Slashdot Mirror
Ford Testing a New 'Traffic Monitoring' Device
Poletown writes "The Detroit Free Press put out this article today about a new vehicle based 'traffic monitoring' system that Ford is testing. It will report your speed, the road temperature, whether or not your wipers/headlights are active, and even if you've used your anti-lock brakes. Initially, the system will be tested on Ford-owned and municipal vehicles."
Quick! Someone make me a hat!
it does all that but it doesn't drive yet!??
but seriously, what use is a traffic monitoring system - if you live in an area REALLY hit by traffic (i live near Central London, UK), there is usually almost no way to avoid it! what's the use unless you're a long distance commuter, or want to decide whether to use subway/underground or car
tim
no more tittie bar lunches for the Public Works sand trucks anymore I guess...
*shrug*
e.
Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
Microsoft will soon take away Ford's glory, Bill vs Henry round two with Traffodata 04.
Nerd history of the Traffodata is located in Fire in the Valley, a great computer history book.
This would be cool if there was some way to hook up your own home PC and access the data. You could write cool python scripts to visualize your commute to work, etc.
When I have kids, I'll expect updates on all their cars' data at regular intervals.
I can't decide whether to praise this kind of "innovation" for the convenience, or to complain about the possibilities for abuse. I know we'll hear plenty of both - but I'll lean toward praising this for now. Technology will always be abused, and complaining about basically harmless things and their potential for evil is not generally productive.
Hey, why not? GM sells cars that do a pretty good job of spying on the driver, and people buy it for this excellent "feature." And to them, it is a feature. It just takes some good marketing spin.
If every single car being made had something like this, then there would be cause for concern. Otherwise, just don't buy the cars that have this if you don't want it. Simple.
You probably shouldn't click this.
This can potentially further clog the microwave/radio spectrum, depending on the range of these sensors. Also, unless some standard exists/is applied, competing manufacturers could select different protocols, leading to a babel of messages, and more traffic jams rather than less
It could have some good use as an anti-theft device.
No comments on the Orwellian overtones of the original post
This is government-funded, so they are going to be seeing the data at some time. What is to stop them from sending a ticket in the mail from the information they collected?
...don't question it!!!
From the article: "Slow vehicle speeds with frequent stops would signal traffic congestion, for instance."
uh... it could also signal that my Mom is at the wheel...
No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
Hopefully this will help getting the speeding jerks off our roads. Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind having completely remote-computer controlled cars in our lifetime.
The owls are not what they seem
I used to do EPA/OSHA type building inspections.
Once I was asked to do some inspection work on a DOT (department of transportation) site, and they had just finished installing (and monitoring) useage of their DOT vehicles.
I was there when the output was generated. The DOT devices monitored how long the vehicles were in motion, how far they traveled, how fast, how long they stopped and using a GPS, where exactly they were at any given time.
The workmen knew nothing of this installation until that point in time.
The moral? The crews weren't doing what they were supposed ot be doing (running about filling potholes) and instead (as found by the GPS) were down at a local bar and grill, drinking it up.
So they were fired.
Sure, they probably deserved it, but should they have been fired in this manner? This device *sounds* like it could be used for *exactly* that.
Something to think about.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
I'm not going to be car owner anymore...
Now I'm just going to be a user of the Ford Mobile Traffic Network.
But I bet I'll be allowed to opt-out... If I can fill out all the paperwork.
The "intelligent roadway" concept sounds all gee-whiz and cool, but the fact still remains that it's we, the drivers, who are responsible for both the volume and the density of traffic. Our being on the roads in the first place generates the volume, and our need to get "there" first generates the density.
Someone posted a link to this site about how one driver can singlehandedly eliminate traffic waves simply by not driving like a nut. I've tried it, and it's not difficult, but I can't imagine convincing my wife to let a gap open up in front of her... there's something in human nature that rebels at the thought of someone else getting ahead of you in line.
