywhere except Home Depot and garbage dump.
I figured out how to sent the servant/slaves an email (had to read source out of their webpage, check phone directories, then email; they didn't provide anything but mailing address for fine payment), and they _seemed_ genuinely amazed that I contacted them to dispute their findings.
BUT...the important part was I went down to DMV and told them that I believed one of my vehicle plates were stolen, that someone was illegally using said plate, and DMV needed to do the right thing and cancel the plates and issue new ones.
I had copies of all the paperwork, including the freeway toll notice, ticket, etc., and whether the clerk caved in or agreed is irrelevant; the effort *had* to be made immediately.
So by the time the freeway people "reviewed" their info, I had already nipped the situation in the bud. So remaining question is whether they did a photo match against drivers license to determine that I was not the driver...
--- tp|pt engineer * bs terminator * propeller head
2 seconds and some double sided sticky tape.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Than in accidents on the roads. I suggest you check the source of your statistics.
Speed isn't even the major cause of most road accidents, but it is very easy to measure.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Here in the states, we just had a Chief of Police murder his wife! Fact is, law enforcement officials stalk there ex's all the time (I guess the controlling personalities that are prone to choose law enforcement are also prone to stalking behaviour). This means if you are a cop's ex-girlfriend in the UK, he now knows where you are at every minute of the day. Be afraid; be very afraid.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
In both categories accidents outnumbered homicides, but of course most of the car deaths were accidental (about 90%) where the deaths from firearms were only about 58% accidental unless you count drunk driving as a non-accidental homicide from a car.
So perhaps we take from this that in the good ol' US of A, owning a car (or bicycle) as a weapon may be protected by the US constitution, but of course using your car (or bicycle) may or may not be legal... ;^)
Then again all this car stuff is happening in the UK. Some folks in europe express that they're often glad that US laws don't apply there. Well, there is no constitution in the UK and can pass whatever laws they see fit and the government can do whatever they want to do :^p
OTOH, in the UK, where gun ownership is highly regulated, I'll bet homicides with the car as a weapon greatly outnumber gun homicides... and you don't have any rights to cars or guns...
Do you live in the UK? In case not, I'll inform you that there is an extensive network of speed cameras in this country, widely considered to be ludircous profit making machines for the police on many roads. However, they don't just fine you for speeding, the put 3 points on your licence. This means that, for being caught going 5mph over the limit, twice, you could get *BANNED* from driving. Still think it's reasonable for the police to be able to track anyone who 'isn't 100% legal'?
The police in this country abuse the law, are effectively the government's hitmen, and they ought to have some fucking accountability. Instead of that, they just turn the roads into more of a frightening place for the average motorist each and every day.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
As you describe yourself, the process of stealing a car would be quite a bit more complicated and risky under this system than at present. You have to get a set of non suspicious plates from somewhere, stop and switch plates somewhere, without arising suspicion, and then stop using the car before your stolen plates have been reported etc.
With any fake plates you would probably have to make sure that the number is registered to a car of similar color and model, or the system would be able to see that something was very wrong with your vehicle.
And this just deals with car theft. Any other criminal with a known car would have to take the same precautions constantly when travelling.
There is a lot of space between "nothing" and "everything". This system would not make it impossible to steal cars etc, but would make it much harder and less attractive and undoubtedly make it easier for the police to catch people they want to catch. If that is a good thing or not is an other issue alltogether...
Not to mention the fact that criminals are now car cloning, they find someone with the same car and copy the number plate and all the fines go to that person and the police does not give a damn, "it looks the same in the picture", the bbc has a article about someone who spent weeks tracking down the cloner themselves.
James
Because statistically, they would also "catch" more innocent people than they would otherwise.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
... many moons ago, had a buddy of mine who, like a lot of real young guys, wasn't all that swift with his finances yet. Comes new plate registration and insurance time for his bike, he found himself a scosh short, as in, beer pizza rent, whoops, no money for the ride that week. He's stuck, no idea, he knows he'll get nailed while he drives to work until the next paycheck. Idea! He's an amateur artist, a fair renderer. He got a set of testor's model paints and reproduced his plate with this years colors and "sticker" in the corner!
