Slashdot Mirror


Traffic Light Switcher Makes Critics See Red

An anonymous reader writes "According to a Yahoo/Washington Post article: 'It sounds like a suffering commuter's dream come true: a dashboard device that changes red traffic lights to green at the touch of a button. Police, fire and rescue vehicles have had access to such equipment for years, but now the devices are becoming available to ordinary motorists thanks to advances in technology and a little help from the Internet. Safety advocates are outraged, and news accounts in Michigan last week led to politicians there seeking a ban on the gadgets'." Update: 11/06 02:25 GMT by S : A previous Slashdot story mentions the device, though not the Michigan legislature's subsequent ire.

40 of 600 comments (clear)

  1. I Wish... by robbyjo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gee... I wish I had a similar device for "See it early" Slashdot post... ;P

    --

    --
    Error 500: Internal sig error
  2. Can someone tell me... by NewWaveNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    why these were legal for non-emergency sale in the first place?

    1. Re:Can someone tell me... by pixel.jonah · · Score: 4, Informative

      FCC controls RF, nobody controls light (IR)

    2. Re:Can someone tell me... by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because things are legal in the US until they're made illegal, instead of the other way around.

    3. Re:Can someone tell me... by donscarletti · · Score: 4, Funny
      Some time ago, just after the dicovery of X-rays in the late nineteenth century, X-ray goggles were banned by congress after intensive lobbying by public decency activists due to conserns of them being used to see through women's clothing.

      X-ray googles have however never been created, and their usage to see through clothing to see naked skin is utturly rediculous, yet they are still illegal. I don't know if this law is still valid, however I doubt if it has been overturned. This is an example however of a technology that never was legal.

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    4. Re:Can someone tell me... by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      and their usage to see through clothing to see naked skin is utturly rediculous

      You've obviously never seen This site or ones like it dedicated to the Sony camcorders with Nightshot and their ability to see through thin clothing. Of course it uses near infrared instead of xrays but the same principal.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  3. If you want one by Anubis333 · · Score: 4, Informative

    They are on sale here

  4. Democratic intersections? by smonner · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Can you imagine the nightmare our roads would be if everybody had one?"

    Couldn't the opposite be true? Maybe the light would stay green longer for whichever side had more traffic? Ideally it could create "democratic" intersections and reduce the amount of time you spend stopped with no traffic going the other way. I'm sure it wouldn't actually work, but wouldn't it be cool if it did?

    1. Re:Democratic intersections? by seinman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Some lights have video cameras on them for this very purpose. They're programmed to tell how far back the cars are lined up based on the contrast between a car and the road. They have the added benefit of catching those who run red lights.

    2. Re:Democratic intersections? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's funny is this is the exact same problem time-slice managers on OS'es have. Either let one side stay for an extraordinate amount of time and take few hits on switching, or give little slices which takes a big hit on swapping?

      The best roads made are ones done by expert traffic engineers.. In the city I live near, there's 9 stop lights in a 3 lane (one way) road. The posted speed is 25MPH. However, if you go 22.5MPH, every one of them will be green,. Usualy there's an idiot or 2 that burns rubber out of one intersection, while I barely cruise up. By the time I hit the next stoplight, it's already changed.

      --
    3. Re:Democratic intersections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Good concept, except these things instantly turn the light green for you and red for the other direction. There's no voting system, and what if someone has a juiced up repeater going off... better yet wouldn't it be great to just sit on the side of the road near an intersection and f*ck sh*t up?

    4. Re:Democratic intersections? by digitalsushi · · Score: 4, Funny

      i do something like that in really congested traffic. like, 15 mph on the interstate. i'll go 14. i'll end up with 500 feet clear in front of me, and people in the left lane will splash back into the buffer in front of me. i never hit the breaks once. it takes about 8 seconds to cover the buffer space to catch up, and sure enough the person behind me is always absolutely livid that i decided to let a space build up. and most of the time, they cut the person off to the left of me, cut close to me, flip me off in the mirror, peel out, and dart ahead. oy ve

      --
      slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  5. Re:I want one! by rtaylor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Funny thing, it'll only actually work for the first 100 people. After that, traffic will be substantially slower due to the lights being out of sync that it'll be slower for everyone.