My prediction: If these devices and systems lead to more efficient roads, then there will simply be more people on the roads. The end result will be *worse* congestion than before. That's why building new expressways is so futile -- you just can't build your way out of gridlock. [Insert mass transit rant here]
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
But it wont work because if a device can tell if your antilock brakes are working it can just as easily tell if your speeding or any other number of big brother activities.
Ever heard of OnStar? It's got GPS, and can therefore report whether you're speeding, and yet it's not abused in the way you suggest it would be. People actually even pay extra to have it in their car.
I'm not saying that it isn't good to be cautious, but just because a technology can be used in a "Big Brother" way doesn't mean it will.
You probably shouldn't click this.
Here in Montreal, they buried a bunch of sensors into the ground under the major highways. These sensors track in realtime the flow of traffic, so you can have an instant glimpse at the entire network's traffic status, and find out where to avoid. For now it's a small portion of the roads, but it's already proven to be very effective. Can't wait until more roads have that and the map! See it here.
Can they really write you a ticket if they know that your vehicle was speeding, but they don't know who was driving it? It seems they are using cameras to penalize red-light runners in some cities already, but how are they doing this? If the car isn't registered to me, then I don't get the ticket?
Your boss could find out if you go drinking on the weekend, and so on. Imagine anyone being able to use this "public" information to stalk or harass someone. Since the information would reported to municipalities, it would by definition be public unless legislated otherwise.
GOOD!
We as a country do too much just because we think we'll get away with it--and we let slide our liberties because we aren't challenged when we exercise them, and so don't have the chance to defend them.
BOSS: "So, Planesdragon, I see that you bought twenty-four kegs of beer last weekend..."
PD: "Yep. I had a kegger at my house. It's my personal life, and, as you can see, I'm here bright-eyed and bushy-tailed monday morning. So what's it to you?"
BOSS: "Oh, ah... Ok."
Wow... I can't say how much this kind of thing scares me. As an advocate for privacy, I don't want people to be able to follow my every move.
/me shudders
I realize, of course, that there are benefits of being able to track cars. Finding stolen cars, keeping unsafe drivers off the road, et cetera, but sometimes you have to sacrifice all these things for the rights of the individual. Our culture has a tendency to take ideas with good intentions and take them to dangerous extremes. Take bias censorship in schools, for example. There are extensive rules that publishing companies have in place so as not to offend children. It started in 1970 as a way to keep racism and homophobia out of schools, but is to the point where you can't mention, for example, a blind man overcoming his disability and climbing a mountain. According to these bias guidelines, that kind of statement could offend blind children.
What is the next step after this? Tracking devices implanted under the skin? Big Brother is watching you.
--Nycto
This is going to be installed in municipal vehicles and police cars, not your vehicle. Relax everyone.
Good luck figuring out traffic patterns by putting this in police cars. The police by me are either sitting by the side of the road looking for speeders and HOV lane violators, or they're cutting through traffic in the disabled vehicle lane.
This sounds like a good idea, but i see it being used in all the wrong ways. Cops would no longer have to catch someone speeding, they would just have to link the illegal speed with the vehical and send the ticket in the mail. Any government could track were certain citizens are (or rather their cars) at any time. I wonder how long it would take someone to put linux on one of these systems. It would be a pretty tight mobile computer.
FORD = Found on road dead
FORD = Fucker only runs downhill
FORD backwards is an acronym for "Driver Returns On Foot."
FORD = First On Recall Day
FORD = Fix Or Repair Daily
FORD = For Oversized Rednick Dicks
Ford Acronyms
"What's wrong with your car reporting to your insurance agency that you're speeding?
Please, please, tell me you're just going for flamebait points. You've got to be kidding, right?
The problem with this is just that: my CAR telling somebody about my habits? Isn't that what we have police officers for? If I let my buddy borrow my pickup to move a desk, and he speeds, I get the ticket & the insurance ding? Oh wait. Why not use the RFID tags in my clothing to make sure that I get the ticket?