We all thought this was funny, and he swore he'd drive cool "until next week" when he got his check and got legit. YEARS later he was still doing the same thing!
note: not to be construed as advocating being irresponsible or avoiding social and economic liabilities, provided under the "fair funny old story" license
For the camera idea in general, this is just more obvious conditioining efforts for "the herd" to keep everyone all "commanded and controlled" up. Same in the US, they just go at it a little different, but basically the same. I mean, anyone REALLY think they will NEVER not use any advanced surveillance tech, if I can mangle all those negatives? MOO, MOO, no one says "boo" to them, everyone sucks it up, one step at a time. Oh well, fingerprinting, well, that's as far as it goes! oh well, dna sampling, that's as far as it goes though! and etc. One step at a time, OF COURSE they are going to keep puting cameras everywhere. and microphones and sniffing traffic and whatever they feel like, once they have the ability to do it. The implantable tracking chips are coming,too, it's definetly on the table, and most people will stand still and take those things. And after tracking, just surveillance? It will be electro-chemical emotional control, and maybe worse than that. Any and all tech that will make big bros job easier and more efficient,in their favor of course, they will do, and charge you cash for the privelege of having it done to you.
This is remotely related since it involves photos:o ry&u=/ap/ 20030530/ap_on_en_mu/people_barbra_streisand_2B arbra Streisand Sues Aerial Photographer"
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=st
"
I remember the coastal photo database referenced here on Slashdot earlier this year; Does anyone know what Streisand residence is involved, and if the photos of it are still online? Just wondering.
Since this system suposedly greatly increases the likelihood of a stop targeting an actual felon, I wonder if the cops will be more likely to approach with guns drawn, thus increasing the chances of a shooting of an innocent motorist.
I'm glad you brought up the point about breathing public air. This is indeed a major problem, one for which I'm sure you will agree that I have discovered a most ingenious and perfect solution.
Much like the airwaves, which also technically belong to the entire populous, the atmosphere is a precious resource we could ill afford to do without. However, it is being wasted and abused on a scale that isn't even possible to measure. Second-hand smoke, industrial polution, farting, and air larceny are rife in our modern world. Perhaps in the past, the most efficient model of oxygen distribution was indeed, a "first come, first serve" style where everyone was responsible for breathing their own air, and that was it. But today, we need something more.
On that note, I'd like to state the incredible number of benefits that would result from privatizing the atmosphere, just as we have done with the airwaves. Following much the policy as that for the rf spectrum, we would allow major corporations and others to license out portions of the atmosphere for substantial fees... fees large enough to make a significant budgetary impact. Who could turn up their nose at that, in these days of economic uncertainty? Think tens of billions of dollars, folks. Money that can be spent propping up our important federal pork barrel projects, like the $230 million dollar Georgia State Museum of Peanut Technology. But back to my main point... these licensees of the atmosphere would then have a stake in our precious air supply, and as a result of that would manage if carefully, something our corporations have honed to a veritable science. Likely they would design some sort of air tax, so that we only payed for what we used. Smokers and the flatulent would be forced to reimburse society for the air that they waste. No longer would freeloaders run around hyperventilating just to take more than their fair share... or if they did, they'd certainly be paying when the monthly air bill came in the mail.
We would be creating thousands of jobs too, air auditors and assessors, management and enforcement positions. The possibilities are endless, an entire sector of industry being born out of a single, ahead-of-its-time concept. It could possibly kickstart us out of this economic funk we've been suffering through.
I maybe on the wrong track but what time zone is slashdot working on?
1 mile = 1.6 km. You were multiplying with 0.8 it seems.
I live in the UK and I don't see that speed cameras are a profit machine for the police.
The only way that the police gets any money is to sign up to the latest home office scheme and that has strict rules about placement and visibilty of cameras.