    Kinda like sitting in the middle of an intersection on a red. Sure, you were 20 feet ahead of those behind you but the only reason you're stuck in the intersection is the guy 3 blocks up blocking your route.

    It's tough, but if everyone cleaned up their driving habits, everyone would be home 5 or 10 minutes earlier rather than just the poor drivers getting home 2 to 3 minutes earlier.

    --
    Rod Taylor
  6. Re:Is this a dupe? by NewWaveNet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You may note that this story is a follow up about how legislatures are pissed. But then again, you may note that you didn't read the story before commenting.

  7. flash demo by glassesmonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MIRT, 3M Opticom(R), and Tomar Strobecom(R) traffic signal preemption are optically-based communications systems and the main brands of these systems.

    Clearly this is illegal (or soon will be) and stupid waste of the public's time and money to refit this lights to stop this silly company. FAC of America located out of Minn. runs websites such as TheMIRT and Guns'N Stuff The are allowing people to be resellers for $300/unit.

    There is a flash "demo" of the MIRT in action here

  8. Solution is to have every car installed.... by eggsurplus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have every vehicle installed with a device that interacts with a Traffic control light so that it would act like a load balancer. If no one else is by the light then a vehicle would get through without having to stop. Otherwise the light would see how many requests it is getting and let the appropriate group go.

  9. dont some use strobe detectors? by jeffy124 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    i was told by a traffic engineering friend of mine that there are detectors out there that look for the strobe lights that apart of a emergency vehicle's blinkinlights, and change the light colors accordingly. I would assume that normal headlights are distinguishable from emergency lights (otherwise the detectors would be useless).

    Are these the same detectors discussed in the article?

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    1. Re:dont some use strobe detectors? by forevermore · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I was going to comment on this, too; but more along the lines of "changing lights isn't NEW". In the '90's, it was common to see strobe detectors attached to traffic light poles all over the place, but as I understand it, so many civilians purchased devices that would hit the proper strobe frequencies that that the cities had to abandon use of the devices. Sometimes similar technology is used, but instead of turning the lights green, it sets ALL lights in the intersection to red, and emergency vehicles just drive on the wrong side of the road (this has safety concerns, and doesn't seem to be practiced very often).

      Honestly, with the availability of technologies like bluetooth and other encrypted wireless technologies, it shouldn't be hard to just encode a daily/weekly-changing code into the signals and give it out to emergency vehicles as needed.

      That, and teaching drivers how to behave around those flashing lights (ie. pull over to the RIGHT if you are in the US - I've seen too many people on the freeway pull left, only to block an ambulance that was trying to get around traffic by driving on the shoulder).

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
    2. Re:dont some use strobe detectors? by jeff_d_schneider · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Amen!

      I'm actually sitting at the fire station tonight pulling a duty shift for the volunteer squad.

      You have NO idea how much it would save in time and safety concerns if everyone would pull to the RIGHT (in the US). G

      lad to know there's at least one person out there who gets it!

    3. Re:dont some use strobe detectors? by stienman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      These detectors do several things:

      Look for extremely intense and brief flashes in the IR region at a specific frequency (or more than one frequency.

      Strobe lights emit very intense, very brief flashes of light which are loaded with IR. Their controllers flash them at the correct frequency.

      The detectors also take into account reflections and other problems which might cause the detector to misread a signal.

      The reason why this was never really a problem before is that strobe lights are illegal on cars - it turn them into emergency response vehicles, and is against the regulations that concern lights on cars. Further, they are very visible, and can be caught relatively easily. An IR filter over the strobe would reduce this problem, but it would be absorbing so much energy it would get too hot to handle (solvable problem). Lastly the detectors require a very exact frequency, which requires more than a generic radioshack strobe controller. - suffice to say they were not easy for an average joe to build and use.

      With the relatively recent advent of high power, cheap IR LEDs this is now possible for the average joe. The LEDs are still fairly expensive for the power required, but certianly not out of reach. The companies selling these things are making a huge bundle of money, though. $300 for probably less than $20 worth of parts and labor.

      It's an issue that will likely take a technological and hands-on solution. Many installed detectors are already capable of being used with more complex transmitters, they just haven't enabled that feature. Probably can't even find the manual.

      -Adam

  10. Bad, bad bad! by roninmagus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These devices could be contrasted with radar/laser detectors.