Wrong. Automated data collection will just keep forcing us into a submissive role. And you're FOR this?
I assume, then, the first time you drive like an idiot, or forget to signal, you'll be prepared for the officers when you pull in your driveway.
"If there's hope, it lies in the proles..."
Yes, your issues are true for personal vehicles. However, in the case of fleet vehicles, where the person doesn't get a choice if it's on or not, I could see it being quite helpful.
In fact, I know a few people whose work vehicles will report to their employer when they showed up at the work site (construction related field). This is just an extension to that.
You're automatically assuming that 'consumer' means 'private citizen' which it may not be. I can see significant demand for this for fleet vehicles, especially if it can be correlated to GPS or some of the other monitor systems that already exist.
Public works vehicles would be a prime candidate for this, as it could give indicators where potholes are, or snow problems, or flooded roads. Radio and TV stations might put it in their vehicles, so they could improve their traffic reporting.
It might move to private vehicles, if there were incentives. Maybe discounts on your insurance, or taxes, or the like, but I don't see people just jumping out and wanting it on their own, for the very reasons you stated.
And it's entirely possible that they'll be put in without people knowing about it, such as the black boxes that record airbag data, or forced to be in there by law [all vehicles in the state of must have them], similar to emissions controls, which help the general population, but not the individual user.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Rental car agencies are already exploiting GPS tracking devices for uncapped profit (eg. bouncing a $250 rental fee to $3.4k). I wonder how long it will take them to exploit this one so they can charge penalties for ... oh ... not using your blinker, leaving the dome light on when the car is off, and perhaps even for not flipping down the sun visors. Y'know, 5 minutes of harsh sunlight can really wreak havoc on unprotected automotive uphostlery, and possibly increase the maintenance cost for a vehicle by a full $0.000000005!!
I'm not saying that it isn't good to be cautious, but just because a technology can be used in a "Big Brother" way doesn't mean it will.
Yes it does, It's only a matter of time before the fed/state/local authorities start to supoena onstar. First it will be for a good reason (murder, kidnapping) but once it starts, we'll be sliding right on down that slope. How long until someone is arrested for terrorism because their SUV was parked at a fertilizer store, a diesel station, and an airport in the same day?
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
"A market is never saturated with a good product, but it is very quickly saturated with a bad one."
--Henry Ford
Rental car companies use GPS to clock your speed or location and fine you for speeding or leaving the geographic area covered by your contract. Red light cameras dole out tickets (usually through some government contracting company). EZ-Pass toll systems can help track the movements of drivers. The microprocessors in your car can provide data to help determine fault in auto accidents. I won't even get into OnStar. Sheesh, next thing you know, Anheuser-Busch will be tracking your drinking habits - oh wait. Imaging linking those databases.
With a simple identification code in each Ford car, the freedom of movement in the U.S. could become very expensive. To me, it's almost more frightening that so many of these functions (and this data) is in private hands than if it were the government getting it itself.
There will be (actually already is) a flurry of legal wrangling to determine: (1) how the private companies can use this (i.e., when they can disclose or sell it); and (2) under what circumstances the government can get to it and use it.
It's a bunch of BS to get people to let this big brother in the car.. then ZAM it'll start to be abused.. Just like OnStar was. OnStar gor saved via a tecnical detail, but if they had multiple audio out channels, it's still be abused today.
The fact is, it's US thats the problem. We employ a greedy and not cooperative strategy on the roads. They did research around here, and they found that all the highways were completely cpable of handling the volume of traffic at rush hour. It's out driving that creates backups.
And don't get me started about RUBBERNECKERS! ARH.
People here are some tips:
1) Don't rummberneck, mangled metal is fun, but it's none of your business.
2) Don't tail gate, leave good room. Tailgating makes you slam on your brakes, so the guy behind you needs to slam arder, and so on, until people are locking up anc causing more accidents.