If you still get caught speeding then stop blaming other people and pay your fines.
How are the police the goverments hitmen? You are a fucking idiot and a waste of good skin.
I lived in the UK for a few years in the mid-90's. Cameras are also used in many locations here in the U.S.
It's one thing to question the penalties handed out for a criminal violation, but that's not the point here. If someone is breaking the law, then they risk getting caught and punished. Using a camera on a highway is fundamentally equivalent to posting a live cop in the same spot. To argue otherwise is to argue that people have a right to get away with their crimes.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I am sure glad I don't live in the USA....this wouldn't happen where I live. We have rights were I live. I think george bush sucks and.....
Oh wait.
I was interviewed a few months ago by a local newspaper (this is in the USA) for a story about cameras placed at toll booths that would take a picture of the plates of people who didn't pay the tolls. He wanted my take on whether this violated privacy rights. I had a hard time not laughing---with the Patriot Act and TIA to talk about, he was worried about cameras at toll booths? I couldn't see how there was any reasonable expectation of privacy. But if you have a camera on every block, and if they keep a record of every car that goes past, that is different. Maybe we need to distinguish between observing and recording information. If I drive down the street, I cannot reasonably expect that my plate will be unobserved. But I can reasonably expect that it will not be recorded, unless there is a particular reason to do so (i.e., I am a criminal on the loose, the car has been reported stolen, etc.).
This post is dedicated to all of those
On a serious note, how many people (include yourself as a statistic for the sake of arguement) should be allowed to be harrassed, stalked, or just plain old given the run around, all in the name of better law enforcement. It comes to a point to where the question is, are you going to get what you ask for by hoping to put altruistic people in charge of something, and hope there is no abuse, It is a question of giving up personal responsibility and freedom for a modicum of comfort. At some point you have to draw the line, the problem is people as a whole will sleep at the wheel during these crucial moments. Next week in slashdot, the Iloo will feature a camera inside so as to track criminals (hey it's public space). next year we roll out the through your window cams, with a side order of you must leave your windows open or go to jail. Is society that bad to where we need big brother to keep us safe.......... People are people wherever you go. Sometimes we forget the ones in charge are just like the ones in jail.
I even saw a piece in one of the more respectable UK papers that described another technology currently in development that allows them to use shortwave EM from mobile phone masts to "X-Ray" buildings - allowing them to monitor your activities inside your own home or office, with the resulting computer generated images being automatically transmitted to a remote receiving station at some arbitrary location. These can be forwarded over the internet or whatever in real time to whoever has authority to see them.
So very soon it will be entirely possible for the authorities to know cheaply and routinely exactly where you are all the time and precisely what you are doing. Without even getting out of their seats, for God's sake!
Judging by the number of urban surveillance and traffic cameras about, we're not really all that far away from that situation right now, as it happens.
Just think for a moment, people: this may all seem reasonable to you now, but are any of you old enough to remember reading George Orwell's "1984" and shuddering with horror at the very idea of living in such a world? I can tell you that the police state we are now heading for would have been completely unthinkable as recently as 1975. After all, wasn't that precisely why the people of Britain fought the second world war and endured the tension of the cold war - to prevent enslavement by a totalitarian regime? Wasn't it? Well it seems to have all been a waste of time because that is exactly what we are headed for now.
The public are being very naive if they think that these surveillance capabilities will only ever be used principally to catch those we people we currently think of as criminals. History has shown time and time again how governments don't often relinquish powers which suppress dissent and maintain their own hegemony, instead they use them to squash opposition while they continue to increase those powers. And "criminals" includes whatever people the law says. In such totalitarian regimes, "criminals" can mean protesters and dissidents of all kinds - like authors, journalists, even people who just said the wrong thing in public - ordinary people like you and me, law-abiding as we understand the term now.
Once ubiquitious surveillance has been a commonplace for a few years and we are all used to it being used to track lawbreakers, it won't seem such a shock when the odd government department is occasionally caught using it for their own nefarious purposes. Just as governments at both ends of the political spectrum have already been caught time and time again using any and all available surveillance technologies to defeat their political opponents.