    I think the radar/laser detectors are fine, but the devices which allow people to actually change the system should not be allowed.

    Radar/Laser detectors serve a good purpose. Yes, they allow people to "undermine" the law by getting around traffic tickets (if you're alert,) but they also slow down traffic when an officer is nearby. The people with the radar detectors slow down when an officer is running radar nearby, and therefore drive safer because they don't want a ticket.

    However, devices like the ones coming now actually affect the system rather than circumvent it. My having a radar detector does not affecy anyone but me. But one that allows me to change traffic lights in my favor affects the other people on the road!

    This is all IMHO.

  11. Don't FIX the vulnerability - just BAN exploits! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This kind of security thinking is akin to hiding your head in the sand. FIX THE PROBLEM! Don't legislate bans on exploits. DESIGN SUCH THINGS SECURELY IN THE FIRST PLACE! It wouldn't be that hard to have developed it with a cryptographically secure access code system in the first place. Sheesh!

  12. I know it's a dup but... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll speak on this again.

    While these politicians are at it, why not mandate fuel governors for all cars to prevent them from speeding?

    Why not mandate RFID for everyone so that the police can tell where you are when you're a suspect in a crime?

    I can understand making people responsible for using such a device, but banning them won't do any more good than those states that banned radar detectors.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:I know it's a dup but... by MrPerfekt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Quite simply this unauthenticated method of changing something so vital to our daily life is idiotic. Beyond that, companies that make this device and market it them to the average consumer as a "Hey, take advantage of the system" product should have the FBI on their door.

      It all comes down to morals and concious. This is not some debacle about copyright, this is about abusing something that actually serves a good purpose for everyone (when have you heard someone complain about the purpose, the purpose not the actual function, of the stop light?). It's bizarre that some people could use this and actually feel good about it.

      --
      I just wasted your mod points! HA!
  13. I'm all for hackin', but... by mooface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...this is probably the first time I've thought to myself: why don't people just leave this alone? It's really a public safety issue, and there is no real reason anyone outside of police, fire, etc have to have this device.

    It's not amusing. It's just wrong.

    1. Re:I'm all for hackin', but... by X_Bones · · Score: 3, Funny

      So what if something is wrong, and is in direct conflict with the interests of the public? Why should that get in the way of good, honest people like these folks trying to make a living? I really see no problem with this at all.

      (This post brought to you by the RIAA, the MPAA, Enron, and your friendly neighborhood cable TV monopoly.)

  14. Re:Simple solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Who would want a device that turns lights at an intersection all red?"

    Try the millions of teens who watch 'Jackass' all day.

  15. Phrack did it first by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Before I ever read it on slashdot, my friends and I were hacking traffic lights thanks to phrack. It used to take me 25 minutes to get to work, but now it only takes 15 :P

    It also tells you how to get into the main traffic light control system, though you have to go through a bunch of backdoors into a VAX system. Imagine if Al-Qaeda managed to do that, though...

    http://www.phrack.org/phrack/60/p60-0x0e.txt

  16. Sorry, but this is BS by C.+Alan · · Score: 5, Interesting


    As the article states, most cities and counties use the Opticon system by 3M. This system has two components, an encoded flash reciever, and a radio reciever. In order to pre-empt the light, you had to have a valid encoded flasher, and the encoded radio signal. There is no nation-wide standard for the pre-emting devices, so each locality sets up its own code. Good luck trying to us one of these black boxes to trip signals, it won't work 99.99% of the time.

    I worked on the traffic signal system in a central california town, and we had 3 different codes: 1 for fire/police, 1 for ambulances, and one for maintenance work. Each time a signal was pre-empted, it was logged at the signal control center downtown. I worked with a guy who had a maintenance encoded flasher on his truck. It was kinda fun cruising through town, never hitting a green, but we didn't do it very often.

    I think the black boxes they are selling are just for people dumb enough to think they work.

  17. Re:I want one! by RackinFrackin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's tough, but if everyone cleaned up their driving habits, everyone would be home 5 or 10 minutes earlier rather than just the poor drivers getting home 2 to 3 minutes earlier.

    \begin{game theoretic rambling}
    This is a classic example of prisoner's dilemma, where individual welfare is pitted against the common good. Either way, a driver is better off if he acts greedily: If most drivers cooperate with each other, then the greedy driver takes advantage and gets home before the cooperating drivers. If almost nobody cooperates, then one must be a greedy driver, or be taken advantage of.