3) When in a backup let the gap be made. Don't floor it to the next guys bumper then brake hard 1) it wastes gas 2) you repeat #2. I've seen "averagers" - peopel who average the flow out create a huge difference. And I think we all rather me slow and steady rather than stop-and -go. If you are a stop and go person: remember: 1) all that gas used to get up to speed gets wasted when you put on your brakes, 2) you waste more brakes killing the effect of overusing gas 3) you create more changes in speed which is more changes for a rear-end collision by another unattentive driver. We handle things if they are steady.
4) Get over early. You having to slow down your lane so you can get over in a hurry, slows down your lane and causes others to change lanes.
5) minimize lane changes. Each one is a time when you a leagally vulderable. When you change lanes, right of way is with the person who is already there. And we all know about 2 people, one moveing left, the other right, that don't see each other.
That shoudl take care of 90% of the problems on the road.
Thank you.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Let me see, the same company that is currently producing a ~400 hp SVT Cobra is going to want a report on how fast I'm going? Why, I'm going the legal speed limit! Of course! Seriously, I intend on picking up my Cobra and driving directly to an auto parts store to get the mod chip that transmits a nice fake signal to Ford.
SVT COBRA VIN#12345
WINDSHIELD WIPERS:OFF
HEADLIGHTS: OFF
SPEED: YOUR MOTHER
stuff |
For Ford SUVs, it will also report if the vehicle is upside-down.
There is no point for every driver on the highway to have this system in their car. Afterall, the car next to you is not likely to report anything different than what you're reporting at any given time.
However, think of this usage. A local radio and TV station operation offers to pay to have this system installed in 2000 volunteer's cars, and those people are paid $250 or so a year to participate. Suddenly, this station will have a a very informative realtime traffic system, because as odds are one of their spotters will be delayed by any rainstorm or lane closure. What's more, the spotters don't have to do anything active to report that they've been stopped or slowed, since the system phones in their reports for them.
There's no need for everybody's privacy to be violated, because this doesn't need a census, just a sample. If a few people are willing to give up some privacy, the whole public can benefit from the data collected in the form of better traffic advisories.
How bout a tattoo on my forehead of a barcode? Maybe we could have a worldwide company named BEAST do this?
No I didnt spell check this post...
[Devil's advocate]We have collectively (note that I didn't say individually) agreed that going too fast on certain roads is bad and, for the sake of public safety, people who exceed certain speeds should be punished. Since this is what the people have decided is best why would anyone object to better enabling the police to enforce the people's will?[/Devil's advocate]
Personally I think victimless crimes such as speeding are the heart of the problem. If it were up to me there would be no speed limits anywhere but the penalties for crimes such as vehicular manslaughter and driving under the influence would be much for draconian.
Embed the sensors in the roads..
I use this every day to choose which way to go home (red on Decarie (the 15) is particularly bad).
S
Slightly offtopic, but speeding tickets in the US are issued to the driver of the vehicle, not the owner of the vehicle (like a parking ticket).
In Texas, many cities are "home-rule" cities which means they can sometimes enact laws which are not specifically prescribed or proscribed by the state. In the town I live in, they issue civil citations to the owners of vehicles caught by the red light cameras. By issuing a civil citation, the city finds it easier to skirt around due process. If you refuse to pay, then you'll find yourself at the receiving end of a criminal charge for failure to pay a civil fine levied by the city, rather than being held responsible for the offense under criminal statutes.
Here's another example: We have several toll roads where I live. I sold my car a few years back; in Texas, the tags go with the car. So of course,the lowlife I sold my vehicle to decide to rack up several hundred dollars in fines for running the toll gates. The toll authority issued me a civil fine of several hundred dollars based on photographs of the rear license plate of the vehicle! Had I not been able to prove that the vehicle was in fact sold (I had a bill of sale), I would have been held liable for the fines.
So yes, in some parts of the country you can receive a citation by simply owning a vehicle caught speeding, running red lights, etc.