If current public apathy is any guide, a few years down the road after that such incidents will be off the front page (if they make the news at all) and won't even cause raised eyebrows.
By that point, if not well before, organized public opposition to any government policy will have become practically impossible as the authorities will always know in advance exactly what you are planning and will put a stop to it before it happens. In fact that's already similar to what happened at this year's (and last year's) UK May Day celebrations.
As for the justification that it will make it easier to catch criminals - let me remind you of the incisive words of Benjamin Franklin (often quoted around here and even more often misquoted):
Unfortunately, the roadside cameras recorded your license plate #s. Do you think nobody in the government would want to have that info? How much would you be willing to pay to not have your wife find out about the motel? Ever heard of America's J. Edgar Hoover?
Now, while this is EXTREMELY unlikely....because the car makers of the world would sic their collective wealth against any such endeavor but seriously.....this is getting too close for comfort.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
I saw the lights go off when I was breaking the speed limit between Reading and Oxford on the A-423.
I continued to break the law, and see the flashbulbs, for the two weeks I spent in the Home Counties.
I'll be back after the warrants run. Thanks for all the beer.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
When laws are broken, the punishment is established as an equilibrium between the chances of getting caught and the payment (incarceration, fine, etc.) Hypothetical example: running a red light results in a $40 fine, if you get caught every time you do it. If there is a 10% chance of getting caught, the fine will be $400. Of course, for the most part, these amounts are determined over time by market forces.
Placing everyone under constant surveillance and keeing the current retribution structure in place results in a loss of equilibrium, and in unfair punishment.
How many "innocent" people are out there, driving around, with some type of offense on their plates that they didn't deserve?
If you are driving with an expired registration, suspended license, arrest warrant, or stolen tags, then you are not "innocent."
So I repeat: how would this lead to them catching "innocent" people? What type of "innocent" people would come up in their computer as having some type of offense on their license plate?
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Speeding tickets really are just a "road tax."
And getting run over by a speeding driver is just a penalty for not having a car?
Yeah, right.
Speeding is dangerous. Excessive speeding, especially when combined with intoxication, kills just as many Americans every month as the September 11th attacks.
What they really should be looking for is unsafe drivers. It would be nice if a combination of technology and new police priorities could push people to drive more safely.
Speeding drivers are unsafe drivers. Stopping them speeding is prevention. What would you do; let everyone speed around like maniacs until they've caused a major crash or killed somebody?
Get real.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
This will only help money-grubbing companies, private eyes, repo ops, and governments/police.
.
Lesser thieves will have the gizmos they need to continue operating. Just like they have jimmys and keysets and hackboxes today.
Everyone else will probably then have access to your position and, probably, satellite or wireless control of your car.
From the company that sold it to you, to the final salesman; plus the financial ladder behind the loans and insurances involved, not to mention state/federal licensing, emissions and safety, police and detectives of all sorts, and, probably, your ex-
Just like they can already track your credit.
How long before some spammer mutations get hold of this info to do something "Minority Report"-ish ?
Or great opportunities for enterprising car-pool quick rental schemes.
:)
Want to go somewhere "special" without tipping off the world ? Why, just rent / swap / borrow one of our "amnesiac" cars for a few hours. The Ronald Reagan ani9matronic mask is free for the ride.
Yes, I actually read 1984. The parallels usually being made to this book are about how a central authority is always watching you.
It's going too far putting so many cameras in 'public' places. Once they have cameras everywhere in public, the only place left will be inside the homes. It would be very simple to extend the vast infrastructure they set up for public monitoring into private dwellings of citizens.
In 1984 the book, I don't remember there being any cars.
Doesn't work here. Authorities are miffed that locals (with internet and money) can buy spray that leaves plates human-readable but camera-unreadable.
One jerk in his fancy imported sportscar zoomed past the same camera over fifty times in three months, at something like 170mph. On the fourth month, the cops finally caught him, the old fashioned way.