    The big question here is what should a driver do to make commuting the least painful, and there's no simple answer. There are many possible strategies:

    1. Always be greedy -- that way you're never the sucker.

    2. Never be greedy (Golden Rule) -- that way you're looking out for the common good, and if most other people do the same, then the relatively few greedy jerks out there won't cause too much trouble.

    3. Only be greedy in retaliation to another's greed (tit for tat) -- can work well, but can lead to feuds of reciprocal retaliation between two parties.

    What will work best? Who knows? Many studies have been done on this with two-player games, with tit-for-tat being the clear winner. Traffic, of course is a multiplayer game, so who knows? My guess is that it would depend on the current traffic conditions -- if you're driving with a bunch of jerks, you have to be a bit greedy, otherwise, go with strategy (2).
    \end{game theoretic rambling}

  18. Re:Unique Emergency vehicle flashing pattern by tz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, other emergency vehicles can or should be able to go through red lights. Motorists might not cooperate though since if they see all-red they may treat it as a 4-way stop.

    They could however instead flash red and yellow alternately and quickly so that it would mean EXACTLY and ONLY that an emergency vehicle is approaching and ALL ways need to stop to give it right of way.

    Gridlock isn't dependent on the traffic lights (remembering various stories about New York where the fire engines were in the middle of a block and it would take 30 minutes to go just over a mile.

  19. Thats rediculous by tgd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just because you can do something doesn't make it right or legal.

    If the government tells you you can't use one of those, its real simple, don't use them. Use it and suffer the penalty!

    Why the hell should the taxpayers shoulder the massive costs of building a device like that which would be completely immune to misuse? Does it add $1000 per? $10000 per? How much per emergency vehicle? In a town of ten or twenty thousand people with, say, 30 lights, you want the town to give up a teacher or ten because you've got some high and mighty belief that if people CAN do something they SHOULD?

    Thats not Score:4 Insightful, it should be Score:0 Retarded.

  20. Re:300$ ?!?!? by EverDense · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dude, when are you in that big a hurry and NOT on the way to a fire already?

    When I'm GETTING AWAY from a fire!

    --
    http://jesus.everdense.com/
  21. Already done. by s20451 · · Score: 4, Informative

    They already do that. They're called proximity detectors, and they determine when cars are sitting on top of them. They work based on induction.

    Sometimes you can see where they were embedded in the road, especially if the light was retrofitted. Look for a patched-over hole in the pavement directly underneath where the first car would pull up at a stop light.

    That is why some lights only change when your car is sitting there. For additional fun, you might be caught behind some dingus who, for some reason, stopped too far back to trigger the sensor. You're going to be there a while.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
  22. Nationwide usage/distribution ban by Chemical · · Score: 3, Informative
    This AP Story talks about how Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, wants to make distribution and use punishable by up to a year in jail and a $10,000 fine. This has quickly gone far beyond Michagin

    These things are no joke and I hope this bill gets through.

  23. This reminds me of a plan... by Infonaut · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I came up with when I last lived in a major city. The fire department could raise money through an unconventional source, action-hungry paintball players could have a lot of fun, and dangerous drivers would receive the attention they richly deserve.

    It goes like this:

    1) Fire department installs special racks atop their fire engines. Fire department allows qualified paintball players who pay a fee (say, $100/mo. for unlimited rides) to ride along in these racks.

    2) As the engines go zooming through the city, a bottleneck appears. It seems some assmunch of a driver is refusing to get out of the way for fear of losing his precious spot in the mad dash to get to the freeway.

    3) Traffic Decency Guardians (aka TDGs) unleash a hail of accurate paintball fire at the offending motorist. The paintballs are colored bright purple, or perhaps a mixture of purple and orange. They are not water-soluble. They do mark said motorist as a complete assmunch, so other motorists are sure to treat the offender accordingly.

    4) Violations of right-of-way rules plummet. Paintballers everywhere compete for selection as TDGs. The fire department finally has enough money to get that extra ladder they've always needed. Everyone wins.