Apparently they can. Gene Weingarten wrote an amusing piece in the Washington Post last week that describes his failed attempt to get out of just such a predicament using the defense you have suggested. It didn't work.
In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not.
Here's the question, though...
Would you drive a car with the intent of being monitored if it meant that your insurance company would give significant fee breaks or if the government gave rebates of some form?
If you start to put money into the equation, things start to seem more interesting than threatening, n'est-ce pas?
After they installed cockpit monitoring devices in all vehicles, the insurance companies analyzed the data and found an amazing coincidence. The last words said in 80% of all pickup truck accidents were the same: "Hey, hold my beer and watch this!"
Before anyone flames me: I drive an F-150.
"Shredded cabbage and mayo go good together." Cole's Law
I watched when my Kenworth T600 was in the shop, thay hooked up a system the size of a laptop and had a complete report from speed to RPM's to brake use and pressure. It even showed air pressure to the suspension giving them an idea of how much weight was on each axle. Combined with the qualcomm on board they knew within 3 feet where and what I was doing every 15 min. with the company truck.
I'm told you are what you eat, does that mean I can be you by tomorrow with some A1?
Let me bring you up to date since you left.
Last year, someone headed back into the city during rush hour crashed into one of those billboards on GA 400 southbound, bringing it down and blocking the entire road well into the evening.
I wasn't there, but I hear people who saw it happen could see the display blinking:
Traffic sign down on GA 400 S & Windward. Use alternate route.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
Ok, monitoring the car can be good or bad. Here's a little story from the real world.
Someone had a very expensive car, the kind of car that cost a fortune to get a insurance for. So the car got a tracking device installed to get a lower insurance. These devices are normally intalled in different places hard to find unless you take the entire car apart and also has their own battery.
One day the police got a call from the company tracking these cars for the insurance company. The car appeared to had been stolen and was going down the freeway. The police got running updates of the location of the car. drove after it down the freeway and ended up "capturing" the thief in a parking lot by blocking the exits with police cars.
The "thief" turned out to be a family member not normally driving the car who had forgotten to disarm the alarm.
The alarm did not make any noise if not disarmed, it just sat there, sending the coordinates from a gps antenna through the cell phone network.
So the owner was happy to see that the alarm indeed worked but less happy about all the attention the Saturday shopping got.
The story said nothing about the price for this mistake.
Supoena!?!? Heck, why bother with all that paperwork?
A Judge told the FEDS to stop listening in to OnStar
I'm not saying that it isn't good to be cautious, but just because a technology can be used in a "Big Brother" way doesn't mean it will.
Yes it does, It's only a matter of time before the fed/state/local authorities start to supoena onstar.
As a matter of fact, they already DID subpoena OnStar or one of its clones. And not just to track the vehicle, but to use the phone function to BUG it. This came to light in the news media as a result of a suit by the service provider.
It seems the device is basically a cellphone (without a ringer and with a fixed number to call, and WITH a data connection to the car's computer). Inbound calls are silently accepted (the better to track stolen cars without alerting the thief and to unlock the door for customers who lock the keys in). Of course this makes bugging the occupants trivial.
The emergency signal is sent by transmitting a tone in the upbound voice channel. With a call permanently set up between the car and the FBI's tape recorder, the emergency service the company was being paid for couldn't be provided. (The tone would go to the tape recorder, rather than a call being made to the emergency service proder.)
When the FBI wanted to continue the tap after a month, the company sued to get them to release it.
(The news item carefully didn't mention which OnStar-or-clone company was involved.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
However, if they try to put this in my car...it will be disconnected quickly.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
"Yes, Mr. Thomas, the data pulled from your 2005 Ford Mustang GT indicates that you were going 134 mph when you wrecked last night at 3:27am. Local weather reports show that it was raining, yet your wipers, as well as headlights were out. Our assumption is you were drunk. Claim denied."