It would be much simpler for them to simply click on a photo and have the system automatically send a towtruck to his present location, a fine to his house, a memo to his insurance co, and a rap inquiry to central. And whatever other idiocy they dream up.
Let me rephrase your post..
If you are driving in an affluent suburb with dark coloured skin, then you are *not* "innocent".
Police officers are not objective individuals who only pull people over for actual offenses. They also pull over blacks, hispanics, for driving while not white amongst other things.
So you're telling me that this isn't going to be abused?
Black and grey are both shades of white.
That's right ! Me too !
Kang shall not win the election !
I bet *no one* will go after urinators. Pissing in the open seems to have become a world fad, these last few years.
If only they had let Tesla install his ground wave "wireless". That would be a shock, the world over.
fact is, i have nothing to hide, so i don`t mind being tracked, if my car is stolen, i want my car back and the theif caught.
you cannot argue instances where it may not work, cos thats like saying "well lets not use it, because 1% of the time it isn`t going to work".
as long as the technology can do it effectively, lets do it.
WTF is a sig?
We have lots of roundabouts, too, of course. You get used to them quickly enough; they can be more efficient than traffic lights (shorter waits), though if traffic is biased in certain directions, they can be rather unfair.
It's interesting driving in a different country; you notice things about your own country's roads that you've always taken for granted. When I drove in the US, for example, I found the four-way stops a little unnerving. Ditto the ability to turn right on a red light, which seemed rather dangerous. And ditto the ability to overtake on either side. OTOH, outside of the big cities, the traffic density seemed to be a lot lower, which helped, so these differences weren't as potentially dangerous as I'd assumed. I also noticed that there they camber the roads properly around slopes; here they're almost always flat.
But in general, driving there was simpler. Junctions are regularly spaced and fairly far apart, and most are relatively simple. The only real trouble I can remember was getting on and off freeways... Whereas here, we have roads that curve in all directions, with all sorts of odd intersections and (in town centres) infuriating one-way systems, and drivers who are usually impatient.
Oh, and cars that you can walk all the way around without stopping for a break...
BTW, speed cameras here are becoming more and more, erm, well, `popular' is hardly the right word, let's just say common. Last night we counted five of them along one particular 2-mile stretch of road; two are new in the last week or so. Not to mention two more cameras to catch cars crossing red lights, in the same stretch. [fx: sigh]
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
If you look at the most ticketed city in the world - Edmonton, Alberta, Canada - there are over 200,000 speeding tickets written per year. This is certainly not normal, and it certainly didn't start out this way. This is also a city that, incidentally, has the highest number of traffic lights in North America.
The intention of photo radar was to create traffic safety, but it has done nothing of the sort. Traffic violation seem to keep going up and up, as this webpage will tell you so is the revenue, from $3.5M in 1995 to $14M in 2001. What's worse, photo radar violations don't stop the driver from speeding, nor are the fines used for driver reeducation. They go straight back to the Edmonton Police where they are used to attempt to buy $4M dog kennels and retirement getaways for retired cops in Arizona.
Red light cameras were then installed with the intention of preventing accidents and catching offenders who would race through red lights. There are at least 37 red light camera today locations in a city of 620,000 people. Now the police have floated the idea of using them not only for red light cameras, but for enforcement of speed at all times.
Some of you are going to say "well don't break the law and you won't get caught" but that's not the problem. The problem is that the government and police have alterior motives. Its mandate under normal circumstances should be to serve its citizens, but who is being served when drivers can continue to act at that moment and not find out until weeks later that they violated the law?
One could extrapolate this scenario to monitoring of citizens using a large database. Maybe they'll start photographing from the front and see who's driving the car. Maybe insurance companies would like to raise someone's rates for lending their car to a friend. You know that corporations could eventually get their dirty paws on this information, with some "anonymous filtering" ruse. Maybe some racial profiling? Send cops into areas in real time when a [insert ethnicity here] goes into a [insert other ethnicity here] neighborhood?