    Except the guy with purple paint all over his car. ;-)

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  24. The real problem by OverkillTASF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All this talk about the cities being at fault for not designing a system that wasn't so easily "hacked"... You know what? That's not the problem. The problem is all the fucktards running around who have no regard for anyone else. The government gets to try to keep the rest of us happy due to a few idiots' actions, and it costs US money. I'm sick and tired of my tax dollars going toward the next mundane project because some script kiddies got together in daddy's garage and dedicated 2 days of their lives to perfecting a work around to the city traffic system. How the hell can you blame the cities? It's not exactly cheap to make something impenatrable to every kind of attack. There's definitely a steep curve to that, in fact. The PROBLEM is the people that buy the things, the people that manufacture the things, and every one of you 12 year old "M$ suX! Linux is t3h be57! D0wn w17h 7He gR33dY C0rP0ra7ion5!!!" fucktards who are so obsessed with the idea of anarchy and having a right to break anything that is breakable. Get a life. Grow up. And don't mess with my damn stoplights. I'm sick of paying for workarounds for your pointless and inconsiderate tampering. Get a job.

  25. Easier solution by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Easier solution -- with no technology.

    I can turn red traffic lights green just by staring at them. The time required varies a bit from light to light, but eventually they all bend to my whim and turn from red to green.

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  26. Interesting by cubicledrone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The answer to traffic is telecommuting. Immense tax breaks should be given to businesses that allow their employees to telecommute at least three days a week. There is no reason for a room full of cubicles when those people could be working from home or somewhere else so they aren't all on the freeway at 7:30AM and 5:30PM.

    Naturally, middle-management, in their rush to control everything and to expect their highly qualified and exhaustively interviewed employees to become irresponsible morons the moment they have left the room, will claim telecommuting cannot ever be approved and go on to schedule another meeting.

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
  27. Overview by upt1me · · Score: 4, Informative

    Explanation of Traffic Signal Preemption (Stoplight Changing)

    The normal operation of any traffic signal controlled intersection is designed for the maximum and efficient throughput of vehicular traffic.

    Unfortunately, a common occurrence at any intersection is traffic back-up, which can require many signaling cycles to clear. Without the ability to change the operation of the traffic signals themselves, police and emergency response vehicles can also be forced to sit in traffic, thus dramatically increasing their response times to crime scenes and fire or medical emergencies.

    Furthermore, even without heavy traffic, a police or emergency response vehicle entering a traffic signal controlled intersection at a high rate of speed places all motorists (and sometimes pedestrians) at extreme risk.

    The MIRT is an optical communications system that allows equipped vehicles to alter the normal operation of traffic signals.

    An overview of a typical scenario is as follows:

    A fire truck is dispatched to an emergency.

    The fire truck is equipped with multiple emergency warning lights and a siren... The fire truck is also equipped with a preemption transmitter, which, in operation, is a high intensity forward-facing strobe light that is flashing at a rapid rate - much faster than normal attention-getting lights on the fire truck.

    When the fire truck approaches within 1,800 feet (line-of-sight) of a preemption-equipped traffic signal controlled intersection, the preemption detector (normally mounted on the cross-arm that suspends the traffic signal) "sees" the fire truck's preemption transmitter and locks onto its flashing strobe.

    Once the traffic signal "sees" the fire truck, it begins to initiate a "preemption sequence" of the actual traffic signal that is different from normal operation.

    If the fire truck already has a green light, the light will remain green. Any other direction that also has a green light (usually the opposite direction) will first get a yellow light, then red.

    When all of the other directions are then red, and the fire truck's direction is the only one that is green, the left turn arrow will illuminate (if one exists), and a brilliant white flood lamp mounted near the traffic signal will begin to flash. This flood lamp tells the driver of the fire truck that he now has control of the intersection, and complete right-of-way.

    If the fire truck has a red light, any other direction that has a green light will transition to yellow, then red. When all the directions (including the fire truck's) are red, the traffic signal facing the fire truck will then turn green, along with the left turn arrow (if one exists), and the brilliant white flood lamp will begin to flash.

    Once the fire truck has passed through the intersection, optical communication with the preemption detector (on the traffic signal) is lost. At that time the traffic signal will default back to normal operation. Conversely, until the fire truck passes through the intersection, it will have a green light, regardless of the time duration.

    If several intersections are within the 1,800 foot range of the fire truck's preemption transmitter, they will all respond accordingly to the above operational description.