Nobody needs this. Not in the UK and certainly not in Edmonton. The balance of its capability does not serve legitimate interests. If you don't fight against it, you are accepting it at face value.
When the service got launched in London, they did quite a big PR activity in the Indian press talking about it..
I wonder if they are also involved in the latest work
One simple way around this is to buy a second hand car but don't send off the details to the DVLA (Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency).
Of course this means the poor sod you bought the car from might have a tough time....
Dave
In other parts of the EU, such as Germany, the insurance company and the vehicle licensing authority communicate. If you have a taxed car, it is impossible to have it without minimum insurance. In the UK, AFAIK, you only need an insurance certificate to show when you renew the road tax, and it need not be for the entire period. This is often abused. The police can easily check that a car is road taxed, but without a real police check where all papers must be produced, it is impossible to see if the vehicle was insured.
Cameras are sometimes useful, but in the end having a police force that can stop cars to check the papers is even better.
I wonder if you can beat those cameras like you would a normal speed camera. :)
At about 170 mph regular speed cameras cant track you and dont go off. I can just imagine a 3am GMT cross central-london race meet just to see if they can beat the congestion charge
Extended Warranty? How can I lose!
according to the article the system only works above 10 mph, so that means its gonna be totally useless in any major city at rush hour, but I guess any other time you can spot the theievs, their the ones doing 10mph on the motorway :)
Yes, well, sounds perfectly reasonable and logical... so why am I feeling glad this has not been proposed in my country (yet)?
I mean, as opposed to most people of the American persuasion (or so it would seem), I do not believe that the authorities are out to fsck and enslave me all the time. Even so, this system definitely sounds creepy and a bit over the top. I think it just rings too much of "1984".
I'm already uncomfortable with the automatic speed cameras (which we do have here) and their potential for abuse. Couple them together with monitoring cameras on toll booths, anti-crime cameras in the centre of cities, surveillance cameras in parking garages and on other private property like petrol stations and we are already far too close to the glum predictions of that fine work of fiction.
The problem, however, isn't that the authorities are proposing new measures like this all the time. After all, if you are a policeman and your job is to catch criminals, then it follows that you want the best possible tools to carry out your job. Whether or not you are an honest policeman doesn't really come in to it, you want to be able to do your job properly and without one arm tied behind your back. Especially if you have a sinking feeling of fighting a losing battle against crime...
No the problem is that most people don't care, don't want to know and can't be bothered to find out. Those who do in fact care, tend to care passionately. On the one hand you have those of us who are worried about the potential for abuse and the implications for our privacy. On the other hand you have the sort of people who live behind tall walls in the suburbs and who have a panic attack every time their kids go outside. The latter group are a lot more vocal than the former, and will have their perceived sense of safety no matter what the cost and who ends up paying it.
And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
Hell my nose is nearly always Congested!!
in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that
Francis Smit
Pretty interesting, I don't think this would fly at all in the states.
a) There isn't anywhere in London you could get up to 170 mph...
b) The congestion charge doesn't apply between 6:30pm and 7:00am
And as a foreigner I am glad the UK police enforces the laws.
From the country I come from the slippery slope began like that ( oh, it is just 5 Km over the limit, it is midnight , nobody will notice). Little by little more and more people found more excuses, last time I was home the red lights seem to be mere indicators of how dangerous the traffic is in that moment, but many don't stop anymore.
Limits are limits, if you are 1 mile over it you are breaking the law and you should be punished, end of the history.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
We only hear about stupid cases like sending speeding fines to an 18 mph mechanical horse and a toddler (although only the toddler actually ended up in court).
However, the information they gather might help detect these mistakes, if the same number plate is spotted in two different places.
I was stationed in englend a few years ago and thought it was strange that for 5 quid you could go and have a plate made with anything on it you wanted.
In the US Stamped ALUMINUM (say it the right way) plates given buy the DMV/MOV are a little harder to fake.
Science is the Real TRUTH!